[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 152 (Monday, August 9, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47906-48177]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17818]
[[Page 47905]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of Labor
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
29 CFR Part 1926
Cranes and Derricks in Construction; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 152 / Monday, August 9, 2010 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 47906]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
29 CFR Part 1926
[Docket ID-OSHA-2007-0066]
RIN 1218-AC01
Cranes and Derricks in Construction
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: OSHA is revising the Cranes and Derricks Standard and related
sections of the Construction Standard to update and specify industry
work practices necessary to protect employees during the use of cranes
and derricks in construction. This final standard also addresses
advances in the designs of cranes and derricks, related hazards, and
the qualifications of employees needed to operate them safely. Under
this final rule, employers must determine whether the ground is
sufficient to support the anticipated weight of hoisting equipment and
associated loads. The employer is then required to assess hazards
within the work zone that would affect the safe operation of hoisting
equipment, such as those of power lines and objects or personnel that
would be within the work zone or swing radius of the hoisting
equipment. Finally, the employer is required to ensure that the
equipment is in safe operating condition via required inspections and
that employees in the work zone are trained to recognize hazards
associated with the use of the equipment and any related duties that
they are assigned to perform.
DATES: This final rule will become effective November 8, 2010.
The incorporation by reference of specific publications listed in
this final rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of November 8, 2010.
ADDRESSES: In accordance with 28 U.S.C. 2112(a)(2), the Agency
designates Joseph M. Woodward, Associate Solicitor of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, Office of the Solicitor, Room S-4004,
U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20210, to receive petitions for review of the final rule.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: General information and press
inquiries. Contact Ms. Jennifer Ashley, Director, Office of
Communications, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3647, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
1999 or fax (202) 693-1634.
Technical inquiries. Contact Mr. Garvin Branch,
Directorate of Construction, Room N-3468, OSHA, U.S. Department of
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone
(202) 693-2020 or fax (202) 693-1689.
Copies of this Federal Register notice. Available from the
OSHA Office of Publications, Room N-3101, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
1888.
Electronic copies of this notice. Go to OSHA's Web site
(http://www.osha.gov), and select ``Federal Register,'' ``Date of
Publication,'' and then ``2010.''
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Availability of Incorporated Standards. The
standards published by the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI), the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), the
American Welding Society (AWS), the British Standards Institution
(BSI), the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the
Power Crane and Shovel Association (PCSA), and the Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE) required in subpart CC are incorporated by
reference into this subpart with the approval of the Director of the
Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce
any edition other than the editions specified in subpart CC, the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) must publish a
notice of change in the Federal Register and the material must be
available to the public.
All approved material is available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, telephone 202-741-6030, or go
to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html. Also, the material is available for
inspection at any OSHA Regional Office or the OSHA Docket Office (U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N-2625,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone 202-693-2350 (TTY number: 877-889-
5627)).
I. General
A. Table of Contents
The following Table of Contents identifies the major preamble
sections in this notice and the order in which they are presented:
I. General
A. Table of Contents
II. Background
A. History
B. The Cranes and Derricks Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory
Committee (C-DAC)
C. Hazards Associated with Cranes and Derricks in Construction
Work
III. The SBREFA Process
IV. Summary and Explanation of the Rule
V. Procedural Determinations
A. Legal Authority
B. Executive Summary of the Final Economic Analysis; Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
C. OMB Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Federalism
E. State-Plan States
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Applicability of Existing Consensus Standards
H. List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1926
V. Authority and Signature
VI. Amendments to Standards
II. Background
A. History
The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1590, 29
U.S.C. 651 et seq.) (the OSH Act) authorizes the Secretary of Labor to
adopt safety and health standards to reduce injuries and illnesses in
American workplaces. Pursuant to that authority, the Secretary adopted
a set of safety and health standards applicable to the construction
industry, 29 CFR part 1926. Initially, standards for the construction
industry were adopted under the Construction Safety Act, 40 U.S.C. 333.
Under the Construction Safety Act, those standards were limited to
employers engaged in Federally-financed or Federally-assisted
construction projects. The Secretary subsequently adopted them as OSHA
standards pursuant to Sec. 6(a) of the OSH Act, 29 U.S. C. 655(a),
which authorized the Secretary to adopt established Federal standards
as OSH Act standards within the first two years the OSH Act was
effective (see 36 FR 25232, Dec. 30, 1971). Subpart N of 29 CFR part
1926, entitled ``Cranes, Derricks, Hoists, Elevators, and Conveyors,''
was originally adopted through this process.
The section of subpart N of 29 CFR part 1926 that applied to cranes
and derricks was former Sec. 1926.550. That section relied heavily on
national consensus standards that were in effect in 1971, in some cases
incorporating the consensus standards by reference. For example, former
Sec. 1926.550(b)(2) required crawler, truck, and locomotive cranes to
meet applicable requirements for design, inspection, construction,
testing, maintenance, and operation prescribed in ANSI B30.5-1968,
``Crawler, Locomotive and Truck Cranes.'' Similarly, former Sec.
1926.550(e)
[[Page 47907]]
required derricks to meet applicable requirements for design,
construction, installation, inspection, testing, maintenance, and
operation prescribed in ANSI B30.6-1969, ``Derricks.'' Until today,
former Sec. 1926.550 was amended substantively only twice. In 1988,
former Sec. 1926.550(g) was added to establish clearly the conditions
under which employees on personnel platforms may be hoisted by cranes
and derricks (see 53 FR 29116, Aug. 2, 1988). In 1993, former Sec.
1926.550(a)(19) was added to require that all employees be kept clear
of lifted and suspended loads.
Considerable technological advances have been made since the 1971
OSHA standard was issued. For example, hydraulic cranes were rare at
that time, but are now prevalent. In addition, the construction
industry has updated the consensus standards on which the original OSHA
standard was based. For example, the industry consensus standard for
derricks was most recently updated in 2003, and that for crawler,
locomotive and truck cranes in 2007.
In recent years, a number of industry stakeholders asked the Agency
to update subpart N's cranes and derrick requirements. They were
concerned that accidents involving cranes and derricks continued to be
a significant cause of fatal and other serious injuries on construction
sites and believed that an updated standard was needed to address the
causes of these accidents and to reduce the number of accidents. They
emphasized that the considerable changes in both work processes and
technology since 1971 made much of former Sec. 1926.550 obsolete.
In response to these requests, in 1998 OSHA's Advisory Committee
for Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH) established a workgroup to
develop recommended changes to the subpart N requirements for cranes
and derricks. The workgroup developed recommendations on some issues
and submitted them to the full committee in a draft workgroup report.
(ID-0020.) In December 1999, ACCSH recommended to OSHA that the agency
consider using a negotiated rulemaking process as the mechanism to
update subpart N. (OSHA-ACCSH1999-4-2006-0187-0035.)
B. The Cranes and Derricks Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee (C-
DAC)
In July 2002, OSHA announced plans to use negotiated rulemaking
under the Negotiated Rulemaking Act (NRA), 5 U.S.C. 561 et seq., to
revise the cranes and derricks standard. The Agency made this decision
in light of the stakeholder interest in updating subpart N, the
constructive discussions and work of the ACCSH workgroup, ACCSH's
recommendation, a positive assessment of the criteria listed in the NRA
(5 U.S.C. 563(a)) for the use of negotiated rulemaking, and the
Department of Labor's policy on negotiated rulemaking (see ``Notice of
Policy on Use of Negotiated Rulemaking Procedures by Agencies of the
Department of Labor,'' 57 FR 61925, Dec. 29, 1992). The Agency
published a Notice of Intent to Establish a Cranes and Derricks
Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee (``C-DAC'' or ``the
Committee'')) (see 67 FR 46612, Jul. 16, 2002).
Negotiated rulemaking is a process by which a proposed rule is
developed by a committee comprised of members who represent the
interests that will be significantly affected by the rule. Section 562
of the NRA defines ``interest'' as follows:
``[I]nterest'' means, with respect to an issue or matter,
multiple parties which have a similar point of view or which are
likely to be affected in a similar manner.
By including different viewpoints in the negotiation process, the
members of a negotiated rulemaking committee learn the reasons for
different positions on the issues as well as the practical effect of
various approaches. Each member of the committee participates in
resolving the interests and concerns of other members. Negotiation
allows interested parties, including members who represent the
interests of employers subject to the prospective rule and the
employees who will benefit from the safer workplaces the rule will
produce, to become involved at an earlier stage of the rulemaking
process. As a result, the rule that OSHA proposes would receive close
scrutiny by affected parties at the pre-proposal stage.
The goal of the negotiated rulemaking process is to develop a
proposed rule that represents a consensus of all the interests. The NRA
defines consensus as unanimous concurrence among the interests
represented on a negotiated rulemaking committee unless the committee
itself unanimously agrees to use a different definition of consensus.
As discussed below, C-DAC agreed by unanimous vote to a different
definition: A consensus would be reached on an issue when not more than
two non-Federal members dissented on that issue.
In the July 2002 Federal Register notice announcing negotiated
rulemaking on cranes and derricks mentioned earlier, the Agency listed
key issues that it expected the negotiations to address, and the
interests that OSHA tentatively identified as being significantly
affected by the rulemaking. The key interests were:
--Crane and derrick manufacturers, suppliers, and distributors.
--Companies that repair and maintain cranes and derricks.
--Crane and derrick leasing companies.
--Owners of cranes and derricks.
--Construction companies that use cranes and derricks.
--General contractors.
--Labor organizations representing construction employees who operate
cranes and derricks.
--Labor organizations representing construction employees who work in
conjunction with cranes and derricks.
--Owners of electric power distribution lines.
--Civil, structural and architectural engineering firms and engineering
consultants involved with the use of cranes and derricks in
construction.
--Training organizations.
--Crane and derrick operator testing organizations.
--Insurance and safety organizations, and public interest groups.
--Trade associations.
--Government entities involved with construction safety and with
construction operations involving cranes and derricks.
In the Federal Register notice, OSHA asked for public comment on
whether interests other than those listed would be significantly
affected by a new rule. It also solicited requests for membership on
the Committee. OSHA also urged interested parties form coalitions to
support individuals identified for nomination to the Committee.
The Agency noted that the need to limit the Committee's membership
to a number that could conduct effective negotiations may result in
some interests not being represented on the Committee. OSHA further
noted that interested persons had means other than Committee membership
available to participate in the Committee's deliberations, including
attending meetings and addressing the Committee, providing written
comments to the Committee, and participating in Committee workgroups
(see 67 FR 46612, 46615, Jul. 16, 2002).
In response to its request for public input, the Agency received
broad support for using negotiated rulemaking, as well as 55
nominations for committee membership. To keep membership to a
reasonable size, OSHA tentatively listed 20 potential committee
members, and asked for public comment on the proposed list (see 68 FR
9036,
[[Page 47908]]
Feb. 27, 2003). In response to the comments, OSHA added three members
to the committee--individuals from the mobile crane manufacturing
industry, the Specialized Carriers & Rigging Association, and the
outdoor advertising industry (see 68 FR 39879, Jul. 3, 2003).
The members of the Committee, the organizations and interests they
represent, and a summary of their qualifications at the time the
Committee was formed are in Table 1 below:
Table 1--The Qualifications of C-DAC Members
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Brown, International Union of Operating Engineers (labor)
Title: Director of Construction Training, International Union of
Operating Engineers.
Organizations/interests represented: Organized construction
employees who operate cranes and derricks, and work with such
equipment.
Experience: Worked in numerous positions in the construction
industry over 28 years, including Equipment Operator, Mechanic, and
Training Director.
Michael Brunet, Manitowoc Cranes, Inc. (manufacturers and suppliers)
Title: Director of Product Support for Manitowoc Cranes.
Organizations/interests represented: Crane manufacturers, suppliers,
and distributors.
Experience: Extensive engineering experience in crane engineering;
participated in development of SAE and ISO standards for cranes.
Stephen P. Chairman, Viacom Outdoor, Inc. (employer users)
Title: Vice President (New York) of Viacom Outdoor Group.
Organizations/interests represented: Billboard construction.
Experience: Over 43 years' experience with the construction
industry, including specialized rigging.
Joseph Collins, Zachry Construction Corporation (employer users)
Title: Crane Fleet Manager.
Organizations/interests represented: Highway and railroad
construction.
Experience: Over 30 years' experience with the construction industry
in a variety of positions including crane operator, mechanic, and
rigger.
Noah Connell, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (government)
Title: Director, Office of Construction Standards and Guidance.
Organization/interests represented: Government.
Experience: 22 years' experience with government safety and health
programs.
Peter Juhren, Morrow Equipment Company, L.L.C. (manufacturers and
suppliers)
Title: National Service Manager.
Organization/interests represented: Tower crane distributors and
manufacturers.
Experience: 22 years' experience with Morrow Equipment Company,
L.L.C.
Bernie McGrew, Link-Belt Construction Equipment Corp. (manufacturers and
suppliers)
Title: Manager for Crane Testing, Product Safety, Metal Labs and
Technical Computing.
Organization/interests represented: Mobile crane manufacturers.
Experience: Extensive engineering experience in crane engineering.
Larry Means, Wire Rope Technical Board (manufacturers and suppliers)
Title: Rope Engineer.
Organization/interests represented: Wire rope manufacturing
industry.
Experience: 36 years' wire rope engineering experience.
Frank Migliaccio, International Association of Bridge, Structural,
Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers (labor organization)
Title: Executive Director for Safety and Health.
Organization/interests represented: Organized construction employees
who operate cranes and derricks, and work with such equipment.
Experience: 31 years' experience in the ironworking industry,
including 10 years as Director of Safety and Health Training for
the Ironworker's National Fund.
Brian Murphy, Sundt Corporation (employer users)
Title: Vice President and Safety Director.
Organization/interests represented: General contractors; crane
owners and users.
Experience: Over 35 years' experience in the construction industry,
most of them with Sundt Corp.
George R. ``Chip'' Pocock, C.P. Buckner Steel Erection (employer users)
Title: Safety and Risk Manager.
Organization/interests represented: Steel erection crane users and
employers.
Experience: Over 22 years' experience in the construction and steel
erection industry.
David Ritchie, St. Paul Companies (trainer and operator testing)
Title: Crane and Rigging Specialist.
Organization/interests represented: Employee training and
evaluation.
Experience: Over 31 years' experience in the construction industry.
Emmett Russell, International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE)
(labor)
Title: Director of Safety and Health.
Organization/interests represented: Organized construction employees
who operate cranes and derricks, and work with such equipment.
Experience: Over 32 years' experience in the crane and construction
industry, including 10 years in the field as well as over 20 years
with IUOE.
Dale Shoemaker, Carpenters International Training Center (labor)
Organization/interests represented: Labor organizations representing
construction employees who operate cranes and derricks and who work
with cranes and derricks.
Experience: Became a crane operator in 1973; served as a rigging
trainer for labor organizations since 1986.
William Smith, Maxim Crane Works (lessors/maintenance)
Title: Corporate Safety/Labor Relations Manager.
Organization/interests represented: Crane and derrick repair and
maintenance companies.
Experience: 24 years' experience in the crane, rigging, and
construction industry, both public and private sectors.
Craig Steele, Schuck & Sons Construction Company, Inc. (employer users)
Title: President and CEO.
Organization/interests represented: Employers and users engaged in
residential construction.
Experience: 30 years' experience in the construction industry with
Schuck & Sons Construction Company, Inc.
[[Page 47909]]
Darlaine Taylor, Century Steel Erectors, Inc. (employer users)
Title: Vice President.
Organization/interests represented: Steel erection and leased crane
users.
Experience: 19 years' with Century Steel Erectors, over 12 years' in
the construction safety field.
Wallace Vega III, Entergy Corp. (power line owners)
Organization/interests represented: Power line owners.
Experience: 35 years' experience in the power line industry.
William J. ``Doc'' Weaver, National Electrical Contractors Association
(employer users)
Organization/interests represented: Electrical contractors engaged
in power line construction.
Experience: Over 53 years' electrical construction experience, 37 of
which spent in management positions.
Robert Weiss, Cranes, Inc. and A.J. McNulty & Company, Inc. (employer
users)
Title: Vice President and Project Manager for Safety.
Organization/interests represented: Employers and users engaged in
precast concrete erection.
Experience: 20 years' experience in the precast and steel erection
industry.
Doug Williams, C.P. Buckner Steel Erection (employer users)
Title: President.
Organization/interests represented: Buckner Heavy Lift Cranes.
Experience: 32 years' experience in the construction industry.
Stephen Wiltshire, Sports and Public Assembly Group, Turner Construction
Corp. (employer users)
Title: National Safety Director.
Organization/interests represented: Employers and users of owned and
leased cranes.
Experience: 28 years' experience in construction safety.
Charles Yorio, Acordia (Wells Fargo) (insurance)
Title: Assistant Vice President.
Organization/interests represented: Insurance.
Experience: 17 years' experience in loss prevention and regulatory
compliance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As this summary of qualifications shows, the Committee members had
vast and varied experience in cranes and derricks in construction,
which gave them a wealth of knowledge in the causes of accidents and
other safety issues involving such equipment. The members used this
knowledge to identify issues that required particular attention and to
devise regulatory language that would address the causes of such
accidents. Their extensive practical experience in the construction
industry and the other industries represented on the Committee helped
them to develop revisions to the current subpart N requirements.
C-DAC was chaired by a facilitator, Susan L. Podziba of Susan
Podziba & Associates, a firm engaged in public policy mediation and
consensus building. Ms. Podziba's role was to facilitate the
negotiations by: (1) Chairing the Committee's meetings in an impartial
manner; (2) Assisting the members of the committee in conducting
discussions and negotiations; and (3) Ensuring minutes of the meetings
were taken, and relevant records retained; (4) Performing other
responsibilities such as drafting meeting summaries to be reviewed and
approved by C-DAC members.
C-DAC first met from July 30 to August 1, 2003. Before addressing
substantive issues, the Committee developed ground rules (formally
approved on September 26, 2003) that would guide its deliberations.
(OSHA-S030-2006-0663-0373.) In addition to procedural matters, the
ground rules addressed the Committee's decision-making process. C-DAC
agreed that it would make every effort to reach unanimous agreement on
all issues. However, if the facilitator determined that unanimous
consent could not be achieved, the Committee would consider consensus
to be reached when not more than two non-Federal members (i.e., members
other than the OSHA member) dissented; no consensus could be achieved
if OSHA dissented.
This consensus process reflects the non-Federal members' view that
Agency support of the Committee's work was essential. The non-Federal
members believed that, if OSHA dissented, the Committee's work product
likely would not be included in the final rule. Therefore, the
Committee members would make every effort to resolve the Agency's
concerns using the negotiation process.
Under the ground rules, if C-DAC reached final consensus on some or
all issues, OSHA would use the consensus-based language in its proposed
standard, and C-DAC members would refrain from providing formal written
negative comment on those issues in response to the proposed rule.
The ground rules provided that OSHA could only depart from the
consensus-based language by (1) reopening the negotiated rulemaking
process, or (2) providing the C-DAC members with a detailed statement
of the reasons for revising the consensus-based language, and do so in
a manner that would allow the C-DAC members to express their concerns
to OSHA before it published the proposed rule. The Committee members
also could provide negative or positive comments in response to these
revisions during the public-comment phase of the rulemaking. (OSHA-
S030-2006-0663-0373.)
A tentative list of issues for the Committee to address was
published along with the final list of Committee members (68 FR at
39877, Jul. 3, 2003). At its initial meeting, the Committee reviewed
and revised the issue list, adding several issues. (OSHA-S030-2006-
0663-0372.) The Committee met 11 times between July 30, 2003 and July
9, 2004. As the meetings progressed, the Committee reached consensus
agreement on various issues and, at the final meeting, reached
consensus agreement on all outstanding issues.
The Committee's work product, which was the Committee's recommended
regulatory text for the proposed rule, is referred to in this notice as
the ``C-DAC Document.'' (OSHA-S030-2006-0663-0639.) On October 12,
2006, ACCSH adopted a resolution supporting the C-DAC Document and
recommending that OSHA use it as the basis for a proposed standard.
(OSHA-ACCSH2006-1-2006-0198-0021.)
OSHA issued a proposed rule based on the C-DAC Document on October
9, 2008 (73 FR 59713, Oct. 9, 2008). In reviewing the C-DAC Document
and drafting the proposed rule, OSHA identified several problems in the
C-DAC Document. These problems ranged from misnumbering and other
typographical and technical errors, to
[[Page 47910]]
provisions that appeared to be inconsistent with the Committee's
purpose, or that were worded in a manner that required clarification.
The proposed rule deviated from the C-DAC Document when revisions were
clearly needed to validly represent the Committee's purpose or to
correct typographical and technical errors. With respect to substantive
revisions, the Agency identified and explained these revisions in the
portions of the preamble to the proposed rule that addressed the
affected provisions. OSHA also prepared a draft of the proposed
regulatory language identifying each instance in which the proposed
rule differed from the C-DAC Document. In accordance with the ground
rules, prior to publication of the proposed rule in the Federal
Register, OSHA provided the draft showing the revisions to the C-DAC
Document, along with its draft of the summary and explanation of the
proposed rule, to the C-DAC members.
Additionally, the Agency identified other instances in which the
regulatory text drafted by the Committee did not appear to conform to
the Committee's purpose, or instances in which a significant issue did
not appear to have been considered by C-DAC. In these instances, OSHA
retained the regulatory language used in the C-DAC Document, but asked
for public comment on whether specific revisions should be made to the
proposed regulatory language in the final rule.
The proposed rule set a deadline of December 8, 2008, for the
public to submit comments on the proposal. At the request of a number
of stakeholders, this deadline was subsequently extended to January 22,
2009 (73 FR 73197, Dec. 2, 2009). On March 17, 2009, OSHA convened a
public hearing on the proposal, with Administrative Law Judge John M.
Vittone presiding. The hearing lasted four days, closing on March 20.
In addition to Judge Vittone, Administrative Law Judge William S.
Colwell presided during the last part of the hearing. At the close of
the hearing, Judge Colwell established a posthearing comment schedule.
Participants were given until May 19, 2009 to supplement their
presentations and provide data and information in response to questions
and requests made during the hearing, make clarifications to the
testimony and record that they believed were appropriate, and submit
new data and information that they considered relevant to the
proceeding. Participants also were given until June 18, 2009, to
comment on the testimony and evidence in the record, including
testimony presented at the hearing and material submitted during the
first part of the posthearing comment period.
C. Hazards Associated With Cranes and Derricks in Construction Work
OSHA estimates that 89 crane-related fatalities occur per year in
construction work. The causes of crane-related fatalities were recently
analyzed by Beavers, et al. (See J.E. Beavers, J.R. Moore, R. Rinehart,
and W.R. Schriver, ``Crane-Related Fatalities in the Construction
Industry,'' 132 Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 901
(Sept. 2006) (ID OSHA-2007-0066-0012 \1\).) The authors searched OSHA's
Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) database for all fatal
accidents for 1997-2003 investigated by OSHA involving cranes in the
construction industry. By searching the database for cases using the
key words ``crane,'' ``derrick,'' or ``boom,'' they identified 381 IMIS
files for the covered year in the Federal program states, which include
states with about 57% of all workers throughout the country. The
authors requested the case files from OSHA so that they could confirm
that a crane or derrick was involved in the fatality. Of the 335 case
files that OSHA provided, the authors identified 125 (involving 127
fatalities) as being crane or derrick related. From these files, they
determined the percentages of fatalities caused by various types of
incidents (see Table 2 below).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The term ``ID'' refers to the column labeled ``ID'' under
Docket No. OSHA-2007-0066 on the Federal eRulemaking Portal, http://www.regulations.gov. This column lists individual records in the
docket. Hereafter, this notice will identify each of these records
only by the last four digits of the record. Records from dockets
other than OSHA-2007-0066 are identified by their full ID number.
Table 2--The Causes of Fatalities During the Performance of Hoisting
Activities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Struck by load (other than failure of boom/cable).......... 32%
Electrocution.............................................. 27%
Crushed during assembly/disassembly........................ 21%
Failure of boom/cable...................................... 12%
Crane tip-over............................................. 11%
Struck by cab/counterweight................................ 3%
Falls...................................................... 2%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A study by Suruda et al. examined the causes of crane-related
deaths for the 1984-1994 period. (See A. Suruda, M. Egger, and D. Liu,
``Crane-Related Deaths in the U.S. Construction Industry, 1984-94,''
The Center to Protect Workers' Rights (Oct. 1997) (ID-0013).) The
authors examined OSHA IMIS data to identify the number of fatal
accidents involving cranes, and determined their causes. For the years
in question, they found 479 accidents involving 502 fatalities. In the
worst year, 1990, 70 deaths occurred. The authors noted some
limitations in the data they examined: Data for California, Michigan,
and Washington State were not available for 1984-1989; the proportion
of fatal accidents investigated by OSHA and states having OSHA-approved
State plans is unknown; and some of the investigation reports were not
sufficiently detailed to allow the authors to determine the cause of
the accident or the type of crane involved.
The Suruda study determined the number and the percentage of
fatalities from various causes (see Table 3 below).
Table 3--The Causes of Crane Incidents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electrocution.............................................. 198 (39%)
Crane assembly/disassembly................................. 58 (12%)
Boom buckling/collapse..................................... 41 (8%)
Crane upset/overturn....................................... 37 (7%)
Rigging failure............................................ 36 (7%)
Overloading................................................ 22 (4%)
Struck by moving load...................................... 22 (4%)
Accidents related to manlifts.............................. 21 (4%)
Working within swing radius of counterweight............... 17 (3%)
Two-blocking............................................... 11 (2%)
Hoist limitations.......................................... 7 (1%)
Other causes............................................... 32 (6%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final standard addresses the major causes of the equipment-
related fatalities identified in the Beavers and Suruda studies. The
following synopsis identifies the sections in the final standard that
address the major causes of equipment-related fatalities.
Electrocution hazards are addressed by Sec. Sec. 1926.1407-
1926.1411, which deal with power-line safety. These sections contain
requirements to prevent equipment from contacting energized power
lines. The final standard delineates systematic, reliable procedures
and methods that employers must use to prevent a safe clearance
distance from being breached. If maintaining the safe clearance
distance is infeasible, additional protections are required, including
grounding the equipment, covering the line with an insulating sleeve,
and using insulating links and nonconductive tag lines.
These procedures and methods are supplemented by requirements for
training the operator and crew in power-line safety (see Sec.
1926.1408(g)), and requirements for operator qualification and
certification in Sec. 1926.1427. C-DAC concluded that compliance with
these training and certification requirements will not only reduce the
frequency of power-line contact, but will give the
[[Page 47911]]
workers the knowledge they need to help avoid injury in the event such
contact occurs.
Fatalities that involve employees being struck or crushed during
assembly/disassembly are addressed in Sec. Sec. 1926.1403-1926.1406.
These sections require employers to follow specific safe-practice
procedures, and to address a list of specific hazards. Also, assembly
and disassembly of a crane must be supervised by an individual who is
well qualified to ensure that these requirements of these provisions
are properly implemented.
As the above-mentioned studies show, and the Committee's experience
confirms, many disassembly accidents occur when sections of lattice
booms unexpectedly move and strike or crush an employee who is
disassembling the boom. The final standard addresses this hazard in
Sec. 1926.1404(f) by prohibiting employees from being under the boom
when pins are removed unless special precautions are taken to protect
against boom movement.
Accidents resulting from boom or cable failure are addressed in a
number of provisions. For example, the standard includes requirements
for: proper assembly procedures (Sec. 1926.1403); boom stops to
prevent booms from being raised too far and toppling over backwards
(Sec. 1926.1415, Safety devices); a boom-hoist limiting device to
prevent excessive boom travel, and an anti two-block device, which
prevents overloading the boom from two-blocking (Sec. 1926.1416,
Operational aids). Also, the inspection requirements (Sec. 1926.1412)
detect and address structural deficiencies in booms before an accident
occurs. Cable failure will be avoided by compliance with sections such
as Sec. 1926.1413, Wire rope--inspection, and Sec. 1926.1414, Wire
rope--selection and installation criteria.
Crane tip-over is caused by factors such as overloading, improper
use of outriggers and insufficient ground conditions. Section
1926.1417, Operations, includes provisions to prevent overloading. This
section prohibits the equipment from being operated in excess of its
rated capacity, and includes procedures for ensuring that the weight of
the load is reliably determined and within the equipment's rated
capacity. Section 1926.1404(q) has requirements for outrigger/
stabilizer use that will ensure that outriggers and stabilizers provide
stability when a load is lifted. Section 1926.1402 contains
requirements to ensure sufficient ground conditions, which will prevent
crane tip-over.
The provisions addressing operator training, qualification, and
certification also will prevent tip-over accidents by ensuring that the
operator is sufficiently knowledgeable and skilled to recognize
situations when the crane may be overloaded.
Fatalities that result from workers being struck by the cab or
counterweights will be avoided under Sec. 1926.1424, Work area
control. That section requires that workers who are near equipment with
a rotating superstructure be trained in the hazards involved, that
employers mark or barricade the area covered by the rotating
superstructure, and that the operator be notified whenever a worker
must enter that area, and instructed not rotate the superstructure
until the area is clear. Protection against being struck by a
counterweight during assembly or disassembly is provided by Sec.
1926.1404(h)(9), which requires the assembly/disassembly supervisor to
address this hazard and take steps when necessary to protect workers
against that danger.
The final rule addresses a number of equipment failures that can
result in the load striking a worker. Such accidents are directly
addressed by Sec. 1926.1425, Keeping clear of the load, and Sec.
1926.1426, Free fall/controlled load lowering. In addition, improved
requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1419-1926.1422 for signaling will help
avoid load struck-by accidents caused by miscommunication.
Improper operation, including failure to understand and compensate
for the effects of factors such as dynamic loading, can also cause
workers to be struck by a load. Such incidents will be reduced by
compliance with Sec. 1926.1427, Operator qualification and
certification and Sec. 1926.1430, Training. Other provisions, such as
those for safety devices and operational aids (Sec. Sec. 1926.1415 and
1926.1416), and the requirement for periodic inspections in Sec.
1926.1412, will also reduce these accidents.
Protection against falling from equipment is addressed by Sec.
1926.1423, Fall protection. That section requires that new equipment
provide safe access to the operator work station, using devices such as
steps, handholds, and grabrails. Some new lattice-boom equipment must
be equipped with boom walkways. The final standard also contains fall-
protection provisions tailored to assembly and disassembly work, and to
other work. Section 1926.1431, Hoisting personnel, addresses fall
protection when employees are being hoisted.
OSHA has investigated numerous crane accidents that resulted in
fatalities. Below are examples from OSHA's IMIS investigation reports
that describe accidents that compliance with this final standard would
prevent.
1. February 16, 2004: four fatalities, four injuries. A launching
gantry collapsed and fatally injured four workers and sent four other
workers to the hospital. The launching gantry was being used to erect
pre-cast concrete segments span by span. The manufacturer required that
the rear legs and front legs be properly anchored to resist
longitudinal and lateral forces that act on the launching gantry. The
legs of the launching gantry were not properly anchored. (ID-0017.)
OSHA believes that this type of accident will be prevented by
compliance with the provisions of this final standard for assembling
equipment. Section 1926.1403 requires that equipment be assembled in
compliance with the manufacturer's procedures, or with alternative
employer procedures (see Sec. 1926.1406) to prevent the equipment from
collapsing. In addition, under Sec. 1926.1404, assembly must be
conducted under the supervision of a person who understands the hazards
associated with an improperly assembled crane and is well-qualified to
understand and comply with the proper assembly procedures.
2. January 30, 2006. One fatality. An employee was crushed by the
lower end section of the lattice boom on a truck-mounted crane while
working from a position underneath the boom to remove the 2nd lower
pin. When the 2nd lower pin was removed, the unsecured/uncribbed boom
fell on the employee. (ID-0017.1.)
Section 1926.1404(f) will prevent this type of accident by
generally prohibiting employees from being under the boom when pins are
removed. In situations in which site constraints require that an
employee be under the boom when pins are removed, the employer must
implement other procedures, such as ensuring that the boom sections are
adequately supported, to prevent the sections from falling on the
employee.
3. July 23, 2001: One fatality. Employee failed to extend the
outriggers before extending the boom of a service-truck crane to lift
pipes. As the employee extended the boom, the crane tipped over on its
side, and another employee standing near the truck was struck on the
head by the hook block. (ID-0017.10.)
This type of accident will be prevented by compliance with Sec.
1926.1404(q), which contains several provisions to ensure that
outriggers and stabilizers are deployed properly before lifting a load.
In addition, the operator
[[Page 47912]]
qualification and certification requirements of Sec. 1926.1427, which
ensure that operators understand and follow the safety-requirements for
the equipment they are operating, will help prevent this type of
accident.
4. March 8, 1999. One fatality. Employees were using a mobile crane
to maneuver a load of steel joists. The crane contacted a 7,200-volt
overhead power line, electrocuting an employee who was signaling and
guiding the load. The crane operator jumped clear and was not injured.
(ID-0017.11.)
Section 1926.1408 includes provisions that will prevent this type
of accident. This section requires the use of ``encroachment
prevention'' measures to prevent the crane from breaching a safe
clearance distance from the power line. It also requires that, if tag
lines are used to guide the load, the lines must be non-conductive.
Finally, if maintaining the normal clearance distance is infeasible, a
number of additional measures must be implemented, one of which is the
use of an insulating link between the end of the load line and the
load.
These measures protect employees guiding the load in several ways,
including: reducing the chance that a crane would contact a power line;
employees using tag lines to guide a load from being electrocuted
should the load become energized.
5. August 21, 2003. Three fatalities. A crane operator and two co-
workers were electrocuted when a truck crane's elevated boom contacted
a 7,200 volt uninsulated primary conductor 31 feet above the ground.
When the operator stepped from the cab of the truck, a conduction
pathway to the ground was established through the operator's right hand
and right foot, resulting in electrocution. A co-worker attempted to
revive the incapacitated crane operator with cardio-pulmonary
resuscitation (``CPR''), while a third co-worker contacted 911, and
then returned to the incident location. When the third co-worker
simultaneously touched the energized truck crane and the back of the
co-worker performing CPR, the resulting pathway conducted the
electrical charge through the workers, electrocuting them all. (ID-
0017.12.)
The final standard will avoid this type of accident. Section
1926.1408 ensures that a minimum safe distance from the power line is
maintained, which prevents equipment from becoming energized. Also,
when working closer than the normal minimum clearance distance, the
crane must be grounded, which reduces the chance of an electrical
pathway through the workers.
In addition, Sec. 1926.1408(g) requires that the operator be
trained to remain inside the cab unless an imminent danger of fire or
explosion is present. The operator also must be trained in the hazards
associated with simultaneously touching the equipment and the ground,
as well as the safest means of evacuating the equipment. The crane's
remaining crew must be trained to avoid approaching or touching the
equipment. The required training is reinforced by the electrocution
warnings that must be posted in the cab and on the outside of the
equipment.
6. September 28, 1999: One fatality. A 19-year old electrical
instrument helper was at a construction site that was on a
manufacturing company's property. A contractor positioned a 50-ton
hydraulic crane in an open area that consisted of compacted fill
material. This area was the only location that the crane could be
situated because the receiving area for the equipment was too close to
the property border.
The crane's outriggers were set, but matting was placed only under
one of the outrigger pads. As the crane was moving large sections of
piping to a new location, the ground collapsed and the crane
overturned, striking the helper. (ID-0017.13.)
Section 1926.1402, Ground conditions, will prevent this type of
accident. Under that section, employers must ensure that the surface on
which a crane is operating is sufficiently level and firm to support
the crane in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. In
addition, Sec. 1926.1402 imposes specific duties on both the entity
responsible for the project (the controlling entity) and the entity
operating the crane to ensure that the crane is adequately supported.
It places responsibility for ensuring that the ground conditions are
adequate on the controlling entity, while also making the employer
operating the crane responsible notifying the controlling entity of any
deficiency in the ground conditions, and having the deficiency
corrected before operating the crane.
7. June 17, 2006: One fatality. A spud pipe, used to anchor a
barge, was being raised by a crane mounted on the barge when the
hoisting cable broke, causing the headache ball and rigging to on an
employee. (ID-0017.3.)
This type of accident can have various causes: an improperly
selected wire rope (one that has insufficient capacity); a damaged or
worn wire rope in need of replacement; or two-blocking, in which the
headache ball is forced against the upper block, causing the wire rope
to fail. The provisions of Sec. Sec. 1926.1413 and 1926.1414 address
wire rope inspection, selection, and installation, and will ensure that
appropriate wire rope is installed, inspected and removed from service
when continued use is unsafe. Section 1926.1416, Operational aids,
contains provisions to protect against two-blocking.
8. July 13, 1999: Three fatalities. Three employees were in a
personnel basket 280 feet above the ground. They were in the process of
guiding a large roof section, being lifted by another crane, into
place. Winds gusting to 27 miles per hour overloaded the crane holding
the roof section; that crane collapsed, striking the crane that was
supporting the personnel basket, causing the boom to fall. All three
employees received fatal crushing injuries. (ID-0018.)
This type of accident will be prevented by Sec. 1926.1417(n),
which requires the competent person in charge of the operation adjust
the equipment and/or operations to address the effect of wind and other
adverse weather conditions on the equipment's stability and rated
capacity. In addition, Sec. 1926.1431, Hoisting personnel, requires
that, when wind speed (sustained or gust) exceeds 20 mph, employers
must not hoist employees by crane unless a qualified person determines
it is safe to do so.
9. November 7, 2005: One fatality. A construction worker was
crushed between the outrigger and the rotating superstructure of a
truck crane. The worker apparently was trying to retrieve a level and a
set of blueprints located horizontal member of one of the outriggers
when the operator began to swing the boom. (ID-0017.5.)
Section 1926.1424, Work area control, will prevent this type of
accident. This section generally requires that employers erect barriers
to mark the area covered by the rotating superstructure to warn workers
of the danger zone. However, workers who must work near equipment with
a rotating superstructure must be trained in the hazards involved. If a
worker must enter a marked area, the crane operator must be notified of
the entry, and must not rotate the superstructure until the area is
clear.
10. March 19, 2005: Two fatalities and one injury. During steel-
erection operations, a crane was lifting three steel beams to a parking
garage. The crane tipped over and the boom collapsed. The boom and
attached beams struck concrete workers next to the structure, killing
two workers and injuring one worker. The accident apparently occurred
because the crane was overloaded. (ID-0017.6.)
[[Page 47913]]
Overloading a crane can cause it to tip over, causing the load or
crane structure to strike and fatally injure workers in the vicinity of
the crane. Section 1926.1417, Operations, includes provisions to
prevent overloading. This section prohibits employers from operating
equipment in excess of its rated capacity, and includes procedures for
ensuring that the weight of the load is reliably determined and within
the equipment's rated capacity.
The provisions of the final standard addressing operator training,
certification, and qualification (Sec. 1926.1427) will also prevent
this type of accident by ensuring that operators recognize conditions
that would overload the crane.
11. December 7, 2005. One fatality. Two cranes were used to lower a
concrete beam across a river. During the lowering process, one end of
the beam dropped below the other end, causing the load's weight to
shift to the lower end; this shift in weight overloaded the crane
lifting the lower end, and it tipped over. The lower end of the beam
fell into the river, while the higher end landed on a support mat
located on the bank of the river, causing a flagger to be thrown into
the beam. (ID-0017.7.)
Section 1926.1432, Multiple crane/derrick lifts--supplemental
requirements, will prevent this type of accident. This section
specifies that, when more than one crane is supporting a load, the
operation must be performed in accordance with a plan developed by a
qualified person. The plan must ensure that the requirements of this
final standard are met, and must be reviewed by all individuals
involved in the lifting operation. Moreover, the lift must be
supervised by an individual who qualifies as both a competent person
and a qualified person as defined by this final standard. For example,
in the accident just described, the plan must include a determination
of the degree of level needed to prevent either crane from being
overloaded. In addition, the plan must ensure proper coordination of
the lifting operation by establishing a system of communications and a
means of monitoring the operation.
12. May 7, 2004: One fatality. An employee, a rigger/operator-in-
training, was in the upper cab of a 60-ton hydraulic boom-truck crane
to set up and position the crane boom prior to a lift. The crane was
equipped with two hoists--a main line and auxiliary. The main hoist
line had a multi-sheave block and hook and the auxiliary line had a 285
pound ball and hook. When the employee extended the hydraulic boom, a
two-block condition occurred with the auxiliary line ball striking the
auxiliary sheave head and knocking the sheave and ball from the boom.
The employee was struck in the head by the falling ball. (ID-0017.8.)
This type of accident will be prevented by Sec. 1926.1416,
Operational aids, which requires protection against two-blocking. A
hydraulic boom crane, if manufactured after February 28, 1992, must be
equipped with a device that automatically prevents two-blocking.
Also, the final rule, under Sec. 1926.1427(a) and (f), prohibits
an operator-in-training from operating a crane without being monitored
by a trainer, and without first having sufficient training to enable
the operator-in-training to perform the assigned task safely.
13. April 26, 2006: One fatality. A framing crew was installing
sheathing for a roof. A crane was hoisting a bundle of plywood
sheathing to a location on the roof. As the crane positioned the bundle
of sheathing above its landing location, the load hoist on the crane
free spooled, causing an uncontrolled descent of the load. An employee
was under the load preparing to position the load to its landing spot
when the load fell and crushed him. (ID-0017.9.)
Section 1926.1426, Free fall and controlled load lowering, will
prevent this type of accident. This section prohibits free fall of the
load-line hoist, and requires controlled lowering of the load when an
employee is directly under the load.
As discussed later in the section titled, Executive Summary of the
Final Economic Analysis; Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, OSHA
finds that construction workers suffer 89 fatal injuries per year from
the types of equipment covered by this final standard. Of that number,
OSHA estimates that 21 fatalities would be avoided by compliance with
the final standard. In addition, OSHA estimates that the final standard
would prevent 175 non-fatal injuries each year. Based on its review of
all the available evidence, OSHA finds that construction workers have a
significant risk of death and injury resulting from equipment
operations, and that the risk would be substantially reduced by
compliance with this final standard.
The OSH Act requires OSHA to make certain findings with respect to
standards. One of these findings, specified by Section 3(8) of the OSH
Act, requires an OSHA standard to address a significant risk and to
reduce this risk substantially. (See UAW v. OSHA, 37 F.3d 665, 668 (DC
Cir. 1994) (``LOTO'').) As discussed in Section II of this preamble,
OSHA finds that crane and derrick operations in construction constitute
a significant risk and estimates that the final standard will prevent
22 fatalities and 175 injuries annually. Section 6(b) of the OSH Act
requires OSHA to determine if its standards are technologically and
economically feasible. As discussed in Section V of this preamble, OSHA
finds that this final standard is economically and technologically
feasible.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C 601, as amended) requires
that OSHA determine whether a standard will have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small firms. As discussed in Section
V, OSHA examined the small firms affected by this standard and
certifies that the final standard will not have a significant impact on
a substantial number of small firms.
Executive Order 12866 requires that OSHA estimate the benefits,
costs, and net benefits of its standards. The table below summarizes
OSHA's findings with respect to the estimated costs, benefits, and net
benefits of this standard. As is clear, the annual benefits are
significantly in excess of the annual costs. However, it should be
noted that under the OSH Act, OSHA does not use the magnitude of net
benefits as decision-making criterion in determining what standards to
promulgate.
Annual Benefits, Costs, and Net Benefits, 2010 Dollars
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Costs*:
Crane Assembly/Disassembly........ $16.3 million.
Power Line Safety................. 68.2 million.
Crane Inspections................. 16.5 million.
Ground Conditions................. 2.3 million.
Operator Qualification and 50.7 million.
Certification.
---------------------------------
Total Annualized Costs........ 154.1 million.
[[Page 47914]]
Annual Benefits:
Number of Injuries Prevented...... 175.
Number of Fatalities Prevented.... 22.
Property Damage from Tipovers 7 million.
Prevented.
---------------------------------
Total Monetized Benefits...... $209.3 million.
---------------------------------
Annual Net Benefits (Benefits minus $55.2 million.
Costs).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: OSHA Office of Regulatory Analysis.
*Costs with 7% discount rate. Total costs with 3% discount rate: $150.4
million annually.
During the SBREFA process, several Small Entity Representatives
expressed concern that the C-DAC Document was so long and complex that
small businesses would have difficulty understanding it and complying
with it. The SBREFA Panel recommended that OSHA solicit public comment
on how the rule could be simplified and made easier to understand. In
the proposal, OSHA requested public comment on this issue. The Agency
did not receive any comments objecting to the length or clarity of the
overall rule, or any comment on how to simplify the final rule. Some
commenters recommended that specific provisions be clarified, and these
comments are addressed later in this preamble.
III. The SBREFA Process
Before proceeding with a proposed rule based on the C-DAC Document,
OSHA was required to comply with the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. (SBREFA). This
process required OSHA to draft an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis that would evaluate the potential impact of the rule on small
entities (defined as small businesses, small governmental units, and
small nonprofit organizations) and identify the type of small entities
that may be affected by the rule. In accordance with SBREFA, OSHA then
convened a Small Business Advocacy Review Panel (``Panel'') composed of
representatives of OSHA, the Office of Management and Budget, and the
Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. Individuals
who were representative of affected small entities (i.e., Small Entity
Representatives, or ``SERs'') were identified for the purpose of
obtaining advice and recommendations regarding the potential impacts of
the proposed rule.
OSHA provided the SERs with the C-DAC Document and the draft
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, and requested that they submit written
comments on these documents. The Agency also drafted questions asking
for their views on the specific aspects of the C-DAC Document that OSHA
believed may be of concern to small entities.
The Panel conducted two conference calls with the SERs in which the
SERs presented their views on various issues. After reviewing the SERs'
oral and written comments, on October 17, 2006, the Panel submitted its
report summarizing the requirements of the C-DAC proposal and the
comments received from the SERs, and presenting its findings and
recommendations. (OSHA-S030A-2006-0664-0019.) In its findings and
recommendations, the Panel identified issues that it believed OSHA
should address in the proposal (1) through further analysis, and (2) by
soliciting public comment. In the proposed rule, OSHA addressed each of
the Panel's findings and recommendations in the section pertaining to
the issue involved, and also solicited public comment on the issues
raised by the Panel. The following table lists the recommendations made
by the Panel, and OSHA's responses to these recommendations.
Table 4--SBREFA Panel Recommendations and OSHA Responses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SBREFA Panel Recommendation OSHA Response
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Panel recommends that OSHA provide OSHA has developed a full
full documentation for how it preliminary economic analysis
estimated the number of affected small (PEA) for the proposal which
entities and all other calculations explains all assumptions used
and estimates provided in the PIRFA. in estimating the costs and
benefits of the proposed
standard. The Final Economic
Analysis (FEA) also explains
the changes made to the
analysis as a result of
comments on the proposed rule,
and OSHA's responses to these
comments.
The Panel recommends that OSHA OSHA included homebuilding
reexamine its estimate of crane use in industries in the ``Own but Do
home building, the coverage of crane Not Rent'' and ``Crane
trucks used for loading and unloading, Lessees'' industrial profile
and the estimates of the number of categories.
jobs per crane. Changes in these OSHA has also made a number of
estimates should be incorporated into additions to the industrial
the estimates of costs and economic profile to cover firms in
impacts. general industry that
sometimes use cranes for
construction work, and has
added costs for these sectors.
The Panel recommends that OSHA review OSHA sought comments on the
its estimates for the direct costs of estimates and methodology. As
operator certification and seek a result of these comments,
comment on these cost estimates. OSHA has increased its
estimate of the unit costs of
certification.
The Panel recommends that OSHA OSHA sought public comment on
carefully examine certain types of all aspects (including
impact that could result from an economic impacts, wages,
operator certification requirement, number of operators, demand,
including reports of substantial etc.) of the operator
increases in the wages of operators; certification requirements,
the possibility of increased market specifically as it pertains to
power for firms renting out cranes; the State of California.
and loss of jobs for existing OSHA has included 2 hours of
operators due to language, literacy, travel time per operator into
or knowledge problems; and seek the unit costs for operator
comment on these types of impacts. The certification.
Panel also recommends studying the OSHA also increased the unit
impacts of the implementation of costs of operator
operator certification in CA. certification as a result of
comments. However, based on
comments, OSHA also reduced
the OSHA percentage of crane
operators still needing
certification.
[[Page 47915]]
The Agency reviewed data on
wage rates for operators in
California immediately before
and after operator
certification was required
(Employment Development
Department, Labor Market
Information Division, State of
California, 2007). The data
did not show much change in
operators' wages.
OSHA also evaluated the changes
in crane related fatality
rates in California and found
these had significantly
declined after the California
certification requirements
were put into place.
The Panel recommends that OSHA OSHA sought comment on the
reexamine its estimates for the amount methodology used to calculate
of time required to assess ground all of the costs in the PEA,
conditions, the number of persons which includes the costs for
involved in the assessment, and the assessing ground conditions.
amount of coordination involved; As a result of these comments,
clarify the extent to which such OSHA has added costs for
assessments are currently being examination of ground
conducted and what OSHA estimates as conditions. This addition of
new costs for this rule represent; and costs does not change OSHA's
seek comments on OSHA's cost estimates. conclusion that this standard
is economically feasible.
The Panel recommends that OSHA The Agency describes the
carefully review the documentation documentation requirements,
requirements of the standard, along with cost estimates, in
including documentation that employers the section of this preamble
may consider it prudent to maintain; entitled ``OMB Review Under
estimate the costs of such the Paperwork Reduction Act of
requirements; seek ways of minimizing 1995.''
these costs consistent with the goals
of the OSH Act; and solicit comment on
these costs and ways of minimizing
these costs.
The Panel recommends that OSHA examine As explained in the discussion
whether the inspection requirements of of Sec. 1926.1412,
the proposed rule require procedures Inspections, OSHA's former
not normally conducted currently, such standard at former Sec.
as lowering and fully extending the 1926.550 requires inspections
boom before the crane can be used, and each time the equipment is
removing non-hinged inspection plates used, as well as thorough
during the shift inspection, estimate annual inspections. In
the costs of any such requirements, addition, national consensus
and seek comment on these issues. standards that are
incorporated by reference
include additional inspection
requirements. This final
standard would list the
inspection requirements in one
place rather than rely on
incorporated consensus
standards. This final standard
does not impose significant
new requirements for
inspections. OSHA received
comments on the issue of
lowering and fully extending
the boom before the crane can
be used. However, OSHA
concludes that the comments
were based on a general
misunderstanding of the
requirements. Section
1926.1413(a) explicitly says
that booming down is not
required for shift (and
therefore monthly)
inspections.
Similarly, OSHA stated in the
proposed preamble (73 FR
59770, Oct. 9, 2008) that it
does not believe inspection of
any of those items would
require removal of non-hinged
inspection plates. In the
discussion of proposed Sec.
1926.1412, OSHA requested
public comment on this point.
OSHA finalized Sec.
1926.1412 as proposed because
comments did not confirm that
non-hinged plates needed to be
removed to meet the
requirements of a shift
inspection.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider Previous subpart N, at former
the costs of meeting the requirements Sec. 1926.550(a)(2),
for original load charts and full required load charts; this is
manuals, and solicit comments on such not a new cost. Subpart N did
costs. not require manuals. OSHA
concludes that most crane
owners and operators have and
maintain crane manuals, which
contain the load charts and
other critical technical
information about crane
operations and maintenance.
The Agency determined that the
cost of obtaining a copy of a
manual should be modest and
solicited comment on how many
owners or operators do not
have full manuals for their
cranes or derricks. Few
commenters saw this as a major
problem.
The Panel recommends that OSHA provide The Agency placed additional
full documentation for its analysis of materials in the rulemaking
the benefits the proposed rule are docket to aid in the
expected to produce and assure that reproduction of the benefits
the benefits analysis is reproducible analysis. The Agency also
by others. developed a full benefits
analysis (sec. 4 of the FEA)
which includes the methodology
and data sources for the
calculations.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider In the discussion of proposed
and solicit public comment on whether Sec. 1926.1400(c)(8), OSHA
the scope language should be clarified requested public comment on
to explicitly state whether forklifts this issue.
that are modified to perform tasks
similar to equipment (cranes and
derricks) modified in that manner
would be covered.
The Panel recommends that there be a OSHA explained in the
full explanation in the preamble of discussion of proposed Sec.
how responsibility for ensuring 1926.1402(e) how the various
adequate ground conditions is shared employers, including the
between the controlling entity, and controlling entity, the
the employer of the individual employer whose employees
supervising assembly/disassembly and/ operate the equipment, and the
or the operator. employer of the A/D director
share responsibility for
ensuring adequate ground
conditions. OSHA did not
receive any significant
comments on this issue and,
therefore, considers this
matter resolved.
The Panel recommends that OSHA restate OSHA addressed this
the applicable corrective action recommendation in the
provisions (which are set forth in the discussion of proposed Sec.
shift inspection) in the monthly 1926.1412(e) and requested
inspection section. public comment on the issue.
Based on these comments, OSHA
concludes that the
requirements were clear as
proposed, and repeating the
provisions will create
confusion. Therefore, OSHA did
not restate the corrective
actions in Sec.
1926.1412(e).
[[Page 47916]]
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit OSHA addressed this
public comment on whether, and under recommendation in the
what circumstances, booming down discussion of proposed Sec.
should be specifically excluded as a 1926.1412(d) and requested
part of the shift inspection, and public comment on the issues
whether the removal of non-hinged raised in the recommendation.
inspection plates should be required
during the shift inspection.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit OSHA solicited comments on this
public comment on whether to include issue, but the Agency did not
an exception for transportation receive any significant
systems in proposed Sec. comments supporting an
1926.1412(a), which requires an exception for transportation
inspection of equipment that has had systems. Based on the analysis
modifications or additions that affect of comments received about
its safe operation, and, if so, what Sec. 1926.1412(a), OSHA
the appropriate terminology for such concludes that the inspections
an exception would be. of modifications as required
by the final rule are
sufficient to ensure that safe
equipment is used. Therefore,
OSHA did include the
recommended exclusion in the
final rule.
The Panel recommends that OSHA explain In the explanation of Sec.
in the preamble that the shift 1926.1412(d)(1) of the
inspection does not need to be proposed rule, OSHA explained
completed prior to each shift but may that the shift inspection may
be completed during the shift. be completed during the shift.
OSHA finalized Sec.
1926.1412(d)(1) as proposed
because the comments did not
demonstrate how it was safer
to deviate from the rule as
proposed.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit OSHA requested public comment
public comment about whether it is on this issue and revised the
necessary to clarify the requirement regulatory text of Sec.
of proposed Sec. 1926.1412(d)(1)(xi) 1926.1412(d)(1)(xi) to provide
that the equipment be inspected for more clarity, in response to
``level position.''. the comments the Agency
received.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit There is no requirement to
comment on whether proposed Sec. check the pressure ``at each
1926.1412(f)(2)(xii)(D) should be and every line.'' The
changed to require that pressure be provision simply states that
inspected ``at the end of the line,'' relief valves should be
as distinguished from ``at each and checked for failure to reach
every line,'' and if so, what the best correct pressure. If this can
terminology would be to meet this be done at one point for the
purpose. (An SER indicated that entire system, then that would
proposed Sec. satisfy the requirement.
1926.1412(f)(2)(xiv)(D) should be
modified to ``checking pressure
setting,'' in part to avoid having to
check the pressure at ``each and every
line'' as opposed to ``at the end of
the line.'').
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit Section 1926.1412(f)(2)(xx) of
public comment on whether proposed the final rule does not
Sec. 1926.1412(f)(2)(xx) should be require the corrective action
deleted because an SER believes that to which the SER refers. If an
it is not always appropriate to retain inspection under Sec.
originally-equipped steps and ladders, 1926.1412(f) reveals a
such as in instances where they are deficiency, a qualified person
replaced with ``attaching dollies.''. must determine whether that
deficiency is a safety hazard
requiring immediate
correction. If the inspection
reveals that original
equipment, such as stairs and
ladders, have been replaced
with something equally safe,
there would be no safety
hazard and no requirement for
corrective action.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit In the discussion of proposed
public comment on the extent of Sec. 1926.1412(f)(7), OSHA
documentation of monthly and annual/ requested public comment on
comprehensive inspections the rule this issue. OSHA finalized
should require. Sec. 1926.1412(f)(7) as
proposed because the comments
did not demonstrate a need to
modify the extent of required
documentation.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit In the discussion of proposed
public comment on whether the Sec. 1926.1412(e), OSHA
provision for monthly inspections requested public comment on
should, like the provision for annual this issue. In response to
inspections, specify who must keep the these comments, OSHA has
documentation associated with monthly explained in the final
inspections. preamble that the employer who
performs the inspection must
maintain documentation. If
another employer wants to rely
on this inspection, but cannot
ensure completion and
documentation of the
inspection, then that employer
must conduct a monthly
inspection.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
ways to account for the possibility recommendation in the
that there may sometimes be an discussion of proposed Sec.
extended delay in obtaining the part 1926.1416(d), and requested
number for an operational aid for public comment on the issue.
older equipment and solicit public The Agency did not receive any
comment on the extent to which this is significant comments.
a problem.
The Panel recommends that the provision Except for a minor change to
on fall protection (proposed Sec. Sec. 1926.1423(h), which was
1926.1423) be finalized as written and made for clarity purposes,
that OSHA explain in the preamble how OSHA has finalized Sec.
and why the Committee arrived at this 1926.1423 as proposed. OSHA
provision. explained the Committee's
rationale in the proposed
preamble discussion of Sec.
1926.1423.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed these
the potential advantages of and recommendations in the
solicit public comment on adding discussion of proposed Sec.
provisions to proposed Sec. 1926.1427, and requested
1926.1427 that would allow an operator public comment on the issues
to be certified on a particular model raised by the Panel. Based on
of crane; allow tests to be these comments, OSHA is not
administered by an accredited permitting certification on a
educational institution; and allow particular crane model because
employers to use manuals that have the body of knowledge and
been re-written to accommodate the skills required to be
literacy level and English proficiency qualified/certified on a
of operators. particular model of crane is
not less than that needed to
be qualified/certified for
that model's type and
capacity. OSHA is not allowing
an institution accredited by
the Department of Education
(DOE) to certify crane
operators solely on the basis
of DOE accreditation; such
institutions would, like other
operator-certification
entities used to fulfill
Option (1), be accredited by a
``nationally recognized''
accrediting body. Finally,
OSHA is permitting employers
to re-write manuals to
accommodate the literacy level
and English proficiency of
operators.
[[Page 47917]]
The Panel recommends that OSHA clarify In the discussion of proposed
in the preamble how the proposed rule Sec. 1926.1427(h), OSHA
addresses an SER's concern that his proposed to allow the oral
crane operator would not be able to administration of tests if two
pass a written qualification/ prerequisites are met. None of
certification exam because the the comments explained why the
operator has difficulty in taking rule as proposed was not
written exams. effective for evaluating the
knowledge of the candidate.
The Panel recommends soliciting public OSHA received public comments
comment on whether the phrase on this issue. In the final
``equipment capacity and type'' in preamble discussion of Sec.
proposed Sec. 1926.1427(b)(1)(ii)(B) 1926.1427(b)(1)(ii)(B), OSHA
needs clarification, suggestions on explains that the Agency added
how to accomplish this, and whether a definition of ``type'' in
the categories represented in Figures response to public comment.
1 through 10 contained in ANSI B30.5- The Agency also references
2000 (i.e., commercial truck-mounted ANSI crane categories to
crane--telescoping boom; commercial illustrate the meaning of
truck-mounted crane--non-telescoping ``type'' in this standard.
boom; crawler crane; crawler crane--
telescoping boom; locomotive crane;
wheel-mounted crane (multiple control
station); wheel-mounted crane--
telescoping boom (multiple control
station); wheel-mounted crane (single
control station); wheel-mounted crane--
telescoping boom (single control
station)) should be used.
The Panel recommends that OSHA ask for OSHA addressed this
public comment on whether the rule recommendation in the
needs to state more clearly that Sec. discussion of proposed Sec.
1926.1427(j)(1)(i) requires more 1926.1430(c), and explained
limited training for operators of that Sec. 1926.1427(j)(1)'s
smaller capacity equipment used in requirement for operator
less complex operations as compared training in ``the information
with operators of higher capacity, necessary for safe operation
more complex equipment used in more of the specific type of
complex situations. equipment the individual will
operate'' addressed the SERs'
concern. However, the Agency
sought public comment on this
issue. OSHA finalized Sec.
1926.1427(j)(1) as proposed
because the comments failed to
explain how the hazards
related to the operation of
smaller equipment differed
from larger equipment. OSHA
then concluded that the
comments also were not
persuasive as to why operators
of smaller capacity equipment
should be allowed limited
training.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
and ask for public comment on whether recommendation in the
a more limited training program would discussion of proposed Sec.
be appropriate for operations based on 1926.1430(c) requested public
the capacity and type of equipment and comment on the issue. The
nature of operations. comments failed to explain how
the hazards related to smaller
equipment were any different
from larger equipment. OSHA
then concluded that the
comments also were not
persuasive as to why operators
of smaller capacity equipment
should be allowed limited
training.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
and ask for public comment as to recommendation in the
whether the supervisor responsible for discussion of proposed Sec.
oversight for an operator in the pre- 1926.1430(c). and requested
qualification period (Sec. public comment on the issue.
1926.1427(f)) should have additional In the proposed preamble, OSHA
training beyond that required in the C- stated that, where a
DAC document at Sec. supervisor is not a certified
1926.1427(f)(2)(iii)(B). operator, ``he/she must be
certified on the written
portion of the test and be
familiar with the proper use
of the equipment's controls;
the supervisor is not required
to have passed a practical
operating test.'' OSHA
finalized this requirement
without substantive change in
Sec. 1926.1427(f)(3)(ii) as
proposed because none of the
comments demonstrated a need
to require additional training
for this qualified individual.
The Panel recommends OSHA solicit In the discussion of proposed
comment on whether there are qualified Sec. 1926.1437(n)(2), OSHA
persons in the field with the requested public comment on
necessary expertise to assess how the this issue. Based on these
rated capacity for land cranes and comments, OSHA has concluded
derricks used on barges and other that there are qualified
flotation devices needs to be modified persons with dual expertise,
as required by proposed Sec. and that the requirement in
1926.1437(n)(2). Sec. 1926.1437(n)(2) is
necessary for safety when
equipment is engaged in duty
cycle work.
The Panel also recommends that OSHA
solicit comment on whether it is
necessary, from a safety standpoint,
to apply this provision to cranes used
only for duty cycle work, and if so,
why that is the case, and how ``duty
cycle work'' should be defined.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider In the discussion of proposed
and ask for comment on whether it Sec. 1926.1440(a), OSHA
would be appropriate to exempt from requested public comment on
the rule small sideboom cranes this issue. These comments did
incapable of lifting above the height not provide any specific
of a truck bed and with a capacity of reason for exempting these
not more than 6,000 pounds. small sideboom cranes and,
therefore, OSHA has not
provided a small capacity
sideboom crane exemption from
this standard.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit The length and
public comment on how the proposed comprehensiveness of the
rule could be simplified (without standard is an issue for this
creating ambiguities) and made easier rulemaking. In the proposed
to understand. (Several SERs believed preamble Introduction, OSHA
that the C-DAC document was so long requested public comment on
and complex that small businesses this issue; however, the
would have difficulty understanding it Agency did not receive any
and complying with it.). comments objecting to the
length or clarity of the
overall rule or offer any
suggestions as to how it could
be simplified.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA will consider developing
outlining the inspection requirements such an aid as a separate
in spreadsheet form in an Appendix or guidance document.
developing some other means to help
employers understand what inspections
are needed and when they must be done.
[[Page 47918]]
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider Some SERs requested
whether use of the words ``determine'' clarification as to when
and ``demonstrate'' would mandate that documentation was required,
the employer keep records of such believing that the document
determinations and if records would be implicitly requires
required to make such demonstrations. documentation when it states
that the employer must
``determine'' or
``demonstrate'' certain
actions or conditions. OSHA
notes that it cannot cite an
employer for failing to have
documentation not explicitly
required by a standard. See
also the discussion under
proposed Sec. 1926.1402(e).
The Panel recommends soliciting public In the discussion of proposed
comment on whether the word ``days'' Sec. 1926.1416(d), OSHA
as used in Sec. Sec. 1926.1416(d) requested public comment on
and 1926.1416(e) should be clarified this issue. As a clarification
to mean calendar days or business days. in response to the comments
received, OSHA determines that
the term ``days'' refers to
calendar days.
The Panel recommends that OSHA OSHA proposed a scope section,
carefully discuss what is included and Sec. 1926.1400, and
excluded from the scope of this discussed in detail the types
standard. of machinery proposed to be
included and excluded under
this standard. OSHA received
public comments on this
proposed scope, analyzed the
comments, and provided more
discussion of the scope
section in the final preamble.
The Panel recommends that OSHA gather OSHA obtained and evaluated a
data and analyze the effects of study by the Construction
already existing certification Safety Association of Ontario
requirements. showing that Ontario's
certification requirement led
to a substantial decrease in
crane-related fatalities
there. OSHA also examined both
economic data of crane
operator wage rates before and
after the certification
requirements, and fatality
rates before and after the
certification requirements.
This data shows that costs
disruptions were minimal, and
that crane fatalities were
significantly reduced as a
result of the California
certification standard.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider In the discussion of proposed
excluding and soliciting comment on Sec. 1926.1400(c), OSHA
whether equipment used solely to requested public comment on
deliver materials to a construction this issue. Based on the
site by placing/stacking the materials analysis of the comments
on the ground should be explicitly received, OSHA recognized an
excluded from the proposed standard's exclusion for delivery
scope. materials that should exclude
most true deliveries, while
avoiding creating a loophole
to the standard that would
allow materials-delivery firms
to engage in extensive
construction activities.
The Panel recommends that OSHA should The information and opinions
consider the information and range of submitted by the SERs are part
opinions that were presented by the of the record for this
SERs on the issue of operator rulemaking, and OSHA
qualification/certification when considered them along with the
analyzing the public comments on this other public comments on the
issue. proposed rule.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
and solicit public comment on recommendation in the
expanding the levels of certification discussion of proposed Sec.
so as to allow an operator to be 1926.1427, and requested
certified on a specific brand's model public comment on the issue.
of crane. Based on these comments, OSHA
is not permitting
certification on a particular
crane model because the body
of knowledge and skills
required to be qualified/
certified on a particular
model of crane is not less
than that needed to be
qualified/certified for that
model's type and capacity.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
and solicit public comment on recommendation in the
expanding the levels of operator discussion of proposed Sec.
qualification/certification to allow 1926.1427(j)(1), and requested
an operator to be certified for a public comment on this issue.
specific, limited type of Though several commenters were
circumstance. Such a circumstance in favor of this option, they
would be defined by a set of did not explain how these
parameters that, taken together, would lifts could objectively be
describe an operation characterized by distinguished from lifts
simplicity and relatively low risk. generally. Several other
The Agency should consider and solicit commenters indicated that the
comment on whether such parameters types of hazards present and
could be identified in a way that the knowledge needed to
would result in a clear, easily address those hazards,
understood provision that could be remained the same, regardless
effectively enforced. of the capacity of the crane
involved or the ``routine''
nature of the lift (see
discussion of Sec.
1926.1427(a)). Based on these
comments, the Agency has not
promulgated such a provision.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
and solicit public comment on allowing recommendation in the
the written and practical tests discussion of proposed Sec.
described in Option (1) to be 1926.1427(b)(3), and requested
administered by an accredited public comment on the issue.
educational institution. Several comments were
submitted in favor of allowing
this option; however, they did
not establish that Department
of Education (DOE)
accreditation would guarantee
the same efficacy in
certification as accreditation
as a personnel certification
entity.
The hearing testimony of Dr.
Roy Swift explained the
difference in the types of
accreditation and the reasons
why DOE accreditation would
not adequately address
operator certification issues.
Therefore, OSHA has finalized
this provision as it was
proposed.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit In the discussion of proposed
public comment on making it clear Sec. 1926.1427(h)(1), OSHA
that: (1) an employer is permitted to requested public comment on
equip its cranes with manuals re- this issue. Based on the
written in a way that would allow an analysis of the comments
operator with a low literacy level to received, OSHA concludes that
understand the material (such as these manuals may not be re-
substituting some text with pictures written as recommended because
and illustrations), and (2) making it it could cause information
clear that, when the cranes are important for safety to be
equipped with such re-written manuals omitted.
and materials, the ``manuals'' and
``materials'' referred to in these
literacy provisions would be the re-
written manuals.
[[Page 47919]]
The Panel recommends that OSHA explain OSHA will issue a Small
in a Small Business Compliance Guide Business Compliance Guide
that the certification/qualification after the final rule is
test does not need to be administered issued, and will explain these
in English but can be administered in points in the Guide.
a language that the candidate can
read; and that while the employee
would also need to have a sufficient
level of literacy to read and
understand the relevant information in
the equipment manual, that requirement
would be satisfied if the material is
written in a language that the
employee can read and understand.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Summary and Explanation of the Rule
Authority Citations
For all subparts affected by this rulemaking, the authority
citations have been amended to refer to the documentation that permits
the promulgation of this rule.
Removal of Sec. 1926.31 and Addition of Sec. 1926.6--Incorporation by
Reference
Section 1926.31 of 29 CFR part 1926 provided information about
locating documents incorporated by reference into all of the
construction standards in that part. The Agency is removing this
section and relocating the majority of its text to new 29 CFR 1926.6
for several reasons. First, the change in the location of the section
from Sec. 1926.31 to Sec. 1926.6 is for organizational purposes. New
Sec. 1926.6 is within 29 CFR part 1926 subpart A (``General''), which
is a more logical placement than Sec. 1926.31, which is within subpart
C (``General Safety and Health Provisions''), and is the same section
number (6) as the incorporation reference section for general industry
standards: 29 CFR 1910.6. Second, OSHA is relocating the list of all
documents incorporated by reference into 29 CFR part 1926 from its
previous location in the ``Finding Aids'' of the CFR to Sec. 1926.6
because the Federal Register is no longer publishing the list in the
hardcopy versions of the CFR.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The list will still be available online at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr from the link to ``Incorporated by
Reference.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Agency is restructuring the text previously located in Sec.
1926.31 to make Sec. 1926.6 parallel 29 CFR 1910.6, which lists the
documents incorporated by reference into the general industry standards
in 29 CFR part 1910. OSHA is not including the text formerly in 29 CFR
1926.31(b), which could be read as implying that OSHA intended to
incorporate into its standards, without following the procedures
specified in 1 CFR part 51, revised versions of documents previously
incorporated by reference.
OSHA determined that the addition of Sec. 1926.6 and the removal
of Sec. 1926.31 are not subject to the procedures for public notice
and comment specified by sec 4 of the Administrative Procedures Act (5
U.S.C. 553), sec. 6(b) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970 (29 U.S.C. 655(b)), and 29 CFR part 1911. New Sec. 1926.6, like
the Sec. 1926.31 it replaces, is a rule of agency organization,
procedure, or practice within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A), and
the addition of Sec. 1926.6 constitutes a technical amendment that
does not affect or change any existing rights or obligations. No member
of the regulated community is likely to object to it. In conclusion,
OSHA finds good cause that the opportunity for public comment is
unnecessary within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), 29 U.S.C.
655(b), and 29 CFR 1911.5.
In addition to relocating the list of documents from the Finding
Aids list, OSHA is adding to the list of documents incorporated by
reference those documents that are newly incorporated by reference in
these final rules. The Federal Register approved these documents, which
are listed as follows, for incorporation by reference as of November 8,
2010: ANSI B30.5-1968; ASME B30.2-2005; ASME B-30.5-2004; ASME B30.7-
2001; ASME B30.14-2004; AWS D1.1/D1.1M:2002; ANSI/AWS D14.3-94; BS EN
13000:2004; BS EN 14439:2006; ISO 11660-1:2008(E); ISO 11660-2:1994(E);
ISO 11660-3:2008(E); PCSA Std. No. 2 (1968); SAE J185 (May 2003); SAE
J987 (Jun. 2003); and SAE J1063 (Nov. 1993).
Subpart L--Scaffolds
Amendments to Sec. 1926.450
The agency is removing the reference to former Sec. 1926.550(g)
from this section because former Sec. 1926.550(g) has been
redesignated and reserved by this rulemaking. Section 1926.450(a)
explains that this section applies to all scaffolds used in work
covered by subpart L. Prior to the promulgation of this final rule, it
referenced former Sec. 1926.550(g) to explain that Sec. 1926.450 did
not apply to crane- or derrick-suspended personnel platforms. Prior to
the promulgation of this final rule, former Sec. 1926.550(g)(2)
regulated crane- or derrick-suspended personnel platforms. Personnel
platforms suspended by cranes or derricks are now regulated by Sec.
1926.1431. This change does not affect the requirements of Sec.
1926.450(a), does not change any existing rights or obligations, and no
member of the regulated community is likely to object to it. OSHA,
therefore, finds good cause that the opportunity for public comment is
unnecessary within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), 29 U.S.C.
655(b), and 29 CFR 1911.5.
Subpart M--Fall Protection
Amendments to Sec. 1926.500
Prior to the promulgation of this final rule, Sec.
1926.500(a)(2)(ii) stated that subpart N set forth the workplaces,
conditions, operations, and circumstances for which fall protection
must be provided for employees working on ``certain cranes and
derricks.'' Because subpart CC now provides comprehensive requirements
for the provision of fall protection to workers on equipment covered by
subpart CC, the Agency amended Sec. 1926.500(a)(2)(ii) by replacing
the reference to subpart N with a reference to subpart CC and deleting
the word ``certain.''
Section 1926.500(a)(3) provided that the requirements for the
installation, construction, and proper use of fall protection for
construction workers were set forth in Sec. 1926.502 of subpart M,
with certain exceptions. OSHA amended Sec. 1926.500(a)(3) to provide
an exception for steps, handholds, ladders, and grabrails/guardrails/
railings required by subpart CC because the criteria for those forms of
fall protection are provided in subpart CC. This exception, Sec.
1926.500(a)(3)(v), also clarifies that Sec. Sec. 1926.502(a), (c)-(e),
and (i) apply unless otherwise stated in subpart CC, and that no other
paragraphs of Sec. 1926.502 apply to subpart CC. The exception reduces
the
[[Page 47920]]
extent to which Sec. 1926.502 applies to work covered under subpart
CC, and clarifies that subpart CC generally sets forth the criteria for
the fall protection systems required under subpart CC.
Section 1926.500(a)(4) stated that Sec. 1926.503 sets forth the
requirements for training in the installation and use of fall
protection systems, except in relation to steel erection activities.
The Agency added the phrase ``and the use of equipment covered by
subpart CC'' at the end of the exception to make clear that the fall
protection training requirements in Sec. 1926.503 of subpart M do not
apply to fall protection systems when used to comply with subpart CC.
Training for fall protection systems required by subpart CC is governed
by Sec. 1926.1423(k).
Subpart N--Helicopters, Hoists, Elevators, and Conveyors
The heading of subpart N has been changed to ``Helicopters, Hoists,
Elevators, and Conveyors.'' The revision of the heading reflects both
the equipment that is now regulated by subpart N and the removal of
sections regulating cranes and derricks from subpart N to subpart CC.
Amendments to Sec. 1926.550
Cranes and derricks used in construction had been regulated by
Sec. 1926.550. Subpart CC is now the applicable standard for
regulating the use of cranes and derricks in construction. Section
1926.550 has been redesignated as Sec. 1926.1501 and reserved.
Amendments to Sec. 1926.553
OSHA revised Sec. 1926.553 to include a new provision, Sec.
1926.553(c). This section explains that Sec. 1926.553 does not apply
to base-mounted drum hoists used in conjunction with derricks. Instead,
base-mounted drum hoists used with derricks must conform to the
requirements of Sec. 1926.1436. This change was made in response to a
request by a commenter who wanted to clarify that the requirements for
base-mounted drum hoists used with derricks could be found in new
subpart CC. (ID-0130.1.) No information was submitted to the record
that indicates OSHA should not make the revision to Sec. 1926.553.
OSHA determined that the revision addresses the commenter's
concerns regarding the applicability of Sec. 1926.553 and enhances the
clarity of the final rule. This revision ensures that base-mounted drum
hoists used in the design of derricks meet the updated requirements of
ASME B30.7-2001, which is referenced in Sec. 1926.1436. The older ANSI
B30.7-1968, which is referenced in Sec. 1926.553, continues to apply
to all base-mounted drum hoists not used in conjunction with derricks.
Subpart O--Motorized Vehicles, Mechanical Equipment, and Marine
Operations
Amendments to Sec. 1926.600
This section regulates motor vehicles, mechanized equipment, and
marine operations. Prior to the promulgation of this final rule, Sec.
1926.600(a)(6) referenced Sec. 1926.550(a)(15), which has been
redesignated and reserved. Because the Agency inadvertently did not
propose any revision of Sec. 1926.600(a)(6), OSHA is preserving the
same requirements imposed by former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15) pursuant to
this section by incorporating language substantively identical to that
of former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15) into revised Sec. 1926.600(a)(6). The
revision of Sec. 1926.600(a)(6) does not alter any of the substantive
requirements of that section, does not change any existing rights or
obligations, and no member of the regulated community is likely to
object to it. OSHA, therefore, finds good cause that the opportunity
for public comment is unnecessary within the meaning of 5 U.S.C.
533(b)(3)(B), 29 U.S.C. 655(b), and 29 CFR 1911.5.
Subpart R--Steel Erection
Amendments to Sec. 1926.753 Hoisting and Rigging
With the exception of former Sec. 1926.550(g)(2), Sec.
1926.753(a) applied all of the provisions of former Sec. 1926.550 to
hoisting and rigging during steel erection. Similarly, Sec.
1926.753(c)(4) allowed cranes and derricks to hoist workers on a
personnel platform in accordance with all of former Sec. 1926.550
except former Sec. 1926.550(g)(2). Because former Sec. 1926.550 has
been redesignated and reserved, Sec. 1926.753 has been revised to
avoid changing the requirements of that section. Section 1926.753(a)
applies all of subpart CC except Sec. 1926.1431(a) to hoisting and
rigging, and Sec. 1926.753(c)(4) applies all of Sec. 1926.1431 except
Sec. 1926.1431(a). These two paragraphs of Sec. 1926.753 reference
Sec. 1926.1431(a) because the requirement formerly found in Sec.
1926.550(g)(2) is now contained in Sec. 1926.1431(a) of subpart CC.
Subpart S--Underground Construction, Caissons, Cofferdams, and
Compressed Air
Amendments to Sec. 1926.800
This section regulates hoisting unique to underground construction.
Prior to the promulgation of this final rule, Sec. 1926.800(t) of this
section referenced former Sec. 1926.550(g), which has been
redesignated Sec. 1926.1501(g). The Agency intended that the reference
to former Sec. 1926.550(g) be replaced by a reference to new subpart
CC, but inadvertently omitted that action from the Federal Register
notice for the proposed rule. To avoid any potential notice issues that
might arise if the Agency substituted a reference to subpart CC in
place of the prior reference to former Sec. 1926.550(g), the Agency
has instead elected to redesignate Sec. 1926.550 as Sec. 1926.1501 in
new subpart DD, which has been created for this purpose. The Agency
intends to revisit this issue in the near future.
References to former Sec. 1926.550(g) have been replaced with
references to Sec. 1926.1501(g). This redesignation of Sec. 1926.550
and the replacement of references do not alter any of the substantive
requirements of Sec. 1926.800(t), do not change any existing rights or
obligations, and no member of the regulated community is likely to
object to it. OSHA, therefore, finds good cause that the opportunity
for public comment is unnecessary within the meaning of 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B), 29 U.S.C. 655(b), and 29 CFR 1911.5.
Subpart T--Demolition
Amendments to Sec. Sec. 1926.856 and 1926.858
These sections regulate the use of cranes and in demolition work.
Prior to the promulgation of this final rule, Sec. Sec. 1926.856(c)
and 1926.858(b) referenced subpart N, part of which (former Sec.
1926.550) has been redesignated as Sec. 1926.1501. The Agency intended
for the reference to subpart N in Sec. 1926.856(c) to be supplemented
with a reference to new subpart CC, and intended that the reference to
subpart N in Sec. 1926.858(b) be replaced by a reference to new
subpart CC, but inadvertently omitted that action from the Federal
Register notice for the proposed rule. To avoid any potential notice
issues that might arise if the Agency substituted a reference to new
subpart CC in place of the prior reference to subpart N, the Agency has
instead elected to redesignate Sec. 1926.550 as Sec. 1926.1501 in
[[Page 47921]]
a new subpart DD which has been created for this purpose. The Agency
intends to revisit this issue in the near future.
References to subpart N in Sec. Sec. 1926.856(c) and 1926.858(b)
have been supplemented or replaced with references to Sec. 1926.1501.
This redesignation of Sec. 1926.550 and the replacement of references
do not alter any of the substantive requirements of Sec. Sec.
1926.856(c) and 1926.858(b), do not change any existing rights or
obligations, and no member of the regulated community is likely to
object to it. OSHA, therefore, finds good cause that the opportunity
for public comment is unnecessary within the meaning of 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B), 29 U.S.C. 655(b), and 29 CFR 1911.5.
Subpart V--Power Transmission and Distribution
Amendment to Sec. 1926.952
The subpart V provisions have been changed to reflect the
terminology used in the scope section of this standard and its new
subpart designation. Accordingly, Sec. 1926.952(c), which referenced
subpart N with respect to derrick trucks and cranes, has been revised
to reference subpart CC. Prior to this final rule, Sec. Sec.
1926.952(c)(1)(i) and (ii) addressed minimum clearance distances.
Because Sec. Sec. 1926.1407 through 1926.1411 address minimum
clearance distances when clearance distances in Table V-1 would apply
to derrick trucks and cranes used in subpart V work, Sec. Sec.
1926.952(c)(1)(i) and (ii) have been deleted.
In conformance with language in Sec. 1926.1400(c)(4), the agency
is adding new Sec. 1926.952(c)(2) into subpart V. It states that
digger derricks used for augering holes for electrical poles, placing
and removing the poles, or handling associated materials to be
installed or removed from the poles must comply with 29 CFR 1910.269.
This provision ensures comparable safety requirements exist for digger
derricks performing electrical pole work.
What was Sec. 1926.952(c)(2) prior to the promulgation of this
final rule has been redesignated Sec. 1926.952(c)(3). Former
Sec. Sec. 1926.952(c)(2)(i) and (ii) listed precautions for operating
mechanical equipment closer to energized power lines than allowed by
Sec. 1926.950(c). The precautions (using an insulated barrier and
grounding the equipment) that were specified in Sec. Sec.
1926.952(c)(2)(i) and (ii) are now required under Sec. 1926.1410(d)
when equipment used in subpart V work is operated closer than the Table
V-1 clearances. Since these precautions are now required by Sec.
1926.1410(d), OSHA is deleting them from subpart V. As a result of that
deletion, former Sec. Sec. 1926.952(c)(2)(iii) and (iv) are
redesignated Sec. Sec. 1926.952(c)(3)(i) and (ii).
OSHA is also adding a note after new Sec. 1926.952(c)(3) to cross-
reference the safe harbor in Sec. 1926.1400(g), which provides that
employers performing subpart V work have the option of complying with
29 CFR 1910.269(p) in lieu of the requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1407
through 1926.1411 of new subpart CC. For additional information, see
the discussion of Sec. 1926.1400(g) in the preamble to this final
rule.
Subpart X--Stairways and Ladders
Amendment to Sec. 1926.1050 Scope, Application, and Definitions
Applicable to This Subpart
This section applies the provisions of subpart X to all stairways
and ladders used in construction. However, C-DAC concluded that the
OSHA requirements of subpart X did not account for the characteristics
of the equipment that would be regulated by subpart CC. OSHA agreed
with the committee and, accordingly, is amending Sec. 1926.1050(a) to
explain that subpart X does not apply to integral components of
equipment covered by subpart CC. It further explains that only subpart
CC establishes the circumstances when ladders and stairways must be
provided on equipment covered by subpart CC. This revision is also
discussed in the preamble section for Sec. 1926.1423(c).
Appendix A to Part 1926 Designations for General Industry Standards
Incorporated Into Body of Construction Standards
OSHA modified Appendix A to part 1926. Before the promulgation of
this final rule, Appendix A referred to former Sec. 1926.550(a)(19),
which has been redesignated and reserved. Therefore, the reference to
this section and the reference to the general industry standard it
incorporated, Sec. 1910.184(c)(9), have been deleted. This deletion is
a technical and conforming change, does not change any existing rights
or obligations, and no member of the regulated community is likely to
object to it. OSHA, therefore, finds good cause that the opportunity
for public comment is unnecessary within the meaning of 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B), 29 U.S.C. 655(b), and 29 CFR 1911.5
29 CFR Part 1926 Subpart CC
The Agency is promulgating Subpart CC for regulating the use of
cranes and derricks in construction. Cranes and derricks used in
construction had been regulated by Sec. 1926.550. Accordingly, Sec.
1926.550 has been redesignated and reserved.
Section 1926.1400 Scope
As explained in the proposed rule, C-DAC decided to describe the
scope of the rule with both a functional description (``power-operated
equipment used in construction that can hoist, lower, and horizontally
move a suspended load'') together with a non-exclusive list of the
types of existing equipment that are covered.\3\ By defining the scope
in this way, C-DAC tried to provide the clearest possible notice as to
the equipment that is covered by the standard while also including new
and/or other existing equipment that is similar to the listed examples.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The scope of the standard with respect to some of the listed
equipment is further delineated in the section of the standard that
specifically relates to that equipment (for example, Sec.
1926.1436, Derricks and Sec. 1926.1438, Overhead & Gantry Cranes).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One commenter objected to this approach, believing that the
approach does not provide the regulated community with clear notice of
the bounds of the regulated equipment. (ID-0286.1.) This commenter
recommended that OSHA avoid this perceived notice problem by limiting
the scope of the standard to equipment described in ASME B30 standards.
It recommended adding the words ``and is described in American Society
of Mechanical Engineers ASME B30 standards'' at the end of the first
sentence of proposed paragraph (a) of this section.
OSHA disagrees with this commenter that paragraph (a), when read
together with the list of exclusions in paragraph (c) of this section,
does not provide clear notice as to what equipment is covered and what
is excluded. As explained earlier, paragraph (a) is designed to make
clear the types of existing equipment that are covered while also
covering newly-developed equipment that is similar to the listed
examples. The approach suggested by the commenter would limit any
coverage of newly developed equipment to any such equipment that might
be included in an unspecified future ASME B30 standard, without the
opportunity for OSHA to assess that equipment to determine whether its
exemption from subpart CC would be appropriate. OSHA concludes that
this approach may unduly limit the scope of subpart CC. In addition, it
would contradict the intent of C-DAC with respect to several specific
types of equipment. For example, at least three
[[Page 47922]]
types of covered equipment that meet the functional definition in
paragraph (a), dedicated pile drivers,\4\ digger derricks (see the
discussion of digger derricks below under paragraph (c)(4)), and
straddle cranes are not covered in ASME B30 standards, while the ASME
B30 standards include equipment (e.g., stacker cranes) not covered
under this standard. Thus, adopting the commenter's suggestion would
exclude certain equipment that C-DAC intended to include and would
introduce ambiguity over whether certain types of equipment that C-DAC
intended to exclude are included. Where the commenter has not made a
compelling argument as to why the standard would be improved by
adopting the ASME standards, OSHA defers to C-DAC's expertise on this
issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The proposed rule explained in detail why C-DAC decided to
include dedicated pile drivers under this rule even though they are
not traditionally considered to be cranes or derricks (see 73 FR
59727, Oct. 9, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A commenter objected to defining the scope of the standard in terms
of types of equipment, saying that it represented an unexplained
departure from OSHA's practice of describing the scope of construction
standards in terms of conditions and practices. (ID-0203.1.) Contrary
to this commenter's belief, OSHA has often defined construction
standards in terms of equipment. See, e.g., subpart L, ``Scaffolds.''
Indeed, this rule for cranes and derricks replaces a previous rule for
cranes and derricks at former Sec. 1926.550, the scope of which was
also defined in terms of types of equipment.
Several commenters asked OSHA to clarify the meaning of
``construction'' as it is used in paragraph (a) of this section. (ID-
0147.1; -0165.1; -0214.1; -0235.1.) Some of these comments asked OSHA
to clarify whether the use of lifting equipment to deliver materials to
a construction site is covered under the standard. That issue is
addressed below and is clarified in a new Sec. 1926.1400(c)(17). One
commenter noted that OSHA draws a distinction between construction work
and routine maintenance and asked for examples of activities that fall
under ``construction'' and under ``maintenance.'' (ID-0147.1.) OSHA
notes that considerable guidance on this distinction is already
available. Several interpretive documents that discuss the distinction
between construction and maintenance in the context of specific
inquiries and issues are available on OSHA's Web site. See, e.g.,
November 18, 2003, Letter of Interpretation to Raymond V. Knobbs,
Minnotte Contracting Corporation, available at http://www.osha.gov;
February 1, 1999, Letter of Interpretation to Randall A. Tindell,
Williams Power Company, available at http://www.osha.gov; August 11,
1994, Memorandum from James W. Stanley, Deputy Assistant Secretary,
available at http://www.osha.gov.
Two commenters objected to the inclusion of overhead and gantry
cranes on the basis that such cranes are rarely used in construction
and that a number of the most significant provisions of the standard,
such as those covering ground conditions and proximity to power lines,
do not apply to overhead and gantry cranes. (ID-0122.0; -0191.1.) OSHA
agrees that overhead and gantry cranes that are installed in general
industry workplaces and used only incidentally for construction work in
such facilities should be covered under the general industry standard.
This final standard accommodates this objective by providing, in Sec.
1926.1438, that overhead and gantry cranes that are permanently
installed in a facility are covered by the general industry standard
even though used in construction work, such as renovating the facility
in which they are installed. However, under Sec. 1926.1438, overhead
and gantry cranes that are not permanently installed in a facility,
such as a launching gantry used in the construction of a bridge, are
covered by this standard. Such cranes are intended to be used for
construction work, present many of the same hazards as other equipment
used in construction work, and are properly regulated under this
construction standard.
No other comments were received objecting to the inclusion of items
on the non-exclusive list in paragraph (a).
Several commenters asked that construction work performed in
certain industries be excluded from the standard. The industries making
such requests include railroads (ID-0170.1; -0176.1); shipbuilders (ID-
0195.1); electric utilities (ID-0203.1; -0215.1); and companies that
install signs in buildings under construction (ID-0189.1). For all of
these industries, the commenters identify what they believe are
specific problems in applying the standard to their activities and
suggest that the most direct way of solving those problems is to
exclude them from the standard entirely. For the following reasons,
OSHA declines to exempt construction work performed by employers in
these industries from the scope of this standard.
Two commenters ask that work along railroad rights-of-way be
excluded from the standard. (ID-0170.1; -0176.1.) They claim that a
number of provisions in the proposed rule are not suitable for railroad
operations, including: (1) The operator qualification/certification
requirement because no current certifying organization tests for the
type of cranes used by railroads; (2) the requirements for ground
conditions, work area control, and level positioning; and (3) the
requirement for a dedicated channel if electronic signals are used.
They also say that most such work is maintenance rather than
construction. OSHA concludes there is merit in some of the specific
concerns raised by these commenters and addresses those concerns in the
sections of the standard pertaining to them. However, OSHA sees no
basis for excluding work along railroad rights-of-way from this rule.
Some such work, such as the replacement or renovation of automotive
bridges over railroads, is plainly ``construction work'' that is
appropriately regulated under this construction standard.
Several commenters raised concerns with the effect that this
rulemaking would have on electric utilities, including: (1) The limited
exclusion for digger derricks used in the industry; (2) the proposed
requirement that employers performing subpart V work show that it is
infeasible to maintain the normal clearance from energized power lines
before they can use the less restrictive clearances in subpart V; (3)
application of the operator qualification/certification requirement to
the industry; and (4) the duties imposed on utility employers when
other employers operate equipment near power lines owned or operated by
the utility employers. (ID-0201.1; -0203.1; -0215.1.) The commenters
suggest that all of these issues can be resolved by excluding utilities
entirely from the standard.
OSHA does not agree that this limited group of concerns justifies
completely excluding utilities from this standard. The use of cranes in
utility construction work has always been subject to the construction
crane standards (see Sec. 1926.952(c)), and these commenters have not
advanced a persuasive argument to discontinue this practice. The
specific issues addressed by these commenters with respect to the
application of this rule to electric utilities will be addressed below
in sections dealing with those issues.
A commenter that operates shipyards in three states asks that
shipyards be excluded from the standard. (ID-0195.1.) This commenter
states that it currently has an excellent crane safety program that is
based on general industry and shipyard standards, and asserts that its
program would be adversely affected by the need to
[[Page 47923]]
administer a separate program for the ``small percentage of lifts''
that would fall under the construction standard. The commenter notes
that the proposed standard has partially addressed its concern by
providing that overhead and gantry cranes that are permanently
installed in a facility are subject to the general industry standard
for such cranes rather than this proposed construction standard. It
states that shipyards ``could potentially'' use other types of cranes
to support construction activities at its sites.
OSHA finds that the proposed rule appropriately addressed this
issue. Overhead and gantry cranes are one of the most common type of
crane used in shipyards and, as the commenter notes, Sec. 1926.1438
allows employers with permanently installed overhead and gantry cranes
to continue to follow the general industry standard. Moreover, 29 CFR
1915.2(a), provides that the shipyard standards ``apply to all ship
repairing, shipbuilding and shipbreaking employments and related
employments.'' Therefore, some work that would otherwise be considered
construction work and subject to subpart CC is in fact included in such
``related employments.'' Therefore, subpart CC will likely affect
shipyards only to a limited extent.
While it is understandable that the commenter may find it more
convenient to administer a single program addressing only the general
industry and shipyard standards, it has not substantiated its claim
that the integration of this standard into that program or
implementation of an additional program addressing this standard would
not improve safety. The Agency notes that the commenter's construction
operations have historically been subject to part 1926 subpart N.
A representative of employers who install signs in buildings asks
that sign erection be excluded from the standard. (ID-0189.1.) This
commenter says that sign erection is low-risk work because most signs
are relatively light (rarely exceeding 2,000 pounds) and the equipment
used is ``light duty'' equipment with relatively simple operating
controls. For heavier signs, it states that sign installers typically
hire crane companies that employ certified and professional crane
operators. The commenter notes that proposed Sec. 1926.1441 would
exempt equipment with a rated capacity of 2,000 pounds or less from the
standard but says this would not provide the industry with relief
because sign installers must use higher capacity cranes due to the
reach needed to install signs. Although it asks for complete exclusion,
the commenter makes clear that its objection pertains to the
requirement for operator qualification/certification in Sec.
1926.1427. It asks for less stringent requirements for its industry,
such as employer self-certification and a broader range of training and
certifying entities, such as accredited educational institutions.
OSHA declines to exempt sign installation from the standard. Using
cranes for sign installation on construction sites involves the same
hazards as when used for other purposes. Examples include installation
of signs near power lines; operation of the crane at an extended radius
due to the need for long reach, which can heighten the risk of tip-
over; the risk to the sign installers of losing the load; failures due
to poor equipment condition or miscommunication between the operator
and signal person. Finally, the commenter's objections to the operator
qualification/certification requirements for its industry parallels
objections raised by others and will be addressed in the discussion of
Sec. 1926.1427.
A commenter representing the propane gas industry says that
industry does not use cranes in ``construction work'' and asks OSHA to
``affirm'' this in the final rule. (ID-0198.1.) The commenter asserts
that the industry installs propane storage tanks ranging from 120 to
5,000 gallons capacity using truck-mounted cranes to lift and place the
tanks onto supports.
From this limited description of the industry's use of cranes, it
is likely that at least some of the industry's work is construction
work. If the site at which the tank is installed is a building under
construction, installation of a propane tank would qualify as
construction work, just as the installation of an air conditioning unit
on that site would be construction work. At the other extreme,
replacing a small tank at an existing site with a new tank of the same
capacity would be considered general industry work. In sum, based on
the information provided, it appears that some of the industry's work
is construction work and some is general industry. OSHA therefore
cannot ``affirm'' that the propane industry is excluded from the
standard.
For the foregoing reasons, OSHA is promulgating paragraph (a) as
proposed except for a grammatical correction to clarify that the
standard applies to only equipment used for construction activities.
Employers who use covered equipment for both general industry work and
construction work would not be required to comply with subpart CC when
the equipment is used for general industry work and not construction
work.
Paragraph (b)
Proposed paragraph (b) of this section provided that equipment
covered by paragraph (a) remains within the scope of the standard when
used with attachments that are either ``crane-attached or suspended.''
As defined in Sec. 1926.1401, an ``attachment'' is ``any device that
expands the range of tasks that can be done by the equipment. Examples
include, but are not limited to: an auger, drill, magnet, pile-driver,
and boom-attached personnel platform.'' C-DAC decided to include such
attachments, even though they might not use the crane's hoisting
mechanism, to avoid the confusion that would result if the equipment
moved in and out of coverage of the rule as attachments are put on and
taken off. Furthermore, most of the operational characteristics and
hazards of the equipment remain the same while the attachment is in
use. No comments were received regarding this paragraph, and it is
being promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)
Proposed paragraph (c) of this section listed machinery that would
be specifically excluded from the scope of the rule. As discussed
below, several of these proposed exclusions generated public comment.
Proposed paragraph (c)(1) provided that machinery otherwise
included under Sec. 1926.1400(a) but ``converted or adapted for non-
hoisting/lifting use'' is excluded. Power shovels, excavators and
concrete pumps are listed as nonexclusive examples of such
``conversions/adaptations'' or modified machinery.
A commenter suggested that OSHA consider including concrete pumping
trucks because they are configured as cranes and suspend loads over a
distance. (ID-0178.1.) C-DAC considered this issue but decided not to
include them. While a concrete pumping truck does pose some of the same
hazards as a crane, its load (i.e., the concrete being pumped) is
carried in a piping system affixed to its boom, rather than being
suspended. Consequently, it does not fit the functional definition in
paragraph (a) of this section. This commenter noted that, like a crane,
a concrete pumping truck may have outriggers or be located near a power
line. However, this standard is designed to address the hazards that
are specific to cranes and derricks rather than to address stability
and power line
[[Page 47924]]
clearance issues for all types of construction equipment.
A commenter asked that a type of equipment for which it holds
patent rights, the ``Linemaster Robotic Arm,'' be excluded. (ID-
0209.1.) According to the commenter, this equipment is a hydraulically
powered, boom mounted, rotating and telescopic robotic arm that is used
to separate live power lines from poles. The commenter states that
crews using the robotic arm use a crane only as a non-hoisting support
machine, and that the crane cannot be used to lift or haul materials
because its winch line is removed. The commenter believes that such
equipment should be excluded under paragraph (c)(1) because the crane
has been converted to a non-hoisting use.
OSHA does not agree with this commenter. As discussed above, under
paragraph (b) of this section, equipment otherwise covered by the
standard remains covered when used with attachments that are either
``crane-attached or suspended.'' The description of the robotic arm
supplied by the commenter suggests that the robotic arm fits within
paragraph (b). As explained above, paragraph (b) is designed to avoid
having equipment move in and out of coverage as attachments are added
and removed. Excluding a crane when a robotic arm is attached would be
inconsistent with that objective. Moreover, as the preamble to the
proposed rule stated, even when a crane is being used for a non-
hoisting purpose, its hoisting capability is still present, and most of
its operational characteristics and hazards remain the same while the
attachment is in use.
For those reasons, and those explained in the preamble to the
proposed rule, paragraph (c)(1) is promulgated as proposed (see 73 FR
59729, Oct. 9, 2008).
Proposed paragraph (c)(2) excluded power shovels, excavators, wheel
loaders, backhoes, loader backhoes, and track loaders. It provided that
such machinery is also excluded when used with chains, slings or other
rigging to lift suspended loads. These types of material handling
machinery were excluded even though, when used to lift suspended loads,
they present hazards similar to those associated with equipment covered
by the proposed rule. However, C-DAC proposed to exclude them because
it determined that the differences between the equipment included in
the standard and the material handling machinery that is excluded are
such that one standard could not be readily designed to suit both. OSHA
agrees. It should be noted that another construction standard, Sec.
1926.602 in subpart O--Motor Vehicles, Mechanized Equipment, and Marine
Operations, covers the material handling equipment that is excluded
from this standard. No comments were received concerning paragraph
(c)(2), and it is promulgated as proposed.
Proposed paragraph (c)(3) excluded automotive wreckers and tow
trucks ``when used to clear wrecks and haul vehicles'' (see explanation
at 73 FR 59729, Oct. 9, 2008). No comments were submitted on this
paragraph, and it is promulgated as proposed for the reasons provided
in the preamble to the proposed rule.
Proposed paragraph (c)(4) would have excluded service trucks with
mobile lifting devices that are designed specifically for use in the
power line and electric industries when those trucks are used either to
auger holes to set power and utility poles or to handle associated
materials that will be installed or removed from utility poles. A
digger derrick, or radial boom derrick, is an example of such a truck.
This machinery is currently covered by subpart N, with the
exception of certain provisions, by virtue of Sec. 1926.952(c). We
note that ASME B30.5-2004 excludes digger derricks and ``cranes
manufactured specifically for, or when used for, energized electrical
line service'' from the scope of that industry consensus standard.
Digger derricks are a specialized type of equipment designed to
install utility poles. They are equipped with augers to drill holes for
the poles and with a hydraulic boom to lift the poles and set them in
the holes. The booms can also be used to lift objects other than poles,
and electric utilities use them both to place objects on utility poles
and for general lifting purposes at worksites such as utility
substations. (ID-0139.1.) Digger derricks have rated capacities as high
as 36,000 pounds. (ID-0369.1.) When electric utilities are finished
with them, they sell them to other construction companies. (ID-0341.)
Since its promulgation in 1972, subpart V (``Power Transmission and
Distribution'') has excluded digger derricks from certain requirements
of subpart N. C-DAC considered whether to continue special treatment of
digger derricks used in subpart V work and proposed to exclude digger
derricks used in Subpart V work from the standard to the extent they
are used to auger holes and to handle associated materials to be
installed on or removed from utility poles. C-DAC determined that such
an exclusion was appropriate because of the ``narrow, specialized range
of activities and circumstances in which such trucks are used'' (73 FR
59729, Oct. 9, 2008).
Most of the commenters on this issue favored an exclusion for
digger derricks but asked that the proposed exclusion be broadened to
all uses of digger derricks by electric utilities. (ID-0129.1; -0139.1;
-0144.1; -0162.1; -0200.1; -0215.1; -0217.1; -0226.) Several noted that
the proposed exclusion would lead to the incongruous result in that
digger derricks would move in and out of coverage depending on the task
they are performing. Noting that most of the exclusions developed by C-
DAC applied to types of equipment rather than specific tasks, a
commenter stated that C-DAC contradicts itself by proposing a task-
related exclusion instead of an equipment-related exclusion. (ID-
0200.1.) One commenter recommended that the proposed exclusion be
extended to the setting and removal of poles. (ID-0209.1.) Another
opposed any exclusion for digger derricks because digger derricks work
in proximity to power lines. (ID-0092.20.)
Some commenters suggested that any exclusion for digger derricks
should also apply to other industries. One stated that a similar
exclusion should apply to digger derricks used to auger holes and set
poles in the telecommunication industry. (ID-0234.) Another contended
that it would be inconsistent to exclude a digger derrick used to set
an electric utility pole but not a telecommunications pole. (ID-
0129.1.) The same commenter also said that digger derricks are used to
set poles for outdoor lighting along roadways and indicated that the
exclusion should apply to such use. A commenter in the railroad
industry said that the exclusion should apply to digger derricks used
in the railroad industry to install utility and communication signal
poles. (ID-0176.1.)
Certain commenters criticized the description of the equipment in
proposed paragraph (c)(4), which described the equipment subject to the
exclusion as ``service trucks with mobile-lifting devices designed
specifically for use in the power line and electric service industries,
such as digger derricks (radial boom derricks).'' One objected to the
limitation that the equipment be ``designed specifically for use in the
power line and electric service industries'' on the basis that
employers should not be required to show the purpose for which their
equipment is designed. (ID-0215.1.) Another, a witness at the public
hearing, stated that the term ``service truck'' used in the proposal
has no commonly
[[Page 47925]]
understood meaning in the industry. (ID-0342.)
OSHA agrees with these commenters that the description of the
excluded machinery should be clarified and is using the term ``digger
derrick'' exclusively to describe the equipment that is subject to the
exclusion. The term ``digger derrick'' is well understood in the
industry and is the only term used to describe the equipment by the
ANSI standard applicable to such equipment, ANSI/ASSE A10.31-2006,
Safety Requirements, Definitions, and Specifications for Digger
Derricks. Accordingly, OSHA concludes that using ``digger derrick''
without reference to the purpose for which the equipment is designed or
synonyms such as ``service truck'' is the clearest way to describe the
exclusion. The Agency notes that despite its name, a ``digger derrick''
is not a ``derrick'' as defined in Sec. 1926.1436(a). Thus, the
additional requirements applicable to derricks in Sec. 1926.1436 do
not apply to digger derricks, and the exception from operator
certification requirements in Sec. 1926.1427(c) for derrick operators
does not apply to operators of digger derricks included within the
scope of Sec. 1926 subpart CC.
OSHA also agrees with the majority of commenters who argued that
the exclusion should be broadened so that it encompasses all digger
derrick work on electric utility poles. Digger derricks are
specifically intended to be used for augering holes for utility poles,
placing the poles in the holes (and removing them when necessary), and
handling materials being installed on or removed from the poles.
Excluding all of these uses will minimize the incongruous result of
having digger derricks move in and out of coverage while they are being
used for their intended purposes at the same worksites. OSHA also
agrees with those commenters who argued that the exclusion should
encompass similar work on poles carrying telecommunication lines, since
the rationale described above is equally applicable.
In addition, OSHA has drafted the exclusion in the final rule so
that it is based on the type of work done with the digger derrick,
rather than the industry classification of the employer performing the
work. For example, digger derricks used by a railroad to install poles
for telecommunication lines would be excluded.
When digger derricks are used in the operation and maintenance of
existing electric power lines, they are subject to the general industry
standard at Sec. 1910.269. OSHA is currently conducting another
rulemaking designed to avoid inconsistencies between subpart V of the
construction standards, which applies to power line construction work,
and Sec. 1910.269 (see 70 FR 34821, Jun. 15, 2005). Pending the
completion of that rulemaking, digger derricks excluded from this rule
will be subject to the same requirements regardless of whether they are
used for work subject to subpart V or work subject to Sec. 1910.269.
To ensure that digger derricks excluded from this rule (Subpart CC) are
subject to appropriate safety requirements, OSHA is including language
in Sec. 1926.1400(c)(4), and is amending subpart V, to explicitly
state that the activities from which digger derricks are excluded from
subpart CC are subject to applicable provisions of Sec. 1910.269.
Those rules include Sec. 1910.269(p) (mechanical equipment), Sec.
1910.269(a)(2) (training), and Sec. 1910.269(l) (work on or near
exposed energized parts).
Similarly, digger derricks used in general industry
telecommunication work are subject to the general industry standard at
Sec. 1910.268. Section 1910.268 includes requirements for working near
energized power lines and requirements pertaining to the operation of
the equipment, such as the need to comply with manufacturer load
ratings. The requirements applicable to digger derricks under the
general industry telecommunications standard (Sec. 1910.268) are
comparable to those in the general industry electric utility standard
(Sec. 1910.269). Accordingly, to ensure that comparable safety
requirements apply to digger derricks during pole work, OSHA is
including language in final Sec. 1926.1400(c)(4) stating that Sec.
1910.268 applies when digger derricks are used in construction work for
telecommunication service. Section 1910.268 includes requirements for
working near energized power lines and requirements pertaining to the
operation of the equipment, such as the need to comply with
manufacturer load ratings.
In addition, Sec. 1926.952(c)(2) is also being amended to conform
subpart V to Sec. 1926.1400(c)(4).
While OSHA agrees that the limited exclusion recommended by C-DAC
should be broadened in this manner, the Agency does not agree that the
exclusion should encompass all uses of digger derricks in electric
utility construction work, as some commenters suggested. Digger
derricks are specifically designed to be used to install and remove
utility poles. However, their lifting ability is not limited to utility
poles, and the record shows that they are used by electric utilities
for general lifting work, such as setting transformers in substations.
Their use with utility poles falls within the ``narrow, specialized
range of activities and circumstances'' that led C-DAC to develop the
proposed exclusion (see 73 FR 59729, Oct. 9, 2008). But when digger
derricks are used for general lifting purposes, the hazards are the
same as when other equipment of similar capacity is used for general
lifting, and the exclusion developed by C-DAC is not appropriate for
such work. OSHA determines that an exclusion limited to augering holes,
setting and removing poles from those holes, and handling associated
material to be installed on or removed from the poles will provide
employees with an appropriate level of protection while accommodating
the unique uses for which digger derricks are designed. It will also
minimize the practical problems associated with equipment moving in and
out of coverage at the same worksite.
OSHA recognizes that excluding digger derricks only when they are
used for pole work would mean that the same machinery might be excluded
for some work but covered when it is used at different worksites.
However, the general lifting work done at those other worksites would
be subject to this standard if done by other types of lifting
equipment, and the same standards should apply as apply to that
equipment. OSHA concludes that excluding digger derricks only for the
work for which they are primarily designed and used is a reasonable
approach. It accommodates the considerations that led C-DAC to propose
a partial exclusion while treating digger derricks used for other
construction work the same as other, similar equipment used for such
work.
OSHA also declines to extend the exclusion broadly to installation
of all poles for outdoor lighting along roadways, as one commenter
suggested. OSHA notes that some poles that carry electric and
telecommunication lines also have street lights installed on them, and
use of digger derricks to install such lights would qualify for the
exclusion to the extent that the employer complies with either
Sec. Sec. 1910.268 or 1910.269. It is unclear whether, and to what
extent, digger derricks are used to install other types of poles used
for lighting alone which do not carry electric power lines or
telecommunication lines. Many such poles are installed on aboveground
concrete bases rather than set in holes in the ground, and it is
unclear whether and to what extent digger derricks are used to install
them. In this regard, OSHA notes that the commenter asking
[[Page 47926]]
for the exclusion to be extended to light poles represents equipment
manufacturers, and no company that installs lighting poles suggested
such an exclusion. To the extent that some light pole installation
would not be covered by either Sec. Sec. 1910.268 or 1910.269,
extending the exclusion to such work would leave the excluded work
without coverage by an appropriate general industry standard and leave
workers without the protection they receive when performing electric
utility or telecommunication work.
OSHA disagrees with the comment that digger derricks should not be
excluded at all because of the danger of power line contact. As
discussed above, the digger derrick exclusion is limited to situations
in which certain general industry standards apply, and those general
industry standards, both Sec. Sec. 1910.268 and 1910.269, contain
requirements for protecting against power line contact.
Proposed paragraph (c)(5) specifically excludes machinery
originally designed as vehicle mounted aerial lifts and self-propelled
elevating work platforms. The language of this provision reflects C-
DAC's intent to differentiate between equipment with an attachment such
as a personnel platform pinned to the boom, which is within the scope
of the proposed rule, and machinery originally designed to be
configured only as an aerial lift, which is excluded. Another standard,
Sec. 1926.453, addresses aerial lifts. The only comments to address
this exclusion supported retaining it. (ID-0129.1; -0312.1.)
Accordingly, paragraph (c)(5) is promulgated as proposed.
Proposed paragraph (c)(6) excluded telescopic/hydraulic gantry
systems. C-DAC excluded this machinery because it presents hazards that
differ in many respects from those presented by the equipment covered
by this standard. As a result, many provisions of this standard would
not be workable or needed for this equipment, and hazards unique to
this type of machinery would not be addressed. In the proposed rule,
OSHA noted that the Specialized Carriers & Rigging Foundation recently
issued a voluntary consensus standard for telescopic/hydraulic gantry
systems. (73 FR 59730, Oct. 9, 2008; ID-0027.) As no comments on this
exclusion were received, paragraph (c)(6) is promulgated as proposed.
Under proposed paragraph (c)(7), stacker cranes were excluded. C-
DAC noted that these cranes are rarely used in construction, and their
configuration is too unlike other equipment covered by the proposed
standard to warrant inclusion. No comments on this exclusion were
received, and paragraph (c)(7) is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)(8) of the proposed rule excluded ``powered industrial
trucks (forklifts).'' C-DAC proposed to exclude such machines because
forklifts are mostly used in a manner that does not involve suspended
loads and would often require different responses to the hazards
presented than are provided in this standard.
OSHA solicited public comment on whether the scope language should
be modified to explicitly state that forklifts modified to perform
tasks similar to cranes are covered. Two commenters stated that the
inclusion in paragraph (a) of this section of multi-purpose machines
when configured to hoist and lower by means of a winch or hook would
include forklifts that are modified to perform tasks similar to a
crane. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) Several other commenters argued that
forklifts should be excluded even if they are configured to perform
tasks similar to cranes and suggested adding specific language to that
effect. (ID-0187.1; -0231.1; -0232.1) These commenters noted that
forklifts are regulated under a different section, Sec. 1926.602(c),
and believed that Sec. 1926.602(c) was better suited to the hazards
presented by such equipment than this standard. One commenter stated
that the challenges facing modified forklift operators are
fundamentally different from the challenges facing crane operators,
thus the standards regulating them should also be fundamentally
different. (ID-0231.1.)
The comments submitted on this issue highlight the need for greater
clarity. This standard applies to equipment that can hoist, lower and
horizontally move a suspended load. First, as a preliminary matter, the
standard does not apply to forklifts used exclusively in their most
traditional form: placing the forks underneath a load and using the
forks to lift or lower the load. With a ``suspended'' load, the forks
(or modified lifting device) would be above the load.
Second, OSHA has included paragraph (c)(8) to exclude forklifts
when used to suspend a load from its forks. OSHA recognized that a
forklift could technically meet the criteria of subpart CC coverage
whenever it is used to suspend a load from its forks (such as by
hanging the load from a chain wrapped around the forks), hoist it
vertically by raising or lowering the forks, and move the load
horizontally by moving the entire forklift. Under such a scenario the
forks are used as the primary support for a load suspended directly
from the forks, but OSHA concludes that these forklifts warrant an
exception from the scope of this subpart CC because they do not utilize
the components in the same manner as other equipment covered by this
standard. In contrast, a piece of equipment covered by this standard
manipulates suspended loads by utilizing components such as winches,
booms, jibs, gantries, and trolleys. Outriggers and stabilizers are
also often needed to stabilize the equipment while hoisting a load.
Third, OSHA is revising paragraph (c)(8) to clarify that the
forklift exclusion applies only to forklifts that do not meet the
definition of multi-purpose machines covered under subpart CC (those
that are configured to hoist and lower (by means of a winch or hook)
and horizontally move a suspended load). This standard covers multi-
purpose machines because they are configured with the above-mentioned
components (winches, booms, jibs, gantries, trolleys, stabilizers,
etc.), even though they also have a dual function. OSHA recognizes that
a powered industrial truck could be modified so that it would qualify
as a multi-purpose machine, such as by adding an after-market boom and
hook attachment in addition to the fork attachment. It is the Agency's
intent that forklifts that are capable of multiple configurations are
treated as multi-purpose machines and excluded from coverage of subpart
CC only as set forth in Sec. 1926.1400(a). A forklift with a boom
attachment affixed to its forks that uses a hook to raise and lower the
load like a crane would be covered by subpart CC. However, as noted in
the preamble to the proposed rule, a forklift would be excluded from
the coverage of subpart CC when its sole means of suspending a load is
a chain wrapped around the forks.
Proposed paragraph (c)(9) excluded mechanics' trucks with hoisting
devices when used in activities related to equipment maintenance and
repair. One commenter stated that similar trucks are used in the power
line industry for tasks such as installing transformers and suggested
that such equipment should also be excluded. (ID-0144.1.) However, as
explained in the proposed rule, this provision was not intended to
exclude mechanics' trucks when used to hoist materials during
construction work but only to provide a limited exception when they are
used for equipment maintenance and repair activities. Their use in this
manner is similar to the way automotive wreckers and tow trucks, which
are excluded under paragraph (c)(3) of this section, are used. OSHA
determines that this exclusion should be
[[Page 47927]]
limited in the manner stated in the proposed rule, and paragraph (c)(9)
is promulgated as proposed.
In proposed paragraph (c)(10), machinery that hoists by using a
come-a-long or chainfall was excluded for the reasons explained in the
preamble to the proposed rule (see 73 FR 59730, Oct. 9, 2008). No
comments were received on this provision, and it is promulgated as
proposed.
Proposed paragraph (c)(11) excluded dedicated drilling rigs. This
exclusion received substantial attention during the C-DAC negotiations
and was discussed at length in the proposed rule (see 73 FR 59730, Oct.
9, 2008). OSHA requested public comment on issues related to this
exclusion. No written comments were submitted but, in testimony at the
public hearing, a trade association supported the proposed exclusion.
(ID-0341.) Accordingly, paragraph (c)(11) is promulgated as proposed.
Proposed paragraph (c)(12) excluded ``gin poles when used for the
erection of communication towers.'' (See discussion at 73 FR 59730,
Oct. 9, 2008). A commenter stated that this exclusion should be
extended to also cover gin poles used to erect electrical transmission
towers and lines, but gave no supporting rationale or information. (ID-
0209.1.)
The use of gin poles for erecting communications towers is highly
specialized; the communication tower industry has developed a detailed
consensus standard that specifically addresses their use in that
application.\5\ However, the Agency is unaware of a similar degree of
specialization and development of safe practices for gin poles used for
erecting electrical transmission towers. Accordingly, OSHA lacks a
basis for extending the exclusion to work other than that covered in
proposed paragraph (c)(12); paragraph (c)(12) is promulgated as
proposed with the addition of the word ``when'' before ``used'' to
clarify that the exclusion does not apply when gin poles previously
used to erect communication towers are used for other purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See ANSI/TIA-1019 (2004), Structural Standards for Steel Gin
Poles Used for Installation of Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting
Structures, which contains detailed provisions for installing and
using gin poles to erect communication towers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed paragraph (c)(13) excluded tree trimming and tree removal
work from the scope of the proposed rule. One commenter favored the
exclusion as written (ID-0040.1), but another suggested limiting the
exclusion to tree trimming performed for maintenance and including tree
trimming related to construction (ID-0172.1). The latter commenter
stated that tree trimming related to construction is particularly
dangerous because the weight of the pick is uncertain and the ground
conditions to support the equipment may be inadequate.
C-DAC agreed to exclude tree trimming and removal because the vast
majority of the tree care industry's work does not take place in
construction and is therefore governed by general industry standards.
OSHA continues to agree that this is a valid reason for the exclusion.
OSHA is promulgating paragraph (c)(13) as proposed.
Proposed paragraph (c)(14) excluded anchor handling with a vessel
or barge using an affixed A-frame. Two commenters suggested that the
vessels to which this paragraph pertains should be excluded even when
used for purposes other than anchor handling to avoid having the
vessels move in and out of coverage depending on how they are used.
(ID-0376.1; -0383.1.) These commenters stated that such vessels are
sometimes used for dredging operations and suggested rewording the
exclusion to state: ``Anchor handling or dredge related operations with
a vessel or barge using an affixed A-frame.''
OSHA is adopting these commenters' suggestion and their recommended
wording of paragraph (c)(14). As explained in the proposed rule, C-DAC
agreed to the exclusion in proposed paragraph (c)(14) because its
Cranes on Barges Work Group concluded that the requirements of this
rule could not readily be applied to the specialized equipment listed
in the exclusion. That rationale favors the broader exclusion
recommended by the commenters.
Proposed paragraph (c)(15) excluded roustabouts because C-DAC
concluded that the proposed standard was similarly unsuited to address
these devices (see 73 FR 59731, Oct. 9, 2008). No commenters addressed
this issue, and paragraph (c)(15) is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)(16) excludes helicopter cranes. Such cranes are
regulated under Sec. 1926.551 of subpart N, which is not affected by
this final rule and continues in effect. C-DAC and OSHA did not intend
to cover helicopter cranes under this subpart. However, such cranes fit
the description in Sec. 1926.1400(a) of the equipment covered by this
rule in that they are power-operated equipment that can hoist, lower,
and horizontally move a suspended load. To avoid any uncertainty over
whether they are subject to this rule or to Sec. 1926.551, OSHA is
explicitly excluding them from this rule through paragraph (c)(16).
Paragraph (c)(17) Delivery of Material to Construction Sites
It is common for material that is to be used in construction work
to be delivered to the construction site on a truck equipped with a
lifting attachment that is used either to place the materials on the
ground or to place them on the structure. For example, articulating/
knuckle-boom truck cranes are often used to deliver bundles of drywall
to the site and then move the bundles from the truck up to a floor of
the building under construction. To the extent these cranes are used in
``construction work,'' they fall within the scope of this final rule as
defined in Sec. 1926.1400(a).
OSHA has long taken the view that an employer who delivers
materials to a construction site is not engaged in ``construction
work'' if that employer's work once at the site is limited to simply
placing/stacking the materials on the ground. OSHA requested comment
from the public on whether the final rule should include an explicit
exclusion to this effect (see 73 FR 59731, Oct. 9, 2008).
Most commenters on this issue favored such an exclusion to clarify
that such equipment was not being used in construction. (ID-0145.1; -
0147.1; -0165.1; -0184.1; -0206.1; -0218.1; -0232.1; -0233.1; -0235.1;
-0299.1.) Certain commenters expressed the view that any such exclusion
should also extend to delivery of materials onto structures at the
construction site because, in their view, this was also not a
construction activity. (E.g., ID -0184.1; -0233.1; -0235.1.) Some of
these commenters represented employers who deliver building materials
such as lumber, drywall, and roofing materials. (See, e.g., ID-0184.1;
-0233.1.) Others represented employers in the heating, ventilation, air
conditioning, and refrigeration (HVACR) industry. (ID-0165.1; -0235.1.)
Several of the commenters pointed to the operator training and/or
certification requirements in Sec. 1926.1427 of the proposed rule as
particularly burdensome given the distinctions between delivery
activities and what they characterized as the more complex activities
typically associated with the equipment covered by the proposed rule.
(ID-0165.1; -0184.1; -0218.1; -0231.1; -0233.1; -0235.1.)
OSHA notes some commenter confusion regarding instances when the
construction materials are not delivered to the curb or a stockyard but
instead to a designated area on the construction site where the
materials are staged/organized to facilitate hoisting activities. In
these scenarios, OSHA construction
[[Page 47928]]
standards apply. See, e.g., Letter to Johnson (2/6/08) (stacking of
materials), Letter to Reynolds (1/5/01) (delivery of materials onto
structure). When hoisting equipment is used to arrange the materials in
a particular sequence for hoisting or to lift materials onto a
structure that is under construction, it is being used to expedite work
that is integral to the construction process and is, therefore,
construction work. However, to remain consistent with existing
compliance guidance, this final rule states that when lifting equipment
is used solely to deliver building supply materials from a supplier to
a construction site by placing/stacking the materials on the ground,
without arranging the materials in a particular sequence for hoisting,
OSHA does not regard the delivery process as a construction activity.
OSHA believes that this limited and conditional exclusion will exclude
this equipment when used to perform such deliveries and address the
concerns of commenters who only deliver construction materials to the
ground.
Construction typically consists of a process of assembling and
attaching (or in some cases, disassembling) a vast variety of materials
to form a building or other structure.\6\ In building construction,
those materials typically include small, individual items (a few
examples include: nails, lumber, pipes, duct work sections, electrical
items, sheet goods), large individual items (a few examples include:
structural steel or precast concrete columns and beams), and
prefabricated structural and building system components (a few examples
include: roof trusses, precast concrete wall sections, and building
machinery such as boilers, pumps, and air handling equipment). All of
these items must be delivered to the jobsite and unloaded from the
vehicle delivering them before they can be used in the building or
structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Construction also includes the deconstruction or demolition
of a portion, or all, of a structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-DAC indicated that to facilitate the assembling or attaching of
such items, cranes and derricks are often used to hoist and hold,
support, stabilize, maneuver, or place them. Sometimes they are used to
place items in a convenient location for subsequent use. For example,
they are often used to place a bundle of steel decking sheets onto the
structure for later ``shaking out'' (i.e., after being landed on the
structure, workers ``break'' the bundle and distribute the decking
sheets for subsequent attachment). One of OSHA's construction standards
contains specific requirements related to the landing and placing of
such bundles (see Sec. 1926.754(e)(1)).
Sometimes cranes and derricks are used to place an item in a
specific location for immediate attachment. For example, cranes are
typically used to precisely place steel columns on concrete footings,
which involves aligning holes at the column's base with anchor rods/
bolts in the footing so that the column can be secured to the footing.
In building and bridge construction, cranes are often used to precisely
place precast concrete members so that workers can attach them to other
precast members (or sometimes to a structural steel frame).
Cranes are also used to place precast concrete components so that
other items can be connected to them. For example, in utility and sewer
construction, precast concrete manholes or vaults are placed for proper
alignment with utility pipes; in residential construction, precast
concrete septic systems are placed for proper location in an
excavation. Clearly, such movement and placement of material by cranes
and derricks is integral to the construction process, and the fact that
this may be done by the vehicle that delivered the material to the site
does not make it a non-construction activity.
Cranes are also commonly used to hoist building materials onto a
structure for subsequent use. Although this is also a construction
activity,\7\ OSHA determines that a limited exclusion for articulating/
knuckle-boom truck cranes used for such work is appropriate to minimize
having this equipment move in and out of coverage of this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Moving building materials onto a structure for subsequent
use is an integral part of the construction process. This is the
case whether the materials are brought onto the structure by hand,
with the aid of a crane after the materials had been previously
delivered to the ground, or by the same equipment that brought them
to the site. See e.g., January 5, 2001, Letter of Interpretation to
Mr. Jeff Reynolds, Division Safety Manager Pacific Supply, available
at http://www.osha.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The record shows that articulating/knuckle-boom truck cranes are
often used to deliver sheet goods (e.g., drywall), or packaged
materials (e.g., roofing shingles) to construction sites and that it is
common for the delivery to be made onto the structure. Delivering
material to a structure can pose a hazard that is typically not present
when material is placed on the ground: when the boom is extended, as
when lifting the material to an upper floor, the possibility of
exceeding the crane's rated capacity, with the resultant possibility of
boom collapse and crane tipover, is present. A representative of a
material delivery trade association testified that articulating/
knuckle-boom cranes are equipped with automatic safety systems that
detect whether the crane is close to being overloaded and automatically
prevent such overloading. (ID-0341; -0380.1; -0381.1.)
The representative described a test on a crane with a load of 2,900
pounds and a maximum extension of 78 feet, 11 inches, and said that the
automatic device preventing the boom from extending beyond its maximum
safe length for that load and angle of 46 feet. (ID-0341.) Thus, with a
load that is typical of the loads that are often delivered, the hazard
of the crane collapsing exists with the boom at far less than its
maximum possible extension. Another representative of the material
delivery industry, also noted the presence of such devices on the
equipment used by its members and, while it asked for such equipment to
be exempt completely from this rule, alternatively suggested an
exemption for equipment with such devices installed. (ID-0184.1.)
OSHA is, to a large extent, adopting the commenter's suggestion.
The overloading and subsequent collapse of cranes is one of the primary
hazards this final rule seeks to address. The trade association
witness's testimony shows that the potential for collapse is present
when articulating/knuckle-boom cranes are used to deliver materials
onto a structure. The industry has, however, addressed this hazard by
equipping such cranes with automatic overload prevention devices.
Therefore, OSHA is excluding articulating/knuckle-boom cranes used to
deliver materials onto a structure from the final rule, but only when
the cranes are equipped with properly functioning automatic overload
prevention devices. Without such a device, the crane is subject to all
provisions of this final rule. It should be noted that electrical
contact with power lines is another serious hazard covered by the final
rule. The limited exemption for articulating/knuckle-boom cranes used
for certain construction operations also exempts this equipment from
the requirements for operations near power lines contained in the final
rule. When performing an exempt operation, this equipment (like must of
the other exempt equipment and operations) will be covered by revised
Sec. 1926.600(a)(6).
OSHA is limiting this exclusion to the delivery of sheet goods and
packaged materials including, but not limited to: sheets of sheet rock,
sheets of plywood, bags of cement, sheets or packages of roofing
shingles, and rolls of roofing felt. The placement of other materials
on a structure under construction is the type of core construction
activity this rule seeks to address, and excluding the
[[Page 47929]]
hoisting and movement of other types of materials, such as precast
concrete members, prefabricated building sections, or structural steel
members, would severely reduce the rule's effectiveness. Moreover,
equipment used to lift these types of materials on construction sites
is rarely, if ever, used for non-construction activities on those sites
and does not often present the problem of equipment moving in and out
of coverage when used for different activities.
OSHA is also limiting the exclusion by making it clear that it does
not apply when the crane is used to hold, support or stabilize the
material to facilitate a construction activity, such as holding
material in place while it is attached to the structure. For example,
while placing a package of shingles onto the roof of a structure would
fall within the exemption, suspending the shingles in the air and
moving them to follow the progress of the roofer would not. When the
crane is being used to facilitate the construction activity, it has
exceeded the ``delivery'' of goods and is therefore engaged in a
process that is more complex than the scenarios addressed by the
commenters who supported an exclusion for materials delivery. OSHA is
also concerned that exempting this activity would provide an incentive
for employers to use materials delivery cranes for other purposes,
thereby undermining the rationale for the materials delivery exclusion.
In particular, OSHA declines to exclude the handling of HVACR
units, as some commenters urged. Using a crane to deliver HVACR
equipment is an example of using a crane to hoist and position a
component of the building's mechanical systems, which is an integral
part of the construction process. According to one industry commenter,
during a typical installation of a large commercial rooftop HVACR unit,
a mobile crane delivers the equipment to its intended location on the
roof, where an HVACR technician connects the equipment to the
ventilation system. (ID-0165.1) Thus, unlike sheet goods and packaged
materials, which are not placed in their location of final use by the
delivery vehicle, delivery of HVACR equipment may be integral to its
installation. Like the hoisting and movement of other building
components, use of cranes and derricks to move HVACR equipment falls
squarely within this rule.
OSHA also received a comment from a representative of the precast
concrete industry requesting the exclusion of equipment used to deliver
materials such as concrete manholes, septic tanks, burial vaults,
concrete block, and concrete pipe. (ID-0299.1) This commenter stated
that their portion of the precast concrete industry solely delivers
materials to a construction site, and believed that they simply supply
materials for a construction project but are not involved in actual
construction. (ID-0299.1)
OSHA agrees that in circumstances where the equipment is used
solely to deliver these types of concrete materials from a supplier to
a construction site by placing/stacking the materials from the delivery
vehicle to the ground in, for example, a storage or staging area,
without arranging the materials in a particular sequence for subsequent
hoisting, the equipment is not being used for a construction activity.
However, if the equipment is used to hoist, hold, support, stabilize or
place precast concrete material as part of the installation process, it
is engaged in a construction activity and would be subject to this
rule. For example, a truck-mounted articulating crane may be used to
maneuver a precast component such as a vault or concrete pipe from the
truck to its installation point in an excavation. As previously
discussed, such use is a typical construction activity.
To summarize, when a delivery vehicle is used solely to deliver
building supply materials from a supplier to a construction site by
placing/stacking the materials on the ground, without arranging the
materials in a particular sequence for hoisting, the equipment is not
being used for a construction activity and is not subject to this rule.
When an articulating/knuckle-boom truck crane that brings material to a
site is used to transfer building supply sheet goods or building supply
packaged materials from the vehicle onto a structure, the activity is a
construction activity but the crane is excluded from this rule if it is
equipped with a properly functioning automatic overload prevention
device and satisfies the other requirements of the exception in Sec.
1926.1400(c)(17). All other equipment that falls under Sec.
1926.1400(a) is subject to this rule when delivering materials onto a
structure.
OSHA is including in the final rule a new Sec. 1926.1400(c)(17) to
clarify the circumstances under which material delivery is subject to
the rule. Paragraph (c)(17)(i) excludes from the scope of this standard
an articulating/knuckle-boom truck crane that delivers material to a
construction site when it is used to transfer materials from it to the
ground, without arranging the materials in a particular sequence for
hoisting.
Paragraph (c)(17)(ii) contains the exclusion for an articulating/
knuckle-boom truck crane that delivers material to a site when it is
used to transfer building supply sheet goods or building supply
packaged materials from it onto a structure, using a fork/cradle at the
end of the boom. This provision conditions this exclusion on the truck
crane being equipped with a properly functioning automatic overload
prevention device and lists examples of the sheet goods or packaged
materials that qualify for the exclusion, stating that these include,
but are not limited to: sheets of sheet rock, sheets of plywood, bags
of cement, sheets or packages of roofing shingles, and rolls of roofing
felt. These are typical building supply materials that pose a reduced
risk of falling when being lifted by the truck crane because of their
configuration and/or packaging, and because the truck crane was
designed to safely handle this type of material.
Any delivery activities not excluded under paragraphs (c)(17)(i)
and (ii) are subject to the standard. However, to avoid any possible
ambiguity on this point, OSHA has included paragraph (c)(17)(iii).
Paragraphs (c)(17)(iii)(A)-(C) list explicit activities for which the
exclusion does not apply. Paragraph (c)(17)(iii)(D) is included to
avoid any possible implication that paragraphs (c)(17)(iii)(A)-(C)
represent an exclusive list of delivery activities that are subject to
the final rule.
Paragraph (d)
Paragraph (d) of this section is included because there are some
types of equipment for which only limited requirements apply, and
others where there are special requirements that supplement, rather
than displace, the other requirements in the rule. To avoid confusion,
this paragraph establishes that all parts of the rule apply unless a
provision specifically identifies other parts of the rule as
inapplicable, or identifies the only provisions of the standard that
are applicable. No comments were received on this paragraph, and it is
promulgated as proposed except that ``subpart CC'' replaces the phrase
``this standard'' from the proposed rule.
Paragraph (e)
Proposed paragraph (e) of this section provided that the duties of
controlling entities \8\ are not limited to the duties specified in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1402(c), 1926.1402(e) and 1926.1424(b). The paragraphs
referenced in this provision listed specific duties imposed on
controlling entities under this rule.
[[Page 47930]]
Paragraph (e) was included to avoid any implication that the listing of
certain duties placed on controlling entities by this rule displaces
the duties placed on them under OSHA's multi-employer policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The definition of ``controlling entity'' is explained in the
discussion of Sec. 1926.1402(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several commenters questioned OSHA's authority to enforce its
multi-employer policy against controlling entities as well as the
provisions in the proposed rule that would impose specific duties on
controlling entities. (ID-0166.1; -0197.1; -0214.1; -0232.1.) OSHA
explained in detail in the proposed rule why it has such authority (see
73 FR 59731-59733, Oct. 9, 2008). Paragraph (e) is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (f)
Paragraph (f) requires that where a provision in the rule directs
an operator, crewmember or other employee to take a specified action,
it is the employer's responsibility to establish work rules to require
the relevant employees to take that action, and to effectively
communicate and enforce those work rules. This paragraph clarifies the
employer's obligations with regard to such provisions. No comments on
this paragraph were received, and it is being promulgated as proposed
with only a minor grammatical correction.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ For clarity, OSHA is substituting references to ``shall'' in
the proposed rule with ``must'' in this final rule to remove any
implication that the sentence is descriptive, rather than
imperative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (g)
Some commenters requested that OSHA provide a complete exemption
from subpart CC for subpart V work. As discussed in Sec. 1926.1410(k),
OSHA has addressed their concerns through exclusions from specific
requirements of the rule.
Most employers engaged in construction work under subpart V are
also engaged in general industry work under Sec. 1910.269, which
covers the operation and maintenance of electric power generation,
transmission, and distribution installations. The requirements for
mechanical equipment in Sec. 1910.269(p) are at least as protective as
the requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1407-1926.1411 of subpart CC.
Therefore, OSHA determines it is appropriate to give employers doing
subpart V work the option of complying with Sec. 1910.269(p) in lieu
of the requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1407-1926.1411 of this final
rule. This decision has been codified in paragraph (g) of this section
and a note referencing this new paragraph has been added to Sec.
1926.952(c)(3).
Paragraph (h)
Paragraph (h) notes that Sec. 1926.1402, Ground conditions, does
not apply to cranes used on railroad tracks that are part of a general
railroad system that is regulated by the Federal Railroad
Administration. OSHA added paragraph (h) to this section of the final
rule to aid the public in finding this exception. (See discussion of
this provision at Sec. 1926.1402(f).)
Section 1926.1401 Definitions
OSHA includes a number of definitions to clarify the meaning of
terms used in this subpart. Many of the defined terms are commonly used
in the industry, and C-DAC in most instances relied on standard
industry sources or its own understanding of how terms are used in the
industry to help ensure that the definitions would be readily
understood by employers and employees. Industry sources on which C-DAC
relied include existing OSHA standards, consensus standards, and ``A
Glossary of Common Crane and Rigging Terms'' (Specialized Carriers and
Rigging Foundation 1997) (``SC&RF Handbook'') (ID-0019.). OSHA includes
other definitions to ensure that certain terms used in the proposed
standard have a precise, unambiguous meaning.
One commenter noted that definitions as proposed were not identical
to those in certain consensus standards and requested they be changed
to match. (ID-0178.1.) The commenter cited to various consensus
standards, including ANSI A10.31-2006, ANSI A10.28-1998, ANSI A10.33-
1998, and ANSI Z359.0-2007. The commenter did not explain why the
definitions as proposed were inappropriate nor how the change would
improve safety. As noted above, consensus standards were utilized as a
resource in developing the definitions for this subpart. OSHA disagrees
with the commenter's position that the definition must match consensus
standards. OSHA established definitions that would work in the
framework of the equipment covered by this subpart, would coordinate
with other OSHA standards and provide a foundation for enforcing the
requirements of this subpart. As a result, OSHA is not making
modifications to definitions based on this commenter's request.
A few definitions in this final rule have been modified from or
added to those in the proposed rule. Those definitions are: A/D
director; Assembly/Disassembly; Builder; Controlling entity; Digger
derrick; Duty cycle; Freeboard; Hoist; Load moment (or rated capacity)
indicator; Load moment (or rated capacity) limiter; Nationally
recognized accrediting agency; Positioning device system; Range control
limit device; Repetitive lift; Tower crane; Type; Upperworks; and Wire
rope.
The reasons for these additions or modifications are discussed in
the preamble at the location indicated in Table 5 below, with the
exception of the definition for hoist, which is discussed below.
OSHA received one comment on the definition of ``hoist'' in the
proposed rule. (ID-0122.0.) This commenter expressed concern that the
proposed definition would exclude hoists that utilized wire rope or
chains. To address this concern, OSHA modified the definition of
``hoist'' in the final rule to refer to ``a line'' rather than
``rope.'' The use of the more general term ``line'' is intended to
refer to any material (e.g., rope, wire rope, chain, etc.) used to
connect the hoist to that which is being hoisted.
Definitions that did not receive comment are adopted for the
reasons set forth in the preamble of the proposed rule (see 73 FR
59733-59739, Oct. 9, 2008).
The preamble location for discussion of all definitions provided in
Sec. 1926.1401 can be found in Table 5 below.
Table 5--Index of Defined Terms
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Term Location of preamble discussion Term Location of preamble discussion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/D director......................... Sec. 1926.1404(a)....................... Load...................... Sec. 1926.1401
Articulating crane................... Sec. 1926.1401.......................... Load moment (or rated Sec. 1926.1416(e)(4)
capacity) indicator.
Assembly/Disassembly................. Sec. 1926.1403.......................... Load moment (or rated Sec. 1926.1416(e)(4)
capacity) limiter.
Assist crane......................... Sec. 1926.1404(h)(4).................... Locomotive crane.......... Sec. 1926.1401
[[Page 47931]]
Attachments.......................... Sec. 1926.1400(b)(2).................... Luffing jib limiting Sec. 1926.1416(d)(2)
device.
Audible signal....................... Sec. 1926.1419(b)....................... Marine hoisted personnel Sec. 1926.1431(b)(2)(iii)
transfer device.
Blocking............................. Sec. 1926.1404(h)(2).................... Marine worksite........... Sec. 1926.1431(b)(2)(iii)
Boatswain's chair.................... Sec. 1926.1431(o)....................... Mobile cranes............. Sec. 1926.1401
Bogie................................ Sec. 1926.1435.......................... Moving point-to-point..... Sec. 1926.1423(e)(1)
Boom (equipment other than tower Sec. 1926.1401.......................... Multi-purpose machine..... Sec. 1926.1400(a)
crane).
Boom (tower cranes).................. Sec. 1926.1435(e)(5)(ii)................ Nationally recognized Sec. 1926.1427(b)(1)(i)
accrediting agency.
Boom angle indicator................. Sec. 1926.1416(d)(1)(i)(A).............. Non-conductive............ Sec. 1926.1407(b)(2)
Boom hoist limiting device........... Sec. 1926.1416(d)(1).................... Operational aids.......... Sec. 1926.1416
Boom length indicator................ Sec. 1926.1416(e)(3).................... Operational controls...... Sec. 1926.1417(b)(2)
Boom stop............................ Sec. 1926.1416(a)(2).................... Operator.................. Sec. 1926.1401
Boom suspension systems.............. Sec. 1926.1404(h)(7).................... Overhead and gantry cranes Sec. 1926.1438
Builder.............................. Sec. 1926.1436(c)....................... Paragraph................. Sec. 1926.1401
Center of gravity.................... Sec. 1926.1404(h)(6).................... Pendants.................. Sec. 1926.1404(h)(8)
Certified welder..................... Sec. 1926.1431(e)(5).................... Personal fall arrest Sec. 1926.1423(g)
system.
Climbing............................. Sec. 1926.1435(b)(7).................... Portal cranes............. Sec. 1926.1415(a)(1)
Come-a-long.......................... Sec. 1926.1400(c)(10)................... Positioning device system. Sec. 1926.1423
Competent person..................... Sec. 1926.1401.......................... Power lines............... Sec. 1926.1407-1411
Controlled load lowering............. Sec. 1926.1426(d)....................... Procedures................ Sec. 1926.1401
Controlling entity................... Sec. 1926.1402(c)....................... Proximity alarm........... Sec. 1926.1407(b)(3)
Counterweight........................ Sec. 1926.1404(h)(9).................... Qualified evaluator (not a Sec. 1926.1428(a)(2)
third party).
Crane/derrick........................ Sec. 1926.1400.......................... Qualified evaluator (third Sec. 1926.1428(a)(2)
party).
Crawler crane........................ Sec. 1926.1401.......................... Qualified person.......... Sec. 1926.1401
Crossover points..................... Sec. 1926.1413(a)(3)(iii)............... Qualified rigger.......... Sec. 1926.1425(c)(3)
Dedicated channel.................... Sec. 1926.1420(b)....................... Range control limit device Sec. 1926.1408(a)
Dedicated pile-driver................ Sec. 1926.1439(a)....................... Range control warning Sec. 1926.1407(a)(3)
device.
Dedicated spotter (power lines)...... Sec. 1926.1407(b)....................... Rated capacity............ Sec. 1926.1401
Digger derrick....................... Sec. 1926.1400(c)(4).................... Rated capacity indicator.. Sec. 1926.1416(e)(4)
Directly under the load.............. Sec. 1926.1425(e)(1).................... Rated capacity limiter.... Sec. 1926.1416(e)(4)
Dismantling.......................... Sec. 1926.1405.......................... Repetitive lift........... Sec. 1926.1414(e)(2)
Drum rotation indicator.............. Sec. 1926.1416(e)(5)(ii)................ Repetitive pickup points.. Sec. 1926.1413(a)(3)(iii)
Duty cycle........................... Sec. 1926.1414(e)(2).................... Running wire rope......... Sec. 1926.1413(a)(2)(ii)(A)
Electrical contact................... Sec. 1926.1407-1411..................... Runway.................... Sec. 1926.1431(k)(12)(ii)(A)
Employer-made equipment.............. Sec. 1926.1437(m)(4).................... Section................... Sec. 1926.1401
Encroachment......................... Sec. 1926.1407-1411..................... Side-boom crane........... Sec. 1926.1440
Equipment............................ Sec. 1926.1400.......................... Special hazard warnings... Sec. 1926.1417(c)(1)
Equipment criteria................... Sec. 1926.1412(b)(1)(i)................. Stability (flotation Sec. 1926.1437(m)
device).
Fall protection equipment............ Sec. 1926.1423(e)....................... Standard Method........... Sec. 1926.1419(c)
Fall restraint system................ Sec. 1926.1423(d)-(e), (g).............. Such as................... Sec. 1926.1401
Fall zone............................ Sec. 1926.1425(b)....................... Superstructure............ Sec. 1926.1424(a)(1)
Flange points........................ Sec. 1926.1413(a)(3)(iii)............... Tag line.................. Sec. 1926.1407(b)(2)
Floating cranes/derricks............. Sec. 1926.1437.......................... Tender.................... Sec. 1926.1437(j)(3)
For example.......................... Sec. 1926.1401.......................... Tilt-up or tilt down Sec. 1926.1425(e)
operation.
Free fall (of the load line)......... Sec. 1926.1426(d)....................... Tower crane............... Sec. 1926.1401
Free surface effect.................. Sec. 1926.1437(m)(5)(ii)................ Travel bogie (tower Sec. 1926.1435(d)(2)(iv)
cranes).
Freeboard............................ Sec. 1926.1437(m)(2).................... Trim...................... Sec. 1926.1437(e)(1)
Hoist................................ Sec. 1926.1401.......................... Two blocking.............. Sec. 1926.1416(d)(3)
Hoisting............................. Sec. 1926.1401.......................... Type...................... Sec. 1926.1427(b)(1)(ii)(B)
Include/including.................... Sec. 1926.1401.......................... Unavailable procedures.... Sec. 1926.1417(b)
Insulating link/device............... Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(v)................. Up to..................... Sec. 1926.1401
Jib stop............................. Sec. 1926.1415(a)(3).................... Upperstructure............ Sec. 1926.1424(a)(1)
Land crane/derrick................... Sec. 1926.1437.......................... Upperworks................ Sec. 1926.1424(a)(1)
List................................. Sec. 1926.1437(e)(1).................... Wire rope................. Sec. 1926.1413
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1926.1402 Ground Conditions
The Committee determined that the failure to have adequate ground
conditions is a significant crane safety problem. Adequate ground
conditions are essential for safe equipment operations because the
equipment's capacity and stability depend on such conditions being
present. In the Committee's view, there are two key problems regarding
ground conditions: (1) Equipment is commonly brought on site by a
subcontractor, who typically has neither control over ground conditions
nor knowledge of hidden hazards, and (2) the entity that usually does
have such authority--the controlling entity--may not have the expertise
to know what changes are needed to make the ground conditions suitable
for equipment operations. This section is designed to address these
problems so that ground conditions will be made sufficient for safe
equipment operations.
One commenter asserted that, with respect to digger derricks, the
ground conditions provision should be changed. In particular, the
commenter stated that the Committee should incorporate by reference
secs. 7 through 10 of ANSI/ASSE A10.31-2006, Safety Requirements,
Definitions, and
[[Page 47932]]
Specifications for Digger Derricks; American National Standard for
Construction and Demolition Operations. (ID-0178.1.) In addition, the
commenter asserted that the ANSI/ASSE standard ``addresses worksite
selection that is clearer than what OSHA has proposed. For example, the
proposed rule does not recognize the danger that ditches can have on
placement, which is a common occurrence.''
OSHA first notes that these suggestions apply only to digger
derricks and thus interprets the comment as a recommendation that
digger derricks be treated differently than other equipment under Sec.
1926.1402. As we noted in the preamble to the proposed rule, the
Committee determined that the failure to have adequate ground
conditions is a significant safety problem. The Committee's
determination that this safety problem exists for various types of
equipment is underscored by the application of Sec. 1926.1402 to
nearly all equipment covered by this subpart. In addition, where the
Committee intended for certain equipment to be exempted from Sec.
1926.1402, it indicated that expressly (see, e.g., Sec. 1926.1440,
Sideboom Cranes). OSHA defers to the expertise of the Committee on this
issue.
Secondly, OSHA has reviewed ANSI/ASSE A10.31-2006 and found that it
is substantively distinguishable from Sec. 1926.1402. Specifically,
the two standards differ in the assignment of responsibilities. ANSI/
ASSE A10.31-2006 divides responsibilities among digger derrick dealers/
installers, owners, users, and operators. Notably, controlling entities
(who often do not fall into any of the ANSI/ASSE A10.31-2006
categories) are assigned no responsibility at all. Furthermore, the
discussion of worksite conditions is included only in sec. 10,
Responsibilities of Operators. ANSI/ASSE A10.31-2006 places the
responsibility of examining ground conditions entirely on the operator.
Also, ANSI/ASSE A10.31-2006 does not require that the ground condition
requirements be met before the equipment is installed; it requires only
that the worksite be surveyed before the digger derrick is used. In
sum, OSHA concludes that Sec. 1926.1402 is more effective than ANSI/
ASSE A10.31-2006 and declines to incorporate ANSI/ASSE A10.31-2006 by
reference.
The Agency disagrees with the commenter that Sec. 1926.1402 fails
to adequately address ditches. The hazard posed by a ditch is that the
ground is less firm in the area adjacent to it. Under Sec. 1926.1402,
the ground must be sufficiently firm to provide ``adequate support''
for the equipment. The section as proposed therefore addresses this
hazard.
Paragraph (a) Definitions
Paragraph (a) provides definitions of key terms used in this
section. The term ``ground conditions'' is defined as the ability of
the ground to support the equipment (including slope, compaction and
firmness). The Committee determined that slope, compaction and firmness
are the key factors that are involved in the ability of the ground to
support the equipment.
``Supporting materials'' is defined as meaning blocking, mats,
cribbing, marsh buggies (in marshes/wetlands), or similar supporting
materials or devices. Such materials typically help to distribute the
load of the crane over a broad area and/or assist in leveling the
equipment. The list in the definition of examples of such materials is
nonexclusive--it includes similar materials and devices that would
serve the same purpose(s).
The one comment that was received that referenced this provision is
addressed in the discussion below of Sec. 1926.1402(b). (See ID-
0178.1.)
Paragraph (b)
Under paragraph (b) of this section, the equipment is prohibited
from being assembled or used \10\ unless ground conditions are firm,
drained, and graded to a sufficient extent so that, in conjunction (if
necessary) with the use of supporting materials, the equipment
manufacturer's specifications for adequate support and degree of level
of the equipment are met. A crane's stability depends (in part) on the
crane being level, and ``degree of level'' is a term used in the
industry to describe the manufacturer's specification for how level the
crane must be. The Agency determined that the text of the proposed rule
did not make it clear that the drainage requirement did not apply to
marshes/wetlands. Accordingly, the final rule's text has been modified
to clearly state that this is the only exception. All other conditions
related to have a stable surface for the equipment is applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Note that ``used'' is not limited to use of the equipment
at a fixed location; it also includes when the equipment is
traveling with a load.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Committee's experience, crane tip-over incidents caused by
inadequate ground conditions are a significant cause of injuries and
fatalities. For example, on September 28, 1999, a 19 year old
electrical instrument helper was killed by a crane that overturned
because insufficient care was taken to ensure that the ground under the
crane was firm and that the crane's outriggers were properly supported.
(ID-0017.13.) Conditions that enhance the chance of such accidents
include ground that is wet or muddy, poorly graded, or that is loose
fill (or otherwise disturbed soil) that has not been compacted. The
Committee determined that requiring adequate ground conditions will
prevent many of these accidents. The exception for marshes and wetlands
is included because the Committee was aware that, in many instances,
the draining of marshes/wetlands is prohibited or restricted by
environmental laws and there are devices available (such as marsh
buggies) that are designed to provide adequate support to cranes in
such areas.
One commenter suggested that the term ``level'' could be confusing
and suggested that it be defined as ``less than one degree of grade
change or as required by the manufacturer.'' (ID-0178.1.) OSHA finds
this comment unpersuasive. The suggested language is circular because
it does not use the term ``level'' by itself; it refers to ``the
equipment manufacturer's specifications for * * * degree of level of
the equipment.'' The reason the provision refers to the manufacturer's
specification in this regard is that it is the manufacturer that
establishes the load chart, and the load chart is valid only for the
parameters, including degree of level, established by the manufacturer.
At the public hearing, a representative of the railroad industry
raised an issue that OSHA determines could be the source of some
confusion. The commenter indicated that the railroad industry regularly
has to work in out-of-level conditions, since some sections of track
are not level. (ID-0342.) The commenter explained that the
manufacturers of track-mounted cranes provide specialized load charts
which take into account these out-of-level conditions.
The manufacturers of these cranes apparently specify that the
cranes can be used in certain out-of-level circumstances, as evidenced
by their provision of load charts for those conditions. Therefore, the
use of equipment in accordance with manufacturer specifications
regarding degree of level would meet Sec. 1926.1402(b)'s requirement
because the provision permits use of the equipment in accordance with
those specifications.
[[Page 47933]]
Paragraph (c)
Under Sec. 1926.1402(c), the controlling entity has several
specific duties regarding ground conditions. OSHA's authority to impose
these duties is discussed in detail in the preamble to the proposed
rule (see 73 FR 59731-59732, Oct. 9, 2008), and the Agency re-asserts
the same authority with respect to the final rule. As it did with
respect to the proposed rule, the Agency is again stating that the
duties imposed on the controlling entity through the promulgation of
this final rule are supplemental to, and do not displace, controlling
entity duties under OSHA's multi-employer policy. (See Sec.
1926.1402(e), discussed below; 73 FR 59731, Oct. 9, 2008).
``Controlling entity'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as ``an
employer that is a prime contractor, general contractor, construction
manager or any other legal entity which has the overall responsibility
for the construction of the project--its planning, quality and
completion.'' This definition, which generally mirrors the definition
of ``controlling contractor'' in the steel erection standard, 29 CFR
part 1926, subpart R, reflects the core principle of general
supervisory control over the construction site. In this final rule,
OSHA is clarifying the definition to make it clear that the controlling
entity must be an employer.
Section 1926.1402(c)(1) requires the controlling entity to ensure
that ground preparations necessary to meet the requirements in
paragraph (b) of this section are provided. The Committee determined
that it is necessary to specify who will have ground condition
responsibility because in many instances the parties are unable to
agree on who will have (or has) that contractual responsibility, with
the result that often no one corrects inadequate ground conditions.
In the Committee's view, the crane user and operator typically do
not have the equipment or authority to make such preparations. In
contrast, the controlling entity, due to its control of the worksite,
has the requisite authority and is in the best position to arrange for
adequate ground conditions. The Committee was concerned, however, that
some controlling entities may lack the expertise to recognize when
ground conditions are inadequate. To address this concern, the
Committee developed Sec. 1926.1402(e).
One commenter said that adequate site assessment requires defining
ground bearing capacity compared to loading of the machine, along with
soil testing and proper analysis for ground conditions. (ID-0143.1.) As
explained in the preamble of the proposed rule, C-DAC considered, but
rejected, including specification requirements regarding the soil
conditions (see 73 FR 59739-59740, Oct. 9, 2008). This reflected the
view that most sites and circumstances do not require sophisticated
soil testing. In light of C-DAC's decision not to add new testing or
soil specifications, the many variables that may affect ground
conditions, and the existing body of law and OSHA guidance relating to
testing duties under the Agency's multi-employer policy, the Agency
concludes that it is appropriate to allow the controlling entity
flexibility in the manner in which it satisfies its duties under Sec.
1926.1402 and the multi-employer policy.
Under Sec. 1926.1402(c)(2), the controlling entity is required to
inform the user of the equipment and the equipment operator of the
location of hazards beneath the equipment set-up area (such as voids,
tanks, and utilities, including sewer, water supply, and drain pipes)
that are identified in documents (such as site drawings, as-built
drawings, and soil analyses) that are in the possession of the
controlling entity. These underground hazards can compromise the
ability of the ground above them to support the equipment. In the
experience of members of the Committee, because of the hidden nature of
these hazards, accidents have occurred when cranes have been set up
above such hazards and a portion of the ground has given way.
In developing this provision, the Committee was mindful that the
controlling entity often possesses documents obtained or developed
during the ordinary course of business that identify the location of
such hazards. Under the provision as proposed, if the controlling
entity has such a document, whether at the site or at an off-site
location, it is required to inform the equipment user and operator of
the location of the hazard as identified in it. If the controlling
entity does not possess the information, it is not required to obtain
it from another source. The Committee concluded that requiring the
controlling entity to obtain such information from other sources would,
in effect, require it to arrange for testing. As explained above, the
Committee determined such a duty would be unduly burdensome and
unnecessary.
Some commenters indicated that clarification is needed regarding
whether the controlling entity is required to possess particular
documents. (ID-0166.1; -0214.1.) OSHA agrees that additional
clarification is needed and is making two changes in the final text of
paragraph (c)(2) of this section. Both of these clarifications are
consistent with the rationale of the rule that the controlling entity
need only share information that it possesses, and that the controlling
entity has no obligation under Sec. 1926.1402 to seek out additional
information not in its possession.
First, OSHA is replacing the proposed phrase ``available to the
controlling entity'' with ``in the possession of the controlling
entity, whether at the site or off-site.'' As explained in the preamble
to the proposed rule,
[i]n developing this proposed provision, the Committee was mindful
that the controlling entity often has access to documents that may
identify the location of such hazards. * * * Under this proposed
provision, if the controlling entity has such a document, whether at
the site or at an off-site location, it would be required to inform
the equipment user and operator of the location of the hazard as
identified in it. If the controlling entity does not possess such a
document, it would not be required to obtain it from another source.
The phrase ``available to'' may be interpreted as including
documents that the controlling entity does not already have in its
possession but has the ability to obtain, i.e., procure, from other
entities. As is evident from the proposed rule explanation quoted
above, the intent is to apply the duty only with respect to information
that is already in the controlling contractor's possession, whether at
the site or off-site.
Second, OSHA is revising the text of paragraph (c)(2) of this
section to emphasize that the employer's existing responsibilities
under OSHA's multi-employer policy are not changed by this new rule. As
noted above and in the preamble to the proposed rule, the duties
provided in Sec. 1926.1402 supplement, and do not displace, the
controlling entity's duties under the multi-employer policy.\11\ The
multi-employer policy reflects the Secretary's reasonable
interpretation of the OSH
[[Page 47934]]
Act and requires controlling employers to exercise reasonable care to
prevent and detect violations on the site. See OSHA CPL 02-00-124,
Multi-Employer Citation Policy, Dec. 10, 1999. Under this policy, the
controlling employer has a duty to address hazards the employer either
creates or controls, regardless of whose employees are threatened by
the hazard. See, e.g. Universal Const. Co., Inc. v. Occupational Safety
and Health Review Comm'n, 182 F3d 726, 730 (10th Cir. 1999). Implicit
in those duties is a duty to notify employees of hazards the
controlling employer controls and has already detected, particularly
where such notification would prevent a violation. As noted in the
preamble to the proposed rule, requiring employers to include hazard
information needed by downstream employees is a necessary and
appropriate means to ensure that the employees are apprised of all
hazards to which they are exposed. (See 73 FR 59731, Oct. 9, 2008; see
also American Petroleum Institute v. OSHA, 581 F.2d 493, 510 (5th Cir.
1978).) (OSHA may require upstream employers to warn downstream
employees of concealed hazards when the upstream employer knows of
those hazards under remedial purpose of the OSH Act and OSHA's broad
authority to prescribe warning labels under 29 U.S.C. 655(b)(7)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The Agency anticipates that the majority of controlling
entities will also be controlling employers for the purposes of the
multi-employer policy. However, even to the extent that a
controlling entity does not also meet the definition of a
controlling employer, the Agency has the authority to require the
controlling entity to comply with the requirements of Sec.
1926.1402. (See discussion of authority at 73 FR 59731-59732, Oct.
9, 2008.) With respect to the controlling entity's duty to warn the
operator and other users of the equipment about hidden ground
condition hazards, Sec. 1926.1402(c) constitutes OSHA's exercise of
its authority to ``prescribe the use of labels or other appropriate
forms of warning as are necessary to insure that employees are
apprised of all hazards to which they are exposed * * * and proper
conditions and precautions of safe use or exposure.'' 29 U.S.C.
655(b)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA is therefore clarifying in paragraph (c)(2) that the
controlling entity still must share both documentary and non-
documentary information about other hazards when the hazards are
``known to the controlling entity.'' This requirement only applies to
hazard information already in the possession of the controlling entity,
and does not require the controlling entity to obtain any additional
information. For example, if the controlling entity is setting up non-
crane equipment and discovers during the course of that work that there
is an undocumented void in the area where the crane is to be set up,
the controlling entity would be required to share that information with
the crane operator. Although this requirement extends beyond the
``documents'' specified in the proposed rule, it is consistent with the
rationale provided in the proposed rule and is supported by those
commenters who favor this provision: C-DAC sought to distinguish
between information in the possession of the controlling entity, and
information that must be sought out by the controlling entity. Thus, to
comply with Sec. 1926.1402(c)(2) of the final rule, the controlling
entity has no duty to seek out new information not already in its
possession; it is only required to share information already in its
possession, whether or not such information is contained in a document.
OSHA received several comments about whether these responsibilities
should rest with the controlling entity as it is defined in Sec.
1926.1401 (prime contractor, general contractor, construction manager
or any other legal entity which has the overall responsibility for the
construction of the project--its planning, quality and completion).
One commenter sought clarification on whether a construction
manager/general contractor or a site/project owner is considered the
controlling entity where the latter contracts with the former but
retains responsibility for oversight of certain matters (e.g., quality
control, safety). The commenter also wanted to know if the site/project
owner is still responsible for inspecting ground conditions under Sec.
1926.1402 if the construction manager/general contractor is the
controlling entity. (ID-0107.1.) As explained above, the ``controlling
entity'' is the entity which has the overall responsibility for the
construction of the project--its planning, quality and completion.
Where this responsibility is split among several entities, there may
not be a controlling entity. In that case, Sec. 1926.1402(d) applies:
whichever employer has authority to make or arrange for ground
preparations is required to ensure that the necessary ground
preparations are made. If more than one entity each possesses this
authority, then OSHA holds each of those entities separately liable for
the duty to ensure that the necessary ground preparations are made.
Some commenters suggested that the provision is unclear as to which
hazards, i.e., known or unknown, the controlling entity is required to
disclose. (ID-0166.1; -0214.1.) The purpose of this requirement is to
ensure that the user of the equipment and the operator are informed of
hazards that might not be known to them, because they are beneath the
set-up area, but are known to the controlling entity. In other words,
under this provision, the controlling entity must examine information
in its possession (such as site drawings, as-built drawings, and soil
analyses) to see if there are hazards beneath the set-up area. If there
are hazards identified in those documents, or if the controlling entity
has already identified other hazards not in those documents, the
controlling entity must inform the user and operator of the hazards. As
explained above and in the proposed rule preamble, new Sec. 1926.1402
does not place any new requirements on the controlling entity to
discover hazards that are not already known to it (see 73 FR 59741,
Oct. 9, 2008). The Agency concludes that the provision's language
adequately reflects this intent.
One commenter suggested that Sec. 1926.1402(c) be replaced with a
section that would simply encourage a cooperative meeting between the
controlling entity, the employer using the crane, and the employer best
situated to control and prepare the ground conditions. (ID-0218.1.)
OSHA determines that such a change would merely replicate the status
quo, an arrangement which the Committee found to be inadequate for
ensuring adequate ground conditions.
Several commenters argued that the crane operator, not the
controlling entity, should be required to obtain information about the
location of hazards beneath the equipment set-up area. (ID-0165.1; -
0179.1; -0191.1; -0197.1; -0214.1; -0232.1; -0235.1; -0285.1.) These
comments fell into one of two groups.
The first group argued that some controlling entities are either
not engaged in construction work,\12\ may have little to no expertise
concerning ground conditions in general, or may hire subcontractors to
work at a remote location of which the controlling entity may have
little knowledge. (See, e.g., ID-147.1; -0165.1; -0232.1; -0235.1.)
This group appears to read Sec. 1926.1402(c)(1) to mean that the
controlling entity must personally determine and provide the ground
conditions necessary to meet the requirements in Sec. 1926.1402(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ In most cases entity that meets the definition of
``controlling entity'' will be engaged in construction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-DAC considered the concern that some controlling entities would
not have the expertise needed to determine if ground conditions were
adequate. The final rule therefore addresses this concern in two ways.
First, paragraph (c)(1) provides that the controlling contractor is
responsible for ``ensuring'' that these ground conditions are provided.
In other words, if the controlling contractor is not familiar with the
crane's requirements or with the ground conditions at the particular
site, then it must make sure that someone who is familiar with those
requirements and conditions provides what is required by Sec.
1926.1402(b). Second, under Sec. 1926.1402(e), if the A/D director or
operator determines that ground conditions are inadequate, the
controlling entity will, through a discussion, obtain the relevant
information. (See discussion of
[[Page 47935]]
1926.1402(e) at 73 FR 59741, Oct. 9, 2008).
One of the commenters suggested that Sec. 1926.1402(c) be revised
to place requirements on either the controlling entity or a competent
person designated by the controlling entity. (ID-0191.1.) As explained
above, Sec. 1926.1402, as promulgated, does not preclude a controlling
entity from using a competent person to provide the information it
needs to meet its responsibilities under this section. However, C-DAC's
experience indicates that it is important to ensure that one entity
with the authority to address ground condition hazards has the
responsibility to do so. To permit a controlling entity to divest
itself of its ground condition responsibilities would unduly fragment
responsibility for ground conditions, thus defeating one of the goals
of the section.
The second group argued that the rule may result in situations that
are beyond the capacity and responsibility of certain subcontractors.
(See, e.g., ID-0165.1; -0191.1; -0235.1.) One commenter suggested that
the definition of ``controlling entity'' be revised ``to reflect that
subcontractors and others who have little to do with the overall
project including site conditions and do not have the expertise to
determine compliance with crane manufacturer specifications are not
included in the definition, purpose, or requirements of a controlling
entity.'' (ID-0191.1) These commenters also argued that, because such
subcontractors do not know or control the site conditions, the
responsibilities in Sec. 1926.1402(c) should fall on the crane owner
or operator. The other two commenters were concerned about the effect
of the rule on heating, ventilating, air conditioning, and
refrigeration (HVACR) contractors in particular. (ID-0165.1; -0235.1.)
These commenters have misunderstood Sec. 1926.1402(c). For
example, an HVACR contractor, if contracted to do only HVACR work and
is not in control of the entire work site, would not be the controlling
entity, and would be subject to the limited requirements in Sec.
1926.1402(d) only if it had authority to make changes to the ground
conditions.
One commenter requested that the term ``user of the equipment'' be
defined. (ID-0214.1.) OSHA determines this term does not need to be
defined in Sec. 1926.1401, since its meaning is sufficiently clear.
``User of the equipment'' refers to the employer that is using the
equipment to perform a task. For example, a drywall installation
employer engaged in erecting precast wall panels would be a ``user of
the equipment'' if that employer directs a crane to hoist the panels
into place. Similarly, an employer installing wooden roof trusses would
be a ``user of equipment'' if that employer directs a crane to place
the trusses on the structure. A general contractor handling several
subcontracting areas, but not the controlling entity for the worksite,
would also be a ``user of equipment'' if it directs its subcontractors
to use a crane to hoist materials. In the latter example, the general
contractor and the subcontractor would each be a ``user of equipment.''
Paragraph (d)
In the event that no controlling entity exists, Sec. 1926.1402(d)
provides that the requirement in Sec. 1926.1402(c)(1) must be met by
the employer that has authority at the site to make or arrange for
ground preparations needed to meet the requirements of Sec.
1926.1402(b). For example, if the employer who hires the crane has the
authority to get the ground prepared in the absence of a controlling
entity, the responsibility for complying with Sec. 1926.1402(b) would
fall to that employer. However, that employer would not be required to
comply with Sec. 1926.1402(c)(2) because the information required to
be disclosed under Sec. 1926.1402(c)(2) is not likely to be available
to that employer.
One commenter suggested that paragraph (d) of this section be
revised to read that the requirements in Sec. 1926.1402(c)(1) must be
met by a competent person designated by the employer that has authority
at the site to make or arrange for ground preparations needed to meet
the requirements of Sec. 1926.1402(b). (ID-0191.1.) As explained above
with respect to a similar suggestion regarding Sec. 1926.1402(c), OSHA
determines this would have the effect of unduly fragmenting the
responsibility for ground conditions, which is contrary to the intent
of the provision.
For the reasons above, OSHA is promulgating Sec. 1926.1402(d) as
proposed.
Paragraph (e)
Proposed Sec. 1926.1402(e) established a mechanism for a
controlling entity to obtain information from the A/D director or the
equipment operator about insufficient ground conditions and the
preparations needed to correct the problem. Specifically (as discussed
above in the context of Sec. 1926.1402(c)(1)), if the A/D director or
equipment operator determines that ground conditions do not meet the
criteria in Sec. 1926.1402(b), that person's employer is required to
have a discussion with the controlling entity regarding the ground
preparations needed so that, with the use of suitable supporting
materials/devices (if necessary), the requirements in Sec.
1926.1402(b) can be met.
The Committee determined that, in some instances, the controlling
entity may lack the expertise needed to know what ground preparations
may be needed. In such cases, it is necessary for the information it
needs to be provided by the A/D director or operator, who has that
expertise, so that the preparations needed for safe crane operations
can be made. The Committee concluded that, in such circumstances, such
a discussion would make it more likely that the requirements in Sec.
1926.1402(b) would be met, which, as discussed above, is necessary for
safe crane operations.
One commenter suggested that the provision will encourage disputes.
The commenter suggested that rental companies would not accept a
controlling entity's ground conditions unless the controlling entity
purchases services from the rental company to improve them. (ID-
0105.1.)
OSHA determines that the commenter's concerns are unwarranted.
Section 1926.1402(e) is a mechanism for a controlling entity to obtain
information to facilitate its compliance with Sec. 1926.1402(c)(1).
Once ground conditions meet the criteria in Sec. 1926.1402(b), the
controlling entity is not required to make further improvements, even
if the rental company objects.
For the reasons above, OSHA is promulgating Sec. 1926.1402(e) as
proposed, with the substitution of the word ``director'' for the word
``supervisor'' to be consistent with the change made and discussed in
Sec. 1926.1404.
Paragraph (f)
At the public hearing, a representative of the railroad industry
explained that, in his experience, railroads use cranes to: remove,
replace or renew rails; build bridges; handle materials; and to pick up
and repair railroad cars. (ID-0342.) In addition, the witness explained
that the railroad industry uses a variety of construction equipment,
some on the tracks (locomotive cranes, rubber-tired off-road cranes
that are capable of being used on the tracks) and others off the tracks
(rubber-tired off road cranes, truck cranes, and service trucks). (ID-
0342.) The witness estimated that 95% of railroad industry crane
operations take place on or around railroad tracks. (ID-0342.)
[[Page 47936]]
One commenter expressed concern about the application of Sec.
1926.1402 to the railroad industry's use of cranes and requested an
exemption for the use of cranes on and alongside tracks. (ID-0176.1; -
0292.1.) The commenter expressed two specific concerns. First, that,
unlike most construction sites, a railroad construction site may
include many miles of railroad track. The commenter elaborated that the
time and cost associated with locating and checking site drawings and
soil analyses--which the commenter said may arguably be available to
the railroad industry--for thousands of miles of track would be
``exorbitant'' and would ``not appreciably lower the risks to the crane
operator.'' (ID-0176.1.)
As for the cost associated with locating and checking documents,
Sec. 1926.1402 does not require the controlling entity to possess or
acquire any particular documents or other information, but requires
that the controlling entity share any information about underground
hazards that it has in its possession with the crane user and operator.
As explained above, OSHA has replaced ``available to'' with ``in the
possession of'' to make this clear.
The commenter also suggested that there is no need to apply Sec.
1926.1402 to cranes used by railroads along track rights of way because
the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has regulations that specify
minimum requirements for roadbeds and areas immediately adjacent to
roadbeds that concern the ground conditions underneath and alongside
the track, as well as requirements for how the track must be laid.
The Federal Railroad Administration has established requirements
for the ballasts beneath railroad tracks,\13\ limited requirements for
the roadbed,\14\ and requirements for the track surface.\15\ The
failure of any one of these elements (the ballast, the roadbed or sub-
grade, or the track) is detrimental to the effectiveness of the system
as a whole. These provisions are designed to, in concert, enable trains
to travel safely, and involve conditions adjacent to the track only to
the extent that they affect track stability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The FRA regulations for the ballast (the foundation for
most railroad tracks) can be found at 49 CFR 213.103 and 213.334,
depending on the class of track. The provisions are otherwise
identical, and provides:
Unless it is otherwise structurally supported, all track shall
be supported by material which will--
(a) Transmit and distribute the load of the track and railroad
rolling equipment to the subgrade;
(b) Restrain the track laterally, longitudinally, and vertically
under dynamic loads imposed by railroad rolling equipment and
thermal stress exerted by the rails;
(c) Provide adequate drainage for the track; and
(d) Maintain proper track crosslevel, surface, and alignment.
\14\ FRA requirements address issues other than ground support
in the area adjacent to the track roadbed. Specifically, 49 CFR
213.31 requires that each drainage or other water carrying facility
under or immediately adjacent to the roadbed be maintained and kept
free of obstruction, to accommodate expected water flow for the area
concerned. Section 213.37 requires the control of vegetation on
railroad property which is on or immediately adjacent to roadbeds to
prevent fires, maintain visibility and signals, and to prevent
interference with other duties.
\15\ 49 CFR 213.51 et seq. contains requirements for the gage,
alignment, and surface of the track.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The comment is persuasive to the extent that it pertains to cranes
that operate on railroad tracks that are part of the general railroad
system of transportation because FRA's regulations address ground
support for the tracks.\16\ Therefore, OSHA has decided to exempt from
the requirements of Sec. 1926.1402 cranes used on railroad tracks that
are part of the general railroad system of transportation subject to
FRA regulation. To effectuate this change from the proposed rule, OSHA
has added Sec. 1926.1402(f), which exempts cranes that are designed
for use on railroad tracks and that are being used on tracks regulated
by the Federal Railroad Administration requirements at 49 CFR part 213.
In addition, OSHA has exempted railroad tracks and their underlying
support from the ground conditions inspection requirements in Sec.
1926.1412(d)(1)(x).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The general railroad system of transportation is defined as
``the network of standard gage track over which goods may be
transported throughout the nation and passengers may travel between
cities and within metropolitan and suburban areas.'' Appendix A to
49 CFR part 209. If a railroad that is part of the general railroad
system of transportation operates over track that is confined to an
industrial installation, that plant trackage is also considered part
of the general railroad system of transportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The commenter also stated that the FRA has regulations that
``concern[] the ground conditions * * * alongside the track.'' (ID-
0176.1.) The only aspects of the ground conditions of the area adjacent
to the track roadbed addressed by the FRA regulations are drainage and
vegetation.\17\ An area with adequate drainage can nonetheless present
problems for equipment set-up with respect to slope, compaction and
firmness, as well as have hazards beneath the set-up area. For this
reason, the Agency has decided not to exempt equipment used alongside
railroad tracks. Therefore, for example, a rubber tired off-road crane
designed for use on tracks would be exempted from Sec. 1926.1402 while
being operated on the tracks, but would be subject to the requirements
of Sec. 1926.1402 if used adjacent to the tracks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See the description of FRA requirements that relate to the
area adjacent to the track roadbed in footnote 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sections 1926.1403--1926.1406 Assembly and Disassembly
Sections 1926.1403 through 1926.1406 set out requirements designed
to ensure the safety of employees while equipment is assembled and
disassembled (and, in the case of tower cranes, during erecting,
climbing and dismantling). C-DAC members indicated that, in their
experience, the failure to adequately address hazards associated with
these processes is a significant cause of injuries and fatalities. The
Committee also concluded that the most effective way to reduce these
injuries and fatalities would be to have a standard that
comprehensively addresses these hazards (see also the Agency's
discussion of fatality data associated with assembly/disassembly at 73
FR 59741-59742, Oct. 9, 2008).
Note that the term ``procedures,'' which is used in the assembly/
disassembly provisions, is defined to include (but is not limited to)
instructions, diagrams, recommendations, warnings, specifications,
protocols and limitations (see Sec. 1926.1401). The operation of an
``assist'' crane used to help in the assembly/disassembly process is
not covered by the assembly/disassembly requirements but is covered by
the other sections of this standard.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ However, the rigging requirements in Sec. Sec.
1926.1404(r) and 1926.1425(c)(3) apply to the rigging used by the
assist crane.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One commenter suggested that the Agency clarify whether Sec. Sec.
1926.1403 through 1926.1406 apply to activities that modify or increase
the height of the crane such as ``jumping.'' (ID-0156.1.) ``Jumping''
(or ``climbing'') refers to the process of adding mast sections to a
tower crane to increase its height. In many cases a tower crane is
first erected and used at one height, and then as the height of the
structure being built increases, the height of the tower crane is
increased in stages to keep pace with it.
Irrespective of whether the crane is initially erected to its full
height, or is ``jumped'' in stages, the process of increasing the
height of the crane is an assembly/erection process. Sections 1926.1403
through 1926.1406 apply whenever the crane's height is modified. To
ensure that this intent is reflected in the standard, OSHA has added a
sentence to the definition of ``assembly/disassembly'' in Sec.
1926.1401 to this effect.
[[Page 47937]]
In proposed Sec. 1926.1401, ``assembly/disassembly'' was defined
to mean ``the assembly and/or disassembly of equipment covered under
this standard.'' With regard to tower cranes, `erecting and climbing'
replaces the term `assembly,' and `dismantling' replaces the term
`disassembly.' C-DAC did not originally include a definition of
``assembly/disassembly,'' but OSHA included this definition in the
proposed rule to avoid any implication that Sec. Sec. 1926.1403-
1926.1406 do not apply to tower cranes because the terms ``assembly''
and ``disassembly'' are not commonly used in the industry in referring
to tower cranes. Instead, the words ``erecting,'' ``climbing,'' and
``dismantling,'' are used, and the definition of ``assembly/
disassembly'' makes it clear that Sec. Sec. 1926.1403-1926.1406 also
apply to tower cranes.
Section 1926.1403 Assembly/Disassembly--Selection of Manufacturer or
Employer Procedures
Final Sec. 1926.1403 requires that when assembling or
disassembling equipment (or attachments), the employer must comply with
all manufacturer prohibitions applicable to assembly and disassembly
and must also comply with either manufacturer procedures, or employer
procedures, for assembly and disassembly. Employer procedures may be
used only where the employer can demonstrate that the procedures used
meet the requirements in Sec. 1926.1406 and may not be used during
rigging if the employer uses synthetic slings, as explained in the
discussion below regarding Sec. 1926.1404(r).
Two commenters suggested that only manufacturer procedures for
crane assembly/disassembly be allowed. (ID-0151.1; -0305.1.) One of
these commenters clarified its comment at the hearing (ID-0343.) and
confirmed this clarification in post-hearing submissions (ID-0387.1.)
that they did not believe the assembly/disassembly procedures should be
limited to just manufacturer procedures. The commenter suggested using
a procedure designed by a registered professional engineer or by a
qualified person. (ID-0387.1.) Note that Sec. 1926.1406(b) of the
final rule requires employer procedures to be developed by a qualified
person.
As explained in the proposed rule preamble, the Committee members
discussed whether employers should be required to comply with the
manufacturer's procedures, or if deviations from those procedures
should be allowed. The Committee determined that deviations should be
allowed for two reasons. First, manufacturers' procedures are typically
designed for use in ``ideal'' environments: Large, flat, dry,
unencumbered open areas. However, in C-DAC's experience, such
conditions are not typical, especially in urban areas. Consequently,
employers are currently unable to implement those procedures in those
situations. Second, members were of the view that there is often more
than one way to safely assemble and disassemble a crane, and that it is
unnecessary to mandate that in every case the manufacturer procedures
be used. The inclusion of specific requirements in the standard that
employer procedures must meet (see Sec. 1926.1406) addresses the
concern that those procedures ensure worker safety.
Another commenter suggested that employer procedures not be allowed
for climbing operations unless approved by the manufacturer. (ID-
0137.1.) As explained in the discussion below regarding Sec.
1926.1404(r), the Agency has decided to require manufacturer procedures
to be used with regard to the use of synthetic slings. Since the
commenter has not provided information substantiating the need for
manufacturer approval with respect to deviation from climbing
procedures, the Agency is unaware of any basis to conclude that the
requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1403 and 1926.1406 would be inadequate
to ensure the safety of employer procedures in this regard. Therefore,
OSHA has decided not to adopt the commenter's suggestion.
Another commenter suggested that if the Agency is going to allow
employer procedures, a written copy should be required to be kept on
the job site for the use of the entire crew. (ID-0178.1.)
The final rule requires that the A/D director understand the
assembly/disassembly procedures. In addition, the A/D director must
review the assembly/disassembly procedures prior to starting the
assembly/disassembly process unless the A/D director is experienced in
having used them on the same type and configuration of equipment and is
able to recollect the procedures such that review is unnecessary. (See
Sec. 1926.1404(b).) Furthermore, before beginning assembly/disassembly
operations, the A/D director must determine that the crew members
understand their tasks and the associated hazards, as well as any
hazardous positions/locations that they need to avoid. (See Sec.
1926.1404(d).) These requirements ensure that both the A/D director and
crew members understand the assembly/disassembly procedures that are
going to be undertaken.
C-DAC declined to require the procedures to be in writing and at
the site. In some cases, the procedures are not complex and are very
familiar to the A/D director. In such cases C-DAC determined that
having them in writing is not necessary. In other cases, such as where
the procedures are complex, the equipment is new to the employer, or
the A/D director has not often assembled/disassembled the equipment,
there is an inherent incentive for the employer to have them in
writing. In such instances, OSHA expects that the employer will have
written procedures on site to facilitate meeting the requirements in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1404(b) and (d). The Agency therefore finds that it is
not necessary to have a requirement that they be in writing and at the
site.
Lastly, a commenter suggested that this section incorporate by
reference the ANSI/ASSE A10.31 American National Standard, Safety
Requirements, Definitions and Specifications for Digger Derricks. (ID-
0178.1.) Because the commenter did not explain how incorporating this
standard would make the final rule more effective, OSHA has decided not
to incorporate ANSI/ASSE A10.31 into Sec. 1926.1403.
In the proposed rule, Sec. 1926.1404(n) set forth the requirement
(now set forth in this section) that an employer must comply with
manufacturer prohibitions. The Agency decided that this important
caveat to Sec. 1926.1403 would be better understood if it was moved to
this section. Therefore, Sec. 1926.1404(n) is now reserved and its
text is integrated in this section.
Additionally, OSHA has substituted an ``or'' in place of the
``and'' separating ``assembling'' and ``disassembling'' to clarify that
the listed requirements apply when the employer is assembling or
disassembling. Finally, a reference to Sec. 1926.1404(r) has been
added to Sec. 1926.1403(b) to clarify when employer procedures may not
be used.
Section 1926.1404 Assembly/Disassembly--General Requirements (Applies
to All Assembly and Disassembly Operations)
Paragraph (a) Supervision--Competent--Qualified Person
Section 1926.1404(a) requires assembly/disassembly to be directed
by a person who meets the criteria for both a competent person and a
qualified person, or by a competent person who is assisted by one or
more qualified persons (``A/D director''). Where the assembly/
disassembly is being performed by only one person, that person must
meet the criteria for both a competent person and a qualified person.
For purposes of this standard,
[[Page 47938]]
that person is considered the A/D director.
Section 1926.1401 defines ``A/D director'' as ``an individual who
meets this standard's requirements for an A/D director, irrespective of
the person's formal job title or whether the person is non-management
or management personnel.'' C-DAC constructed the definition in this way
to make clear that it is the substance of the individual's
qualifications, and not his or her job title or position in the company
hierarchy, that determines whether the person is qualified to act as an
A/D director.
In the proposed rule, OSHA used the term ``A/D supervisor.'' Some
commenters objected by written submission and at the hearing to the use
of the word ``supervisor'' in this provision. (ID-0182.1; -0199.1; -
0172.1; -0341.) They were concerned that the use of this term would
imply that anyone who serves in this role under Sec. 1926.1404 would
be considered a supervisor under the National Labor Relations Act
(``NLRA'').\19\ Their objections are rooted in the fact that the word
``supervisor'' is used and defined in the NLRA. The commenters' only
objection to Sec. 1926.1404(a) was the use of the term ``supervisor'';
they did not object to the actual duties or prerequisites spelled out
in the proposed rule applicable to this individual/team. Several
commenters suggested that the word ``supervisor'' be replaced with the
term ``designated individual'' and that the regulatory text be amended
to definitively indicate that OSHA has no intention of creating NLRA
implications by use of the term. (ID-0182.1; -0199.1; -0172.1.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 29 U.S.C. 159-169 (1935).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The use of ``supervisor'' in this rule would not be determinative
of supervisor status under the NLRA.\20\ Nonetheless, OSHA understands
the commenters' concerns that workers in the industry may be confused
by the use of this term. However, the term ``designated individual,''
suggested by a labor representative and other commenters, could also
cause confusion, since it is ambiguous as to whether that person had
been granted the authority to correct hazards. Such ambiguity in the
minds of the A/D crew members regarding the authority of the A/D
supervisor would undermine the effectiveness of the provision itself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ With ``A/D supervisor,'' OSHA was merely creating a
descriptive term for use solely in the application of an OSHA
standard. OSHA's use of the term is a less significant designation
for the purposes of the NLRA than even a job title, which is itself
not determinative under the NLRA. See, e.g., N.L.R.B. v. St. Mary's
Home, Inc., 690 F.2d 1062, 1066 (4th Cir. 1982) (``As the [NLRB]
itself has put it, `job titles are meaningless).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, OSHA has decided to use the term ``A/D director.''
``Director'' is not a defined term in the NLRA nor does it have any
particular significance as a job title with respect to NLRA
jurisprudence. Furthermore, like ``A/D supervisor,'' it is consistent
with C-DAC's intent to use a term that conveys the concept of authority
to oversee the assembly/disassembly process. To remain consistent with
this new term, in Sec. 1926.1404(a)(1), OSHA has replaced the word
``supervised'' with ``directed.''
The A/D director has to meet the definition of both a ``competent''
and ``qualified'' person as OSHA defines those terms.\21\ The Committee
determined that having an A/D director overseeing the assembly/
disassembly process who had both the authority to correct a hazard and
who had the expertise of a qualified person was necessary to ensure the
safety of the operation. Several commenters strongly endorsed the new
A/D director requirement, believing the addition will improve workplace
safety. (See, e.g., ID-0343.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Section 1926.1401, Definitions, defines a ``competent
person'' as: ``one who is capable of identifying existing and
predictable hazards in the surroundings or working conditions which
are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees, and who has
authorization to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate
them.'' Section 1926.1401 defines a ``qualified person'' in this
proposed standard as: ``One who, by possession of a recognized
degree, certificate, or professional standing, or who by extensive
knowledge, training, and experience, has successfully demonstrated
his ability to solve or resolve problems relating to the subject
matter, the work, or the project.'' These definitions are
essentially the same as the definitions in Sec. Sec. 1926.32(f) and
1926.32(m).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A commenter asserted that the qualifications for A/D directors are
too abstract and allowed for too much interpretation. The commenter
suggests that the qualifications for an A/D director should be more
similar to the requirements for operator certification in Sec.
1926.1427. (ID-0137.1.)
C-DAC thoroughly discussed the necessary qualifications for an A/D
director and determined that the best option for ensuring employee
safety during assembly/disassembly was to require an A/D director to be
both a qualified and a competent person. (See ID-0321.5.) Furthermore,
the terms qualified person and competent person and their definitions
are well established and well recognized in the construction industry.
For these reasons, OSHA is deferring to the judgment of the Committee
and is not making the suggested change.
Paragraphs (b) Knowledge of the Procedures and (c) Review of the
Procedures
Section 1926.1404(b) requires that the A/D director understand the
assembly/disassembly procedures. In addition, Sec. 1926.1404(c)
requires the A/D director to review the procedures immediately prior to
starting the process unless the director's experience in having used
them on the same type and configuration of equipment, and recollection
and understanding of the procedures is such that it makes their review
unnecessary.
These two sections work together to ensure that an experienced A/D
director understands the procedures. Even if an A/D director has
experience, he/she must still meet the knowledge requirement in Sec.
1926.1404(b). For example, if an A/D director configured a type of
crane a number of years ago and no longer remembers the procedures
applicable to such a crane, he/she does not fall within the experienced
A/D director exception, and must, accordingly, review the procedures
immediately prior to starting the process.
No comments were received on these provisions. They are promulgated
as proposed except that, in addition to a grammatical clarification,
Sec. 1926.1404(c) now contains a clearer knowledge requirement to
clarify the interplay between Sec. Sec. 1926.1404(b) and 1926.1404(c),
as described above.
Paragraph (d) Crew Instructions
Under this provision, before beginning assembly/disassembly
operations, the A/D director would have to ensure that the crew members
understand their tasks and the associated hazards, as well as any
hazardous positions/locations that they need to avoid.
No comments were received on this provision. It is promulgated as
proposed except that ``ensure'' replaces ``determine,'' to better
represent the role of the A/D director.
Paragraph (e) Protecting Assembly/Disassembly Crew Members Out of
Operator View
Section 1926.1404(e) requires that before a crew member goes to a
location that is out of view of the operator and is either in, on, or
under the equipment, or near the equipment (or load) where the crew
member could be injured by movement of the equipment (or load), the
crew member must inform the operator that he/she is going to that
location. Where the operator knows that a crew member went to a
location
[[Page 47939]]
covered by paragraph (e)(1) of this section, the operator must not move
any part of the equipment (or load) until the operator is informed in
accordance with a pre-arranged system of communication that the crew
member is in a safe position. An example of such a system would be the
use of a signal person who gives an all-clear signal to the operator
once the signal person sees that the employee has exited the hazard
area. Another example would be where the employee in the hazard area is
equipped with a portable air horn and, in accordance with a pre-
arranged horn signal system, sounds an appropriate signal to the
operator that the employee has exited the hazard area. To be effective,
the pre-arranged signal system needs to be designed so that this all-
clear signal could not be confused with a horn signal from some other
employee for another purpose.
One of the hazards identified by the Committee is an operator
swinging or moving the crane/derrick when assembly/disassembly
personnel are in a crush/caught-in-between zone and out of the
operator's view. The Committee concluded that an effective and
practical means of preventing these accidents would be through a
communication procedure that would provide key information to, and
coordination between, the operator and these workers.
One Committee member suggested that instead of requiring that the
crew member directly inform the operator of his/her location, the rule
should permit the crew member to provide this information to the
operator through a third person. For example, the crew member would
instruct his/her foreman to radio the information to the operator. OSHA
requested public comment on this suggestion in the preamble of the
proposed rule (see 73 FR 59743, Oct. 9, 2008).
Several commenters stated that the requirements should remain as
originally proposed and the Agency should not allow notification
through a third person. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1; -0182.1; -0187.1; -
0379.1.) One commenter believed that third party notification could
result in miscommunication or delays. (ID-0226; -0357.1.)
One commenter testified that introducing a third person into the
communications link would not present any danger so long as there was
some verbal confirmation. (ID-0344.)
OSHA agrees with C-DAC and the majority of the commenters. Indirect
communication between the crane operator and the employee working out
of view, through an intermediary, would increase the potential for
miscommunication. Therefore, the Agency has not changed the provisions
to allow third party notification.
Commenters raised additional issues regarding Sec. 1926.1404(e).
Proposed Sec. 1926.1404(e) provided two methods to assure that
employees would not be injured while working outside of the operator's
view. Under proposed Sec. 1926.1404(e)(2)(i), the operator would give
a warning that is understood by the crew member as a signal that the
equipment (or load) is about to be moved and would allow time for the
crew member to get to a safe position. Under proposed Sec.
1926.1404(e)(2)(ii), the operator was prohibited from moving any part
of the crane until informed, in accordance with a pre-arranged system
of communication, that the crew member is in a safe position.
Two commenters raised concerns regarding crew members actually
hearing warnings that were given in accordance with proposed Sec.
1926.1404(e)(2)(i). One commenter suggested that the operator should be
required to confirm that the employee has moved to a safe location
prior to initiating crane movement. (ID-0292.1.) Another commenter
suggested that a prearranged communications system should be required
because audible warnings can be drowned out by ambient noise. (ID-
0122.)
These comments identified two flaws in proposed Sec.
1926.1404(e)(2)(i) that were not addressed by C-DAC. First, a crew
member may not hear a warning signal that the equipment or load is
about to move and may not respond appropriately. Second, the crew
member may hear the warning signal but be unable to move from his/her
position. This would leave the crew member exposed to struck-by and
crushing hazards. As a result, the Agency has revised the provision by
deleting the option that was in proposed Sec. 1926.1404(e)(2)(i).
Proposed Sec. 1926.1404(e)(2) is otherwise included as proposed except
for one grammatical correction.
Paragraph (f) Working Under the Boom, Jib or Other Components
Section 1926.1404(f) requires that when pins (or similar devices)
are being removed, employees must not be under the boom, jib, or other
components, except where the employer demonstrates that site
constraints require employees to be so positioned. In such instances
the A/D director must implement procedures that minimize the risk of
unintended dangerous movement and minimize the duration and extent of
exposure under the boom. An example of such procedures is provided in
non-mandatory Appendix B.
Paragraph (g) Capacity Limits
This provision requires that the rated capacity limits for loads
imposed on the equipment, each of its components (including rigging),
lifting lugs and equipment accessories being assembled or disassembled
not be exceeded. The provision applies ``during all phases of assembly/
disassembly.'' (See the discussion of this provision at 73 FR 59744,
Oct. 9, 2008.) Note that where an assist crane is being used during the
assembly/disassembly of another crane/derrick, the requirements for
rated capacity during operations must be met under Sec. 1926.1417(o),
Compliance with rated capacity, with respect to the assist crane.
No comments were received on this provision. It is promulgated as
proposed except for one grammatical correction.
Paragraph (h) Addressing Specific Hazards
Section 1926.1404(h) requires that the A/D director supervising the
assembly/disassembly operation address known hazards associated with
the operation with methods to protect the employees from them, and
provides a list of specific hazards that are likely to cause serious
injury or death. The A/D director must consider each hazard, determine
the appropriate means of addressing it, and oversee the implementation
of that method.
No comments were received on this provision. It is promulgated as
proposed with a grammatical clarification and the addition of the words
``which include'' at the end of the introductory language to
acknowledge the employer's existing responsibility under Sec. 5(a)(1)
of the OSH Act (the ``general duty clause'') to address other
recognized hazards not listed in this paragraph.
Paragraph (h)(1) Site and Ground Bearing Conditions
This provision works in conjunction with Sec. 1926.1402, which
addresses ground conditions for both assembly/disassembly and use of
the equipment, including ground condition criteria. Section
1926.1404(h)(1) requires the A/D director to assess the ground
conditions for conformance with those criteria, and to assess the site
for suitability for assembly and disassembly. (See the discussion of
this provision at 73 FR 59744, Oct. 9, 2008.) No comments were received
on this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
[[Page 47940]]
Paragraphs (h)(2) Blocking Material and (h)(3) Proper Location of
Blocking
These two provisions address the hazards associated with inadequate
blocking. Section 1926.1404(h)(2) requires the size, amount, condition
and method of stacking the blocking to be sufficient to sustain the
loads and maintain stability. Section 1926.1404(h)(3) requires that
when used to support booms or components, blocking must be
appropriately placed to protect the structural integrity of the
equipment, and prevent dangerous movement and collapse.
``Blocking'' (also referred to as ``cribbing'') is defined in Sec.
1926.1401 as ``wood or other material used to support equipment or a
component and distribute loads to the ground. Typically used to support
latticed boom sections during assembly/disassembly and under outrigger
floats.'' This definition is from A Glossary of Common Crane and
Rigging Terms, a publication by the Specialized Carriers & Rigging
Foundation (``SC&RF Handbook''). (ID-0035.)
Proper blocking plays an important role in assembly/disassembly
safety by reducing the risk of injuries from unplanned movement or the
collapse of equipment. (See the discussion of blocking at 73 FR 59744,
Oct. 9, 2008.)
One commenter suggested including a strength requirement for
blocking. (ID-0053.1.) OSHA determines that the provision as proposed,
which requires that the ``size, amount, condition and method of
stacking blocking must be sufficient to sustain the loads and maintain
stability,'' appropriately addresses blocking strength. Therefore, OSHA
has not made a change to the wording of the provision in this regard.
The version of paragraph (h)(3) in the proposed rule was applicable
only to lattice booms and components. In the proposed rule's preamble,
OSHA asked for public comment on whether the provision should also
apply to other types of booms and components (i.e., those for hydraulic
cranes). (See the discussion of this provision at 73 FR 59745, Oct. 9,
2008.)
Several commenters stated that proper blocking is necessary for
hydraulic cranes in addition to lattice boom cranes. (ID-0213.1; -
0205.1; -0118.1.) In addition, hearing testimony also indicated that
there is a need for this requirement to apply to hydraulic cranes
because they are sometimes assembled or disassembled, at least
partially, in the field. (See ID-0343.1.)
OSHA has concluded that the requirement is necessary for both
hydraulic and lattice boom cranes and components. At times, portions of
hydraulic cranes are assembled and disassembled in the field and need
proper blocking. As a result, the word ``lattice'' in the proposed
provision's language has not been included in the final rule so that
the provision applies to hydraulic cranes and components as well as
lattice boom cranes and components.
Paragraph (h)(4) Verifying Assist Crane Loads
This paragraph requires that, when using an assist crane, the loads
that will be imposed on the assist crane at each phase of assembly/
disassembly must be verified in accordance with Sec. 1926.1417(o)(3).
The purpose of this requirement is to avoid exceeding the assist
crane's rated capacity. ``Assist crane'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401
as ``a crane used to assist in assembling or disassembling a crane.''
When used for this purpose, an ``assist crane'' is subject to all
applicable provisions of this standard, including the requirement of
Sec. 1926.1417(o) that it not be used in a manner that exceeds its
rated capacity. (See the discussion of this provision at 73 FR 59745,
Oct. 9, 2008.)
No comments were received on this provision; it is promulgated as
proposed except that the purpose of the requirement is now included
above in the preamble, rather than in the rule text, to increase the
clarity of the requirement.
Paragraph (h)(5) Boom and Jib Pick Points
This provision would require the A/D director to address the hazard
of using improper boom and jib pick points. Specifically, the points of
attachment of rigging to a boom/jib or boom/jib section(s) must be
suitable for preventing structural damage. Such damage could compromise
structural integrity and, in some cases, may not be immediately
noticed. If that component were nonetheless used, the boom/component
could fail.
The points of attachment also need to facilitate the safe handling
of these components. (See the discussion of this provision at 73 FR
59745, Oct. 9, 2008.) No comments were received on this provision; it
is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (h)(6) Center of Gravity
In a variety of instances the method used for maintaining stability
during assembly/disassembly depends on supporting or rigging a
component (or set of components) so that it remains balanced throughout
the process. In such instances the A/D director is required to identify
the center of gravity of the load. (See the discussion of this
provision at 73 FR 59745, Oct. 9, 2008.) No comments were received on
this provision. It is promulgated as proposed except for one
grammatical change.
Paragraph (h)(7) Stability Upon Pin Removal
This paragraph requires that each of the following must be rigged
or supported to maintain stability upon the removal of the pins: Boom
sections, boom suspension systems (such as gantry A-frames and jib
struts), and components. ``Boom suspension system'' is defined in Sec.
1926.1401 as ``a system of pendants, running ropes, sheaves, and other
hardware which supports the boom tip and controls the boom angle.''
This definition is the same as that for ``boom suspension'' in the
SC&RF Handbook. (See the discussion of this provision at 73 FR 59745,
Oct. 9, 2008.)
No comments were received on this provision; it is promulgated as
proposed except that the conjunctive ``and'' is substituted for ``or''
to make it clear that all three of the listed items (boom sections,
boom suspension systems, and components) must be properly rigged, not
just any one of those.
Paragraph (h)(8) Snagging
As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, ``snagging''
occurs when pendant cables hung alongside the boom are caught
(``snagged'') on the pins, bolts, or keepers as the operator raises the
boom (see 73 FR 59746, Oct. 9, 2008.) Snagging could damage the cables
or other equipment and result in injury. This paragraph requires that
suspension ropes and pendants not be allowed to catch on the boom or
jib connection pins or cotter pins (including keepers and locking
pins). The definition for pendants can be found in Sec. 1926.1401.
This definition is similar to that in the SC&RF Handbook, but with the
addition of the reference to ``bar type'' pendants. (See the discussion
of this provision at 73 FR 59746, Oct. 9, 2008). No comments were
received on this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (h)(9) Struck by Counterweights
Final Sec. 1926.1404(h)(9) requires the A/D director to address
the potential for unintended movement from inadequately supported
counterweights and from hoisting counterweights. ``Counterweight'' is
defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as a ``weight used to supplement the weight
of equipment in providing stability for lifting loads by
counterbalancing those loads.'' This
[[Page 47941]]
definition is taken from the SC&RF Handbook. (See the discussion of
this provision at 73 FR 59746, Oct. 9, 2008.)
No comments were received on this provision; it is promulgated as
proposed except that OSHA has replaced the adjective ``unexpected''
with ``unintended'' to remain consistent throughout this section.
Paragraph (h)(10) Boom Hoist Brake Failure
This provision addresses a hazard that can occur both during
assembly and disassembly, although it is more typically a hazard during
assembly. In many older cranes the boom hoist brake mechanism has an
external or internal mechanical brake band that operates by pressing
against the hoist drum. As the configuration of the crane changes and,
for example, more boom is added, this type of boom hoist brake may slip
unless it has been adjusted to hold the extra weight. The Committee was
concerned that the inability of an unadjusted brake to hold the
increased load will not be evident until the additional boom section(s)
has been added and the operator attempts to rely on the brake in a
subsequent phase of the operation. If the operator does not first raise
the boom a small amount after the section has been added (with the crew
clear of the boom) to test the brake, employees could be injured later
in the process when the operator manipulates the boom and finds that
he/she is unable to brake it.
To address this hazard, the employer is required to test the brake
to determine if it can hold the load. In many cases, if it is
insufficient, an adjustment to the brake will correct the problem. If
it remains insufficient, the employer is required to use a boom hoist
pawl, other locking device, back-up braking device, or another method
of preventing dangerous boom movement (such as blocking or using an
assist crane to support the load) from a boom hoist brake failure.
The Agency was concerned that the text of the proposed provision
was not sufficiently clear regarding the timing of this brake test, so
it solicited public comment on this issue. OSHA's interpretation was
that the test would need to be done immediately after each section (or
group of sections) is installed, and after all sections are in place
(see 73 FR 59746, Oct. 9, 2008).
One commenter recommended revising the provision to specify that
the brake be tested prior to the commencement of lifting. (ID-0214.1.)
However, two other commenters wrote that the regulatory text should
remain as is and should not specify when to perform the brake test.
They point out that C-DAC's intent in Sec. 1926.1404(h) was to
identify hazards and require that they be addressed by the A/D
director. C-DAC designed Sec. 1926.1404(h) so that, for the most part,
the A/D director could determine the procedures (or how to implement
specified requirements) that would be best suited in each situation to
protect against those hazards. They also state that, in some cases, the
specific procedure that OSHA referred to in the proposed rule preamble
could result in a greater hazard. (ID-0205.1; 0213.1.)
OSHA agrees that specifying an overly-detailed procedure to address
this hazard would be inappropriate given the myriad of circumstances in
which this issue may arise. However, the Agency also determined that
the proposed rule's regulatory text did not identify the purpose of the
provision with sufficient clarity. Therefore, the final standard does
not specify that the test has to be performed at a certain time that is
tied to the installation of any particular section, but instead
requires a test whenever the A/D director will be relying on the boom
hoist brake to function properly. In short, the test needs to be
performed, prior to reliance being placed on the brake, and the test
needs to accurately account for the loads that will be placed on the
brake. The provision in the final rule, therefore, requires the boom
hoist brake to be tested prior to each time reliance on the boom hoist
brake is anticipated.
Paragraph (h)(11) Loss of Backward Stability
The Committee identified three points during the assembly/
disassembly process at which there is a heightened risk of loss of
backward stability. These are: when swinging the upperworks, during
travel, and when attaching or removing equipment components. Therefore,
under this provision, before any of these occur, the A/D director is
required to consider whether precautions need to be instituted to
ensure that backward stability is maintained. No comments were received
on this provision. However, OSHA is not including the drawing described
as Figure 1 in the proposed rule. See the discussion of the removal of
this figure below in Sec. 1926.1405. Except for the removal of any
reference to figure 1, OSHA is promulgating the provision as proposed.
Paragraph (h)(12) Wind Speed and Weather
Section 1926.1404(h)(12) requires the A/D director to address
hazards caused by wind speed and weather to ensure that the safe
assembly/disassembly of the equipment is not compromised.
The Committee considered the option of establishing a maximum wind
speed, as well as the option of incorporating ANSI's provisions
regarding wind speed. However, it determined that selecting any one
particular speed as a maximum would be arbitrary because of the variety
of factors involved. For example: different cranes and crane types vary
with respect to the ``sail'' area they present; an assembly process
involving use of an assist crane may require lower wind speeds than one
in which no assist crane is used; and assembly/disassembly operations
done ``in the air'' (that is, with the boom elevated in the air,
without ground support for the boom) may require lower wind speeds than
a boom assembled/disassembled on the ground. The Committee ultimately
decided that a better approach would be to have the A/D director
determine the maximum safe wind speed under the circumstances.
Other weather conditions that can affect the safety of assembly/
disassembly would include, for example, ice accumulation on crane
components. Ice can both add to the weight of the components and create
slippery, dangerous surfaces on which employees work. The A/D director
must address weather conditions that affect the safety of the
operation. No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed with a slight rewording for clarity.
Paragraph (i) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (j) Cantilevered Boom Sections
Members of the Committee determined that a common mistake in
assembly/disassembly is cantilevering too much boom. When too much boom
is cantilevered, structural failure can occur in components such as the
mast/gantry, boom sections and lifting lugs. Employees may be struck by
falling components from this type of failure. To prevent accidents from
cantilevering too much boom during assembly/disassembly, this provision
requires manufacturer's limitations on cantilevering not to be
exceeded.
If the manufacturer's limitations are not available, the employer
is required to have a registered professional engineer (RPE) determine
the appropriate limitations, and to abide by those limitations. The
Committee concluded that in such cases there would need to be a
requirement that the RPE's determination be in writing to ensure that
the assessment has been done.
[[Page 47942]]
This provision is promulgated as proposed with one grammatical
correction to make it clear that it is the limitations that must not be
exceeded.
Paragraph (k) Weight of Components
As with any load to be lifted by a crane/derrick, the weight of the
components must be available to the operator so that the operator can
determine if the lift can be performed within the crane/derrick's
capacity. This requirement applies irrespective of whether the
component is being hoisted by the crane being assembled/disassembled or
by an assist crane.
No comments were received on this provision. OSHA is promulgating
this provision largely as proposed, but has modified the text to make
it clear that assembly/disassembly is prohibited when the weight of
each of the components is not readily available.
Paragraph (l) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (m) Components and Configuration
This provision deals with the selection of components that will be
used to comprise the crane/derrick, the configuration of the equipment,
and its inspection upon completion of assembly. (See the discussion of
this provision at 73 FR 59747, Oct. 9, 2008.)
No comments were received on this provision. However, to be
consistent with the requirements of Sec. 1926.1403, the word
``prohibition'' has been added to Sec. 1926.1404(m)(1)(i); otherwise,
it is promulgated as proposed with the addition of commas to clarify
that this paragraph only applies to the selection of components and
configuration to the extent that either one affects the capacity or
safe operation of the equipment.
Note that another section (Sec. 1926.1434) allows cranes/derricks
to be modified under certain circumstances. To the extent a crane/
derrick is modified in accordance with Sec. 1926.1434, the employer is
not required to follow the manufacturer's original instructions,
limitations and specifications regarding component selection and
configuration regarding those modifications. Instead, under Sec.
1926.1404(m)(1)(ii), the employer is required to follow the component
selection and configuration requirements approved in accordance with
Sec. 1926.1434.
Paragraph (n)
For clarity, OSHA has reserved this paragraph and incorporated its
substance in Sec. 1926.1403, as explained above in the discussion
regarding Sec. 1926.1403. (See the discussion of this provision at 73
FR 59747, Oct. 9, 2008.)
Paragraph (o) Shipping Pins
This provision requires reusable shipping pins, straps, links and
similar equipment to be removed. Once they are removed they must either
be stowed or otherwise stored so that they do not present a falling
object hazard. No comments were received for this paragraph; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (p) Pile Driving
This provision prohibits equipment used in pile driving operations
from having a jib attached. An attached jib could be dislodged during
pile driving operations and cause structural damage to the boom,
potentially causing the boom to fail or diminishing its capacity. (See
the discussion of this provision at 73 FR 59748, Oct. 9, 2008.) No
comments were received on this provision; it is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (q) Outriggers and Stabilizers
This paragraph specifies requirements regarding outriggers. (See
the discussion of this paragraph at 73 FR 59748, Oct. 9, 2008.)
OSHA received several comments with regard to Sec. 1926.1404(q)(2)
in relation to stabilizers. One commenter stated that it is necessary
to add the term ``stabilizers'' to the regulatory text for the
provision to properly apply to articulating cranes. (ID-0206.1.) The
commenter explains that, as opposed to outriggers, which are designed
to take all load off of the tires, stabilizers are designed to relieve
some, but not all, of the sprung weight for the purpose of increasing
the stability of the vehicle. The commenter believes that the provision
as written in the proposed rule would lead to improper use of
stabilizers in such a way that is dangerous and against manufacturer
recommendations. A second commenter emphasized that cranes equipped
with stabilizers (and not outriggers) do not raise the wheels off the
ground. (ID-0292.)
OSHA agrees with the commenters that it is necessary to address
stabilizers in Sec. 1926.1404(q). With the exception of Sec.
1926.1404(q)(2), the term ``stabilizers'' has been added so that each
provision also applies to stabilizers. Section 1926.1404(q)(2) does not
apply to stabilizers because they are not designed to remove all weight
from the vehicle's wheels.
One comment was received in regards to Sec. 1926.1404(q)(4). Under
that provision, each outrigger must be visible to the operator or to a
signal person during extension and setting. The commenter suggested
that the requirement be modified so that it would also apply to the
retraction of outriggers. (ID-0053.1.) The commenter indicated that
employees can be subject to crushing and pinching hazards during
outrigger retraction and this would be less likely to occur if it the
outrigger had to be visible to the operator or signal person during
retraction.
OSHA agrees that crushing and pinching hazards exist during
outrigger retraction. However, Sec. 1926.1404(q) is designed to
prevent the overturning of the crane; it does not address the crushing
and pinching hazards posed by operation of the equipment in struck-by
or crushed/by locations outside the operator's view. The final rule
contains other provisions that are designed to address such hazards.
(See, e.g., Sec. 1926.1404(e).) Therefore, the Agency is not
incorporating the commenter's suggestion into Sec. 1926.1404(q) and is
promulgating the provision largely as proposed.
Paragraph (r) Rigging
This paragraph specifies requirements regarding rigging during the
crane assembly/disassembly process. It includes a requirement for a
qualified rigger and sets forth specifications regarding the use of
synthetic slings.
C-DAC did not focus on the proper use of synthetic sling rigging
during the crane assembly/disassembly process, primarily because
another standard--29 CFR 1926 Subpart H (Materials handling, storage,
use, and disposal)--already addresses some of the hazards associated
with the use of synthetic slings in construction.
However, after C-DAC completed its work, a catastrophic crane
collapse resulted in a reevaluation of subparts N and H with regard to
synthetic slings and rigging expertise. On March 15, 2008, a tower
crane in New York City collapsed, killing six construction workers.
OSHA's investigation of that incident focused on the use of synthetic
slings to hold a bracing collar that was being installed.
The Agency determined that neither subpart H (Rigging equipment for
material handling) nor subpart N specifically address the hazard posed
when a synthetic sling is used in a manner causing compression or
distortion of a sling, or when the sling is in contact with a sharp
edge. The Agency asked for public comment on whether to prohibit using
synthetic slings altogether in the assembly/disassembly process or,
alternatively, to
[[Page 47943]]
require padding or similar measures to protect the slings from being
damaged (see 73 FR 59742, Oct. 9, 2008).
Commenters generally opposed prohibiting the use of synthetic
slings during assembly/disassembly, as long as appropriate precautions
are taken. (See, e.g., ID-0205.1; -0213.1; -0343.) Specifically,
commenters stated that synthetic slings have the advantage of helping
to prevent damage to equipment components, but need to be protected
from cuts, compression, distortion and reduction of capacity, by the
use of ``softeners'' (i.e., padding). (See, e.g., ID-0187.1; -0343.)
One commenter testified that it does not oppose synthetic slings if
they are listed in the manufacturer's procedures or if they are not
specifically prohibited by the manufacturer. (ID-0343.) Some commenters
also emphasized the need for such slings to be properly rated and
inspected. (See, e.g., ID-0226.) Another commenter recommended
requiring rigging equipment for material handling to be inspected. One
commenter advocated prohibiting synthetic slings used in conjunction
with tower crane erection, unless the manufacturer specifically allows
their use. (ID-0156.)
Commenters also suggested adding requirements regarding the
qualifications and training of riggers. Specifically, several
commenters suggested requiring certification of riggers similar to
operator certification requirements in Sec. 1926.1427. (ID-0126; -
0132.1; -0136; -0204.1; -0311.1; -0362.1.) One commenter opposed
certification, but supported requiring training. Another suggested
third party certification or licensing of supervisors. (ID-0156.1.)
Another advocated employer qualification of riggers. (ID-0197.1.)
OSHA acknowledges that synthetic slings have certain advantages,
such as preventing damage to equipment components, and no commenters
advocated a prohibition in all instances. OSHA has therefore decided
not to prohibit the use of synthetic slings in assembly/disassembly.
There must, however, be adequate safeguards for their use.
OSHA agrees with the comment that stressed the importance of
inspecting slings. However, as Sec. 1926.251(a)(1) already requires
that all rigging equipment be inspected, no additional requirement is
needed in subpart CC regarding the inspection and removal of synthetic
slings.
The Agency finds that it is vital that synthetic slings be
protected from abrasive, sharp or acute edges, since any of those
conditions can damage a synthetic sling, resulting in a failure. Also,
based on its review of the record, the Agency concludes that such
slings must be protected from configurations that could cause
compression or distortion of the sling, since that can also cause
failure. For example, wrapping a synthetic sling through a V-angled
junction point of steel members in a tower mast section can cause the
sling to compress and distort under load, compromising its capacity.
As was demonstrated by the March 2008 collapse in New York City,
such protection is needed whenever the object that is in contact with
the sling--whether it is a load or something else, such as a crane
component used to anchor the sling--has such an edge or configuration.
Therefore, OSHA is including a requirement in the final Sec.
1926.1404(r)(2) to protect employees from such synthetic slings hazards
when used in assembly/disassembly.
OSHA also learned from its investigation of the March 2008 collapse
that it is vital that synthetic slings be selected and used properly.
In particular, the sling manufacturer's recommendations must be
observed strictly as the capacity ratings set by the manufacturer are
highly dependent on the sling being used as specified by the
manufacturer. (See ID-0336.) Consequently, employers, even with the
assistance of a qualified rigger, will typically not have the ability
to develop safe alternative procedures regarding their use. Therefore,
the Agency is including a requirement in the final Sec.
1926.1404(r)(3) (also noted in Sec. 1926.1403(b)) that when a
synthetic sling is used during assembly/disassembly, the sling
manufacturer's instructions, limitations, specifications and
recommendations must be followed.
Note that Sec. 1926.1403 requires that the employer ``comply with
all applicable manufacturer prohibitions.'' Therefore, if a
manufacturer prohibits the use of synthetic slings during assembly/
disassembly, OSHA prohibits that use of such slings. Furthermore, while
Sec. 1926.1403 requires the employer to comply with either the
manufacturer's or the employer's assembly/disassembly procedures (see
Sec. 1926.1403(a) and (b)), employer procedures may be used only if
the employer meets a two-prong test. First, the employer must not be
using synthetic slings. Second, the employer must demonstrate that its
procedures meet the requirements in Sec. 1926.1406.
There may be cases in which the equipment manufacturer does not
prohibit the use of synthetic slings during assembly/disassembly, but
identifies wire rope slings in its procedures. In such cases, the
employer may only use synthetic slings if it establishes and implements
its own procedures under Sec. 1926.1403(b) and can demonstrate that
those procedures, including the use of synthetic slings, meet the
criteria requirements in Sec. 1926.1406.
As noted above, several commenters advocated adding a requirement
that rigging be performed by qualified riggers. One local government
stated that although rigging operations are critical to completing
crane work, rigging operations involve a high level of risk if not
performed properly. (ID-0362.1.) The local government's experience
supports the proposition that human error causes most rigging
accidents. (ID-0362.1.) The New York crane collapse and the subsequent
OSHA investigation further highlight the dangers associated with
improper rigging during assembly/disassembly, and the need to address
this hazard was supported by all of the commenters who addressed this
issue. OSHA notes that although several commenters pointed to the need
for qualified riggers early on in the comment process, and again during
the hearing, no one expressed any disagreement about the need to
address the hazard by requiring riggers to be qualified. This means of
addressing the hazard is consistent with the means that C-DAC applied
when it identified a hazard related to rigging in Sec. 1926.1425(c),
and the Agency relies on C-DAC's expertise in selecting the appropriate
method to address a rigging hazard. OSHA is therefore requiring in
Sec. 1926.1404(r)(1) that all rigging for crane assembly/disassembly
be performed by a qualified rigger.
Finally, the fact that the commenters did not limit their
suggestions on rigging qualifications to rigging synthetic slings leads
the Agency to conclude that all rigging done for assembly/disassembly,
irrespective of type, is a safety-critical function. One person
testified about how he was involved with improper rigging which led to
the death of his coworker. He stressed the importance of having
qualified riggers, stating that in his experience most of the accidents
he has seen and been involved with or investigated have involved
problems with rigging. (ID-0343.)
After considering the record, OSHA is including the qualified
rigger requirement in the final rule and it applies to all rigging used
for assembly/disassembly.
[[Page 47944]]
Section 1926.1405 Disassembly--Additional Requirements for Disassembly
of Booms and Jibs (Applies to Both the Use of Manufacturer Procedures
and Employer Procedures)
Section 1926.1405 requires that none of the pins in the pendants be
removed (partly or completely) when the pendants are in tension. In
addition, none of the pins (top or bottom) on boom sections located
between the pendant attachment points and the crane/derrick body are to
be removed, partly or completely, when the pendants are in tension.
None of the pins (top or bottom) on boom sections located between the
uppermost boom section and the crane/derrick body are to be removed,
partly or completely, when the boom is being supported by the uppermost
boom section resting on the ground (or other support). Finally, none of
the top pins on boom sections located on the cantilevered portion of
the boom being removed (the portion being removed ahead of the pendant
attachment points) are to be removed (partly or completely) until the
cantilevered section to be removed is fully supported. (See the
discussion of these requirements at 73 FR 59748, Oct. 9, 2008.)
The Committee determined that many of the accidents associated with
cranes occur during the removal of pendant, boom and jib pins. The
Committee determined that accidents typically occur because of a
failure to recognize that, in certain situations, particular pins are
``in tension.'' If partly or fully removed while in that state the
result can be unplanned movement of a component or the collapse of the
boom or jib.
Consequently, the Committee concluded that the removal of pendant,
boom section and jib pins warrants heightened attention. This section
focuses on protecting employees from these hazards during the
dismantling of booms and jibs, either when disassembling the crane/
derrick or when changing the length of a boom or jib. To make clear
that ``dismantling'' includes activities such as shortening a boom,
final Sec. 1926.1401 defines ``dismantling'' to include ``partial
dismantling (such as dismantling to shorten a boom or substitute a
different component).''
In this section, the Committee identified particular scenarios
that, in the experience of many of the Committee members, pose specific
hazards in disassembly if the wrong pins (that is, pins that are in
tension) are partly or completely removed. The Committee concluded that
the failure to follow the provisions would very likely result in
unintended movement and/or collapse of the components. OSHA agrees that
these requirements will help to prevent unintended movement or collapse
of booms or jibs as they are being disassembled.
Several comments were received regarding the illustrations in this
section of the proposed rule. Two commenters noted the illustration of
a tower crane in figure 2 of the proposed rule and suggested it be
replaced with a mobile crane. (ID-0205.1;-0213.1.) Two commenters
recommended that figures 4 and 6 be changed such that no pins would be
permitted to be removed without blocking the entire boom. (ID-0131.1; -
0292.) Specifically, these commenters did not believe that the bottom
boom connecting pins could be removed due to the weight of the
cantilevered boom exerting force on these bottom connecting pins. They
stated that if there was sufficient clearance between the connecting
lugs to enable the pins to be removed, the boom could move downward
upon the removal of the pins.
Based upon C-DAC's expertise, OSHA determines that figures 2, 4 and
6 in the proposed rule were accurate depictions as to blocking, but the
proposed arrows may have been confusing to the extent that commenters
incorrectly understood that the removal of pins would be allowed where
arrows did not appear. To avoid confusion, OSHA is not including any of
the assembly/disassembly figures from the proposed rule in the final
rule.
Section 1926.1406 Assembly/Disassembly--Employer Procedures--General
Requirements
Section 1926.1406 sets requirements that must be met if an employer
elects to use its own procedures for assembling and disassembling a
crane/derrick instead of those of the manufacturer. (See the discussion
of this provision at 73 FR 59748, Oct. 9, 2008.)
One commenter wrote that, to ensure safe assembly and disassembly,
employer procedures must not be allowed. In the preamble to the
proposed rule, OSHA explained its rationale and the basis of C-DAC's
recommendation that employer procedures be allowed where they meet the
specified criteria in Sec. 1926.1406. (See full discussion at 73 FR
59742, 59748, Oct. 9, 2008). The commenter did not challenge the
rationale or provide any evidence of why employer procedures that
comply with Sec. 1926.1406 would be insufficient. The Agency is
therefore adopting Sec. 1926.1406 as proposed for the reasons
explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, with several minor
clarifications.
In Sec. 1926.1406(a), the phrase ``assembly/disassembly'' replaces
``assembling or disassembling'' to make this section consistent with
other sections of the rule. Also in Sec. 1926.1406(a), OSHA has
removed the phrase ``are designed to'' to increase clarity. In Sec.
1926.1406(a)(1), the phrase ``any part'' replaces ``all parts'' to make
it clear the duty to prevent dangerous movement in any part of the
equipment. This provision is otherwise promulgated as proposed with
several grammatical corrections.
Sections 1926.1407-1926.1411 Power Lines
Introduction
Final Sec. Sec. 1926.1407 through 1926.1411 contain requirements
designed to help ensure the safety of employees while cranes/derricks
are being assembled, disassembled, operated, or while they travel under
power lines.
Previously, subpart N, in former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15), addressed
power line hazards by specifying the minimum distance that must be
maintained between a crane and an energized power line. For lines rated
50 kilovolts (kV) or below, the minimum distance was 10 feet; for lines
over 50 kV, the minimum distance was generally 10 feet plus 0.4 inches
for each 1 kV over 50 kV (we will refer to this subpart N requirement
in this preamble as the ``10-foot rule'').
However, the subpart N provisions, which instructed employers to
maintain a minimum clearance distance, did little by way of requiring
employers to implement measures to help prevent operators from
inadvertently breaching that distance. The only preventative measure in
subpart N was a requirement, in former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15)(iv), to
use a spotter ``where it is difficult for the operator to maintain the
desired clearance by visual means.'' In discussing how to reduce power
line fatalities, the Committee determined that a systematic, proactive
approach to preventing power line contact is needed (see the Agency's
explanation for the need for these provisions in the proposed rule
preamble at 73 FR 59748-59750, Oct. 9, 2008).
Brief Overview of Requirements
The standard requires the implementation of a systematic, proactive
approach to dealing with the hazard of power lines. This approach is
comprised of the following steps: (1)
[[Page 47945]]
Identify the work zone and assess it for power lines--determine how
close the crane could get to them. The employer has the option of doing
this assessment for the area 360 degrees around the crane or for a more
limited, demarcated area; (2) If the assessment shows that the crane
could get closer than a trigger distance--20 feet for lines rated up to
350 kV (50 feet for lines rated over 350 kV)--then requirements for
additional action will be triggered.
The voltages given in the final rule are phase-to-phase system
voltages on the power lines. It should be noted that the system
voltages for power lines generally take three forms. First, there is
the actual voltage on the line. This voltage varies from one moment to
the next as conditions on the power line change. Second, there is the
nominal voltage on the line that is used to designate its voltage. The
actual operating voltage varies above and below this voltage. (See the
definition of ``voltage, nominal'' in subpart K of the Construction
Standards, Sec. 1926.449.) Third, there is the maximum operating
voltage on the line. This represents the maximum voltage that can
appear on a power line and is 5 percent above the nominal voltage on
the line. (See IEEE Std. 516-2009.) For purposes of the final rule, the
power line voltage is the maximum operating voltage for that line. This
approach, which is consistent with the determination of minimum
approach distances in Sec. 1910.269,\22\ ensures that the minimum
clearance distance is appropriate when the voltage on the line rises to
its maximum. The following table lists the maximum operating voltages
over 50 kV for power line systems commonly found in the U.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ For further information, see Appendix B to Sec. 1910.269.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
operating
Nominal voltage range (kV) voltage (kV)
\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
46.1 to 72.5........................................... 72.5
72.6 to 121............................................ 121
138 to 145............................................. 145
161 to 169............................................. 169
230 to 242............................................. 242
345 to 362............................................. 362
500 to 550............................................. 550
765 to 800............................................. 800
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 29 CFR 1910.269 Table R-6 and Appendix B to that section.
Note 1: This is the ``voltage'' of the power line for the purposes of
the final rule.
Unless the power lines are deenergized and grounded, encroachment/
electrocution prevention measures have to be implemented to prevent the
crane from breaching a minimum clearance distance and protect against
electrocution. The employer is allowed to choose among several minimum
clearance distance options.
For example, for lines up to 350kV, the minimum clearance distance
options would be: (1) 20 feet; or (2) the distance specified in Table A
of Sec. 1926.1408 for the line's voltage (Table A is the ``10-foot
rule''; see discussion of Table A in discussion of Sec. 1926.1408); or
(3) a distance closer than what is specified in Table A.
However, there are limitations to the availability of some of these
options, and the number of mandatory encroachment prevention (and
other) measures increases when using a clearance distance closer than
Table A.
A commenter stated that use of the term ``employer'' was confusing
when there are multiple employers on a given construction site, and
raised the issue of whether each employer was responsible for employing
its own dedicated spotter and its own set of barricades and similar
safety measures. (ID-0143.1.)
In general, except where otherwise specified in this standard, the
requirements of this standard apply to employers whose employees are
exposed to hazards addressed by this standard, and also to other
employers in certain situations as explained in OSHA's multi-employer
policy (see OSHA CPL 02-00-124, Multi-Employer Citation Policy, Dec.
10, 1999). For example, with respect to situations in which barricades,
a dedicated spotter, or other measures are required under Sec. Sec.
1926.1407-1926.1411, each such employer is responsible for ensuring
that the required measures are in place. However, that does not mean
that each employer is required to install or provide duplicate sets of
those measures. In multiple employer worksites, one employer may rely
on measures provided by another employer as long as those measures meet
the requirements of the standard.
Several commenters asked that OSHA specify in the standard that
utility owner/operators may charge fees for the services they are
required to perform under the standard. (ID-0155.1; -0203.1.) For
example, where the employer uses Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(iii)'s Option
(3) for setting the clearance distance (i.e., the clearance distance
under Table A), under Sec. 1926.1408(c), the utility owner/operator
must provide requested voltage information within two working days of
the request.
The standard does not address the issue of fees; the Agency
determined that fees will generally be addressed as a contractual
matter between the parties involved.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Note that in the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, OSHA has
assumed that the cost of providing this information would be passed
on to the employer requesting the information, not the utility
owner/operator. See section V.B of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1926.1407 Power Line Safety (Up to 350 kV)--Assembly and
Disassembly
The requirements in Sec. 1926.1407 address the hazards of
assembling and disassembling equipment near power lines up to 350 kV.
The requirements in Sec. 1926.1407 are similar in most respects to the
requirements in Sec. 1926.1408, which address operations of equipment
near power lines.
One commenter suggested that OSHA amend Sec. 1926.1407 to include
cranes used to assist the assembly and disassembly of other cranes.
(ID-0131.) As OSHA noted in the preamble to the proposed rule, when an
assist crane is used during the assembly or disassembly of another
crane/derrick, the use of the assist crane, with respect to power line
safety, would be considered ``operations'' and therefore covered by
Sec. 1926.1408 (or, for power lines over 350 kV, Sec. 1926.1409).
This is because the assist crane has already been assembled and is
being used for a crane operation. Therefore, use of the assist crane
must comply with Sec. 1926.1408 during the assembly/disassembly
process rather than with Sec. 1926.1407.
In contrast, a crane that is not yet fully assembled is often used
to complete its own assembly. For example, a crane is often used to
load its own counterweights. Similarly, it may unload its
counterweights in its own disassembly process. Such activities would be
covered under Sec. 1926.1407 since it is being assembled/disassembled.
Therefore, the provision is promulgated in the final rule without
change.
Paragraph (a)
Under this paragraph, before beginning assembly or disassembly, the
employer must determine if any part of the crane, load or load line
(including rigging and lifting accessories) could get, in the direction
or area of assembly, closer than 20 feet to a power line.
As stated in the preamble of the proposed rule, the phrase ``in the
direction or area of assembly/disassembly'' was included to address the
fact that, in some cases, the assembly or disassembly of a crane takes
place not just in an ``area,'' that is, a fixed portion of the work
site, but also in a ``direction.'' For example, when
[[Page 47946]]
disassembling a crane, the disassembly process takes place in an area
that includes the area under and around the boom's path as it is
lowered to the ground (in most, but not all cases, the boom is lowered
to the ground for the disassembly process). Under this provision, the
employer must assess the proximity that the boom will be in to the
power line in its path of travel to (and on) the ground.
Two commenters expressed confusion about the meaning of the phrase
``in the direction or area of assembly/disassembly.'' (ID-0122; -
0178.1.) C-DAC's intent in including this phrase was to ensure that
employers make the initial 20-foot clearance assessment based on not
only the area which the crane equipment occupies at the beginning of
the assembly/disassembly process, but also with respect to other areas
radiating from the initial area, both horizontally and vertically, that
will be occupied as the equipment components are added, removed,
raised, and lowered during the assembly/disassembly process. For
example, when assembling a lattice boom crane, the ``area'' involved
will expand as boom sections are added.\24\ This area expands in the
``direction'' in which the boom sections are added. The power line
assessment has to be made for the portion of the site that will be
involved as these boom sections are added.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ This also occurs with telescopic extensible boom cranes
when a ``dead man section'' is added to the boom.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in the preamble to the proposed rule, ``direction''
includes the direction that, for example, the boom will move as it
rises into the air after the boom has been assembled on the ground. For
example, the boom, when fully assembled on the ground, may be more than
20 feet from a power line. However, when raising it from the ground, it
may get closer than 20 feet. Accordingly, under this language, the
``direction'' that the boom will travel as it is raised must also be
evaluated for proximity to power lines.
Another example is the assembly of a tower crane. As tower sections
are added, the assembly process may reach a point where components are
closer to power lines than when the process began. That ``direction''
of assembly upwards must also be evaluated.
If an employer determines that the 20 foot ``trigger''
determination is positive, then the employer is required to take
additional steps. Specifically, the employer must meet the requirements
under either Option (1), Option (2), or Option (3) of Sec.
1926.1407(a).\25\ Some commenters were concerned that the three
compliance options in Sec. 1926.1407(a) could be construed as a
prioritization of compliance preferences, e.g., a preference for
deenergization over the other options. (ID-0203.1; -0214.1.) In
response, OSHA wishes to clarify that the three options are in no
particular order. In the Agency's view they represent three adequately
protective compliance methods. The standard offers employers the
flexibility to select the method most suitable for each specific work
situation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ If no part of the crane, load or load line could come
closer than 20 feet to a power line, the employer is not required to
take any further action under this section. However, the employer
may encounter a situation where it needs to get closer than
anticipated to the power lines during the assembly/disassembly
process. In such a case the employer is required to go back and
conduct a new 20 foot ``trigger assessment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (a)(1) Option (1)
An employer choosing Option (1) of this section will protect
against electrocution by having the power lines deenergized and visibly
grounded. Where the employer elects this option, it will not have to
implement any of the encroachment/electrocution prevention measures
listed in Sec. 1926.1407(b). This option helps to minimize the
electrical hazards posed by power lines.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Grounding the lines helps minimize the electrical hazard
from possible reenergizing of the lines; however, some voltage will
still appear on the line until the circuit protective devices open
the circuit. In addition, under certain conditions, the circuit
protective devices will not open the line, and the voltage will
remain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A number of commenters confirmed the Committee's determination that
because of the time and cost considerations in arranging for the
utility owner/operator \27\ to deenergize and ground the line,
deenergizing and grounding has not been routinely done. (ID-0155; -
0203; see the discussion in the proposed rule preamble of deenergizing
and grounding with regard to proposed Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(i), 73 FR
59755, Oct. 9, 2008.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ OSHA notes that the phrase ``utility owner/operator''
reflects scenarios where utilities may not be operated by an owner
but by some entity other than the owner. Therefore wherever the
phrase ``utility owner/operator'' is used in the standard or in the
preamble it is meant to apply to utility owners or utility
operators. The final rule also uses the word ``utility'' in its
broadest sense. It includes traditional utilities as well as other
entities (such as steel or paper companies) that own or operate the
power lines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, OSHA continues to conclude that providing other safe and
practical options in the final rule will help to reduce unsafe
practices in the industry. Those other options (Options (2) and (3) in
Sec. 1926.1407(a)) combined with Sec. 1926.1407(b) are designed to be
effective protection against the hazards of electrocution.
One commenter requested that OSHA provide guidance on whether
written confirmation of deenergization and grounding from the utility
owner/operator will be required. (ID-0214.1.) He further recommended
that the requested guidance should be set forth in the regulatory text
rather than in the preamble if OSHA expects employers to obtain a
written confirmation. OSHA did not determine that written confirmation
is necessary. As long as the utility owner/operator confirms that the
line is deenergized and it is visibly grounded, employee safety is
assured. Thus, the final rule does not require written confirmation
that the line is deenergized.
For a discussion of comments related to the requirement for visible
grounding, see the section later in this preamble addressing Sec.
1926.1408(a)(2)(i).
One commenter suggested that in some situations deenergizing and
grounding could place the utility owner/operator in conflict with other
Federal and State regulatory requirements. (ID-0203.1.) The commenter
did not provide information for OSHA to consider regarding any specific
conflicts, and OSHA has not identified any such conflicts. Moreover, in
the event that such a conflict does arise, the employer could choose,
as an alternative to deenergizing, Options (2) or (3) as described
below.
This paragraph is being adopted without change from the proposal.
Paragraph (a)(2) Option (2)
Under Option (2) (Sec. 1926.1407(a)(2)), the employer is required
to maintain a minimum clearance distance of 20 feet. To help ensure
that this distance is not breached, the employer has to implement the
encroachment prevention measures in Sec. 1926.1407(b). Under this
option, no part of the equipment, load or load line, including rigging
and lifting accessories, is permitted closer than 20 feet to the power
line.
Employers using this option will have to stay further away from the
power line than had been required under subpart N's 10-foot rule
(employers wanting to use the 10-foot rule would have to use Option
(3), discussed below).\28\ However, an advantage of this option to many
employers is that they do not have to determine the voltage of the
power line; they only have to determine that the line voltage is no
more than 350 kV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ As discussed above, the 10-foot rule requires varying
clearance distances increasing with voltage with clearance distances
that begin at 10 feet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the old subpart N formula, an employee was required at most
to
[[Page 47947]]
maintain a 20-foot distance away from a power line. Under the new
option, employees are required to stay at least 20 feet away from the
power line, so the Committee determined that there would be no
diminution of safety under this new option. In fact, in the Committee's
experience, most power lines encountered by most employers have
voltages that, under the current subpart N formula, require a minimum
clearance distance of 10 feet. Therefore, use of this option will
result in a higher margin of safety. Employers who do not need to get
closer than 20 feet to assemble/disassemble the crane could use this
option and would be saved the step of obtaining the line voltage.
As noted above, in addition to maintaining a minimum clearance
distance of 20 feet, employers using this option are required to
implement the encroachment prevention and other measures specified in
Sec. 1926.1407(b).
Paragraph (a)(3) Option (3)
Under Option (3) (Sec. 1926.1407(a)(3)), the employer is required
to maintain a minimum clearance distance in accordance with Table A of
Sec. 1926.1408. Under Table A, depending on the voltage of the power
line, the minimum clearance distance ranges from 10 feet to 20 feet for
lines up to 350 kV. Under this option the employer is required to
determine the line's voltage.
As a practical matter, in the Committee's experience, the power
lines most typically encountered by most employers would require a
minimum clearance distance of 10 feet under Table A. As a result,
employers can assemble/disassemble equipment closer to power lines
under this option than under Option (2).
Table A is based upon the same formula that was used in subpart N
(the 10-foot rule) and is similar to Table 1 in ASME B30.5-2004. Unlike
subpart N, which had required employers to calculate the minimum
clearance distance from a formula, Table A sets forth specified
clearance distances in a readily understood table and requires no
calculations. In addition to maintaining the minimum clearance distance
specified in the Table, employers using this option are required to
implement the encroachment prevention and other measures specified in
proposed Sec. 1926.1407(b).
Several commenters verified C-DAC's determination that obtaining
voltage information in practice can often be difficult and time-
consuming. (ID-0118; -0143.1; -0146.1; -0155.1.) OSHA determines that
providing a mechanism under Sec. 1926.1407(a)(2) (``Option (2)'') to
proceed with construction operations without having to obtain voltage
information from utilities provides employers with a viable alternative
to obtaining voltage information without compromising the safety of
workers. This section of the final rule provides a mechanism by which
employers can, using Table A, perform work with clearance distances of
less than 20 feet. It is promulgated as proposed.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ The proposed regulatory text for Sec. 1926.1407(a)(3)(i)
used the phrase ``minimum clearance distance'' while that for Sec.
1926.1407(a)(3)(ii) used ``minimum approach distance.'' For
consistency, OSHA has, in Sec. 1926.1407(a)(3)(ii), changed the
phrase ``minimum approach distance'' to ``minimum clearance
distance.'' Provisions in Sec. 1910.269 and proposed subpart V of
29 CFR 1926 use the phrase ``minimum approach distance.'' OSHA
believes that employers who are covered by those standards are
familiar with that term. In contrast, the Agency believes that
employers that do not perform electric power work will better
understand the term ``minimum clearance distances.'' OSHA considers
the terms ``approach distance'' and ``clearance distance'' to be
interchangeable; no substantive distinctions are intended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (b) Preventing Eencroachment/Electrocution
Once an employer has determined that some part of the crane, load
or load line could come within the trigger distance of 20 feet of a
power line (see Sec. 1926.1407(a)), if it chooses either Option (2) or
(3) of Sec. 1926.1407(a) it is required to implement encroachment
prevention measures to help ensure that the applicable minimum
clearance distance (20 feet under Option (2) or the Table A distance
under Option (3) is not breached.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Alternatively, under Option (1), the employer could have
the lines deenergized and grounded. If Option (1) were selected, no
further action under this section would be required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of the measures in this paragraph are designed to help the
employer maintain the appropriate clearance distance and thereby
prevent electrical contact while in the process of assembling or
disassembling equipment. One of the measures is designed to prevent
electrocution in the event of electrical contact.
Paragraph (b)(1)
Under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the employer is required to
conduct a planning meeting with the Assembly/Disassembly Director \31\
(A/D Director), operator, assembly/disassembly crew and other workers
who will be in the assembly/disassembly area (including the area of the
load). This planning meeting must include reviewing the location of the
power line(s) and the steps that will be implemented to prevent
encroachment and electrocution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ As explained in the preamble accompanying Sec. 1926.1404,
the term ``assembly/disassembly director'' replaces the proposed
term ``assembly/disassembly supervisor.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the planning meeting, the employer is required to select a
protective measure from paragraph (b)(3) of this section (see
discussion below) and review all the measures that will be used to
comply with this section.
The purpose of the meeting requirement is to ensure that the
operator and other workers who will be in the area understand these
measures and how they will be implemented. That understanding is
important to their successful implementation. Because of the critical
nature of these measures, and the seriousness of the consequences to
the safety of the employees if they are not implemented correctly, the
Committee concluded that it is necessary for there to be a structured
process by which the employer communicates this information.
As noted below, a planning meeting to discuss implementing
encroachment prevention measures is also required under Sec.
1926.1408(b)(1). Refer to the preamble section related to that
provision for a discussion about public comments received regarding
responsibilities for ensuring that such a meeting takes place. That
discussion is equally relevant to this section. With the exception of
the use of the term ``director'' instead of ``supervisor,'' as
explained above, this section is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b)(2)
Paragraph (b)(2) of this section requires that where tag lines are
used they must be nonconductive. This provision uses two terms that are
defined in Sec. 1926.1401. ``Tag lines'' is defined as ``a rope
(usually fiber) attached to a lifted load for purposes of controlling
load spinning and pendular motions or used to stabilize a bucket or
magnet during material handling operations.'' Thus, one end of a tag
line is attached to the load and the other end is held by an employee
who controls the load's motion by exerting force on the line.
If the equipment or load were to make electrical contact with a
power line while an employee was holding a tag line that was able to
conduct electricity, the employee could be electrocuted. The
requirement that the tag line be nonconductive is designed to protect
against such an event. Section 1926.1401 defines ``nonconductive'' as
meaning that, ``because of the nature and conditions of the materials
used, and the conditions of use (including environmental conditions and
condition of the material), the object in question has the property of
not becoming
[[Page 47948]]
energized (that is, it has high dielectric properties offering a high
resistance to the passage of current under the conditions of use).''
This definition recognizes that it is not only the inherent
property of the tag line material that results in it being
nonconductive but also the conditions of use. For example, in some
cases, if an otherwise nonconductive material were to become wet and
therefore able to conduct electricity, it would no longer qualify as
nonconductive under this paragraph.
One commenter requested that OSHA specify test procedures to assist
employers in making the determination of whether a tag line is
nonconductive. (ID-0178.1.) C-DAC considered the utility of setting
specifications for materials required to be nonconductive but
determined that it would be impractical. American Society for Testing
and Materials (ASTM) Standard Specification for Unused Polypropylene
Rope With Special Electrical Properties, ASTM F1701-05 contains
specifications and test methods for live-line rope used in electric
power work. These ropes are used to insulate power line workers from
energized power lines. Tag lines meeting this standard are acceptable
under the final rule. However, to meet the requirement for
``nonconductive'' tag lines, they need not meet this standard, which
requires a degree of insulation beyond that intended by the final rule.
In addition, several other OSHA general industry and construction
standards call for nonconductive materials, including Sec.
1910.268(n)(13)(ii) (requiring nonconductive measuring devices to
measure clearance distances from overhead power lines), Sec. Sec.
1910.269(l)(6)(i) and 1910.333(c)(8) (requiring metal articles worn by
employees to be rendered nonconductive), and Sec. 1926.955(a)(8)
(requiring nonconductive tag lines). In general these and other
standards that call for nonconductive materials require the use of
insulating material that does not have a voltage rating; thus, there is
no need to specify a test method. In fact, setting test criteria for
these materials would produce a voltage rating and render them
insulating rather than nonconductive. (Because nonconductive materials
have no voltage rating, there is still a risk of injury from electric
shock should contact occur. However, these materials reduce that risk
substantially.) In practice, under dry conditions nonmetallic fiber
rope typically satisfies the definition for nonconductive.\32\ The
Agency concludes that this guidance is sufficient to help employers
determine whether their tag lines meet the definition and has
therefore, declined to specify test procedures in the final rule. The
provision is promulgated as proposed, without change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Wet, muddy, or high humidity conditions can cause such rope
to stop being nonconductive. Similarly, the presence of metal or
other conductive fibers or conductive sheaths or reinforcement would
render the tag line conductive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (b)(3)
Under this paragraph the employer is required to implement one of
five listed encroachment prevention measures (Sec. 1926.1407(b)(3)(i)
through (v)). The Committee concluded that the use of any one of these
measures, in combination with the required measures listed elsewhere in
Sec. 1926.1407(b), would be feasible and effective in protecting
against encroachment. Specifically, the employer is required to choose
either: (i) The use of a dedicated spotter; (ii) a proximity alarm;
(iii) a device that automatically warns the operator when to stop
(i.e., a range control warning device); (iv) a device that
automatically limits the range of movement of the equipment; or (v) an
elevated: warning line, barricade, or line of signs, in view of the
operator, equipped with flags or similar high-visibility markings.
Providing the ability to choose among these options gives the employer
flexibility so that it can pick one that is well suited and efficient
in the circumstances.
A definition of ``dedicated spotter (power lines)'' is included in
Sec. 1926.1401, Definitions. A dedicated spotter must meet the signal
person qualification requirements of Sec. 1926.1428 and his/her sole
responsibility must be to watch the separation between the power line
and the equipment, load line, and load, and to ensure through
communication with the operator that the applicable minimum distance is
not breached.
When the employer uses a dedicated spotter to prevent encroachment
under this section, that person has the critical responsibility of
ensuring, through communication with the operator, that the equipment
maintains a specified minimum clearance distance from a power line.
This definition makes clear that the dedicated spotter cannot have any
other responsibilities.\33\ The dedicated spotter must have the
qualifications required of a signal person under Sec. 1926.1428,
discussed below. Those qualifications will ensure that the signal
person can communicate effectively with the operator. They also ensure
that the signal person is knowledgeable about crane dynamics and
therefore is able to recognize situations in which the minimum
clearance distance may inadvertently be breached if, for example, the
load is stopped quickly while it is being moved near a power line.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ The preamble language of the proposed rule stated that
``the dedicated spotter cannot have any other responsibilities that
detract him/her from this task.'' (73 FR 59752, Oct. 9, 2008.) The
phrase ``that detract him/her from this task'' incorrectly implied
that a dedicated spotter could have other tasks provided those other
tasks did not distract the dedicated spotter from his/her task of
maintaining the required separation between the power line and the
equipment, the load, and the load line. This implication was
incorrect. As stated in the definition section, the dedicated
spotter's duty to maintain the required separation from the power
line must be his/her ``sole responsibility.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One commenter requested that OSHA include a clarification that the
dedicated spotter can also be the signal person. (ID-0292.1.) As noted
in the definition of ``dedicated spotter'' quoted above, although the
dedicated spotter must be a qualified signal person under the
requirements of Sec. 1926.1428, that definition also mandates that the
sole responsibility of the dedicated spotter be to ensure the required
separation between the power line and the equipment, the load line, and
the load (including loading and lifting accessories). Thus, in
situations where the equipment operator requires the assistance of a
signal person to provide signals related to maneuvering the equipment
or the load other than maintaining the required power line clearance
distance, a different person must serve as signal person.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ If a dedicated spotter also served as a signal person for
purposes other than maintaining the clearance distance, the
dedicated spotter would be vulnerable to a typical cause of power
line contact--focusing on something else and forgetting about, or
being distracted from, maintaining the clearance distance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The devices listed in Sec. Sec. 1926.1407(b)(3)(ii) and (iii) are
also defined in Sec. 1926.1401. A ``proximity alarm,'' is a device
that warns of proximity to a power line and must be listed, labeled, or
accepted by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory in accordance
with Sec. 1910.7.\35\ A Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory is an
organization that has been recognized by OSHA pursuant to Sec. 1910.7
as competent to evaluate equipment for conformance to appropriate test
standards for that type of equipment. Thus, approval of a
[[Page 47949]]
proximity alarm by a nationally recognized testing laboratory provides
assurance that the device will work as intended. (For a discussion of
public comments submitted relating to proximity alarms, see discussion
of Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4).) A ``range control warning device,'' is
defined in Sec. 1926.1401 and is a device that can be set by an
equipment operator to warn that the boom or jib tip is at a plane or
multiple planes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ The C-DAC version of this provision defined proximity alarm
as: ``a device that provides a warning of proximity to a power line
that has been approved by a Nationally Recognized Testing
Laboratory.'' OSHA has modified the provision to conform its
language to that used in Sec. 1910.7, the OSHA rule governing
nationally recognized testing laboratories, and to explicitly refer
to Sec. 1910.7 to make clear that the listing, labeling, or
acceptance of a device under this rule must be accord with Sec.
1910.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA realized that some of the devices listed in Sec.
1926.1407(b)(3) would not be operational or effective against
electrocution during certain phases of the assembly or disassembly
process of certain types of cranes. For example, for lattice boom
cranes, proximity alarm devices may not be able to be used when the
boom is not yet fully assembled; at that point the proximity alarm
typically cannot be connected and functioning. Therefore, during
certain phases of assembly/disassembly, one of the other options would
need to be used (such as a dedicated spotter) to provide the needed
protection.
However, the proposed regulatory text would have permitted an
employer to select an option under paragraph (b)(3) of this section
irrespective of whether it would be effective under the circumstances.
To address this concern, OSHA requested public comment on whether to
modify proposed Sec. 1926.1407(b)(3) to preclude the employer from
selecting an option that, in the employer's situation, would be
ineffective, such as by revising the provision to read:
(3) At least one of the additional measures listed in this
paragraph must be in place. The measure selected from this list must
be effective in preventing encroachment. The additional measures
are: * * *.
Two of four commenters on this issue supported amending the
language of this provision as described above. (ID-0067; -0118.) The
two commenters who disagreed with requiring that the chosen method be
effective in preventing encroachment thought that this provision would
prove problematic for employers; they favored the original wording from
the Committee that did not specifically require efficacy. (ID-0205.1; -
0213.1.) These latter two commenters did not present any evidence to
counter OSHA's concern that some of the listed encroachment prevention
measures may not be fully effective under all circumstances. OSHA
concludes that prudence dictates amending this provision to require
that the selected measure be effective in preventing encroachment; the
final rule therefore reflects the change described above.
In situations where an employer chooses the option of using a
dedicated spotter to prevent encroachment under Sec. 1926.1407(b)(3),
the employer is required to meet the requirements for spotters in Sec.
1926.1407(b)(3)(i). As specified in paragraph (b)(3)(i)(A) of this
section, the spotter must be equipped with a visual aid to assist in
identifying the minimum clearance distance. The Committee concluded
that a visual aid is needed for the spotter because of the difficulty
in visualizing the minimum clearance distance boundary in the air.
Under paragraphs (b)(3)(i)(B)-(D) of this section, the spotter must
be positioned so that he/she can effectively gauge the clearance
distance from the power line; the spotter, where necessary, must use
equipment that enables him/her to communicate directly with the
equipment operator; and the spotter must give timely information to the
operator so that the required clearance distance can be maintained. C-
DAC determined that each criterion is needed for the spotter to be able
to be effective.
One commenter on this provision asked whether an airhorn is
appropriate communication equipment for purposes of paragraph (C). (ID-
0120.) OSHA determines that an airhorn would not enable the dedicated
spotter to communicate with the operator as effectively as a radio,
telephone, or other electronic communication device, and, in any event,
might not be an effective means of communication on a noisy
construction site; therefore, OSHA does not consider use of an airhorn
to constitute compliance with paragraph (C).\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ The cross-reference to Sec. 1926.1420 originally included
in this provision as proposed was deleted in the final rule for
consistency with the parallel provisions for dedicated spotters in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(ii)(C) and 1926.1410(d)(2)(iii). This is
a ministerial change not intended to have any substantive
enforcement implications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (c) Assembly/Disassembly Below Power Lines Prohibited
This paragraph precludes employers from assembling or disassembling
cranes/derricks beneath energized power lines. The Agency agreed with
the Committee's conclusion that assembly/disassembly below energized
power lines presents an extreme risk and needs to be prohibited. The
assembly/disassembly process necessarily involves moving and hoisting
parts of the equipment into place. If some of this work takes place
beneath a power line, the risk that a part, load, load line, or other
equipment would make electrical contact is very high. Also, in both
assembly and disassembly, maneuvering an assembled crane out from under
the power lines, or maneuvering a crane that is about to be
disassembled under them, itself poses a high risk of such contact.
C-DAC's agreement on this provision indicates a determination by
the Committee that, in almost all cases, the employer can plan the
assembly/disassembly so that there will be no need to be beneath power
lines. The Committee and OSHA also concluded that, in the very few
instances where this is not possible, in light of the extreme risk
involved, it is essential that the lines be deenergized and visibly
grounded. No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d) Assembly/Disassembly Closer Than Table A Clearance
Prohibited
Assembly and disassembly of cranes/derricks closer than the minimum
clearance distance in proposed Table A of Sec. 1926.1408 to an
energized power line is prohibited under this paragraph. If assembly or
disassembly needs to take place closer than that distance, the employer
is required to have the line deenergized and visibly grounded. The
rationale for this provision is similar to that discussed above for
assembly/disassembly beneath power lines (that rationale is set forth
in the discussion in the proposed rule preamble of proposed Sec.
1926.1407(c), 73 FR 59753, Oct. 9, 2008). Engaging in assembly/
disassembly activity closer to an energized power line than the Table A
distance was considered by the Committee to be too hazardous to be
permitted under any circumstances.
This reflects certain inherent characteristics of the assembly/
disassembly process that preclude the employer from being able to
reliably maintain clearance distances closer than Table A of Sec.
1926.1408. For example, when disassembling a lattice boom, pins that
hold boom sections together are removed. Even when done properly, this
can release stored kinetic energy and cause the boom section being
removed, as well as the remaining sections, to move. It is too
difficult to estimate the amount of such potential movement with the
precision that would be necessary when working closer than the Table A
distances.
Another example is when assembling a boom, an error in the assembly
process may similarly cause unanticipated movement. Using clearances
closer than those in Table A would not allow sufficient room in light
of the difficulty
[[Page 47950]]
of predicting the amount of such movement.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ In this respect this provision differs from Sec.
1926.1410. As discussed below, Sec. 1926.1410 allows use of minimum
clearance distances closer than Table A in some circumstances for
crane ``operations.'' In contrast, Sec. 1926.1407(d) reflects a
determination by the Committee that there are no circumstances for
``assembly/disassembly'' when it would be safe for any part of the
crane, load or load line (including rigging and lifting accessories)
to get closer than the Table A minimum clearance distance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This paragraph is being adopted as proposed.
Paragraph (e) Voltage Information
This section operates in conjunction with Sec. 1926.1407(a)(3).
Under Sec. 1926.1407(a)(3), employers who elect to use Option (3) of
Sec. 1926.1407(a) must determine the line's voltage. Under Sec.
1926.1407(e), where the employer asks the utility owner/operator for
that voltage information, the utility owner/operator of the line is
required to provide the voltage information within two working days of
the request.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ One commenter suggested that utility owners/operators be
required to label all power lines with voltage information. (ID-
0143.1.) OSHA rejected this suggestion because it believes the cost
of labeling every overhead power line in the country would be
prohibitive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This reflects a conclusion of the Committee that, in the absence of
such a time limitation on the utility owner/operator, in many instances
Option (3) Sec. 1926.1407(b) would not be useful because the employer
would not be able to get the voltage information in sufficient time to
be able to use it. Many employers will rely on the utility owner/
operator to get this information. The Committee was concerned that an
extended delay in getting it would result in employers, to some extent,
doing the work anyway without the information. Therefore, for Option
(3) Sec. 1926.1407(b) to be viable, the Committee concluded that a
reasonable time limitation for the utility owner/operator to respond
was needed.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ As noted in the introduction, C-DAC included two members
from the electric utility industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some utility owner/operators asserted that OSHA cannot require them
to provide voltage information because OSHA does not have authority to
impose such requirements on an electric utility that does not have
employees at the construction site in question. (ID-0166.1; -0203.1; -
0226.1.)
OSHA's authority to require that electric utilities disclose
voltage information derives from secs. 6(b) and 8(g)(2) of the Act.
While sec. 6(b) generally authorizes the Secretary to promulgate and
enforce occupational safety and health standards, sec. 6(b)(7)
specifically permits the Secretary to ``prescribe the use of labels or
other appropriate forms of warning as are necessary to insure that
employees are apprised of all hazards to which they are exposed * * *
and proper conditions and precautions of safe use or exposure.'' 29
U.S.C. 655(b)(7). Thus, OSHA may include information-gathering
requirements among the provisions of a standard. Section 1926.1407(e)
falls within the scope of sec. 6(b)(7), because voltage information is
necessary to the determination of safe clearance distances for
employees who work near power lines.
The Agency previously exercised its authority under sec. 6(b)(7) of
the Act to promulgate the Hazard Communication Standard, which requires
that chemical manufacturers and importers provide information for the
benefit of downstream employees (see Sec. 1910.1200). As a rationale
for these provisions, OSHA explained that chemical manufacturers and
importers are in the best position to develop, disseminate, or obtain
information about their products (see 48 FR 53280, 53322, Nov. 25,
1983). Similarly, in an early case discussing sec. 6(b)(7), the Fifth
Circuit found that ``[t]he ability of downstream employers to protect
their own employees is also an appropriate consideration in determining
where the duty to warn should lie.'' American Petroleum Institute v.
OSHA, 581 F.2d 493, 509 (5th Cir. 1978).
Section 8(g)(2) of the Act affords the Secretary additional
authority for Sec. 1926.1407(e). According to this section, the
Secretary may ``prescribe such rules and regulations as he may deem
necessary to carry out responsibilities under the Act.'' The enumerated
purposes of the Act indicate that the Secretary's responsibilities
include:
-- Setting mandatory occupational safety and health standards
applicable to businesses affecting interstate commerce (29 U.S.C.
651(b)(3));
--Developing innovative methods, techniques, and approaches for
dealing with occupational safety and health problems (29 U.S.C.
651(b)(5)); and
--Providing for appropriate reporting procedures with respect to
occupational safety and health which procedures will help achieve the
objectives of this Act and accurately describe the nature of the
occupational safety and health problem (29 U.S.C. 651(b)(12)).
An electric utility representative asserted that, because employees
of electric utilities are not likely to perform work under the
circumstances that the standard contemplates, sec. 4(a) prevents OSHA
from including requirements that target electric utilities. OSHA
disagrees. Section 4(a) broadly provides that the OSH Act applies
``with respect to employment performed in a workplace,'' 29 U.S.C.
653(a), and does not bar the statute's application to any class of
employers. Section 4(a) contains no language to suggest that the Act's
application depends on the relationship between the employees at risk
and the employer with the power to reduce their risk.
Additionally, the commenter stated that Sec. 1910.12(a) precludes
OSHA from regulating electric utilities, because employees of electric
utilities will not be present at construction worksites and therefore
will not be ``engaged in construction.'' \40\ The commenter cites Reich
v. Simpson, Gumpertz & Heger, Inc., 3 F.3d 1, 4-5 (1st Cir. 1993), in
which the First Circuit relied on the second sentence of Sec.
1910.12(a) as a basis for vacating citations that OSHA had issued to an
engineering firm under the multi-employer worksite doctrine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ It should be noted that utility employees will be at these
worksites from time to time to perform work on the power lines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simpson, Gumpertz is inapposite; the multi-employer worksite
doctrine has no bearing on the validity of Sec. 1926.1407(e), which
explicitly holds electric utilities responsible for the distribution of
voltage information. A more relevant case is Sec'y of Labor v. Trinity
Indus., Inc., 504 F.3d 397 (3d Cir. 2007), in which the Third Circuit
upheld information disclosure requirements that are analogous to those
in Sec. 1926.1407(e). In Trinity, the Third Circuit affirmed OSHA's
authority for provisions in the Asbestos Standard for the Construction
Industry that require building owners to communicate the presence of
asbestos or presumed asbestos-containing materials to certain
prospective employers. Id. at 402. The court distinguished OSHA's
authority to require that specific employers disclose information from
the Agency's authority under the multi-employer doctrine to cite a
general contractor for violations committed by a subcontractor:
Unlike the regulations at issue in Summit Contractors, Inc., the
regulation at issue here specifically applies to building owners * *
*. We are not convinced that the Secretary is powerless to regulate
in this field, especially given the findings she has made regarding
the importance of building owners in the discovery and communication
of asbestos hazards.
Id. As Trinity confirms, the multi-employer worksite doctrine does not
govern the validity of regulatory provisions that require specific
employers to provide information. As a
[[Page 47951]]
result, the interpretation that the multi-employer case law has given
to Sec. 1910.12(a) is not controlling in relation to Sec.
1926.1407(e). Moreover, the requirement that electric utilities provide
voltage information is not in conflict with the plain language of Sec.
1910.12(a), which states:
The standards prescribed in part 1926 of this chapter are
adopted as occupational safety and health standards under section 6
of the Act and shall apply, according to the provisions thereof, to
every employment and place of employment of every employee engaged
in construction work. Each employer shall protect the employment and
places of employment of each of his employees engaged in
construction work by complying with the appropriate standards
prescribed in this paragraph.
As the Agency noted in the proposal, the first sentence in Sec.
1910.12(a) makes the construction standards applicable to every
employment and to every ``place of employment'' of every construction
employee. The second sentence of Sec. 1910.12(a), by providing that
each employer must protect the employment and the places of employment
of each of his employees, does not negate the broad reach of the first
sentence. The Secretary did not include language to indicate that an
employer has obligations only toward his employees and the worksites of
his employees.
Furthermore, the history of Sec. 1910.12(a) reveals that the
Secretary did not intend for it to limit her authority. Indeed, Sec.
1910.12(a) is located within a subpart entitled ``Adoption and
Extension of Federal Standards,'' which the Secretary created to extend
her jurisdiction through the adoption of the Construction Safety Act's
standards. Sec. 1910.11(a), subpart B. The opening paragraph of
subpart B states that the subpart's provisions ``adopt and extend the
applicability of established Federal standards * * * with respect to
every employer, employee, and employment covered by the Act.'' Sec.
1910.11(a). Thus, neither the language nor the context of Sec.
1910.12(a) suggest a conflict with the requirement that electric
utilities provide voltage information when employers request it.
The commenter also cites United States v. MYR Group, Inc., in which
the Seventh Circuit held that OSHA could not cite a parent corporation
for the failure of a subsidiary to train its employees. 361 F.3d 364
(7th Cir. 2004). Yet the court distinguished the facts of that case
from circumstances where ``[e]ach employer at the worksite controls a
part of the dangerous activities occurring at the site and is the
logical person to be made responsible for protecting everyone at the
site from the dangers that are within his power to control.'' Id. at
367. Consistent with the Seventh Circuit's reasoning, OSHA has placed
on utilities the responsibility to inform construction workers about
power line voltage, as electric utilities are in the best position to
disseminate voltage information.
In summary, OSHA has firmly-established precedent, under part 1926
and beyond, for requiring that an employer with special knowledge of
occupational hazards provide information to protect workers. Like the
provisions of the Hazard Communication Standard and the Asbestos
Standard for the Construction Industry, Sec. 1926.1407(e) imposes
requirements on employers who possess essential information and are in
the best position to distribute it.
The Committee determined that two business days would be a
reasonable amount of time to allow the utility owners/operator to
respond and be sufficiently short to be useful to the employer
requesting the information. Most of the utility owner/operators who
submitted comments or testimony on this issue did not indicate that a
two-day requirement was unworkable so long as weekends and holidays
were excluded from the two-day calculation.\41\ (ID-0203.1; -0205.1; -
0213.1.) Similarly, although one contractor indicated a desire to be
able to obtain power line voltage information immediately at all times
through Internet services provided by the utility owner/operator (ID-
0118.1), other contractors indicated that a two working day time frame
was manageable from a construction planning standpoint (ID-0205.1; -
0213.1). In light of these comments, OSHA concludes that the proposed
two-day requirement to fulfill voltage information requests was a
reasonable time frame for both contractors and utility owners/
operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ One electric utility representative at the public hearing
did request, however, that the time period for responding to a
request be changed to four business days. (ID-0342.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the proposed rule preamble, the Agency noted that the C-DAC
provision read:
Voltage information. Where Option (3) is used, owner/operators
of power lines must provide the requested voltage information within
two working days of the employer's request.
In a different context--determining the timeliness of notices of
contest to OSHA citations--OSHA defines ``working days'' to mean
``Mondays through Fridays but shall not include Saturdays, Sundays, or
Federal holidays.'' 29 CFR 1903.22(c). Since the term is already
defined in an OSHA regulation, the Agency stated that it would apply
the same definition here unless this rule were to specify a different
definition and solicited comments on whether the phrase ``working
days'' should be defined differently for purposes of this rule than it
is in Sec. 1903.22(c). All comments received on this issue indicated
that the Sec. 1903.22(c) definition was appropriate in this context.
(ID-0203.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) Although OSHA is not specifically
incorporating the Sec. 1903.22 definition by reference, the Agency
intends to rely on that definition for purposes of enforcing Sec.
1926.1407(e). One commenter sought clarification that the two working
day time period would start to run on the first full business day after
the request for information is received. (ID-0215.1.) This is, in fact,
an accurate representation of how this provision will be enforced. If,
for example, the utility receives a request for voltage information on
Monday, it will have until the end of the business day on Wednesday to
provide the necessary information.
Another commenter asked OSHA to provide guidance on whether the
voltage information needed to be provided in written form. (ID-0214.1.)
Given the inherent difficulties of obtaining written information
expeditiously in many construction sites, OSHA concurs with C-DAC's
recommendation not to require that voltage information be provided in
writing.
Paragraph (f) Power Lines Presumed Energized
This paragraph requires that employers always assume that all power
lines are energized unless the utility owner/operator confirms that the
power line has been and continues to be deenergized and visibly
grounded at the worksite. No adverse comments were received on this
provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (g) Posting of Electrocution Warnings
This paragraph requires the posting of electrocution warnings as
follows: one inside the cab in view of the operator and (except for
overhead gantry and tower cranes) at least two on the outside of the
equipment. The Committee concluded and OSHA agrees that these
electrocution warnings are necessary to protect the operator as well as
any employees working in the area around the crane by increasing their
awareness of the hazard. This provision is similar to sec. 5-3.4.5.2(d)
of ASME B30.5-
[[Page 47952]]
2004. No adverse comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Section 1926.1408 Power Line Safety (Up to 350 kV)--Operations
As discussed with respect to power line safety in assembly/
disassembly, the standard requires the implementation of a systematic
approach to power line safety for crane/derrick operations. This
approach consists of two basic steps. First, the employer must identify
the work zone, assess it for power lines, and determine how close the
crane could get to them. The employer has the option of doing this
assessment for the area 360 degrees around the crane or for a more
limited, demarcated area. Second, if the assessment shows that the
crane could get closer than a trigger distance--20 feet for lines rated
up to 350 kV--then requirements for additional action are triggered.
Specifically, unless the power lines are deenergized and grounded,
encroachment prevention measures have to be implemented to prevent the
crane from breaching a minimum clearance distance. The employer is
allowed to choose among three minimum clearance distance options. For
example, for lines up to 350 kV, the minimum clearance distance options
are 20 feet, or the distance specified in Table A of this section for
the line's voltage (Table A is the ``10-foot rule''; see discussion of
Table A below), or a distance closer than what is specified in Table A.
However, there are limitations to the availability of some of these
options, and the number of mandatory encroachment prevention (and
other) measures increases when using a clearance distance closer than
Table A.
Paragraph (a) Hazard Assessments and Precautions Inside the Work Zone
Before beginning crane/derrick operations, the employer is required
to determine if power lines would pose a hazard. The first step in this
process is to identify the work zone for which this hazard assessment
will be made (Sec. 1926.1408(a)(1)). The employer has two options for
defining the work zone.
Under the first option (Sec. 1926.1408(a)(1)(i)), the employer is
required to define the work zone by marking boundaries and prohibiting
the operator from operating the equipment past those boundaries.
Examples of how to demarcate the boundaries include using flags or
devices such as a range limit device or range control warning device.
``Range control warning device'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as ``a
device that can be set by an equipment operator to warn that the boom
or jib tip is at a plane or multiple planes.''
OSHA noted in the proposed rule that the term ``range limit
device'' was used in proposed Sec. 1926.1408(a)(1)(i) but that no
definition of this term was provided in proposed Sec. 1926.1401. OSHA
stated that it determined that C-DAC understood a range limit device to
be a device that physically limits how far a crane can boom out and the
angle within which the boom can swing. OSHA requested public comment on
whether a definition of ``range limit device'' should be added to Sec.
1926.1401 and, if so, whether the definition described in the proposed
rule preamble is appropriate (73 FR 59759, Oct. 9, 2008).
Three commenters responded, endorsing the need for a definition and
suggesting language along the lines discussed in the proposed rule.
(ID-0118; -0205.1; -0213.1.) OSHA has added a definition for a ``range
control limit device'' that defines it as ``a device that can be set by
an equipment operator to limit movement of the boom or jib tip to a
plane or multiple planes.''
Employers are not permitted to use existing landmarks to demarcate
work zone boundaries unless they are marked. For example, a line of
trees would be insufficient. Without anything more the trees would not
signal a reminder to the operator of there being a boundary that must
be maintained. However, adding flags to those trees would be sufficient
because the flags would serve as a reminder that the trees are located
along a boundary that the operator must not breach.
The boundaries must mark the limits of all crane movement. For
example, a work zone could be defined by demarcating boundaries: (1) To
the left and right of the operator, to limit the lateral movement of
the boom, and (2) in front of the operator, in a line connecting the
side boundaries, limiting the boom's radius.
In identifying the work zone, the employer must consider the entire
area in which the crane will need to operate. If the crane will need to
be positioned in more than one spot to accomplish its work, or to
travel with a load, the employer must consider the total area in which
it will need to operate and set the boundaries accordingly.
The second option for identifying the work zone (Sec.
1926.1408(a)(1)(ii)) is to define the work zone as the area 360 degrees
around the crane, up to the crane's maximum working radius. In other
words, under this option, the work zone is the area within a circle,
with the crane at the center, and the radius defined by the maximum
working radius of the crane. No boundaries would have to be marked
under this option since the crane would be permitted to operate in the
entire area that it could reach.
Paragraph (a)(2)
Once the employer has identified the work zone according to Sec.
1926.1408(a)(1), it is then required to make the power line hazard
assessment. Specifically, it must determine if any part of the crane,
load or load line (including rigging and lifting accessories) could
come within a ``trigger'' distance--20 feet of a power line. This
determination must be made based upon the assumption that the crane
would be operated up to its maximum working radius (or, if a demarcated
boundary is used, the assessment must be made with the assumption that
the crane would be operated up to that boundary).
Three commenters expressed concern over OSHA's use of the term
``maximum working radius'' in describing the methodology for defining
the work zone. (ID-0146.1; -0206.1; -0209.1.) Their concern is that
using ``maximum working radius'' would trigger the encroachment-
prevention requirements of Sec. 1926.1408(b) on construction sites
where the equipment operator has no intention of using the equipment up
to the equipment's maximum working distance. Another commenter
questioned whether the phrase ``any part of the equipment'' would
include the boom if the boom ``could be lowered within 20 feet of a
power line even though the working radius will not require encroachment
into the 20-foot zone.'' (ID-0178.1.)
OSHA notes that these concerns are already addressed through a
mechanism in the provision as proposed: the employer's ability, under
Sec. 1926.1408(a)(1)(i), to define the work zone boundaries and then
prohibit operation of the equipment beyond those boundaries. In other
words, employers may define the boundary of a work zone at the outer
boundary of the intended working radius of any part of the equipment,
including the boom.
To illustrate, if an employer is using a crane with a maximum
working radius of 100 feet, but intends to extend the crane boom out
only 75 feet beyond the center point of the crane, that employer can
demarcate the outer boundary of the work zone using such measures as a
line of flags, and then prohibit crane operations beyond that 75-foot
work zone boundary. Therefore, in the one commenter's example of where
the boom could come within 20 feet of a power line but the work does
not
[[Page 47953]]
require it, the employer need not take encroachment-prevention measures
if it prohibits working beyond a radius that would bring the boom
within 20 feet of the line. OSHA concludes, therefore, that no change
to the proposed regulatory language is needed to address these concerns
and is promulgating this paragraph as proposed.
If, after defining a work zone, an employer determines that the 20
foot ``trigger'' determination is positive, then the employer is
required to take additional steps. Specifically, the employer must meet
the requirements under either, Option (1), Option (2), or Option (3) of
Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2).\42\ See above discussion of Sec. 1926.1407(a)
for additional information about how OSHA intends to enforce these
compliance options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ If no part of the crane, load or load line could come
closer than 20 feet to a power line, the employer is not required to
take any further action under this section. However, the employer
may encounter a situation where it unexpectedly needs to increase
the size of the work zone. This may occur, for example, as a result
of an unanticipated need to change the crane's position or to have
the crane operate beyond the original work zone boundaries. In such
a case the employer is required to go back to the first step under
Sec. 1926.1408(a)(1), re-identify a work zone and conduct a new 20
foot ``trigger'' assessment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1926.1408(a)(2) is adopted without change from the
proposal.
Paragraph (a)(2)(i) Option (1)
An employer choosing Option (1) of this section will protect
against electrocution by having the power lines deenergized and visibly
grounded at the worksite. This option minimizes the probability that
equipment that contacts the power line will become energized. The power
line must be ``visibly grounded at the worksite.''
One commenter believed that the requirement for visible grounding
was ``impractical and overly burdensome.'' (ID-0146.1.) A second
commenter believed that this requirement was needed to permit the
employer to visually verify that the power line has been deenergized.
(ID-0190.0.)
After reviewing these comments, OSHA continues to conclude, as C-
DAC did, that visible grounding of the deenergized line is necessary to
protect workers. First, it minimizes the voltage that can appear on the
power line from a number of causes, including induced current and
capacitive coupling, lightning, other energized lines falling onto the
power line (for example, where there is a traffic accident involving a
motor vehicle striking a utility pole supporting the power line), and
accidental reenergizing of the lines. It also facilitates the operation
of circuit protective devices to deenergize the line after it is
reenergized from the last two causes. It also serves as a visual
confirmation that the power line has been deenergized. (See discussion
of Sec. 1926.1407(a)(1) where OSHA declines to amend the proposal to
require written confirmation that the power line has been deenergized.)
Where the employer elects to deenergize the power line, it will not
have to implement any of the encroachment/electrocution prevention
measures listed in Sec. 1926.1408(b). However, some amount of time is
needed to arrange for the utility owner/operator to deenergize and
ground the line. Also, in some instances, especially where the
construction project is small, the cost of deenergizing and grounding
may be a substantial portion of the cost of the project. Because of
these factors, deenergizing and grounding, which was also a permissible
option under former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15), has not been routinely done.
Accordingly, the rule provides other safe and practical options to
reduce unsafe practices in the industry. Those other options (Options
(2) and (3) in Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(ii) and (iii), discussed below)
combined with Sec. 1926.1408(b) are designed to afford effective
protection against the hazard of electrocution.
Section 1926.1408(a)(2)(i) is adopted as proposed.
Paragraph (a)(2)(ii) Option (2)
Under Option (2) (Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(ii)), the employer is
required to maintain a minimum clearance distance of 20 feet. To help
ensure that this distance is not breached and that employees are
protected from electrocution, the employer is required to implement the
encroachment/electrocution prevention measures in Sec. 1926.1408(b).
Employers using this option will have to stay further away from the
power line than had been required under subpart N's 10-foot rule
(employers wanting to use the 10-foot rule will have to use Option (3)
of this section, discussed below).\43\ However, an advantage of this
option to many employers is that they do not have to determine the
voltage of the power line; they only have to determine that the line
voltage is not more than 350 kV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ As discussed above, the 10-foot rule requires varying
clearance distances increase with voltage with clearance distances
that begin at 10 feet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several commenters verified the Committee's conclusion that
obtaining voltage information from utilities can often be difficult and
time-consuming. (ID-0118.1; -0143.1; -0146.1; -0155.1.) OSHA determines
that by providing a mechanism under Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(ii) for
employers to proceed with construction operations without having to
obtain voltage information, employers will have more flexibility
without compromising the safety of workers.
One commenter believed that the maximum clearance distance for this
option should be 15 feet instead of the proposed 20 feet because it
believed such a distance would be safe for what it described as
``relatively small cranes.'' (ID-0184.1.) However, OSHA does not agree
that a distinction based on crane size is justified. When smaller
cranes operate near power lines, they present the same hazard as larger
cranes and need to take similar precautions. OSHA further notes that
smaller cranes, i.e., cranes with shorter booms, will have a smaller
work zone than larger cranes and therefore should be better able to
avoid coming within the permitted 20-foot clearance and, as a result,
may be less likely to trigger the protective steps required under
paragraph (a)(2) of this section in any event. Moreover, if OSHA were
to adopt a 15-foot minimum clearance distance for this option as
advocated by the commenter, it would have to make a corresponding
reduction in the maximum voltage covered by Sec. Sec. 1926.1407 and
1926.1408 and a corresponding increase in the minimum voltage covered
by Sec. 1926.1409 to retain the protection afforded by the 10-foot
rule previously contained in subpart N. Therefore, OSHA has concluded
that it would be inappropriate to decrease the proposed 20 foot minimum
clearance distance under Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(ii); this paragraph is
therefore promulgated as proposed.
As noted above, in addition to maintaining a minimum clearance
distance of 20 feet, employers using this option are required to
implement the encroachment prevention and other measures specified in
Sec. 1926.1408(b).
Paragraph (a)(2)(iii) Option (3)
Under Option (3) (Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(iii)), the employer is
required to maintain a minimum clearance distance \44\ in accordance
with
[[Page 47954]]
Table A of this section.\45\ Under Table A, depending on the voltage of
the power line, the minimum clearance distance ranges from 10 feet to
20 feet.\46\ Under this option the employer is required to determine
the line's voltage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ The proposed regulatory text for this section used the
phrase ``minimum approach distance'' instead of ``minimum clearance
distance.'' As pointed out by two commenters the latter phrase is
what was used in the proposed Sec. 1926.1407(a)(3)(i) regulatory
text. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) For consistency, OSHA has, in this
section, changed the phrase ``minimum approach distance'' to
``minimum clearance distance.'' Provisions in Sec. 1910.269 and
proposed subpart V of 29 CFR 1926 use the phrase ``minimum approach
distance.'' OSHA believes that employers who are covered by those
standards are familiar with that term. In contrast, the Agency
believes that employers that do not perform electric power work will
better understand the term ``minimum clearance distances.'' OSHA
considers the terms ``approach distance'' and ``clearance distance''
to be interchangeable; no substantive distinctions are intended.
\45\ The information in Table A of the final rule is similar to
information in Table 1 of ASME B30.5-2004. A table with specified
clearance distances is more easily applied than the formula set out
in former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15). Table A is intended to be a clear
way of conveying the minimum clearance distances.
\46\ The range referred to here is the range in the part of the
table that is applicable up to 350 kV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to maintaining the minimum clearance distance specified
in the Table, employers using this option are required to implement the
encroachment prevention and other measures specified in Sec.
1926.1408(b).
A labor representative urged OSHA to require a minimum clearance
distance of 20 feet rather than the lower clearance distances allowed
under Table A, in essence eliminating Option (3). (ID-0201.1.) The 20-
foot clearance is needed because, in the commenter's view, under the
options in the proposal, crane operations can easily encroach on an
absolute safe distance from power lines. OSHA does not agree. The
clearance distances permitted under Table A are ``safe'' distances, as
indicated by their inclusion in ASME B30.5-2004 as well as the
consensus reached by C-DAC. As discussed in the preamble to the
proposed rule, the 10-foot rule was not effective under prior subpart N
because subpart N provided little guidance as to how to maintain the
required clearance. In the proposed rule, OSHA discussed how the
provisions of this rule addressed two major problems employers faced in
complying with the minimum clearance requirements of former subpart N:
(1) The lack of a means to enable operators to judge when the crane was
breaching the minimum required clearance distance; and (2) the problem
of temporary operator inattention to a power line as he/she
concentrated on tasks related to moving the load. (73 FR 59749, Oct. 9,
2008.) The provisions of paragraph (b) of this section, discussed
below, are designed to overcome these two problems and ensure
compliance with the minimum clearance distances in this rule. Even
where Table A permits the clearance distance to be the same as the 10-
foot rule of former subpart N, this final rule provides far greater
protection against equipment violating the allowed clearance. It does
not allow a crane ``to very easily encroach'' on a safe clearance
distance, as IBEW suggests.
The labor representative also proposed more stringent requirements
than those currently contained in Sec. 1926.1410 when it is infeasible
to maintain the Table A clearances. OSHA addresses this issue below in
the discussion of Sec. 1926.1410. Accordingly, paragraph (a)(2)(iii)
is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b) Preventing Encroachment/Electrocution
Once the employer has determined that some part of the crane, load
or load line could come within the work zone assessment trigger
distance of 20 feet of a power line (see Sec. 1926.1408(a)), if it
chooses either Option (2) or (3) (of Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(ii) and
(iii)), it must implement encroachment prevention measures to help
ensure that the applicable minimum clearance distance (20 feet under
Option (2) or the Table A distance) under Option (3) is not
breached.\47\ Most of the measures in this paragraph are designed to
help the employer maintain the appropriate distance and thereby prevent
electrical contact while operating the equipment. One of the measures
is designed to prevent electrocution in the event of electrical
contact.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ Alternatively, under Option (1) of Sec. 1926.1408(a)(i),
the employer could have the lines deenergized and grounded. If
Option (1) were selected, no further action under this section would
be required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (b)(1)
Under 1926.1408(b)(1) the employer is required to conduct a
planning meeting with the operator and other workers who will be in the
area of the crane or load. This planning meeting must include reviewing
the location of the power line(s) and the steps that will be
implemented to prevent encroachment and electrocution.
One commenter raised the issue of who is responsible for ensuring
that the planning meeting takes place. (ID-0218.1.) Where encroachment
precautions are required under Option (2) or Option (3) (see Sec.
1926.1408(a)(2)(ii) and Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(iii)), the employers of
the operator and other workers who will be in the area of the equipment
or load must ensure that the required planning meeting under Sec.
1926.1408(b)(1) takes place. Other employers at the work site may also
be responsible for such compliance in certain situations; see OSHA CPL
02-00-124, Multi-Employer Citation Policy, Dec. 10, 1999 for further
information.
As discussed below, under this paragraph, certain encroachment/
electrocution prevention measures are required (they are listed in
Sec. 1926.1408(b)(1) through (3)). In addition, the employer is
required to select at least one additional measure from the list in
Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4). In the planning meeting, the employer must make
that selection and review all the measures that will be used to comply
with this section. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that
the operator and other workers who will be in the area understand these
measures and how they will be implemented. That understanding is
important to their successful implementation. Paragraph (b)(1) is
adopted as proposed.
Paragraph (b)(2)
Section 1926.1408(b)(2) requires that where tag lines are used they
must be nonconductive. This provision provides additional protection to
those employees who would be exposed to electrical hazards in the event
that the equipment, load line, tag line or load contacts a power line
and the tag line they are holding becomes energized. Note the
discussion above related to Sec. 1926.1407(b)(2). This provision is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b)(3)
Section 1926.1408(b)(3) requires elevated warning lines, barricades
or a line of signs, in view of the crane operator, equipped with flags
or similar high-visibility markings, at 20 feet from the power line (if
using Option (2) of Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(ii)) or at the minimum
clearance distance under Table A (if using Option (3) of Sec.
1926.1408(a)(2)(iii)). The steps required by this provision are
designed to remind the operator that there are power lines with
associated minimum clearance distances that must be met. Warning lines,
barricades or a line of signs in the operator's view equipped with
high-visibility markings also indicate to the operator where the
minimum clearance distance boundary is located. This serves as one of
two layers of protection (the second layer consists of an additional
means selected by the employer under Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4), discussed
below).
A commenter urged OSHA to reconsider this requirement because there
is nothing outside of the traveled roadway to which a warning line,
barricade, or line of signs could be affixed. (ID-0114.) OSHA
recognizes that this requirement will often require the employer to
install a series of poles or other supports to install an elevated
warning line. However, temporary
[[Page 47955]]
supports are routinely installed on construction sites, and installing
them for the purpose of enabling the operator to maintain a safe
distance from a power line serves an important safety purpose without
being overly difficult or time-consuming.
A visual line on the ground to mark the minimum clearance distance
is not permitted under Sec. 1926.1408(b)(3) because an operator would
generally not notice or see a line on the ground and because, from
where the operator sits, it would be particularly difficult for the
operator to extrapolate from that line the location of the boundary in
the air. By contrast, visual reminders that are sufficiently elevated
from the ground level enable the operator to more accurately judge the
distance between the load, load line (including rigging and lifting
accessories) or crane and the boundary marked by the elevated warning
line.
In reviewing the C-DAC draft of this provision, OSHA realized that
there may be situations where the employer would not be able to place
such a line so that it would be visible to the operator. In such a
case, to have two layers of protection, it would be necessary to
require that a dedicated spotter be used in addition to one of the
other (non-spotter) methods described below in Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4).
Therefore, in the proposed rule, OSHA stated that it was planning to
modify the proposed provision by adding the following after the last
sentence in Sec. 1926.1408(b)(3):
If the operator is unable to see the elevated warning line, a
dedicated spotter must be used as described in Sec.
1926.1408(b)(4)(ii) in addition to implementing one of the measures
described in Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(i), (iii), (iv) and (v).
The Agency requested public comment on this issue. Two commenters
agreed with the substance of the proposed addition to this provision
(ID-0205.1; -0213.1); a third commenter agreed with the proposed
addition but recommended that OSHA go a step further and require a
dedicated spotter at all times (ID-0113). For the reasons explained in
the discussion of Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4) below, OSHA has decided not to
accept this latter recommendation for a dedicated spotter in all cases.
The Agency has, however, included the additional regulatory text
delineated above in the final rule.
Paragraph (b)(4)
This section sets out a list of five prevention measures, from
which the employer must select at least one, when the employer elects
to use either Option (2) or Option (3) under Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2). The
first four measures are methods for encroachment prevention. The fifth
measure is a method of electrocution prevention in the event of
electrical contact with a power line. Specifically, the employer is
required to choose one of the following: (i) A proximity alarm; (ii)
the use of a dedicated spotter; (iii) a device that automatically warns
the operator when to stop (i.e., a range control warning device); (iv)
a device that automatically limits the range of movement of the
equipment; or (once they are available) (v) an insulating link/device,
as defined in Sec. 1926.1401.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See discussion later in this section for an explanation of
the delay in the effective date for this provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proximity alarm performance was the subject of a study conducted by
the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
published in January 2009, and submitted as an exhibit to this
rulemaking. (ID-0141.2.) This study tested the efficacy of two
proximity alarm models under various simulated construction conditions.
The study indicated that the accuracy of the proximity alarms could be
adversely affected by such factors as: (1) Operating the equipment with
a boom angle and length significantly different than that used for the
device's last sensitivity adjustment; and (2) operating the equipment
on sites with multiple overhead power lines, especially where those
power lines had differing voltages or involved intersecting
installations. Two other commenters also questioned the efficacy of
proximity alarms. (ID-0118.1; -0206.1.)
OSHA shares the concerns expressed by NIOSH and other commenters
over the accuracy of currently available proximity alarms.\49\ However,
such concerns are addressed by the definition of ``proximity alarm'' in
Sec. 1926.1401, which states that the term refers to a device ``that
has been listed, labeled, or accepted by a Nationally Recognized
Testing Laboratory in accordance with Sec. 1910.7.'' To be so listed,
labeled, or accepted, the Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory
(NRTL) must determine that the device works properly by concluding that
it conforms to an appropriate test standard. Accordingly, no proximity
alarm can be listed, labeled, or accepted by a Nationally Recognized
Testing Laboratory (NRTL) in accordance with Sec. 1910.7 until the
problems identified by the commenters have been rectified. OSHA
concludes that retaining this option in the final rule will provide an
incentive for proximity alarm manufacturers to improve these devices to
the point where they will meet the definition's criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ Neither of the proximity alarm models tested in the NIOSH
study had obtained NRTL listing, labeling, or acceptance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In situations where an employer chooses the option of using a
dedicated spotter, the employer is required to meet the requirements
for spotters in Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(ii). As specified in Sec.
1926.1408(b)(4)(ii)(A), the spotter has to be equipped with a visual
aid to assist in identifying the minimum clearance distance.
Under Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(ii)(B)-(D), the spotter has to be
positioned so that he/she can effectively gauge the clearance distance
from the power line; the spotter, where necessary, must use equipment
that enables him/her to communicate directly with the equipment
operator; and the spotter must give timely information to the operator
so that the required clearance distance can be maintained.
Some commenters recommended that dedicated spotters be required at
all times. (ID-0112; -0113.) OSHA declines to impose such a
requirement. The Agency determines that allowing the employer to choose
from a variety of options for this second layer of protection allows
the employer to select a method that it believes would be suitable,
increases the likelihood of employer compliance, and will be an
effective approach to reducing power line related injuries and
fatalities.
One commenter also advocated adding a provision requiring dedicated
spotters to pass a visual acuity exam. (ID-0071.) OSHA determines that
it is unnecessary to require a specific level of visual acuity.
Wherever this standard requires an employer to have an individual
perform a particular task, that duty is met only where the individual
has the ability to perform the task. If an employer assigns an
individual to serve as a spotter, but his/her vision is insufficient to
perform the task of a spotter, the employer will not have met the
spotter requirement. For additional discussion of spotter requirements
see the discussion of Sec. 1926.1407(b)(3)(i) earlier in this
preamble.
Section 1926.1408(b)(4)(iii) gives the employer the option of using
a device that automatically warns the operator when to stop movement,
such as a range control warning device. Such a device must be set to
give the operator sufficient warning to prevent encroachment. ``Range
control warning device'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as ``a device
that can be set by an equipment operator to warn that the boom or jib
tip is at a plane or multiple planes.''
For example: An employer has chosen the option of maintaining a 20-
foot
[[Page 47956]]
distance from the power line. Under Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(iii), it has
chosen to use a range control warning device to help maintain that
distance. The device would have to be set to alert the operator in time
to prevent the boom, load line or load (whichever is closest to the
power line) from breaching that 20-foot distance. As a practical
matter, the device would have to be set to sound the warning more than
20 feet from the line, since the operator will need some time to react
and to account for the momentum of the equipment, load line and
load.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ One commenter questioned whether range control warning
devices exist. (ID-0151.1.) OSHA has confirmed that some cranes are
equipped with such a device.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1926.1408(b)(4)(iv) gives the employer the option of using
a device that automatically limits the equipment's range of motion and
is set to prevent encroachment. Such a device can be particularly
suitable for tower cranes, for which the swing angle can be programmed
so that the operator cannot move the boom or jib past a certain range.
While it may be more technically difficult to apply swing limitation
devices for use in mobile cranes, the technology may develop so that
they could be used in such cranes as well.
The insulating link option that is available under Sec.
1926.1408(b)(4)(v) would not protect against encroachment but would
provide protection to employees handling the load against electrocution
in the event encroachment did occur. Such a device must be installed
between the end of the load line and the load. When so installed, it
prevents the load from becoming energized in the event the load line or
other part of the equipment makes electrical contact with a power line.
Preventing the load from becoming energized helps protect riggers, who
often guide crane loads manually and who are therefore at high risk of
being electrocuted if a load becomes energized.
Some commenters expressed concern about the effectiveness of
insulating links. (ID-0206.1; -0378.1.) As stated in Sec. 1926.1401,
``Insulating link/device'' is defined as ``an insulating device that
has been listed, labeled, or accepted by a Nationally Recognized
Testing Laboratory in accordance with Sec. 1910.7.'' This definition
addresses this concern, since an insulating link used under this
provision must have been found by a Nationally Recognized Testing
Laboratory (``NRTL'') to conform to an appropriate test standard as
required in Sec. 1910.7.
Because insulating links previously have not been required by any
OSHA standard, OSHA has not yet recognized any testing laboratory as a
NRTL for purposes of insulating link listing, labeling, or acceptance.
A period of time will be needed to review laboratory requests for such
recognition. Once there are NRTLs for testing insulating links, some
time will also be needed for the NRTLs to conduct the tests. As a
result, where Sec. 1926.1408(b) applies, Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(v) will
be unavailable as an additional measure in the list contained in Sec.
1926.1408(b)(4) until employers acquire NRTL-approved insulating links.
Therefore, during that period, in addition to implementing the
requirements in Sec. 1926.1408(b)(1)-(3), the employer must implement
at least one of the measures listed in Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(i)-(iv).
A commenter suggested that Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(v) be deleted
because it involves a live line procedure covered under Sec. 1910.269,
which, it says, requires an operator to be a qualified worker to get
this close to an insulating link. (ID-0161.1.) This commenter
misunderstands the provision. Paragraph (b)(4)(v) allows employers to
use an insulating link between the load line and load as an alternative
to other protective measures. It has nothing to do with live line
procedures under Sec. 1910.269, which is a general industry standard
that applies to operation and maintenance of power lines and which has
no provision regulating the proximity of an operator or a qualified
person to an insulating link.
One commenter pointed out that insulating links do not provide
protection for those employees, such as equipment operators, who are in
contact with the equipment ``upstream'' of the insulating link. (ID-
0053.1.) That is incorrect. Insulating links serve a dual purpose. They
protect a rigger who is handling the load if the equipment upstream of
the link makes electrical contact with a power line. And they protect
employees who are upstream of the insulating link if the load makes
electrical contact with a power line. The workers who are at the
greatest risk of electrocution--the riggers who handle the load, are
also protected by the requirement for nonconductive tag lines. But the
best protection for all workers, and the primary focus of paragraph
(b), is to employ effective encroachment prevention measures to prevent
electrical contact of any part of the equipment and/or load with a
power line. For additional discussion of insulating links, see later in
this preamble where OSHA addresses Sec. 1926.1410(d)(4).
Paragraph (b)(5)
Employers engaged in construction of electric transmission and
distribution lines, which is addressed by 29 CFR part 1926 subpart V
(Sec. Sec. 1926.950-1926.960), also have to meet the requirements in
Sec. 1926.1408, with several exceptions.\51\ The first exception is
found in Sec. 1926.1408(b)(5). The other exceptions are discussed
elsewhere in this preamble. In accordance with Sec. 1926.1408(b)(5),
employers engaged in work involving cranes/derricks that is covered by
subpart V are not required to comply with the requirements in Sec.
1926.1408(b)(4). Subpart V applies to the construction of electric
transmission and distribution lines and equipment, which includes the
alteration, conversion, and improvement of existing lines and
equipment. Thus, when employees are engaged in subpart V work near
energized lines, by the nature of the job, their full attention is on
the power lines. Non-subpart V workers, by contrast, do not work
directly with the lines, and their attention is primarily directed
elsewhere.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ As discussed in Sec. 1926.1400, Scope, construction of
electric transmission and distribution lines is covered under this
subpart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart V contains additional requirements to protect those
employees against making electrical contact with the lines. These
include requirements in Sec. 1926.950(c) for guarding the line or
using insulation (such as insulating gloves) to prevent electrical
contact. This paragraph is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c) Voltage Information
This section operates in conjunction with Sec.
1926.1408(a)(2)(iii) (Option (3)--Table A clearance). Where an employer
elects to use Option (3) (Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(iii)), the employer
must, under Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(iii)(A), determine the voltage of the
power lines. Under Sec. 1926.1408(c), utility owner/operators of these
lines must provide the requested voltage information within two working
days of the request (see the discussion above of Sec. 1926.1407(e) for
a description of the public comments received on this requirement and
OSHA's resolution of the issues raised by those comments).
As discussed above with respect to Sec. 1926.1407(e), ``working
days'' means Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. This
provision is promulgated as proposed.
[[Page 47957]]
Paragraph (d) Operations Below Power Lines
When a crane operates below a power line, the likelihood of
breaching the minimum clearance distance is enhanced by several
factors, including the greater difficulty of judging the distance to
the power line when it is above the equipment and the fact that in most
such situations the operator has to purposely look up to see the line
(and therefore is more likely to forget its location or that it is
there).
This section addresses this problem by prohibiting any part of a
crane, load or load line (including rigging and lifting accessories)
from being below a power line unless the employer has confirmed with
the utility owner/operator that the power line is deenergized and
visibly grounded at the worksite or unless the employer can demonstrate
that it meets one of the four exceptions in Sec. 1926.1408(d)(2).
The first exception, Sec. 1926.1408(d)(2)(i), is for work covered
by 29 CFR part 1926 subpart V. Subpart V work involves work on the
power line itself and commonly requires equipment to operate below a
power line. As explained above with respect to Sec. 1926.1408(b)(5),
subpart V work does not require all of the precautions required of
other work because the full attention of the workers is directed at the
power line.
The second exception, Sec. 1926.1408(d)(2)(ii), is for equipment
with non-extensible booms and the third exception, Sec.
1926.1408(d)(2)(iii), is for equipment with articulating or extensible
booms. These exceptions apply when the uppermost part of the boom (for
non-extensible booms) or with the boom at its fullest extension (for
extensible booms), will be more than 20 feet below the plane of the
power line or more than the Table A minimum clearance distance below
the plane of the power line at the boom's most vertical point.\52\
Where this criterion is met, it is not possible for the minimum
clearance distance to be breached.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ The plane of the power line is the horizontal plane that
touches the lowest point on the lowest power line.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The last exception, Sec. 1926.1408(d)(2)(iv), is for situations in
which the employer can demonstrate that it is infeasible to comply with
Sec. 1926.1408(d)(1), which prohibits any part of a crane, load or
load line from being below a power line unless the line is deenergized
and visibly grounded. Under this exception, the employer must not only
show that compliance with Sec. 1926.1408(d)(1) is infeasible, it must
also comply with the requirements in Sec. 1926.1410. Section 1926.1410
governs equipment operations closer than the Table A minimum clearance
distances.
Two commenters requested that OSHA define the term ``infeasible.''
(ID-0203.1; -0214.1.) Infeasibility determinations are fact-dependent,
and OSHA generally considers compliance with a measure to be infeasible
when it is impossible or would prevent performance of the work in
question. See OSHA CPL 02-00-148, ch. 5, sec. VI.B.2, Field Operations
Manual, Nov. 10, 1999. OSHA notes that this is not the first standard
to incorporate feasibility considerations; the Agency has incorporated
feasibility language into many other standards. See, e.g., Fall
Protection (Sec. 1926.502(k)); Permit-Required Confined Spaces (Sec.
1910.146(d)(5)(i)); Bloodborne Pathogens (Sec. 1910.1030(f)(3)(ii));
and Electrical Work Practices (Sec. 1910.333(a)(1)). In letters of
interpretation and guidance documents explaining these and other
standards, OSHA has elaborated on the meaning of infeasibility in
numerous factual contexts. Because infeasibility is a concept of broad
applicability in the OSHA context, and its meaning depends on the
particular facts present in a given worksite situation, a single
definition would not provide useful guidance to employers. Accordingly,
the Agency declines to adopt a definition of that term specific to
subpart CC. Paragraph (d) is adopted as proposed.
Paragraph (e) Power Lines Presumed Energized
This provision requires employers to assume that all power lines
are energized unless the utility owner/operator confirms that the power
line has been and continues to be deenergized and visibly grounded at
the worksite. This fundamental precaution is essentially the same as it
was in subpart N at former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15)(vi). The one commenter
on this proposed provision supported it (ID-0161.1); this provision is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (f)
Paragraph (f) of this section addresses the danger that employees
could receive an electric shock from equipment that is operating near a
transmitter or communication tower. During such operation, the
equipment can act as an antenna and become energized by the
electromagnetic signal emitted from the tower. As proposed, Sec.
1926.1408(f) stated that when the equipment is close enough for an
electrical charge to be induced in the equipment or load, the
transmitter must be deenergized or the following precautions taken: The
equipment must be grounded, and non-conductive rigging or an insulating
link/device must be used.
Previously, subpart N, at former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15)(vii),
required that when equipment is close enough to a transmitter tower for
an electrical charge to be induced, the equipment had to be grounded
and a ground jumper cable used to connect the load to the equipment. In
addition, nonconductive poles having large alligator clips or other
similar protection had to be used to connect the ground jumper cable to
the load. Connecting the load to the grounded equipment dissipated any
electrical charge induced in the load. The Committee determined that
subpart CC's proposed requirement for nonconductive rigging or an
insulating link instead of grounding the load better reflected current
industry practice and better protected employees.
The requirement for nonconductive rigging or an insulating link in
proposed Sec. 1926.1408(f) was a fundamentally different approach than
requiring a ground jumper cable to be connected to the load as was
specified in former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15)(vii). The latter connects the
load to a ground, while proposed Sec. 1926.1408(f) would have
insulated the load from the equipment or employees handling the load.
The Agency requested public comment on whether the proposed
requirement was preferable to that in former Sec.
1926.550(a)(15)(vii). Some commenters agreed that the proposed
requirements would provide better protection of workers and argued that
they were more feasible than the requirements of former Sec.
1926.550(a)(15)(vii). (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) One commenter believed that
Sec. 1926.1408(f) as proposed was inferior to former Sec.
1926.550(a)(15)(vii) because ``insulating links are generally rated for
distribution voltages and would not properly protect employees working
near power lines.'' \53\ (ID-0209.1.) Another commenter recommended
that the proposed Sec. 1926.1408(f) requirements be supplemented with
a requirement that any insulating link used be rated for the applicable
[[Page 47958]]
transmission tower frequencies, and that nonconductive tag lines be
used.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ Another commenter opposed the proposed language because it
believed that grounding the equipment under the provisions of former
Sec. 1926.550(a)(15)(vii) would better protect employees, the
crane, and the power line because it would result in a very quick
trip of the line. (ID-0144.1.) This comment is not relevant because
grounding the crane would not cause the transmitter or communication
towers to trip.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The problem addressed by these comments involves how to protect a
worker, such as a rigger, who may come into electrical contact with the
load. Under the proposed rule, the load would be insulated from the
grounded crane to isolate the load from circulating current that could
cause it to be energized. However, it may be possible that the load
itself could become energized by absorbing energy from the transmitter
or communication tower. The former rule addresses this possibility by
requiring an electrical connection between the load and the (grounded)
equipment. However, in the event there is either a poor electrical
connection or a ground that is not fully effective, this method might
not provide complete protection. Therefore, OSHA has decided not to
require either precaution, but instead to require that any tag line
used be nonconductive. This precaution is required in other provisions,
discussed above, to protect the rigger from the possibility that the
equipment may come into electrical contact with a power line. It will
be equally appropriate here. Section 1926.1408(f) is modified
accordingly.
OSHA notes that former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15)(vii) of subpart N
required employers to provide crews ``with nonconductive poles having
large alligator clips or other similar protection to attach the ground
cable to the load.'' This requirement protected employees from the
electric shock hazard that exists when employees apply grounds. Due to
what the Agency determined was an inadvertent oversight on the part of
the Committee, the proposed rule did not contain provisions addressing
these hazards. Although no commenters raised this issue, OSHA is aware
that employees are exposed to serious electric shock hazards when they
are attaching grounds in accordance with Sec. 1926.1408(f). For
example, when attaching the rigging to the load or the ground to the
crane, the crane and load will be energized. OSHA views this condition
as a recognized hazard and expects employers to ensure that employees
are adequately protected when they are attaching grounds. Employers who
fail to properly protect their employees in this regard will, in
appropriate circumstances, be subject to citation under the General
Duty Clause (sec. 5(a)(1)) of the OSH Act.
It should also be noted that work covered by Sec. Sec. 1926.1407
and 1926.1410 that is performed near transmitter or communication
towers can pose electric shock hazards similar to those addressed by
Sec. 1926.1408(f). Due to another oversight by the Committee, however,
neither Sec. 1926.1407 nor Sec. 1926.1410 contains provisions
addressing these hazards. OSHA considers these to be recognized hazards
and will use its enforcement authority under the General Duty Clause,
as appropriate, to ensure that employers are taking measures, such as
those required in Sec. Sec. 1926.600(a)(6)(vii) or 1926.1408(f), to
protect employees from electric shock and fires while performing work
covered by Sec. Sec. 1926.1407 and 1926.1410 near transmitter or
communication towers. OSHA will consider addressing both of these
oversights through future rulemaking.
A commenter suggested adding a provision to paragraph (f) whereby
the owner of a transmitter communication tower would be required to
evaluate whether power level density levels were high enough to
endanger employees working near the tower and, if so, implement
precautions to prevent them. (ID-0130.1.) The issue raised by this
comment is beyond the scope of this rule, which addresses hazards
related to the use of equipment and not employee exposure to possible
radiation hazards. Such hazards are covered by Sec. 1926.54,
Nonionizing radiation.
Paragraph (g) Training
Paragraph (g) of this section sets forth training requirements for
crane operators and other crew members assigned to work with the
equipment. The training topics listed are designed to ensure that both
the operator and the other crew members have the information they need
to help protect themselves from power line hazards. One commenter
suggested that, in addition to the topics listed in the proposed rule,
employees working on equipment operating closer than Table A clearance
distances also be trained on induction, step and touch potentials, and
proper equipment grounding procedures. (ID-0161.1.) Other commenters
also recommended training in grounding procedures and in the
limitations of the protection that grounding provides. (ID-0131.1; -
0155.1.) OSHA concludes that training on induction, step, and touch
potentials would get into issues that are highly technical and would
not help workers understand what they must do to protect themselves and
others. OSHA does, however, agree with the suggestion that workers be
trained in proper grounding procedures and in the limitations of the
protection that grounding provides. As discussed under Sec. 1926.1410,
equipment grounding is one of the additional precautions required when
it is infeasible to maintain the Table A clearances, and training in
proper grounding procedures will help ensure the effectiveness of this
provision. In addition, employees must understand that grounding may
not afford complete protection. Accordingly, OSHA is adding a new Sec.
1926.1408(g)(1)(v) that requires training in the procedures to be
followed to properly ground equipment and the limitations of grounding.
In addition, proposed Sec. 1926.1408(g)(1)(i)(E) stated that
training was required in the need to avoid approaching or touching
``the equipment.'' In the proposed rule's preamble, OSHA stated that it
determined that C-DAC inadvertently failed to add the phrase ``and the
load'' to that provision, since whenever the equipment is in electrical
contact with a power line, the load may also be energized. OSHA
requested public comment on whether that provision should be modified
to correct this omission. Commenters agreed that adding the phrase
``and the load'' was appropriate. (ID-0051.0; -0205.1; -0213.1.)
Therefore, OSHA has made this addition in the final rule.
In the proposed rule, the Agency noted that proposed Sec.
1926.1408(g) did not address the timing and frequency of this training.
OSHA requested public comment on whether and, if so, how the standard
should address training timing and frequency.
The one commenter on this issue advocated not dictating the timing
or frequency of training in this provision. For the final rule, OSHA
has decided to cross reference the testing administration requirements
of Sec. 1926.1430. That training section requires that employees be
evaluated to confirm that they understand the information provided in
the training, and that refresher training be provided when, based on
employee conduct, there is an indication that retraining is necessary.
Section 1926.1408(g) is modified accordingly.
Paragraph (h)
In the proposed rule, this provision required that where devices
originally designed by the manufacturer for use as safety devices,
operational aids, or a means to prevent power line contact or
electrocution are used to comply with Sec. 1926.1408, they must meet
the manufacturer's procedures for use and conditions of use. The
Committee concluded that this provision is necessary to ensure that the
devices work as intended. No comments were received on this provision,
and it is promulgated without change. (See
[[Page 47959]]
Sec. 1926.1417 for a discussion of OSHA's authority to require
compliance with manufacturer procedures.)
Section 1926.1409 Power Line Safety (Over 350 kV)
As proposed, the requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1407 and 1926.1408
would apply to power lines rated over 350 kV in all respects except
one: Wherever the regulatory text states ``20 feet,'' ``50 feet'' would
be substituted. Therefore, the ``trigger'' distance that would be used
when assessing an assembly/disassembly area or work zone would be 50
feet. In addition, an employer engaged in assembly/disassembly that is
using Option (2) of proposed Sec. 1926.1407(a)(2), or an employer
engaged in crane operations that is using Option (2) of proposed Sec.
1926.1408(a)(2)(ii), would be required to maintain a minimum clearance
distance of 50 feet. This would apply to all power lines rated over 350
kV, including power lines over 1,000 kV.
For power lines over 1,000 kilovolts,\54\ employers electing to use
Table A of Sec. 1926.1408 in either assembly/disassembly (Option (3)
in Sec. 1926.1407(a)(3)) or crane operations (Option (3) in Sec.
1926.1408(a)(2)(iii)) are required, pursuant to instructions in the
Table, to maintain a minimum clearance distance determined by the
utility owner/operator or a registered professional engineer who is a
qualified person with respect to electrical power transmission and
distribution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ OSHA does not believe that there are any electric power
transmission lines in the United States that operate at more than
800 kV. However, there may be some power lines associated with
research laboratories or other similar facilities that operate at
more than 1,000 kV. In addition, it is possible that utilities may
install new power lines operating at more than this voltage or may
upgrade existing lines to operate at higher voltages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In reviewing this regulatory language, OSHA recognized that a
minimum clearance distance of 50 feet may be inadequate for the open-
ended category of ``over 1,000 kV.'' In fact, at some point in that
range, a utility owner/operator or a registered professional engineer
may well specify a minimum clearance distance of more than 50 feet.
However, as drafted in the proposed rule, employers using Option (2)
(in both proposed Sec. Sec. 1926.1407(a)(2) and 1926.1408(a)(2)(ii))
would only have to maintain a minimum clearance distance of 50 feet.
OSHA requested public comment on whether proposed Option (2) is
insufficiently protective for power lines rated over 1,000 kV. The one
commenter on this issue agreed that the proposed provision was
insufficiently protective for power lines carrying voltages greater
than 1,000 kV. OSHA agrees and has modified Sec. 1926.1409 in the
final rule to conform to the requirement of Table A that the minimum
clearance distance for lines over 1,000 kV be determined by the utility
owner/operator or a registered professional engineer who is a qualified
person with respect to electrical power and distribution. OSHA notes
that the minimum distance under Option (2) for voltages between 351 and
1,000 kV is 50 feet. The Agency expects that the distances set by
utilities and registered professional engineers in accordance with
Sec. 1926.1409(b) will be at least 50 feet.
Section 1926.1410 Power Line Safety (All Voltages)--Crane Operations
Closer Than the Table A Zone
Subpart N did not permit work closer than the 10-foot rule \55\
unless the lines were deenergized and visibly grounded or where
insulating barriers, separate from the equipment, were erected.
However, the Committee recognized that many employers, without meeting
the exceptions, nonetheless worked closer than the 10-foot rule. The
Committee determined that most employers do not use the option to
deenergize and ground because of the time, expense and difficulty in
making those arrangements.\56\ In addition, the Committee concluded
that an ``insulating barrier'' of the type that is currently available
does not, by itself, adequately protect employees because these
barriers are only effective for ``brush'' contact. If there is more
than brush contact, they will not protect employees from electrocution
because the equipment will damage the device.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ As described earlier, the ``10-foot rule'' is shorthand for
the formula in former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15) for minimum clearance
distances. Under the 10-foot rule, for lines rated 50 kV or less,
work was not permitted closer than 10 feet to an energized power
line. For lines rated more than 50 kV, a clearance of 10 feet plus
.4 inch for each 1 kV over 50 kV was generally required.
\56\ If power lines are deenergized and grounded, power is shut
off to the utility owner/operator's customers. As a result, utility
owner/operators are understandably reluctant to implement such
measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address the insufficient protections provided to employees who
work closer than the 10-foot rule, the Committee developed, and OSHA
proposed, a new approach, which is contained in Sec. 1926.1410. It
consists of prerequisites and criteria that apply when work must be
conducted closer than the minimum clearance distance specified in Table
A of Sec. 1926.1408.
In this case, the Committee's rationale misrepresented existing
OSHA enforcement policy under subpart N regarding insulating barriers
in two respects. First, current policy recognizes other types of
insulating barriers besides the type to which the Committee
referred.\57\ OSHA also recognizes goal-post-type barriers and, in
certain limited circumstances the insulation on insulated power lines
operating at 480 volts or less. See, e.g., letters of interpretation
dated February 8, 1994, to Mr. Ivan Blood (http://www.osha.gov) and
August 9, 2004, to Mr. Mathew McFarland (http://www.osha.gov). Second,
the Agency does accept barriers that protect against brush contact
under limited circumstances. See, e.g., letter of interpretation dated
February 8, 1994, to Mr. Ivan Blood (http://www.osha.gov).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ The barriers are known as electrically insulating plastic
guard equipment. See ASTM F712-06 Standard Test Methods and
Specifications for Electrically Insulating Plastic Guard Equipment
for Protection of Workers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, as these letters of interpretation recognize, these
barriers have their limitations. Because of this, OSHA has concluded
that, although the Committee's rationale with respect to Sec.
1926.1410 was slightly flawed by a misunderstanding of subpart N
requirements, their reasoning that the provisions of this section are
more protective than the former standard still holds.
This section starts out by explicitly prohibiting equipment from
operating closer than the distances specified in Table A of Sec.
1926.1408 to an energized power line except where the employer
demonstrates compliance with the requirements in Sec. 1926.1410.
Note that, in the discussion below of Sec. 1926.1410, references
to a ``registered professional engineer'' are, in accordance with Sec.
1926.1410(c)(1), references to a registered professional engineer who
is a qualified person with respect to electrical power transmission and
distribution.
One commenter on the proposed rule asked for clarification
regarding who determines whether a professional engineer is such a
``qualified person.'' (ID-0155.1.) Under Sec. 1926.1401, a qualified
person is a ``person who, by possession of a recognized degree,
certificate, or professional standing, or who by extensive knowledge,
training and experience, successfully demonstrated the ability to
solve/resolve problems relating to the subject matter, the work, or the
project.'' At a given construction site, the employer who is conducting
crane operations and who uses the services of the engineer to carry out
that employer's responsibilities under this section is responsible for
determining whether the registered professional engineer is a
[[Page 47960]]
qualified person with respect to electrical power transmission and
distribution.
Paragraphs (a) and (b)
These paragraphs set forth prerequisites that must be met for the
employer to be permitted to operate equipment closer to a power line
than the applicable Table A of Sec. 1926.1408 distance. Section
1926.1410(a) requires the employer to determine that it is infeasible
to do the work without breaching the minimum clearance distance under
Table A. If the employer determines it is infeasible to maintain the
Table A distance, under Sec. 1926.1410(b) it also has to determine,
after consulting with the utility owner/operator, that deenergizing and
grounding the power line, as well as relocating the line, are
infeasible. See discussion of infeasibility determinations in Sec.
1926.1408(d).
Two commenters argued that the requirement to demonstrate
infeasibility was unnecessary for electric utility work regulated under
subpart V. (ID-0203.1; -0209.1.) After careful review of these
comments, OSHA has concluded that it is appropriate for subpart V work
to be excluded from the need to show infeasibility under Sec.
1926.1410.
Subpart V applies to the erection of new electric transmission and
distribution lines and equipment and the alteration, conversion, and
improvement of existing transmission and distribution lines and
equipment (Sec. 1926.950(a)(1)). Construction of new lines generally
takes place some distance from existing lines, and the lines themselves
are not energized until construction is complete. Hence, clearance
distances are usually not an issue for new construction. However,
alteration, conversion, and improvement of existing lines necessarily
takes place on or near the lines themselves. To enable such work to be
done safely, subpart V contains clearance requirements that permit
equipment to operate much closer to the lines than either former Sec.
1926.550 or Sec. Sec. 1926.1408-1926.1409 of this final rule, as well
as supplementary protective requirements that must be followed when the
subpart V clearance requirements cannot be observed.
Subpart V's clearance requirements are found in Table V-1 of Sec.
1926.950. Subpart V does not require a showing of infeasibility before
allowing subpart V work to comply with these shorter clearance
distances, and OSHA concludes that the record does not support
requiring such a showing under the final rule either. The very nature
of work that alters, converts, or improves existing power lines must
necessarily be carried out close to those lines, and it would almost
always be infeasible for the clearances in Sec. Sec. 1926.1408-
1926.1409 to be maintained. As a result, requiring such a finding would
be a formality that would not add to worker safety.
It is similarly inappropriate to require a showing that it is
infeasible to deenergize and ground the lines or relocate the lines
under paragraph (b) of this section for subpart V work. Subpart V
provides for deenergizing and grounding as an alternative to live line
precautions, but it also recognizes that subpart V work may take place
on live lines to avoid power disruptions to the utility's customers and
includes precautions for such live line work. Thus, subpart V leaves to
the utility employer the discretion to decide whether to deenergize and
ground without the need for an infeasibility determination, and OSHA
concludes they should continue to have this same discretion under this
final rule. OSHA also notes that paragraph (b) of this section requires
the employer to consult with the utility owner/operator before deciding
that it infeasible to deenergize and ground the lines or relocate them,
and it would be anomalous to apply this provision where the utility
owner/operator is itself the employer.
For these reasons, OSHA has modified Sec. 1926.1410(c)(2) of the
final rule to clarify that paragraphs (a),(b), and (c)(1) of Sec.
1926.1410 do not apply to work covered by subpart V of 29 CFR 1926.
Instead, the Sec. 1926.950 Table V-1 minimum clearances apply. Section
1926.1410(c)(2) also explains that employers engaged in subpart V work
may work closer than the Sec. 1926.950 Table V-1 distances where both
the requirements of Sec. 1926.1410 and Sec. 1926.952(c)(3)(i) or (ii)
are met.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ OSHA is in the process of updating subpart V requirements.
If the Agency makes changes to those provisions that necessitate
updating the cross-references in Sec. 1926.1410(c)(2), those
changes will be made as part of that rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
See discussion later in this section regarding other provisions in
Sec. 1926.1410 that deal specifically with subpart V work.
Paragraph (c) Minimum Clearance Distance
After the employer makes the infeasibility determinations required
by Sec. 1926.1410(a) and (b), a minimum clearance distance must be
established. Under Sec. 1926.1410(c)(1), the employer can establish
this distance by either having the utility owner/operator determine the
minimum clearance distance that must be maintained or by having a
registered professional engineer who is a qualified person with respect
to electrical transmission and distribution determine the minimum
clearance distance that must be maintained. The Committee believed that
either of these sources of this information has sufficient expertise to
accurately apply the factors discussed below in setting an appropriate
minimum clearance distance.
Commenters objected to requiring the utility owner/operator to be
involved in setting the minimum clearance distance. (ID-0161.1; -
0162.1.) However, paragraph (c) of this section does not require the
utility owner/operator to establish the minimum clearance distance. It
gives the employer the option of engaging the utility owner/operator
for this purpose but, if the utility owner/operator declines, the
employer must engage a registered professional engineer who is a
qualified person with respect to electrical transmission and
distribution. In no case is the utility owner/operator required to
establish the minimum clearance distance.
Under Sec. 1926.1410(c)(1), regardless of whether it is the
utility owner/operator or a registered professional engineer that makes
this determination, several factors must be considered when
establishing the minimum clearance distance. These factors include, but
are not limited to: conditions affecting atmospheric conductivity; time
necessary to bring the equipment, load and load line (including rigging
and lifting accessories) to a complete stop; wind conditions; degree of
sway in the power line; lighting conditions, and other conditions
affecting the ability to prevent electrical contact.
A commenter objected to allowing cranes to operate closer to power
lines than the ``appropriate minimum approach distance to an energized
line.'' (ID-0226.) He further noted that, under the proposed rule, an
operator could take equipment closer to power lines than a qualified
electrical worker. C-DAC concluded, and OSHA agrees, that workers will
be better protected if employers are required to adhere to additional
safety precautions when it is infeasible to maintain the Table A
clearances. Accordingly, to the extent the commenter recommended that
the standard not permit equipment to come within the Table A distances,
OSHA rejects this commenter's suggestion.
The same commenter objected to allowing equipment operated by
nonelectrical workers to approach closer to power lines than a
qualified electrical worker. The rule does not, however, allow this.
This section requires the
[[Page 47961]]
employer to determine a minimum clearance distance that will prevent
the equipment from making electrical contact with the line. Although
existing subpart V permits employees to take equipment closer to power
lines than Table V-1 of Sec. 1926.950, the corresponding general
industry standard at Sec. 1910.269(p)(4)(i) prohibits the operation of
equipment closer than the distances in Tables R-6 through R-10 of Sec.
1910.269. In the proposed revision of subpart V, the proposed rule
contains the same prohibition as the general industry standard. As a
general matter, OSHA determines that it is not appropriate or safe for
nonelectrical workers to bring equipment closer to power lines than is
permitted under Sec. 1910.269(p)(4)(i) for qualified workers.
Therefore, the Agency does not expect that distances shorter than those
in Tables R-6 through R-10 of Sec. 1910.269 will be adequate ``to
prevent electrical contact'' for purposes of Sec. 1926.1410(c)(1).
Several commenters suggested that when equipment operations closer
than the Table A of Sec. 1926.1408 zone are performed, (1) ``qualified
employees'' (as defined under Sec. 1910.269) should be used (ID-
0161.1; -0199.1); (2) the equipment should be considered energized (ID-
0075.0; -0161.1); and/or (3) the power line should be deenergized (ID-
0161.1; -0226.0).
Regarding the ``qualified employees'' suggestion, OSHA determines
that the training required under Sec. 1926.1410(m), discussed below,
is more appropriate for construction workers working with cranes and
other hoisting equipment than the training required under Sec.
1910.269(a)(2)(ii) for electrical workers. The training required under
paragraph (m) focuses on the actions that employees can take to protect
themselves when working near potentially energized equipment, while the
training under Sec. 1910.269(a)(2)(ii) focuses on safe practices for
working on energized lines.
The second suggestion is valid because prudence dictates treating
the equipment as energized when it is closer than the Table A distance
to an energized power line. However, some provisions of the rule
already treat the equipment as energized. These include paragraph
(d)(8), which requires barricades around the equipment to prevent
unauthorized personnel from entering the work area, and paragraph
(d)(9), which prohibits employees from touching the equipment. OSHA
determines that no additional benefit would be gained by a statement to
treat the equipment as energized and therefore declines to add such a
statement.
The third suggestion misconstrues the standard, which prohibits
work within the Table A clearance distances unless the employer can
show, among other things, that deenergizing and grounding the line is
infeasible. Therefore, except as noted above, Sec. 1926.1410(c) is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)
Once a minimum clearance distance has been established under Sec.
1926.1410(c), the employer may not proceed without first having a
planning meeting with either the owner/operator of the power line or
the registered professional engineer to determine what procedures will
be implemented to prevent electrical contact and electrocution. In
accordance with Sec. 1926.1410(e), these procedures have to be
documented and immediately available on-site. In addition, in
accordance with Sec. 1926.1410(f) and (g), these procedures have to be
reviewed with the operator and other workers who will be in the area of
the equipment and the procedures must be implemented (Sec.
1926.1410(e)-(g) are discussed below).
Section 1926.1410(d) sets out the minimum protective measures that
must be included in the procedures set by the employer and utility
owner/operator (or registered professional engineer). These procedures
need to include more stringent protective measures than those set out
in Sec. 1926.1408, because equipment will be in closer proximity to
power lines and there is otherwise a greater risk of contacting a power
line and causing electrocution. Therefore, these procedures have to
include, at a minimum, those set out in the remainder of this section.
Commenters objected to having the utility owner/operator involved
in the planning meeting required by paragraph (d) of this section. (ID-
0161.1; -0162.1.) As with paragraph (c) of this section, discussed
above, the utility owner/operator is not required to become involved
with the decisions that must be made under this section. If the utility
owner/operator declines to participate in the planning meeting, the
employer must engage a registered professional engineer to help
determine the procedures needed to prevent electrical contact. OSHA
notes, however, that equipment making electrical contact with a power
line can disrupt electrical service as well as create a hazard to
employees on the worksite. Therefore, at least in some cases, the
utility owner/operator may wish to help develop precautions to prevent
such electrical contact.
Paragraph (d)(1)
Under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, for power lines that are
equipped with a device that automatically reenergizes the circuit in
the event of a power line contact, the automatic reclosing feature of
the circuit interrupting device must be made inoperative prior to
beginning work. This will help ensure that, in the event of a power
line contact and activation of the automatic reclosing feature, the
line would not be automatically re-energized. One commenter stated that
many circuit interrupting devices currently in use are incapable of
having their automatic reclosing mechanisms disabled. (ID-0155.1.) OSHA
verified that fact and has amended Sec. 1926.1410(d)(1) to clarify
that the automatic reclosing feature must be made inoperative only if
the design of the device permits.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ This revised language is also consistent with the
provisions of Sec. 1910.269(q)(3)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (d)(2)
Under paragraph (d)(2) of this section, a dedicated spotter who is
in continuous contact with the operator must be used. In addition, the
dedicated spotter must be equipped with a visual aid to assist in
identifying the minimum clearance distance, must be positioned to
effectively gauge the clearance distance, where necessary must use
equipment that enables him or her to communicate directly with the
operator, and must give timely information to the operator so the
required clearance distance can be maintained. For a more in-depth
analysis of the dedicated spotter requirement and the public comments
received, consult the discussion of Sec. Sec. 1926.1407(b)(3)(i) and
1926.1408(b)(4)(ii) above. This provision is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(3)
Under paragraph (d)(3) of this section, an elevated warning line,
or barricade that is not attached to the equipment, positioned to
prevent electrical contact, must be used. This warning line or
barricade must be in view of the operator either directly or by use of
video equipment and must be equipped with flags or similar high-
visibility markings. The need for an elevated warning line or barricade
is explained above in the discussion of Sec. 1926.1408(b)(3). This
provision does not apply to subpart V work.
As discussed above in relation to Sec. 1926.1408(b)(3), there may
be situations where the operator is not able
[[Page 47962]]
to see an elevated warning line or barricade. To address such
situations, under Sec. Sec. 1926.1408 and 1926.1409, OSHA changed the
regulatory text so that the employer is required to use both a
dedicated spotter and one of the other (non-spotter) measures listed in
Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4). Because the clearance distances are likely to be
significantly smaller than the Table A distances, the Agency determines
that more precise means of estimating the clearance distance are
necessary. When the operator is not able to see an elevated warning
line or barricade when working closer than the Table A clearance
distance, it is necessary to provide an additional layer of protection
by requiring the use of video equipment to enable the operator to see
the warning line or barricade. Therefore, in all cases when working
closer than the Table A clearance distance, the operator will have
``two sets of eyes'' (in addition to other protection required under
this section) to ensure that the equipment maintains the minimum
clearance distance established under Sec. 1926.1410(c). This paragraph
is adopted as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(4) Insulating Link/Device
Under paragraph (d)(4) of this section, an insulating link/device
must be installed at a point between the end of the load line (or
below) and the load. As described in the discussion of Sec. 1926.1408,
an insulating link is a barrier to the passage of electrical current.
When used on a crane, it prevents the load from becoming energized if
the boom or the load line makes electrical contact with a power line
and prevents the equipment from becoming energized if the load contacts
a power line.
As explained in the discussion of Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(v), OSHA
anticipates that NRTL approval of these devices, which is necessary
from them to meet the definition of ``insulating link'' under Sec.
1926.1401, will not be available for up to one year after the effective
date of this rule. OSHA is providing two phase-in periods to allow time
for the NRTL recognition process, and to phase in the requirement in a
manner that will reduce the economic burden on employers with existing
inventories of devices that would qualify as ``insulating links/
devices,'' as defined in Sec. 1926.1401, except that they have not
been subject to NRTL approval (``non-approved links''). First, OSHA is
providing for an alternative measure that will be available to all
employers for one year after the effective date of the standard. Sec.
1926.1410(d)(4)(iv). Second, OSHA is allowing employers who have
existing inventory of non-approved links to continue to use these links
for an additional two years (up to a total of three years after the
effective date of the final rule), so long as the same protections
required for the alternative measures available during the one-year
interim period remain in place. Sec. 1926.1410(d)(4)(v). However, the
use of links manufactured after the one-year interim period is
prohibited unless they are NRTL-approved as required by the definition
of ``insulating link/device'' in Sec. 1926.1401.
The absence of an insulating link can result in the load becoming
energized if the equipment makes electrical contact with a power line
or the equipment becoming energized if the load makes electrical
contact with a power line. When working inside the clearances permitted
under Table A, the danger of such electrical contact is increased. As
an interim precaution until insulating links (as defined in Sec.
1926.1401) become available, OSHA is requiring that all employees who
may come in contact with the equipment, the load line, or the load,
excluding equipment operators located on the equipment, must be
insulated or guarded from the equipment, the load line, and the load.
Insulating gloves rated for the voltage involved are adequate
insulation for the purposes of this alternative. This interim
precaution will provide some degree of protection to employees working
near the equipment or load by providing a layer of insulation should
the equipment or the load become energized. During the one-year interim
period following the effective date of subpart CC, OSHA is encouraging,
but not requiring, the use of non-approved links as an extra form of
protection (although they cannot be used to satisfy the standard).
OSHA is also providing a separate alternative measure that would
apply for an additional two-year transition period (following the
first-year interim period, for a total of three years) to address
employers who already own or purchase non-approved links. See Sec.
1926.1410(d)(4)(v). Under this alternative, employers with non-approved
links would be required to use them in addition to other alternative
measures required under Sec. 1926.1410(d)(4)(iv) during the initial
one-year interim period. To be eligible for this alternative measure,
employers must use and maintain these non-approved links in compliance
with manufacturer requirements and recommendations. While OSHA
anticipates that NRTL-approved insulating links will be available for
purchase within a year after the effective date of subpart CC, the
Agency recognizes that some employers will have existing inventories of
non-approved links. OSHA is, therefore, allowing employers the
additional two years to phase out the use of the non-approved links to
reduce the economic burden of replacing the existing inventory of non-
approved links.
As noted above, OSHA encourages employers to use non-approved links
during the initial one-year interim period as an extra measure of
protection, but is not requiring employers to use them during this
interim period. The Agency recognizes that some employers might not
already own these devices because OSHA did not mandate their use under
subpart N. If OSHA required the use of non-approved links during the
initial one-year interim period, these employers would be forced to
incur additional costs for devices that could only be used for a fixed
period of one to three years.\60\ However, once the NRTL-approved links
are available for purchase, the cost of purchasing the NRTL-approved
links would be a capital investment that could be amortized over the
normal life of the insulating link.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ While the record indicates that these devices are available
for rental, it is not clear from the record that all employers would
have access to the businesses renting these devices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several commenters noted the limitations of insulating links/
devices and advocated for the ability to employ alternative measures
when necessary. For example, commenters stated that no insulating
links/devices were readily available for loads above 60 tons or
voltages above 33 kV. (ID-0132.1; -0155.1; -0197.1.) In addition,
commenters noted that the added length of rigging that results when
insulating links are used can create problems in locations where there
is limited overhead clearance. (ID-0132.1; -0155.1; -0197.1.)
Another commenter who manufactures insulating links stated that
insulating links are available with lifting capacities of up to 120
tons and voltage capacities of up to 125 kV.\61\ (ID-0216.1.)
Therefore, OSHA concludes that no changes are necessary to address the
objections to the proposed insulating link requirement based on load or
voltage capacities. However, OSHA has concluded that some accommodation
may be necessary to address conditions associated with electric utility
operations in work areas
[[Page 47963]]
with low overhead clearance from power lines.\62\ Accordingly, OSHA has
added an alternative to this provision for subpart V operations where
use of an insulating link is infeasible. However, this provision should
rarely, if ever, be available to employers, as there are several
alternatives to using a crane or derrick in this operation including
use of an aerial lift with a material handler or a manual hoist. The
alternative requires use of alternate electrical safety precautions;
specifically, the alternate precautions are those required under the
electric power generation, transmission, and distribution regulations
applicable to general industry under Sec. 1910.269(p)(4)(iii)(B) or
(C). Those precautions require either that the hoisting equipment be
insulated for the voltage involved, or that each employee be protected
from hazards that might arise from equipment contact with energized
lines.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ Refer to the discussion of Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(v) for a
description of other comments received concerning insulating links
in the context of that provision.
\62\ The example provided by the commenter was replacement/
repair of utility pole transformers. (ID-0155.1.) Such operations
frequently involve hoisting transformers onto and off of utility
poles immediately beneath power lines. The commenter stated that
frequently in those operations there is barely sufficient room for
the boom head itself; when an insulating link is added to the load
line, the extra 2-3 feet of rigging prevents the hoisting of the
transformer to the required elevation. The commenter did not explain
why an aerial lift or manual hoist could not be used.
\63\ See discussion of this paragraph below under subpart V-
work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (d)(5)
Under paragraph (d)(5) of this section, if the rigging may be
closer than the Table A of Sec. 1926.1408 distance during the
operation, it must be of the nonconductive type. This provides
protection to those employees who would be exposed to electrical
hazards in the event that the rigging contacts a power line, which
otherwise could energize the rigging and the load.
One commenter stated that he was unaware of any sling manufacturers
who market their slings as being nonconductive, and that there are no
test standards for testing the dielectric properties of slings. (ID-
0155.1.) As noted in the discussion of tag lines of Sec.
1926.1407(b)(2), C-DAC considered the utility of setting specifications
for material required to be nonconductive but determined that it would
be impractical, and OSHA has additionally concluded that there is no
need to specify test criteria for these materials. The guidance
provided for determining whether a tag line is nonconductive applies
equally here. Slings made from nonmetallic fibers will meet the
standard provided they are not wet, dirty, or have substances on or in
them that will conduct electricity. Therefore, OSHA has concluded that
the requirement that rigging that may be closer than the Table A
distance be nonconductive is appropriate, and the provision is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(6)
Under paragraph (d)(6) of this section, if the crane is equipped
with a device that automatically limits range of movement, it must be
used and set to prevent any part of the crane, load or load line
(including rigging and lifting accessories) from breaching the minimum
clearance distance established under Sec. 1926.1410(c). This paragraph
is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(7)
Under paragraph (d)(7) of this section, if a tag line is used it
must be nonconductive. This requirement provides additional protection
to those employees who would be exposed to electrical hazards in the
event that the equipment contacts a power line and the tag line they
are holding becomes energized, or in the event that the tag line itself
makes contact with the power line.
Refer to the discussion of Sec. 1926.1407(b)(2) for further
explanation of tag line non-conductivity and public comments received
on this subject. This provision is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(8)
Under paragraph (d)(8) of this section, barricades must be used to
form a perimeter at least 10 feet away from the equipment to prevent
unauthorized personnel from entering the work area. In areas where
obstacles prevent the barricade from being at least 10 feet away, the
barricade is required to be as far from the equipment as feasible. This
provision, along with Sec. Sec. 1926.1410(d)(9) and 1926.1410(d)(10),
minimizes the likelihood that any more employees than are absolutely
necessary to the operation will be near the equipment in the event the
equipment, load or load line makes electrical contact with the power
line. No comments were submitted on this provision; therefore, it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(9)
Under paragraph (d)(9) of this section, employees other than the
operator are prohibited from touching the load line above the
insulating link/device and equipment. The reason C-DAC did not extend
this prohibition to the operator is that the operator, by being in the
cab, is going to be in electrical contact with both the equipment and
load line. However, this assumes that the operator is in fact standing
or sitting on the equipment. There may be some situations where this is
not the case. For example, some equipment may be operated by pendant
control or wireless control; in such cases the operator need not be on
the equipment to control it. OSHA requested public comment on this
issue.
Commenters agreed that equipment operators operating from the
ground via remote controls need to be protected from potential shocks
by either (1) using wireless controls that physically isolate the
operator from the equipment; or (2) using insulating mats that insulate
the operator from the ground. (ID-0062.1; -0162.1.) OSHA agrees with
these comments. Although rubber insulating matting is designed for use
as a floor covering, the Agency determines that such mats can provide
an additional measure of protection for workers operating the equipment
from the ground.\64\ OSHA has amended paragraph (d)(9) accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ The proposed revision of subpart V also proposed a new
construction standard for electrical protective equipment, which
would cover rubber insulating matting. Until the subpart V revision
is finalized, rubber insulating matting meeting ASTM D178-01(2005)
Standard Specification for Rubber Insulating Matting, meets the
requirement in final Sec. 1926.1410(d)(9) for insulating mats.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (d)(10)
Under paragraph (d)(10) of this section, only personnel essential
to the operation are permitted to be in the area of the equipment and
the load. In conjunction with Sec. Sec. 1926.1410(d)(8) and
1926.1410(d)(9), this minimizes the likelihood that any more employees
than are absolutely necessary to the operation would be in a position
to make electrical contact with the equipment in the event the
equipment, load or load line makes electrical contact with the power
line. No comments were submitted on this provision; it is promulgated
as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(11)
Under paragraph (d)(11) of this section, the equipment must be
properly grounded. As described in the summary and explanation of final
Sec. 1926.1408(a)(2)(i) Option (1), in the event the equipment
inadvertently makes electrical contact with the power line, proper
grounding will protect employees in two ways. First, if the line is
equipped with a circuit interrupting device, the grounding facilitates
the operation of the device to deenergize the line. However, under some
conditions, for example, if there is arcing contact or if the contact
is near the end of a power
[[Page 47964]]
line, the fault current may not be high enough to open the circuit for
the power line. Second, in the event an employee on the ground is
touching the equipment when it contacts the power line or if the
circuit protective device does not operate to deenergize the power
line, proper grounding will reduce the danger to the employee by
providing an additional, low resistance path to ground for the electric
current, substantially lowering the voltage on the equipment while the
power line remains energized.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ It should be noted that hazardous potential differences can
be created in the ground when a contact occurs, and employees
standing close to, but not touching, anything in contact with the
power line can still be injured or killed. The requirements in Sec.
1926.1425, Keeping clear of the load, which are designed to protect
employees from being struck or crushed by hazards, will also protect
employees from these electrical hazards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenters on this provision stressed the need for worker training
on proper equipment grounding procedures and the limitations of the
protection that grounding provides. (ID-0131.1; -0155.1; -0161.1.) OSHA
agrees. As discussed under Sec. 1926.1408(g), OSHA is requiring that
the training under that paragraph include training in proper grounding
procedures and the limitations of the protection grounding provides. To
make clear that the training required under Sec. 1926.1408(g) is also
required under this section, OSHA is adding Sec. 1926.1410(m),
discussed below, to require that operators and crew assigned to
equipment under this section be trained in accordance with Sec.
1926.1408(g). Section 1926.1410(d)(11) is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(12)
Under paragraph (d)(12) of this section, insulating line hose or
cover-up must be installed by the utility owner/operator except where
such devices are unavailable for the line voltages involved. The
Committee noted that prior subpart N, at former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15),
allowed such insulating barriers to be used as a complete alternative
to deenergizing and grounding or to maintaining the applicable minimum
clearance distance from the power line. However, the Committee
determined that such insulating devices do not provide complete
protection because they can be pierced if the equipment makes more than
brushing contact with the device. However, the Committee concluded that
these insulating devices do provide protection if there is brushing
contact and that such devices are useful to supplement the other
protective measures provided by the requirements of this Sec.
1926.1410(d).
One commenter on this provision believed that when work is being
performed under Sec. 1926.1410 around voltages above which insulating
line hose or cover-up are available, OSHA should require that the power
line be deenergized and visibly grounded. (ID-0161.1.) Another
commenter stated that the Committee correctly limited the use of line
hoses and similar rubber cover-ups as complete protection since it can
be pierced, but stated that it was unfortunate that the Committee
prohibited the use of other rigid plastic barriers that are effective
insulation and are not easily pierced. (ID-0144.1.) Regarding the
former comment, OSHA notes that the rule applies only when the employer
demonstrates that it is infeasible to deenergize and ground the power
line. Also, the provision does not require that line hose or cover-up
be made of rubber; if rigid plastic barriers provide effective
insulation for the voltage involved, they are permitted by this
paragraph. OSHA also notes that rigid plastic barriers (that is,
electrically insulating plastic guard equipment) is also intended for
brush contact only. (See ASTM F712--06 Standard Test Methods and
Specifications for Electrically Insulating Plastic Guard Equipment for
Protection of Workers.) Although this equipment may be able to
withstand higher forces, it is easier to displace than rubber
insulating line hose. This provision is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (e)
Under paragraph (e) of this section, the procedures that are
developed to comply with Sec. 1926.1410(d) must be documented and
immediately available on-site. This ensures that these procedures are
available to be used as a reference while the work is in progress.
No comments on this provision were submitted, and it is promulgated
as proposed.
Paragraph (f)
Under paragraph (f) of this section, the equipment user and utility
owner/operator (or registered professional engineer) must meet with the
equipment operator and the other employees who will be in the area of
the equipment or load to review the procedures that are developed under
Sec. 1926.1410(d) to prevent a breach of the minimum clearance
distance established under Sec. 1926.1410(c). It is important that
this review take place so that the operator and other employees
understand this critical information and have the opportunity to
discuss the procedures with the utility owner/operator or registered
professional engineer who developed the procedures.
OSHA notes that proposed Sec. 1926.1410(f) referred only to the
utility owner/operator. However, under Sec. 1926.1410(d), the
procedures are determined in a planning meeting with either the utility
owner operator or a registered professional engineer, and whichever
entity helped develop those procedures must also participate in the
meeting required under paragraph (f). Therefore, OSHA has modified this
paragraph by adding a reference to the registered professional engineer
as an alternative to the utility owner/operator.
Several electric utility representatives questioned OSHA's
authority to impose these and other requirements upon power line owners
and operators. (ID-0162.1; -0166.1; -0203.1; -0226.1.) As stated above
in response to similar arguments, this paragraph does not require the
utility owner/operator to take any action. Another commenter asked who
was responsible for bearing the costs of deenergizing power lines and
other safety precautions, and what would happen if a utility owner/
operator was unable to meet the equipment user at the requested time.
(ID-0155.1) As stated above with respect to compliance costs, OSHA
determines that issues of compliance costs and specific obligations are
best handled as contractual matters among the parties involved, and/or
as prescribed by local and regional utility regulatory authorities.
Paragraphs (g) and (h)
Under paragraph (g) of this section, the employer must implement
the procedures developed in accordance with Sec. 1926.1410(d). And
under paragraph (h) of this section, the utility owner/operator (or
registered professional engineer) and all employers of the employees
involved in the work must identify one person who will direct the
implementation of the procedures. This person must direct the
implementation of the procedures and have the authority to stop work at
any time to ensure safety. As with paragraph (f) of this section, OSHA
is adding a reference to the registered professional engineer to
paragraph (h) to ensure that the entity that helped develop the
procedures participate in the decision required under paragraph (h).
The Committee concluded that, in view of the fact that more than
one employer is typically involved in these situations, coordination
among the employers of these employees is needed for the protective
measures to be effectively implemented. Once the
[[Page 47965]]
operation is underway, safety-related orders typically need to be given
and followed without delay. Since an employee of one employer typically
would not immediately follow an instruction from another employer, it
is necessary that, before these operations begin, all employees
understand that the one designated person will have this authority. For
these reasons, the Committee determined that there needs to be one
person who all involved in the operation recognize as having this role
and authority.
A commenter objected to having the utility owner/operator involved
in determining which individual should direct implementation of the
procedures, saying that the decision should be made by the contractors.
(ID-0155.1.) OSHA notes that this provision is closely tied to
paragraphs (d) and (f) of this section, under which the utility owner/
operator or registered professional engineer is involved in developing
the procedures and in reviewing the procedures with the appropriate
employees. At this point, the utility or registered professional
engineer is well situated to help identify an individual who is able to
direct the implementation of the procedures. As with the other
provisions of this section that require the involvement of the utility
or a registered professional engineer, the utility has the discretion
not to participate, in which case the employer operating the equipment
must use a registered professional engineer.
Paragraph (i) [Reserved]
Paragraph (j)
This provision requires the employer to safely stop operations if a
problem occurs with implementing the procedures in paragraph (d) of
this section or if there is an indication that those procedures are
inadequate to prevent electrocution. In addition, this provision
requires that the employer either develop new procedures which comply
with paragraph (d) or contact the utility owner/operator and have them
deenergize and visibly ground or relocate the power line(s) before
resuming operations.
Two commenters suggested that the utility might not be able to
deenergize the lines for medical or security reasons and asked what
would happen in such a case. (ID-0155.1; -0162.1.) OSHA recognizes that
utilities may not be willing or able to discontinue power to their
customers, and Sec. 1926.1410(j) permits relocating the line as an
alternative to deenergizing.
An electric utility representative requested that OSHA clarify
which employer has the responsibility to comply with this provision,
stating it should be the equipment operator and not the utility owner/
operator. (ID-0161.1.) OSHA notes that this paragraph's requirement for
the employer to ``safely stop operations'' applies to the employer(s)
who are conducting the operation, and the requirement for that employer
to contact the utility owner/operator after stopping operations makes
clear that a utility owner/operator who is not conducting equipment
operations near the power line is not the ``employer'' under this
paragraph. OSHA concludes these points are sufficiently clear, and the
provision is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (k)
Proposed paragraph (k) required that, where a device originally
designed by the manufacturer for use as a safety device, operational
aid, or a means to prevent power line contact or electrocution is used
to comply with Sec. 1926.1410, it must meet the manufacturer's
procedures for use and conditions of use. (See Sec. 1926.1417 for a
discussion of OSHA's authority to require compliance with manufacturer
procedures.) No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
General Comment
A commenter suggested that OSHA consider requiring a written permit
as a precondition to any work being done closer than 20 feet to a power
line.\66\ (ID-0201.1.) The permit, according to this commenter, should
document many of the requirements of this section, including the basis
for the employer's infeasibility determinations, the utility owner/
operator's or registered professional engineer's determination of a
minimum clearance distance, the specific procedures to be followed in
performing the work, verification that the employees have received the
required training, and other information relevant to the work. The
commenter did not explain why it believed such a permit system would
result in greater safety, but OSHA infers that the commenter believes
that the need to document certain information, such as the basis for
the employer's infeasibility findings, will lead to more careful
consideration of the factors that enter into the decision that it is
necessary to work closer to a power line than is normally permitted and
more carefully thought out procedures when such work is done. OSHA is
not convinced that a permit system is needed to ensure that employers
act carefully under this section. OSHA expects that the stringent
precautions required when employers work closer than the Sec.
1926.1408 and Sec. 1926.1409 clearance distances will ensure that an
employer will only determine that it is infeasible to work within those
distances if there is really no other viable option. Similarly, the
requirement that a minimum clearance distance must be determined by a
utility owner/operator or registered professional engineer ensures that
sound expert judgment will enter into that determination without the
need for additional documentation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ This commenter recommended that 20 feet should be the
minimum clearance distance for all work and that Table A of Sec.
1926.1408 should be deleted. OSHA explained in Sec. 1926.1408 why
it was rejecting this suggestion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart V Work
In the proposed rule, OSHA discussed in detail the compliance
duties the rule would impose on employers engaged in subpart V work
(see 73 FR 59762-59764, Oct. 9, 2008). Industry representatives
objected to some of the changes from the requirements of subpart V.
Among other things, they pointed to another ongoing rulemaking in which
OSHA proposed to amend subpart V in ways that differ from the changes
proposed by C-DAC (70 FR 34821, Jun. 15, 2005).\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ The subpart V proposed rule was published after C-DAC
completed its work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA proposed requirements in addition to those in subpart V
because it had already concluded that the measures required by subpart
V for the operation of equipment near power lines are insufficiently
protective. (See the discussion of Sec. 1910.269(p)(4) in the preamble
to the final rule promulgating the general industry standard on the
operation and maintenance of electric power generation, transmission,
and distribution installations (59 FR 4320, 4400-4404, Jan. 31, 1994)).
Although proposed subpart V would require measures that are
sufficiently protective, OSHA has not yet adopted it as a final rule.
Consequently, the Agency is taking action today to increase the
protection currently afforded by subpart V. In doing so, OSHA has also
addressed the concerns raised by utility industry representatives.
First, as discussed above, OSHA has made several changes to the
final rule in response to comments from the electric utility industry.
These include: (1) An expanded exclusion for digger derricks used in
utility pole work; (2) deleting the requirement that employers engaged
in subpart V work show the infeasibility of complying with the required
clearance distances in Sec. Sec. 1926.1408
[[Page 47966]]
through 1926.1409; and (3) an alternative to the requirement for
insulating links under Sec. 1926.1410(d)(4).
In addition, employers engaged in subpart V activities are not
required to implement certain other protective measures required by
this standard when working near power lines. As discussed above,
subpart V work would not be subject to the requirement for an
additional protective measure from the list in Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4).
Also, subpart V work would not be subject to the prohibition in Sec.
1926.1408(d)(1) against equipment operating under power lines (see
discussion above of Sec. 1926.1408(d)(2)(i)). And Sec.
1926.1410(d)(3) provides that an employer engaged in subpart V work
closer than the Table A of Sec. 1926.1408 distance is not required to
use an elevated warning line or barricade.
In recognition of the fact that much subpart V work necessarily
takes place on or near energized power lines, employers engaged in such
work may comply with shorter minimum clearance distances than those
specified in Sec. Sec. 1926.1408 and 1926.1409: they must generally
adhere to the clearance distances in Table V-1 of Sec. 1926.950.
However, Sec. 1926.952(c)(2) (redesignated as Sec. 1926.952(c)(3) as
a result of this rulemaking) permits clearances less than those in
Table V-1 and includes requirements that must be met when equipment is
operating closer to power lines that those distances. To make this
clear, Sec. 1926.1410(c)(2) provides: ``Employers engaged in subpart V
work are permitted to work closer than the distances in Sec. 1926.950
Table V-1 where both the requirements of this section and Sec.
1926.950(c)(3)(i) or (ii) are met.'' \68\ OSHA is also making
conforming amendments to Sec. 1926.952(c)(3), which was formerly
designated Sec. 1926.952(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ The proposed rule referred to ``Sec. 1926.950(c)(2)(iii)
or (iv).'' The final rule reflects the changes in numbering to Sec.
1926.950(c)(2) that are made elsewhere in this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under this section, the precautions previously specified in
Sec. Sec. 1926.952(c)(2)(i) and (ii) are required under Sec.
1926.1410(d) when equipment used in subpart V work is operated closer
than the Table V-1 clearances. Since these precautions are now required
by Sec. 1926.1410(d), OSHA is deleting them from subpart V as
redundant. Therefore, OSHA is including the non-redundant provisions
from the proposed rule in the final rule, with proposed Sec.
1926.952(c)(2) redesignated as Sec. 1926.952(c)(3).\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ In subpart V, when equipment is considered energized, a
number of subpart V requirements are triggered. See, e.g., Sec.
1926.951(c)(1) (restricting use of metal or conductive ladders near
energized equipment); Sec. 1926.951(f)(3) (hydraulic tools used on
or around energized equipment shall use nonconducting hoses); Sec.
1926.953(c) (materials or equipment shall not be stored near
energized equipment if it is practical to store them elsewhere).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One commenter opposed deleting former Sec. Sec. 1926.952(c)(2)(i)
and (ii) because the commenter believed that it would not be confusing
to duplicate requirements now found in subpart CC in subpart V. OSHA
disagrees. As amended by this rule, Sec. 1926.952(c)(3) states that
its requirements are ``in addition to'' the requirements in Sec.
1926.1410. Restating requirements in Sec. 1926.952(c)(3) that are also
found in Sec. 1926.1410 can lead to uncertainty over whether the
duplicate requirements are in fact redundant or are separate
requirements.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ Amendments to Sec. 1926.950(c)(1) are discussed in Sec.
1926.1400, Scope.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA notes that in this zone, one of the options that an employer
engaged in subpart V has under prior Sec. 1926.952(c)(3)(i) is to
insulate the equipment. Under Sec. 1926.1410(d)(11), that employer
also must ground the equipment. An employer can comply with both
requirements by using equipment with an insulating boom and grounding
the uninsulated portion of the equipment (that is, the portion below
the insulated section of the boom).
It should also be noted that, in the subpart V rulemaking, OSHA has
proposed to prohibit equipment (other than insulated aerial lifts,
which are not covered by this final rule) from being operated closer
than the minimum approach distances from power lines. If this
prohibition is carried into the final subpart V rule, then the
requirements in this final rule relating to work inside the distance in
Table V-1 will have no effect.
Finally, Sec. 1926.1400(g) includes a new compliance alternative
for subpart V work that has been added to the final rule.
Paragraph (l) [Reserved]
Paragraph (m)
As noted above, the training requirements contained in Sec.
1926.1408(g) are being added to this section as well to assure that
employees engaged in activities under this section receive adequate
training.
Section 1926.1411 Power Line Safety--While Traveling Under Power Lines
With No Load
Paragraph (a)
Proposed paragraph (a) provided that this section is designed to
protect against electrical hazards while equipment is traveling with no
load under power lines on a construction site. It did not address the
potential hazards associated with equipment traveling without a load
near power lines. OSHA requested public comment on whether it is
necessary to expand the applicability of this section to include
equipment traveling on a construction site without a load near power
lines.
Two commenters favored broadening the applicability of Sec.
1926.1411 to include equipment traveling near power lines, with
``near'' being defined as the distances listed in Table T. (ID-0205.1;
-0213.1.) One commenter responded that adding an additional set of
power line clearance distances to trigger the requirements of Sec.
1926.1411 would be confusing. (ID-0144.1.) A fourth commenter thought
that the requirements of Sec. 1926.1411 should extend to cover
equipment traveling ``along side of'' power lines, but did not suggest
a definition for the term ``along side of.'' (ID-0155.1.)
After considering these public comments, OSHA concludes that this
section should address the hazard of equipment traveling near, as well
as under, power lines with no load. If equipment comes into electrical
contact with a power line while traveling without a load, the same
electrocution hazard is present as when it is operating with a load.
The precautions in this section will protect workers against that
hazard.
OSHA agrees with the two commenters who suggested that Table T of
this section contains appropriate clearances for equipment traveling
near, as well as under, power lines. Applying Table T to equipment
traveling near power lines will provide a uniform rule for this section
and will ensure adequate worker protection. Although the Table T
clearance distances are less than those required under Table A of Sec.
1926.1408 during crane operations, additional protection is provided
under this section by the requirement in paragraph (b)(1), discussed
below, that the boom/mast and boom/mast support system be lowered
sufficiently to meet the requirements of this paragraph. With the boom/
mast lowered, the highest point of the equipment will generally be
below the plane of the power line, reducing the risk of accidental
contact. Moreover, as also noted below, the dedicated spotter
requirement of Sec. 1926.1411(b)(4) will be triggered whenever the
equipment while traveling will get closer than 20 feet to a power line,
thereby providing additional protection against accidental contact.
[[Page 47967]]
Accordingly, in the final rule, paragraph (a) applies to
``equipment traveling under or near a power line on a construction site
with no load.'' In addition, in the proposed rule, the heading of Sec.
1926.1411 read: ``Power line safety--while traveling.'' In the final
rule, OSHA has added the words ``under or near power lines with no
load'' so that the heading more clearly describes the activity to which
the section applies.
These requirements apply only to cranes/derricks while traveling on
a construction site under or near power lines; they do not apply to
equipment while traveling on roads (or in areas) that are not part of a
construction site. In addition, this section does not apply to
equipment traveling on a construction site with a load. That situation
is governed by Sec. Sec. 1926.1408, 1926.1409, and 1926.1410. To make
this clear, OSHA is adding the language to paragraph (a) specifying
that Sec. Sec. 1926.1408, 1926.1409, and 1926.1410, whichever is
appropriate, govern equipment traveling on a construction site with a
load.
Paragraph (b)
Under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the boom/mast and boom/mast
support system must be lowered sufficiently to meet the requirements of
this paragraph. Paragraph (b)(2) specifies that the clearances
specified in Table T of this section must be maintained. The values in
Table T, which provides the minimum clearance distances while traveling
with no load and a lowered boom, are substantially similar to the
values used in sec. 5-3.4.5.5 of ASME B30.5-2004.
In the proposed rule, the heading of Table T read: ``MINIMUM
CLEARANCE DISTANCES WITH NO LOAD AND BOOM/MAST LOWERED.'' In addition,
each clearance distance in the table was followed by the following
parenthetical: ``(while traveling, boom lowered).'' OSHA determines
that the references to the boom in the heading and parentheticals could
be confusing. The intent of the table is to establish minimum clearance
distances while the crane is traveling, not clearance distances with
the boom lowered. As noted in the discussion of Sec. 1926.1411(b)(1),
the boom and/or mast must be lowered sufficiently to comply with Table
T; it is not a prerequisite to the applicability of Table T.
Accordingly, in the final rule, the words ``AND BOOM/MAST LOWERED'' are
deleted from the heading of Table T, and the parentheticals are also
removed from the clearance distances in the table.
Section 1926.1411(b)(3) requires the employer to ensure that the
effects of speed and terrain are considered so that those effects do
not cause the minimum clearance distances specified in Table T to be
breached. Sections 1926.1411(b)(1)-(3) are promulgated as proposed.
Section 1926.1411(b)(4) requires the employer to use a dedicated
spotter if any part of the equipment while traveling will get closer
than 20 feet to a power line. This provision also requires that the
dedicated spotter be in continuous contact with the crane operator; be
positioned to effectively gauge the clearance distance; where
necessary, use equipment that enables the spotter to communicate
directly with the crane operator; and give timely information to the
crane operator so that the required clearance distance can be
maintained. See the earlier discussion of spotters in Sec. Sec.
1926.1407 and 1926.1408.
In reviewing proposed Sec. 1926.1411(b)(4), OSHA noted that the
language ``crane operator'' was used rather than ``driver.'' Because
Sec. 1926.1411 deals with power line safety while equipment is
traveling without a load, OSHA recognized that the language ``crane
operator'' may not be appropriate in all situations. In some cases a
crane operator may not be the driver of such equipment on the
construction site. Therefore, OSHA solicited comments on whether the
language ``crane operator'' used in proposed Sec. 1926.1411(b)(4)
should be changed to ``driver'' or ``driver/operator.'' The two
commenters who addressed this issue supported changing the language to
``driver/operator.'' (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) Therefore, this change to
the regulatory text has been made in the final rule.
Section 1926.1411(b)(5) requires the employer to ensure that, when
traveling at night or in conditions of poor visibility, the power lines
must either be illuminated or another means of identifying them are
used and a safe path of travel is identified. No public comments
concerning this provision were received; therefore, it is promulgated
as proposed.
Section 1926.1412 Inspections
This section seeks to prevent injuries and fatalities caused by
equipment failures by establishing an inspection process that
identifies and addresses safety concerns. The reasoning underlying the
proposed requirements is discussed at 73 FR 59766-59776, Oct. 9, 2008.
The following addresses public comments and differences between the
proposed and final rules.
Paragraphs (a) through (j) of this section provide inspection
requirements for equipment covered by subpart CC. Those requirements
are supplemented by other sections of this standard for specific types
of equipment. This section is structured so that certain activities
(e.g., equipment modification, repair/adjustment, assembly, severe
service, or equipment not in regular use) and the passage of time
(e.g., shift, monthly, and annual/comprehensive) trigger the inspection
requirements.
The proposed rule specified that the various inspections were to be
conducted by either a ``competent person'' or a ``qualified person''
depending on the type of inspection. Both terms are defined in Sec.
1926.01. OSHA solicited public comment on whether a protocol similar to
that for signal person qualifications in Sec. 1926.28 is needed to
ensure that the person who performs these inspections has the requisite
level of expertise (73 FR 59766, Oct. 9, 2008). Section 1926.28
establishes qualification requirements for signal persons and requires
those individuals to have their qualifications evaluated by a qualified
evaluator to act as signal persons under this subpart.
Several commenters responded that there should be a verified
testing system to ensure ``qualified inspectors'' have the requisite
knowledge to inspect effectively or that the standard require
inspectors to demonstrate that ability. (ID-0182.1; -0187.1; -0226.)
Regarding paragraph (f) of this section (annual/comprehensive
inspections of equipment) and Sec. 1926.1413(c) (annual wire rope
inspections), a local government further recommended that OSHA require
that a government agency or a third party crane inspector licensed or
certified by the local government perform the annual inspection. (ID-
0156.1.) The commenter also believed that the individual who inspects
an equipment modification in accordance with paragraph (a) of this
section must possess a certification from the manufacturer or an
independent third party and have the requisite training to inspect
modified, repaired, or altered crane components.
In contrast, a utility company and two trade associations did not
support revising the final rule to include a more stringent inspector
qualification requirement. (ID-0226; -0205.1; -0213.) The two trade
associations expressed concerns that the Committee never discussed the
required level of knowledge of inspection workers, which, in the
commenter's view, means that consensus was not reached on the issue and
that the issue should not be included in the final rule.
[[Page 47968]]
In response to these comments, OSHA is retaining the qualification
requirements for inspectors as specified in the proposed rule but is
not mandating that the inspector be assessed by a qualified evaluator,
certified, or licensed because there is not sufficient evidence in the
record to warrant these additional requirements. A number of current
OSHA construction standards, as did former Sec. 1926.550, require
inspections to be conducted by competent persons or qualified persons.
For example, Sec. 1926.651(k) requires that a competent person conduct
a daily inspection of excavations for possible cave-in hazards. OSHA is
not aware of evidence in the record indicating that accidents would be
prevented if OSHA required inspectors to have additional qualifications
or credentials. OSHA disagrees, and concludes that accidents do not
occur due to the inability of competent or qualified persons to conduct
adequate inspections of cranes under the former standard. Accordingly,
OSHA is retaining the requirement in Sec. 1926.1412 that the various
required inspections be conducted either by competent persons or
qualified persons.
The local government's request that OSHA not preempt local laws and
allow local governments to continue to play a role in crane inspections
is within the scope of the local government's broader preemption
concerns addressed in the discussion of federalism in section V.D of
this preamble. However, OSHA notes that Sec. 1926.1412 would not
preclude local government inspectors or others who are not employees of
the employer responsible for the inspections, from serving as
inspectors in compliance with the requirements of this standard. The
inspector need only meet the definition of a competent or qualified
person in Sec. 1926.1401 (note that a ``competent person'' must have
the authority to take corrective action.)
Paragraph (a) Modified Equipment
Paragraph (a) of this section requires an inspection (that includes
functional testing of the equipment) to be performed by a qualified
person for equipment that has been modified or has additions that
affect the safe operation of the equipment prior to initial use after
that modification/addition.\71\ As proposed, this paragraph did not
contain a documentation requirement. An industrial contractor stated
that the standard should require documentation of this inspection (as
well as the inspections required under paragraphs (b) and (c) of this
section, discussed below) but offered no reasons to support its
suggestion. (ID-0120.) Absent a basis in the record to add such a
requirement, OSHA declines to require documentation of the inspections
under paragraphs (a), (b), and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ The phrase ``modifications or additions'' and the term
``modifications/additions,'' as used in this section, have the same
meaning (an addition is a type of modification). C-DAC wanted to
emphasize that additions are subject to the same approval procedures
as other types of modifications. Wherever a form of the word
``modification'' is used in this preamble, it is a reference to all
modifications, including additions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Sec. 1926.1412(a)(1)(ii) stated that ``[t]he inspection
shall include functional testing.'' OSHA requested public comment on
whether it should modify the provision to limit the functional testing
requirement to components that the modification affects or may affect
(73 FR 59766-59767, Oct. 9, 2008). Several commenters asserted that
functional testing is only necessary to test modifications of the
equipment and other affected components. (ID-0205; -0213.) In contrast,
a local government asserted that the functional testing should be of
the entire crane. (ID-0156.1.)
OSHA is concerned that there may be instances where a modification
has an unanticipated effect on the equipment that would not become
apparent if the test were limited. Therefore, the Agency has decided to
require a functional test of the equipment as a whole. To make this
clear, the words ``of the equipment'' have been added at the end of the
sentence of the provision in the final rule.
During the SBREFA process, a Small Entity Representative (SER)
suggested adding an exception to Sec. 1926.1412(a) for
``transportation systems,'' by which the SER meant any system
dispersing the weight of the crane for movement on a highway. As
recommended by the Panel, OSHA solicited public comment on whether to
include such an exception and possible language for it (73 FR 59767,
Oct. 9, 2008). No comments were submitted on this point. OSHA notes
that Sec. 1926.1412 specifies the items that must be inspected, and
these items do not include any items dealing with the movement of
equipment on a highway.
Paragraph (b) Repaired/Adjusted Equipment
Paragraph (b) of this section provides that equipment that has had
a repair or adjustment that affects the safe operation of the equipment
must be inspected by a qualified person prior to initial use after the
repair/adjustment. In summary, the qualified person is required to
determine if such repairs and adjustments were performed in accordance
with manufacturer equipment criteria.
Proposed Sec. 1926.1412(b)(1)(iii) stated that ``[t]he inspection
shall include functional testing.'' As in the case of proposed Sec.
1926.1412(a)(1)(ii) discussed above regarding modified equipment, OSHA
requested public comment on whether the functional testing required for
repaired/adjusted equipment should be limited to testing only those
components that are or may be affected by the repair or adjustment (73
FR 59767, Oct. 9, 2008).
Several commenters asserted that functional testing is only
necessary to test the repairs or adjustments and other affected
components and systems of the equipment. (ID-0205; -0213.) In contrast,
one commenter indicated that the functional testing should be of the
entire crane. (ID-0156.)
The standard requires that repairs or adjustments of equipment must
be done in accordance with the manufacturer's or qualified person's
recommendations. Repairs or adjustments are meant to restore equipment
to original design specifications and safety factors. Otherwise, OSHA
considers the maintenance activity performed a modification of the
equipment. In essence, repair or adjustment of a system or component
must be consistent with the engineering in the original equipment
design. OSHA believes that a functional test that is limited to only
those components that are or may be affected by the repair or
adjustment, in conjunction with the inspection required under Sec.
1926.1412(d). Each shift (discussed below), will sufficiently identify
a deficient repair or adjustment. OSHA has therefore modified the
language of Sec. 1926.1412(b)(1)(iii) in the final rule accordingly.
A commenter stated that Sec. 1926.1412(b) should be structured
similarly to Sec. 1926.1434, Modifications, in that the employer
should be required to consult with the manufacturer before employers
perform repairs or adjustments of equipment that relate to safe
operation. (ID-0292.) In that case, the commenter stated, no third
party would be able to overrule a manufacturer statement that a repair
cannot be made. The commenter believed that an employer should only be
able to go to paragraph (b)(1)(ii) if the manufacturer is unavailable.
OSHA does not agree with the suggested change. Implicit in the
comment is the suggestion that there are instances where a repair
cannot be made without compromising the integrity of the equipment.
That concern is already addressed by the standard. If the repair
[[Page 47969]]
cannot meet the criteria in accordance with Sec. 1926.1412(b)(1)(i)
(or, if applicable, Sec. 1926.1412(b)(1)(i)), then the requirements in
subpart CC for modifications would have to be met. Therefore, OSHA
declines to adopt the suggested change.
Paragraph (c) Post-Assembly
Paragraph (c) of this section requires a post-assembly inspection
of equipment by a qualified person prior to its use. In sum, the
provision requires the qualified person to assure that the equipment is
configured in accordance with the manufacturer's equipment criteria. If
manufacturer equipment criteria are unavailable, the qualified person
must determine whether a registered professional engineer (RPE) is
needed to develop criteria for the equipment configuration. If an RPE
is not needed, the employer must ensure that a qualified person
develops them. If an RPE is needed, the employer must ensure that an
RPE develops them. Equipment must not be used until an inspection under
this paragraph demonstrates that the equipment is configured in
accordance with the applicable criteria. OSHA received no comments on
the proposed paragraph; therefore, it is published as proposed.
Paragraph (d) Each Shift
Paragraph (d) of this section requires a shift inspection, the
first of three regularly scheduled equipment inspections that are
required. Specifically, paragraph (d)(1) sets forth the frequency of
this inspection, the degree of scrutiny required and the level of
expertise required of the person performing this inspection. The
paragraph lists the items that are required to be included in this
inspection and specifies the corrective action that is required. The
purpose of this provision is to identify and address safety hazards
before they cause accidents.
A utility company recommended that OSHA revise Sec. 1926.1412(d)
to read ``each shift the equipment is used * * * .'' to clarify that
the equipment does not have to be inspected when it will not be used on
a shift. (ID-0226.) This suggested change is consistent with the intent
of the proposed rule, and OSHA is adding similar language to final rule
Sec. 1926.1412(d)(1) to clarify that intent.
One commenter asserted that OSHA should prohibit operation of the
equipment until the shift inspection is complete rather than permitting
the inspection to be completed during the shift. (ID-0156.1.) A
different commenter disagreed. (ID-0143.) OSHA does not agree with this
suggestion. While some of the items that must be inspected can readily
be inspected before each shift, e.g., cab windows for deficiencies that
would hinder the operator's view, others can best be checked while the
equipment is operating. For example, one item that must be inspected is
control mechanisms for maladjustments that interfere with proper
operation. During the shift, such maladjustments may be easier to
detect than a check conducted before the equipment is operating. Still
others may change during the shift and require additional inspection.
For example, if the crane is moved to a new location during the shift,
it would be necessary to inspect the ground conditions in that
location.
Regarding the frequency of this inspection, an energy utility
representative commented that the per-shift crane inspection fails to
take into account the frequency or severity of use. (ID-0203.1.) The
commenter points out that if a crane is used once during the first
shift, and once during the second shift, even if only to lift a minor
load, the inspection would have to be conducted twice. The commenter
agrees that the per shift inspection may be valuable and necessary on
constructions sites where cranes are used continuously for heavy use,
but states that the level of inspection should be adjusted to reflect
the infrequent use of mobile cranes for construction activities at
operating generating plants. The commenter suggests that the final
standard should permit employers to use the inspection protocol in ASME
B30.5, sec. 5-2.
OSHA does not agree that minimal use during one shift negates the
need for a shift inspection during the next shift. Since the completion
of the last shift inspection, the equipment could have developed a
deficiency or been damaged even if it was used to hoist one load. For
example, fluids may expand or freeze, seals may leak due to a change in
temperature, structural materials may crack, or electrical components
may fail. A deficiency that might not have been apparent earlier might
become more readily observable.
Moreover, while some equipment may be used infrequently for
construction work, the commenter did not disagree that it may be used
heavily for other purposes. When a crack, leak, or other hazard
appears, and the equipment is to be used in construction, the source of
that hazard is immaterial; the fact that the problem may have developed
during non-construction uses does nothing to reduce the safety hazard
that would be posed by the use of that equipment in construction.
Instead, the multiple uses of some of this equipment, potentially by
different employees using it for different purposes, makes it all the
more likely that important information might not be shared in a timely
manner, and therefore more important to ensure that the equipment is
inspected during each shift of construction work. An employer cannot
assume that the condition of the equipment has not changed since the
completion of the last shift inspection, even if the employer did not
use the equipment extensively during that shift. OSHA is convinced that
it is reasonable, and not overly burdensome, to require a competent
person to complete this inspection of the equipment before or during
each shift to ensure it is safe for use.
A competent person is required to perform the shift inspection. A
labor management association commented that OSHA should replace
``competent person'' with ``operator'' for the purposes of who should
perform the visual inspection required by Sec. 1926.1412(d). (ID-
0172.) As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, OSHA
anticipates that the employer will often use the equipment operator as
the competent person who conducts the shift inspection. The operator,
in most cases, by virtue of his or her qualification or certification
under Sec. Sec. 1926.1427 and 1926.1430, experience, and familiarity
with the equipment, is a competent person. However, the employer has
the flexibility to use someone else to conduct the shift inspection as
long as that person is a competent person. When the operator does not
qualify as a competent person, the employer is required to choose a
different person. For these reasons, in the final rule, OSHA is
retaining the requirement that a competent person conduct the shift
inspection.
A local government requested that the standard require the employer
to document the completion and results of the shift inspection. (ID-
0156.1.) In addition, it asked that the standard require employers to
submit daily logs to the equipment owner at the end of each job that
include a list of maintenance and repairs made to the equipment by the
user at the jobsite. It also requested that the owner maintain these
documents for the life of the equipment and transfer them from owner to
owner when sold.
OSHA determines the documentation described by the commenter would
be burdensome for the user and owner of the equipment, with no added,
industry-recognized, benefit to safe hoisting operations. There is no
significant, safety-related evidence in the record to substantiate the
documentation
[[Page 47970]]
requirements the commenter recommended. Therefore, OSHA is not
requiring documentation of the shift inspection.
The SBREFA Panel recommended that OSHA solicit public comment on
whether, and under what circumstances, booming down should be
specifically excluded as a part of the shift inspection, and whether
the removal of non-hinged inspection plates should be required during
the shift inspection. Section 1926.1413(a)(1), discussed below,
explicitly states that booming down is not required as part of the
shift inspection for wire rope. C-DAC did not include a similar
provision in the general shift inspection provision in Sec.
1926.1412(d) because booming down is not required to observe a
deficiency in any of the items requiring inspection under that
paragraph. Similarly, OSHA determines that inspection for a deficiency
in any of those items does not require the removal of non-hinged
inspection plates.
Several commenters submitted comments that indicated a need for
OSHA to clarify that it is not usually necessary to boom down to
complete a visual inspection of the items listed in Sec. 1926.1412(d).
(ID-0143.1; -0205; -0213.) In response to the apparent ambiguity
suggested indicated by these comments, OSHA is revising Sec.
1926.1412(d)(1), to clarify that booming down is not required
routinely. The term ``disassembly'' was replaced with ``taking apart
equipment component'' in paragraph (d)(1) of this section to avoid any
confusion as to whether the provision was addressing disassembly as
defined for the application of Sec. Sec. 1926.1403 through 1926.1406.
Paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (xiv) set forth the list of items
that, at a minimum, a competent person must inspect each shift.
Paragraph (d)(1)(x) of the proposed rule listed ``[g]round conditions
around the equipment for proper support, including ground settling
under and around outriggers and supporting foundations, ground water
accumulation, or similar conditions.''
A railroad association objected to the application of this
provision to railroads. (ID-0170.1.) The association commented that the
Sec. 1926.1412(d)(1)(x) requirement that an inspector verify the
ground conditions around the equipment before each shift makes no sense
for a crane moving down the track. OSHA notes that this provision does
not require a railroad to inspect the ground conditions along the track
if a railroad crane is simply traveling down the track. Section
1926.1402, which contains requirements for ground conditions, makes
clear that the conditions being addressed are those where the equipment
is operating. To the extent that a railroad crane may move down the
track during a construction operation, OSHA determines it is
appropriate to require the ground conditions along the track to be
inspected to ensure that no hazardous conditions, such as the erosion
or other physical degradations of the support for railways, have
developed that will adversely affect the support needed for equipment
to perform safely during hoisting operations. However, OSHA is adding
language to exempt railroad tracks and their underlying support from
inspection when those rails are regulated by the FRA. OSHA concludes
that the exemption is appropriate because the FRA already regulates the
ground conditions for railroad tracks, including specific regulations
addressing the inspection of those rails and their support. See, e.g.,
49 CFR 213.233 (track inspections) and 213.237 (inspection of rail).
For consistency and clarity, OSHA is adding similar language exempting
rails regulated by the FRA to paragraph (d)(1)(xiii).
A crane rental company objected to the requirement to inspect
ground conditions, stating that there is no similar provision for
inspecting ground conditions in the elements of inspections required by
ASME B30.5 sec. 5-2.1.2. (ID-0143.1.) It also believes listing this
requirement in the elements for shift inspections is confusing and
suggests that this requirement should either be removed or included in
Sec. 1926.1402, Ground Conditions. As stated in the explanation of the
proposed rule, this item was included because ground conditions can
change from shift to shift, and sufficient ground support is of
critical importance for safety. OSHA is retaining it in this section
because it is more appropriately included in the list of items to be
inspected than as a stand-alone inspection item in Sec. 1926.1402.
In paragraph (d)(1)(x) in the final rule, OSHA is replacing the
word ``outriggers'' with ``outriggers/stabilizers.'' The term
``stabilizers'' was added because some pieces of equipment, like
articulating cranes, are designed to use stabilizers instead of
outriggers to add stability at their bases. A full discussion of the
comments that prompted this regulatory text change is provided in the
explanation of the rule for Sec. 1926.1404(q).
Proposed Sec. 1926.1412(d)(1)(xi) included among the items to be
inspected ``the equipment for level position, both shift and after each
move and setup.'' The SBREFA Panel recommended that OSHA solicit public
comment about whether it is necessary to clarify the requirement of
proposed Sec. 1926.1412(d)(1)(xi) that the equipment be inspected for
``level position'' by clarifying the amount of tolerance that would be
allowed for the equipment to be considered ``level.'' OSHA requested
public comment on this issue and several commenters asked OSHA not to
specify tolerance limits. (ID-0143.1; -0170; -0205; -0213; -0226.) OSHA
notes that Sec. 1926.1402(b), which pertains to ground conditions,
requires the equipment, during use, to be level to the degree specified
by the equipment manufacturer. For clarity, OSHA is adding language to
Sec. 1926.1412(d)(1)(xi) to state that the equipment must be inspected
for level position ``within the tolerances specified by the equipment
manufacturer's recommendations.'' OSHA is also adding the words
``before each'' before shift to clarify the provisions intent.
Paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3) require the employer to take
corrective action where the competent person identifies a deficiency
during inspection. Once the inspector identifies any deficiency in the
areas in (d)(1)(i) through (xiii),\72\ or pursuant to other equipment-
specific inspections (e.g., Sec. 1926.1436(p) (inspection of
derricks)), the inspector must immediately determine whether that
deficiency constitutes a safety hazard. If so, then equipment
operations must cease and the employer must take the equipment out of
service, following the tag-out procedure in Sec. 1926.1417(f), and may
not use it again until the deficiency has been corrected. This approach
reflects C-DAC's determination that not all deficiencies constitute
safety hazards. However, regardless of whether the inspector determines
that there is a safety hazard, if any deficiency affects a safety
device or operational aid, then the employer must take the steps
required under Sec. Sec. 1926.1415, Safety Devices, or 1926.1416,
Operational aids.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ Proposed Sec. 1926.1412(d)(2) inadvertently referred to
deficiencies in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (xiv), but the preamble
to the proposed rule explained correctly that it only applied to
deficiencies in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (xiii) (not (xiv)) (73
FR 59770, Oct. 9, 2008). The text of paragraph (xiv) addresses
operational aides and safety devices, which are specifically
addressed in paragraph (d)(3). Therefore, in the final paragraph
(d)(2), OSHA refer to deficiencies in ``paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through
(xiii).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA is requiring the procedures in paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3) to
ensure that the employer stops using unsafe equipment as soon as the
safety hazard is identified. The correction procedure
[[Page 47971]]
set forth in paragraph (d)(2) is similar to that in ANSI B30.5-1968 and
ASME B30.5-2004 for their Frequent Inspections. OSHA is requiring a
competent person to make the determination to ensure that his or her
findings are implemented; i.e., the competent person would have the
authority to order the equipment out of service if the deficiency
constituted a hazard. In the final rule, OSHA has replaced the phrase
``removed from service'' with ``taken out of service,'' which is the
phrase used in Sec. 1926.1417(f), to avoid any ambiguity about the
employer's duty to tag out the unsafe equipment.
Paragraph (e) Monthly
Paragraph (e) of this section requires a monthly inspection of the
equipment, the second of the three regularly scheduled general
inspections that are required by this standard. The monthly inspection
is identical in coverage and manner to the shift inspection required by
Sec. 1926.1412(d), with one addition discussed below. Thus, the
monthly inspection is a visual inspection of the items listed in the
shift inspection for apparent deficiencies, conducted by a competent
person. However, unlike a shift inspection, the employer must document
the inspection and retain the documentation for a minimum of three
months.
In addition, under the annual/comprehensive inspection in Sec.
1926.1412(f)(4), the employer is required to identify developing
deficiencies that, while not yet safety hazards, need to be monitored.
In such cases the employer, under Sec. Sec. 1926.1412(f)(4) and
(f)(6), is required to monitor them in the monthly inspections.
One commenter suggested adding text to the final rule to clarify
how the monitoring information would be transferred from annual
inspector to monthly inspector, if different. (ID-0226.) The Agency is
not modifying the text of the rule as requested, but notes that under
paragraph (f)(7)(i) of this section the inspector must document all
``items checked and the results of the inspection.'' Therefore, if the
inspector determines that further monitoring is required, that
information would be a ``result of the inspection'' included in the
annual report. The inspector would then be responsible for checking the
annual report prior to monthly inspections (see Sec. 1926.1412(f)(6).)
An industrial contractor commented that OSHA should require
employers to keep monthly inspection documentation for a minimum of
three months or the duration of the project, whichever is longer. (ID-
0120.) This commenter did not, however, describe how expanding the
retention requirement would produce any significant benefit, and OSHA
determines there would be no benefit. The documentation requirement
enables the individuals who use the equipment and conduct shift and
monthly inspections to assess the results of earlier monthly
inspections. Once more than three months have passed since a monthly
inspection, the information in the documentation for that inspection
will not reflect the current condition of the equipment.
The SBREFA Panel recommended that OSHA solicit public comment on
whether the provision for monthly inspections should, like that for
annual inspections, specify who must keep the documentation associated
with monthly inspections. (The provision for annual inspections states
that the documentation must be ``maintained by the employer who
conducts the inspection.'') OSHA requested public comment on the issue
raised by the Panel's recommendation. Several commenters believed that
OSHA should require the employer who conducts the monthly inspection to
maintain the documentation. (ID-0205; -0213; -0214; -0226.)
OSHA agrees that the employer who conducts the monthly inspection
should maintain the documentation. This revision clarifies the intent
of C-DAC and is consistent with other provisions in this section.
A utility company commented that if the operating employer is not
the inspecting employer, the operating employer should be provided with
a copy of the inspection if requested. (ID-0226.) This comment suggests
that some employers who operate rented equipment are concerned that the
required documentation may not be available to them from other parties
unless explicitly required in the regulatory text of this final rule.
In some cases, one employer owns and operates the equipment used to
perform construction activities. It is reasonable to require these
employers to maintain the equipment inspection records. However, during
the analysis of public comments and testimony, OSHA recognized that
there would be situations where an employer rents or uses equipment
owned by another party or where multiple employers use the same piece
of equipment. The standard allows any employer to conduct the monthly
inspection. The employer who conducts the inspection must document the
items checked and the results of the inspection and must retain it for
a minimum of three months. If employers whose employees use the
equipment rely on another employer to conduct, document, and maintain
the record of the monthly inspection, it is the responsibility of each
employer engaged in construction activities to assure compliance with
the standard.
OSHA determines that it is in the interest of all employers who
conduct monthly inspections, whether they use or own equipment, to
share the inspection results with each employer who uses the equipment.
However, employers engaged in construction activities are responsible
for assuring compliance with the standard. Therefore, if an employer
engaged in construction activities is unable to assure that another
employer has conducted the monthly inspection, then the employer
engaged in construction activities must conduct a monthly inspection
prior to using the equipment. The monthly inspection is similar to a
shift inspection (with the addition of the monitoring of deficiencies
that a qualified person deemed not to be a safety hazard in the annual
inspection), but, unlike a shift inspection, the monthly inspection
must be documented and maintained. Requiring an employer who uses the
equipment to conduct a monthly inspection when that employer is unable
to determine whether another employer conducted a monthly inspection is
an insignificant burden compared to the safety benefit of ensuring this
inspection is completed.
The SBREFA Panel also recommended that OSHA restate the corrective
action provisions from the shift inspection (Sec. 1926.1412(d)(2) and
(3)) in paragraph (e) of this section. Under Sec. 1926.1412(e)(1), the
monthly inspection must be conducted in accordance with Sec.
1926.1412(d) on shift inspections, meaning that the corrective action
provisions in Sec. 1926.1412(d)(2) and (3) must also be followed in
the monthly inspections. OSHA requested comment on whether the language
in Sec. 1926.1412(d)(2) and (3) should be repeated under Sec.
1926.1412(e). Two trade associations believed that clarity would be
improved if paragraph (e) of this subpart repeated the corrective
actions provisions from the shift inspection paragraph. (ID-0205; -
0213.) OSHA disagrees because Sec. 1926.1412(e)(1) explicitly requires
this inspection to be done in accordance with Sec. 1926.1412(d).
Paragraph (d) immediately precedes paragraph (e), and OSHA concludes
that repeating the provisions will create, rather than alleviate,
confusion by requiring employers to read two lists that contain
identical information.
[[Page 47972]]
Paragraph (f) Annual/Comprehensive
Paragraph (f) of this section requires an annual (i.e., once every
twelve months), general inspection of the equipment, the third of the
three regularly scheduled general inspections that are required by this
standard. It promotes safety by ensuring that a thorough, comprehensive
inspection of the equipment is performed to detect and address
deficiencies that might not be detected in the shift and monthly
inspections.
Under paragraph (f)(1), a qualified person must inspect the
equipment. The Committee specified a qualified person because the items
required in the shift inspection must be examined more thoroughly than
during the shift or monthly inspections. The Committee, determined, and
OSHA agrees, that the higher level of expertise of a qualified person
would help to ensure that the inspector was able to identify
deficiencies necessitating a greater degree of scrutiny than what would
be required in the shift inspection; for example, a deficiency that is
not apparent in a visual inspection but is detectable through taking
apart equipment components. The Committee's decision to require a
qualified person is consistent with COE-EM 385-1-1 (3 Nov 03) and ASME
B30.5-2004, both of which call for a qualified person to perform those
standards' ``periodic'' inspections.
OSHA notes that Sec. 1926.1412(f) does not specify the level of
scrutiny for the annual/comprehensive inspection. In drafting the
proposed rule, OHSA determined that C-DAC intended for this inspection
to be more thorough than the visual inspection for apparent
deficiencies required of the shift and monthly inspections. OSHA
therefore solicited comments from the public as to whether language
specifying a higher level of scrutiny (for example, ``thorough,
including disassembly when necessary'') should be added.
A railroad equipment supplier commented that this section does not
additionally burden employers if it requires them to open covers to
inspect for safety defects that could cause an incident or death. (ID-
0124.) Therefore, they were in support of adding stronger language to
paragraph (f) of this section to emphasize some disassembly is
necessary to complete a thorough inspection of the equipment. In
contrast, two trade associations believed that no additional language
was need in the regulatory text to specify that a higher level of
scrutiny is needed during an annual inspection. (ID-0205.1; -0213.)
OSHA determines that some disassembly of the equipment will be
needed for the qualified person to complete the inspection. Therefore,
OSHA has revised Sec. 1926.1412(f)(2) accordingly.
The proposed rule did not require the individual who conducts the
annual inspection to review any documentation related to the crane
prior to or during the inspection. A labor representative suggested two
types of documentation they believe the qualified person should review
when conducting an annual inspection. (ID-0182.1.) First, the commenter
wanted OSHA to include a requirement in paragraph (f) of this section
that the inspector contact the manufacturer for any relevant
information the manufacturer may have about the equipment. The
commenter explains that the manufacturer may have information about
recently discovered defects or deficiencies in the equipment or have
recommended modification, which inspectors should take into account
when performing the annual inspection.
Second, the commenter recommended that OSHA require the inspector
to review all available information regarding the history of the piece
of equipment. This information would include annual or periodic
inspection reports, which would describe previously discovered defects
or previously made modifications, to which the inspector should pay
particular attention while conducting a comprehensive inspection. OSHA
declines to impose the requirements suggested by the commenter because
the Agency does not agree they would lead to better inspections. The
annual inspection requirements are designed to ensure that the
inspector thoroughly scrutinizes and evaluates the current condition of
critical components of the equipment. Reviewing the maintenance history
of the equipment will not further the value of this inspection, for
defects previously discovered should have been repaired and defects not
present in the past may now exist. For example, if a part such as a
ball bearing is replaced with a new part, there is no reason to expect
that the bearing will fail. To the contrary, the brand new part is less
likely to fail than another ball bearing that has been subjected to
heavy use for years. OSHA determines that the inspection will be more
valuable if the inspector concentrates on thoroughly inspecting the
items listed in the rule to determine whether they currently present
any safety defects. Similarly, OSHA is not convinced that contacting
the manufacturer will yield valuable information that will advance the
annual inspection. OSHA determines that important safety information
about their products is provided voluntarily by manufacturers to their
customers and that a requirement to contact them each year is not
likely to yield any further information of value.
Paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through (xxi) specify the parts of the
equipment and the conditions the inspector must look for during the
annual inspection. The Committee developed this list based on the
members' experience and current industry practice as reflected in
current consensus standards for annual/periodic inspections. The
Committee concluded that each item plays an important role in the safe
operation of equipment. Only a few of these items require discussion.
Proposed paragraph (f)(2)(xiv) listed ``[o]utrigger pads/floats''
for excessive wear or cracks.'' The purpose of the inspection of
outrigger pads/floats is to make certain that these pads (which are
attached to the outrigger and used to distribute the weight of the load
to the ground) will not fail and leave the outrigger without proper
support. In the final rule, OSHA is referring to ``outrigger or
stabilizer pads/floats'' because some types of equipment, such as
articulating cranes, are designed to use stabilizers instead of
outriggers to add stability at their bases. A full discussion of the
comments that prompted this regulatory text change is provided in the
explanation of the rule for Sec. 1926.1404(q).
Proposed paragraph (f)(2)(xv) listed ``slider pads for excessive
wear or cracks.'' The word ``cracks'' had not been included in the C-
DAC Consensus Document for this item, and two trade associations (ID-
0205.1; -0213.1) commented that ``cracks'' should be removed from the
provision to be consistent with the intent of C-DAC. After examining
how the word came to be included in the proposed rule, OSHA concludes
that the word ``cracks'' was added inadvertently to this provision and,
lacking an evidentiary basis to include it, is removing the words ``or
cracks'' from paragraph (f)(2)(xv) in the final rule.
Section 1926.1412(f)(2)(xviii) has been modified from the proposed
rule. Upon review of this requirement, the Agency found that it was
necessary to clarify this requirement to allow the use of a seat that
is equivalent to the original operator's seat. This provision requires
the employer to replace the original seat with one that provides
function and safety that is equivalent to the original seat. The text
of the final rule has been modified accordingly.
In Sec. 1926.1412(f)(2)(xix) the term ``unserviceable'' is
replacing the term
[[Page 47973]]
``unusable'' to clarify that the operator's seat must be in good
working condition to allow the operator to safely work at the controls
of the equipment. The text of the final rule has been modified
accordingly.
Paragraph (f)(3) requires functional testing as part of the annual/
comprehensive inspection. No comments were received on this provision.
Paragraphs (f)(4) through (6) delineate the follow-up procedures
that apply when a deficiency is identified during the annual/
comprehensive inspection. The purpose of these provisions is to ensure
that a deficiency that is not yet a safety hazard but may develop into
one is monitored on a monthly basis, and that a deficiency that is a
safety hazard is corrected before the equipment is returned to service.
Paragraph (f)(4) provides that immediately following the
identification of a deficiency, the qualified person must determine
``whether the deficiency constitutes a safety hazard, or though not yet
a safety hazard, needs to be monitored in the monthly inspections.'' No
comments were received and paragraph (f)(4) is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (f)(5) requires that equipment with a deficiency
identified as a safety hazard by the qualified person be removed from
service until the deficiency is corrected. Paragraph (f)(6) requires
the employer to check the deficiencies in the monthly inspections that
the qualified person had identified as needing monitoring.
In the proposed rule, OSHA discussed an apparent conflict between
Sec. 1926.1412(f)(4) and Sec. 1926.1416. Paragraph (f)(2)(v) lists
operational aids among the items that must be included in the annual
inspection.\73\ Section 1926.1416 permits equipment with operational
aids that are not functioning properly to continue to be used for
limited periods of time as long as specified alternative measures are
used while the operational aids are being repaired. By contrast, under
Sec. 1926.1412(f)(4), if any deficiency is identified in the annual
inspection, the qualified person must make an immediate determination
as to whether the deficiency constitutes a safety hazard. If it does,
under Sec. 1926.1412(f)(4), the equipment must be removed from service
immediately. OSHA requested public comment on whether Sec.
1926.1412(f)(4) should explicitly provide that the corrective action in
Sec. 1926.1416 applies if an operational aid is found to be
malfunctioning during an annual inspection. Two trade associations
agreed that Sec. 1926.1412(f) should state that the corrective action
required for malfunctioning operational aids is that specified in Sec.
1926.1416. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) OSHA also notes that Sec.
1926.1435(e) specifies the temporary alternative measures that must be
implemented when operational aids on tower cranes malfunction, and
Sec. 1926.1412(f)(5) applies to tower cranes as well as equipment
covered by Sec. 1926.1416. Paragraph (f)(5) of the final rule is
modified accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ Paragraph (f)(2)(v), as proposed and in the final rule,
distinguishes between deficiencies that result in ``significant
inaccuracies'' in the operation of any of the safety devices or
operational aides, and those that do not. The phrase ``significant
inaccuracies'' reflects the fact that such devices normally operate
within a tolerance range. Corrective actions are not required if the
inaccuracy is so small as to be irrelevant regarding the safe
operation of the equipment. In contrast, significant inaccuracies in
these devices could mislead the operator and contribute to actions
that could result in the equipment being inadvertently used in an
unsafe manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, OSHA is adding text to paragraph (f)(1) of this section
to emphasize that paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3) of this section do not
apply to annual inspections.
Paragraph (f)(7), Documentation of annual/comprehensive inspection,
requires the employer that conducts the inspection to complete and
maintain, for a minimum of twelve months, documentation that contains
``[t]he items checked and the results of the inspection,'' and ``[t]he
name and signature of the person who conducted the inspection and the
date of the inspection.'' Section 1926.1413(c)(4), which pertains to
the annual/comprehensive wire rope inspection, contains a similar
documentation requirement. In the proposed rule, the 12-month retention
requirement was located in paragraph (f)(7)(iii). OSHA has incorporated
that requirement into the introductory sentence to clarify that it is
the employer who conducts the inspection who must retain the documents
for 12 months. OSHA has also clarified that the date of the inspection,
not the date on which the document was signed, must be entered on the
document.
During the SBREFA process, several Small Entity Representatives
objected to the requirement for documentation of monthly and annual
inspections, stating that such documentation would be unduly burdensome
and would not, in their opinions, add to worker safety. The Panel
recommended that OSHA solicit public comment on the extent of
inspection documentation the rule should require. OSHA requested
comment on this issue.
A local government supported annual/comprehensive inspection
documentation. (ID-0156.) It also commented that daily logs should be
maintained and submitted to the crane owner to capture when maintenance
has been performed on the equipment, and maintained by the equipment
owner for the life of the crane. This commenter did not, however,
explain how such a retention requirement would produce safety benefits,
and OSHA declines to adopt it.
The Committee determined that the documentation of the annual
inspection, signed by the person who conducted the inspection and
retained for 12 months, would have several effects. First, it would
increase the likelihood that more employers would implement systems for
conducting and responding to inspections. Second, the failure to do so
would be more readily apparent if a record was not made, and the
signature of the person who conducted the inspection would be an
inducement to that person to ensure that the inspection was done
correctly.
The Agency notes that the three month retention period reflects the
Committee's decision to have a retention period that is consistent with
Department of Transportation truck inspection documentation
requirements.
The documentation of these inspections serves as references that
inspectors can use to monitor the condition of items critical to the
safe operation of the equipment. It has been a longstanding industry
practice to maintain annual inspection documentation as a reference
that the inspection was completed, to identify who performed the
inspections, and to document the results of that inspection.
Paragraph (g) Severe Service
Paragraph (g) of this section requires the employer to inspect the
equipment when the severity of use/conditions--``such as loading that
may have exceeded rated capacity, shock loading that may have exceeded
rated capacity, [or] prolonged exposure to a corrosive atmosphere''--
creates a ``reasonable probability of damage or excessive wear.'' In
such instances, the employer is required to stop using the equipment
and have a qualified person ``inspect the equipment for structural
damage;'' determine whether, in light of the use/conditions of the
severe service, any items listed in the annual/comprehensive inspection
need to be inspected and if so, inspect them; and if a deficiency is
found, follow the correction/monitoring procedures set forth in Sec.
1926.1412(f)(4)-(f)(6).
Upon review of this paragraph, the Agency determines that
[[Page 47974]]
Sec. 1926.1412(g)(1) needs clarification; therefore, OSHA added a
phrase to the provision requiring that a determination be made to
ensure the equipment remains safe for continued use. This revision
emphasizes that this inspection must determine the capability of the
equipment to operate continuously under severe conditions. No comments
were received on this paragraph, and it is promulgated as proposed,
with the exception of the clarification to Sec. 1926.1412(g)(1).
Paragraph (h) Equipment Not in Regular Use
Paragraph (h) of this section requires that equipment that sits
idle for three months or more be inspected by a qualified person in
accordance with the monthly inspection provisions of Sec. 1926.1412(e)
before being used. This would ensure that deficiencies that may arise
as a result of the equipment standing idle are checked before its
subsequent use. The Committee determined that this inspection would
need to be done by a qualified person, rather than a competent person,
because some of the deficiencies that may arise from sitting idle
require the qualified person's higher level of ability to detect and
assess. (See further discussion at 73 FR 59775, Oct. 9, 2008.) No
comments were received on this paragraph. It is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (i) [Reserved]
Paragraph (j)
Proposed paragraph (j) of this section required that any part of a
manufacturer's inspection procedures relating to safe operation that is
more comprehensive or has a more frequent schedule than that required
by this section must be followed. These inspection procedures include
any information provided by the manufacturer. Examples are provided in
the provision of the types of items that would be considered to relate
to safe operation (``a safety device or operator aid, critical part of
a control system, power plant, braking system, load-sustaining
structural components, load hook, or in-use operating mechanism''). The
proposed paragraph goes on to state: ``Additional documentation
requirements by the manufacturer are not required.''
Several commenters asked that OSHA delete the line in the
regulatory text of Sec. 1926.1412(j) that reads ``Additional
manufacturer documentation requirements need not be followed.'' (ID-
0165; -0232; -0235.) OSHA acknowledges that the intent of this sentence
is unclear and is not including it in the final rule.
A safety association and a trade association commented that the
thorough and equipment-specific frequency of inspections required by
the manufacturer are well suited for the equipment used in their
trades. (ID-0184; -0206.) The safety association asserted that
compliance with equipment manufacturers' inspection recommendations
assure a greater degree of safety than compliance with a list of shift,
monthly, and annual inspections, which may be deficient with regard to
thoroughness and frequency. The two commenters asked that OSHA revise
Sec. 1926.1412 to allow employer-documented compliance with the
inspection recommendations of the equipment manufacturer as an
alternative to meeting the requirements of Sec. 1926.1412.
OSHA agrees with the commenters that manufacturer's equipment-
specific inspection requirements can help promote safety. For this
reason, Sec. 1926.1412(j) provides that any additional inspection
requirements recommended by the manufacturer must be followed by
employers. However, OSHA does not agree with the commenters regarding
their assessment that the minimum inspection requirements and schedules
specified in Sec. 1926.1412 are more burdensome for employers who use
articulating lifting equipment in particular. There is no evidence in
the record that inspections recommended by manufacturers are as
thorough as those provided in this section. To the extent that they
are, there is no additional burden to employers in requiring them to
follow this section than to follow the manufacturer's recommendations.
Paragraph (k)
OSHA determines that the competent person or persons who conduct
shift and monthly inspections, and the qualified person who conducts
annual inspections, must have access to all written documents produced
under this section, during the time for which the employer is required
to retain those documents, so that they are made aware of any
components of the equipment that may require special attention during
their inspections. Accordingly, OSHA is adding a new paragraph (k) at
the end of Sec. 1926.1412.
Section 1926.1413 Wire Rope--Inspection
Cranes and derricks use wire rope to lift and support their loads
and parts of the equipment. If the rope is worn or damaged, it can
break, causing the equipment to fail and/or the load to fall, which can
kill or injure workers. Approximately 3% of crane fatalities in
construction work result from wire ropes snapping. J.E. Beavers et al,
Crane-Related Fatalities in the Construction Industry, 132 Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management 901, 903 (Sept. 2006). (ID-
0011.) Accordingly, C-DAC concluded it would improve crane/derrick
safety to establish updated requirements for wire rope inspections.
The definition C-DAC developed for proposed Sec. 1926.1401 defined
``wire rope'' as ``rope made of wire.'' In the preamble of the proposed
rule, OSHA noted that this definition could be read to exclude rope
made with a fiber core, which, as discussed below under Sec.
1926.1414, may be used for purposes other than boom hoist reeving. OSHA
requested public comment on whether a more appropriate definition would
be the following one used by the Specialized Carriers & Rigging
Association:
A flexible rope constructed by laying steel wires into various
patterns of multi-wired strands around a core system to produce a
helically wound rope.
(73 FR 59739, Oct. 9, 2008.) Three commenters supported this revised
definition, and none were opposed. (ID-0187.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.)
Accordingly, OSHA is revising the definition in Sec. 1926.1401 to that
quoted above.
One of the commenters supporting the revised definition also stated
that OSHA should not exclude wire rope with a synthetic or fiber core
and should include definitions of these terms. (ID-0187.1.) However, as
OSHA explained in the proposed rule, the revised definition is designed
to encompass cores other than wire, and OSHA determines it is not
necessary to include separate definitions for each type of such rope to
make clear that they fall within the definition of ``wire rope.''
The proposed rule provided for wire rope inspections at the same
frequency--shift, monthly, and annually--that would apply for other
crane components under Sec. 1926.1412. It also proposed that, like
inspections of other components, the shift and monthly inspections be
conducted by a ``competent person,'' and the annual inspection by a
``qualified person.'' As discussed below, OSHA is retaining this
equivalence of frequency and qualifications in the final rule.
Paragraph (a) Shift Inspection
Paragraph (a)(1) of this section of the proposed rule required a
shift
[[Page 47975]]
inspection by a competent person. One commenter recommended that this
provision require the shift inspection to be conducted ``each shift the
equipment is used'' rather than ``each shift,'' to clarify that the
equipment does not have to be inspected when it will not be used on a
shift. (ID-0226.0.) This suggested change is consistent with the intent
of the proposed rule, and OSHA is adding similar language to Sec.
1926.1413(a)(1) to clarify that intent.
Another commenter stated that it was unnecessary to require a wire
rope inspection each shift. (ID-0203.1.) This commenter believed that
per-shift wire rope inspections were an unnecessary burden for
employers with good maintenance programs who have not experienced wire
rope failures. The commenter recommended that OSHA adopt the protocol
in sec. 5-2.4 of ASME B30.5-2004, which allows the periodic inspection
frequency to be determined by a qualified person based on factors that
affect rope life.
OSHA rejects this commenter's suggestion which could, at a
qualified person's discretion, result in less frequent wire rope
inspections than were required under former subpart N. Section 5-2.4.1
of ANSI B30.5-1968, which was incorporated by reference in subpart N,
provided for wire rope inspections ``once each working day.'' The
current version of B30.5, in sec. 5-2.4.2(a) of ASME B30.5-2004,
similarly provides for daily wire rope inspections. The commenter's
reference to the provision in ASME B 30.5-2004 that allows the
inspection frequency to be determined by a qualified person refers to
the type of comprehensive inspection that is similar to the annual
inspection required by Sec. 1926.1413(c), not to the shift inspections
required under Sec. 1926.1413(a).
As discussed below, the purpose of this inspection is to ensure
that deficiencies are identified and that, depending on the competent
person's evaluation of those deficiencies, appropriate action is taken.
C-DAC wanted to make clear, however, that the inspection was not to be
so comprehensive and time-consuming that it would be unrealistic to
conduct it for each shift. To clarify that the inspection was one that
was reasonable for a shift inspection, the provision states that
neither ``untwisting (opening of wire rope)'' nor ``booming down'' is
required during this inspection. OSHA believes that requiring a
realistic level of inspection each shift will encourage compliance and
ultimately serve to reduce accidents. No comments were received on this
aspect of the proposed rule.
Proposed Sec. 1926.1413(a)(1) referred to wire ropes (running and
standing) that are ``reasonably likely'' to be in use during the shift.
OSHA is also removing the word ``reasonably'' to avoid ambiguity.
Accordingly, Sec. 1926.1413(a)(1) is promulgated as proposed except
for the minor changes noted above.
Paragraph (a)(2) Apparent Deficiencies
Paragraph (a)(1) of this section requires the competent person to
conduct a ``visual inspection * * * for apparent deficiencies,
including those listed in paragraph (a)(2).'' Proposed paragraph (a)(2)
established three categories (I, II, and III) of apparent wire rope
deficiencies. The likelihood that a deficiency is hazardous increases
as the number of the category increases from I to III. The basis for
categorizing apparent deficiencies in this way was discussed in detail
in the proposed rule (73 FR 59776-59777, Oct. 9, 2008). As discussed
further below, the category determines the options or ``next steps''
available to or required of the employer under paragraph (a)(4),
Removal from service.
The Agency is providing minor clarifications for the two apparent
deficiencies that relate to damage from electricity. As proposed,
paragraph (a)(2)(i)(C) read: ``Electric arc (from a source other than
power lines) or heat damage.'' C-DAC intended that both ``electric
arc'' and ``heat'' would modify ``damage.'' To make this more clear,
OSHA is adding the word ``damage'' after ``electric arc.'' Proposed
paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(B) read: ``Electrical contact with a power
line.'' OSHA is adding the word ``prior'' at the beginning of the
paragraph to clarify that the inspector must note a deficiency whenever
he or she is aware, through observation or from any other information,
that the wire rope has previously made electrical contact with a power
line.
OSHA notes that a wire rope can be damaged in two ways from
electrical contact. First, if the source of electrical power contacts
the wire rope, the electricity can arc to the wire rope and cause a
localized burn. The extent of the damage will depend on the amount of
electrical energy involved. A low energy arc will typically cause
little damage; a high energy arc may cause significant damage. When the
arc results from a source other than a power line, the extent of the
damage will vary, and the inspector must determine whether the rope is
damaged to the extent that repair or replacement is necessary.
If a power line arcs to a wire rope, there will usually be
sufficient localized burn damage that the rope must be removed from
service. However, a wire rope may make electrical contact with a power
line and leave no visible damage. For example, if the load contacts a
power line and is not insulated from the wire rope, a large current can
flow through the rope. The current may be large enough to damage the
internal structure of the rope and weaken it without leaving any
visible evidence on the rope itself that this has happened. There is no
realistic way to assess the internal damage that such electrical
contact has caused to the wire rope. Therefore, C-DAC determined that
any wire rope that came into electrical contact with a power line must
be removed from service.
Only one comment was submitted regarding proposed paragraph (a)(2).
The commenter suggested adding two additional conditions to the list of
Category II deficiencies. (ID-0121.1.) The first is where one outer
wire is broken at the point of contact with the core of the rope and
protrudes or loops out from the rope structure. The second is where one
outer wire is broken at the strand to strand contact point and is
raised up from the body of the rope or looped out of the rope
structure.
OSHA disagrees with the commenter because this commenter did not
offer any rationale to justify these additional provisions. Therefore,
OSHA is deferring to the expertise of the Committee. Section
1926.1413(a)(2) is promulgated as proposed except for the
clarifications noted above.
A ``running wire rope'' is a wire rope that moves over sheaves or
drums. This definition is included in Sec. 1926.1401 of this final
rule to make clear the nature of the wire rope that is subject to this
inspection provision. These criteria are the same as those contained in
sec. 5-2.4.3 of ASME B30.5-2004, and those for running wire ropes and
pendant or standing wire ropes are also contained in sec. 5-2.4.2 of
ANSI B30.5-1968, which is incorporated by reference in subpart N. One
issue that was left unanswered during the Committee discussions is
whether these broken wire criteria are equally applicable when using
plastic sheaves. The Agency requested public comment on this issue.
However, no comments were received. OSHA notes that the proposed broken
wire criteria did not depend on the type of sheave involved and would
therefore include plastic as well as metal sheaves. Since the paragraph
is being promulgated as proposed, the criteria apply regardless of the
material of which the sheave is made.
[[Page 47976]]
Paragraph (a)(3) Critical Review Items
Under paragraph (a)(3) of this section, the competent person must
give particular attention to certain ``Critical Review Items'' during
the shift inspection (as well as, as discussed below, in the monthly
and annual inspections). Proposed paragraph (a)(3)(iii) listed, among
the critical review items, ``wire rope at flange points, [and]
crossover points.'' These terms were defined in proposed Sec.
1926.1401, Definitions.
One commenter suggested that each wrap of the rope is a crossover
point such that the crossover points will line up across the face of
the drum. (ID-0121.) The Agency disagrees with this view. As defined in
the standard, a crossover point occurs ``where one layer of rope climbs
up and crosses over the previous layer * * *.'' While the rope climbs
up at the drum's flange, it does not climb up as it then spools across
the previous (lower) layer towards the other flange, i.e., as it wraps
across the face of the drum.
In the proposed rule, OSHA noted that the items listed in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1413(a)(3)(iv) and (a)(3)(v) (``Wire rope adjacent to
end connections'' and ``Wire rope at and on equalizer sheaves'') are
functionally equivalent to items requiring special scrutiny during the
annual inspections required in proposed Sec. Sec.
1926.1413(c)(2)(ii)(C) and (F) (``Wire rope in contact with saddles,
equalizer sheaves or other sheaves where rope travel is limited'' and
``Wire rope at or near terminal ends''). The Agency stated that it
planned to revise the language in proposed Sec. Sec.
1926.1413(a)(3)(iv) and (a)(3)(v) to match the language in Sec. Sec.
1926.1413(c)(2)(ii)(C) and (c)(2)(ii)(F). This would enable OSHA to
delete Sec. Sec. 1926.1413(c)(2)(ii)(C) and (c)(2)(ii)(F) because
Sec. 1926.1413(c)(2)(ii)(A) incorporates by reference the critical
review items listed in Sec. Sec. 1926.1413(a)(3)(iv) and (a)(3)(v),
thereby making the items listed in Sec. Sec. 1926.1413(c)(2)(ii)(C)
and (c)(2)(ii)(F) redundant. OSHA did not receive any adverse comment
on modifying Sec. Sec. 1926.1413(a)(3)(iv) and (a)(3)(v) in this
manner and modified Sec. 1926.1413(a)(3) accordingly.
Paragraph (a)(4) Removal From Service
Paragraph (a)(4) of this section of the proposed rule set out
remedial steps to be taken once the competent person performing the
inspection identifies an apparent deficiency. Those steps depended upon
whether, under Sec. 1926.1413(a)(2), the deficiency falls under
Category I, II, or III. Under this approach, immediate removal from
service would be required for certain deficiencies, while continued use
under prescribed circumstances would be allowed for others before the
rope must be removed from service. When removal from service is
required, the provisions of Sec. 1926.1417 (Operation) apply, and the
inspector must either tag out the entire equipment or the hoist with
the damaged wire rope. This approach was adopted by C-DAC because, in
the Committee's collective experience, different types of deficiencies
warrant different responses, with some deficiencies being so serious
that continued use of the rope must be prohibited while other
deficiencies may, if adequately evaluated and monitored, allow
continued use of the rope for a limited time.
Paragraph (a)(4)(i) applies to Category I apparent deficiencies.
Paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B) allows the rope to be severed under some
circumstances and the undamaged part to be used. Two commenters
suggested that language be added to require the user to verify that the
drum will still have at least two wraps of rope around it when the
block is lowered to its lowest position. (ID-0122; -0178.1.) The
concern of these commenters is that shortening the rope too much might
not leave enough rope to allow a sufficient margin of safety (two
wraps) to remain on the drum and prevent the rope from becoming
disconnected from the drum.
Another provision of the final rule, Sec. 1926.1417(t), addresses
this potential safety hazard by requiring that neither the load nor the
boom be lowered below the point where less than two full wraps of rope
remain on their respective drums. Normally, newly installed ropes are
long enough to ensure compliance with Sec. 1926.1417(t) when the load
or boom are in their lowest positions, and these commenters are
concerned that shortening the rope could result in the rope becoming
disconnected if the remaining part of the rope is not long enough to
always ensure that two wraps remain on the drum.
OSHA agrees with this comment and is adding language to paragraph
(a)(4)(i)(B) (and also to paragraphs (a)(4)(iii)(B) and (c)(3)(i)(B) of
this section, which contain a similar provision) to specify that if a
wire rope is shortened under this paragraph, the employer is required
to ensure that the drum will still have two wraps of wire rope when the
load and/or boom is in its lowest position.
OSHA also notes that paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B) twice refers to power
line contact in the phrases ``other than power line contact'' and
``repair of wire rope that contacted an energized power line is also
prohibited.'' OSHA is concerned that these phrases could be misleading
in a paragraph devoted to remedial steps for a Category I deficiency,
as power line contact can never be a Category I deficiency. It is a
Category III deficiency that requires immediate replacement of the
rope. To avoid any implication that power line contact could be a
Category I deficiency and that a competent person could determine that
the rope does not constitute a safety hazard under paragraph (a)(4)(i),
OSHA is deleting the words in proposed paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B) referring
to power line contact.
Paragraph (a)(4)(ii) applies to Category II apparent deficiencies.
In paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(A), OSHA is removing the references to safety
hazards to make it clear that utilization of this option (compliance
with manufacturer requirements) mandates removal of the rope from
service whenever the manufacturer's criteria for removal from service
are met, without the employer making an independent determination as to
whether the rope is a safety hazard.
Paragraphs (a)(4)(ii)(B) and (C) allow the employer the option of
either removing the wire rope from service or to implement the measures
as described in paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B) above. In addition, OSHA is
adding a cross-reference to Sec. 1926.1417 (Operation), which includes
a number of separate requirements that are triggered if the equipment
is taken out of service.
The proposed rule would have allowed Category II wire-rope
deficiencies \74\ to remain in service up to 30 days when using
specified alternative measures. Under former subpart N, these
deficiencies would have resulted in removing the wire rope immediately
from service. However, OSHA relied on C-DAC's expertise and proposed
the provision as recommended by the Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ These measures were proposed at Sec. Sec.
1926.1413(a)(4)(ii)(B) and 1926.1413(a)(4)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Agency received comments regarding the alternative measures
proposed for Category II wire-rope deficiencies from three commenters.
All of the commenters objected to allowing continued use of wire rope
with Category II deficiencies. Two of the commenters stated that the
proposed option to continue using wire rope with the proposed
alternative measures relaxed both national consensus standards and the
instructions of wire rope manufacturers. (ID-0122.0; -0178.1.) They
believed allowing the employer to use the damaged wire rope in service
up to 30 days was a
[[Page 47977]]
dangerous precedent because it based employee protection on conditions
that could be difficult for a qualified person to assess accurately.
The third commenter (a crane manufacturer), which had a
representative on C-DAC, also objected to the continued use of wire
rope with Category II deficiencies. (ID-0292.1.) This commenter noted
that such deficiencies indicate that the wire rope does not meet the
``acceptable life'' criteria accepted by the wire-rope industry.
Further, the commenter noted that, if the wire rope continued to be
used with the Category II deficiencies, ``failure could occur without
further indication.''
OSHA finds these comments persuasive with respect to the protection
of employee safety. The integrity of the wire rope is critical to the
safety of any lift performed by equipment covered by this subpart. For
example, a break in the rope can result in a dropped load which
endangers employees on the worksite. Based on these comments and the
requirements of former subpart N, OSHA is changing the requirements in
the final rule for wire rope with Category II deficiencies. The Agency
notes that this revision is consistent with the requirements of former
subpart N. Accordingly, the alternative measures outlined in the
proposed rule at Sec. 1926.1413(a)(4)(iii) have been deleted and
subsequent paragraphs renumbered.
Paragraph (a)(4)(iii) \75\ applies to Category III apparent
deficiencies. Two commenters suggested that Category III is unnecessary
because paragraph (a)(4)(iv)(B) is the same as for Category I. (ID-
0122; -0178.1.) As noted above, the corresponding proposed provision
for Category I, paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B), is being changed to remove the
references to power line contact. Moreover, Category III differs from
Category I because the competent person may decide that rope with a
Category I deficiency does not constitute a safety hazard and allow the
rope to continue to be used. However, rope with a Category III
deficiency must either be replaced or, if the deficiency is localized
and did not result from power line contact, be severed and the
undamaged part to be used.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\75\ This was Sec. 1926.1413(a)(4)(iv) in the proposed rule (73
FR 59930, Oct. 9, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above in relation to paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B), OSHA is
changing paragraph (a)(4)(iii)(B) \76\ to state that, if the rope is
severed and the undamaged portion used, the rope in use must be long
enough to ensure that two full wraps remain on the drum at all times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\76\ This was Sec. 1926.1413(a)(4)(iv)(B) in the proposed rule
(73 FR 59930, Oct. 9, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed paragraph (a)(4)(iv) \77\ specified that where a wire rope
must be removed from service under this section, the equipment (as a
whole) or the hoist with that wire rope must be tagged-out as provided
in proposed Sec. 1926.1417(f)(1) until the wire rope is replaced or
repaired. No comments were received on this provision, and it is being
promulgated as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ This was Sec. 1926.1413(a)(4)(v) in the proposed rule (73
FR 59930, Oct. 9, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A commenter suggested adding that the competent person who conducts
the shift inspection must receive such information in writing. (ID-
0132.1.) OSHA concludes that the competent person or persons who
conduct shift and monthly inspections, and the qualified person who
conducts annual inspections, must have access to all written documents
produced under this section so that they are made aware of any
components of the equipment that may require special attention during
their inspections.
Accordingly, OSHA is adding a new paragraph (e) at the end of Sec.
1926.1413 that specifies that all documents produced under this section
must be available to all persons who conduct inspections under this
section.
Paragraph (b) Monthly Inspection
Proposed paragraph (b) required a monthly inspection of wire rope
that would be, in both the level of scrutiny and the expertise required
of the inspector, a documented shift inspection.
A commenter pointed out that paragraph (c)(3)(ii) requires that
certain deficiencies identified during the annual inspection must be
monitored during the monthly inspection and suggested that this
requirement be specifically stated in paragraph (b). (ID-0226.) OSHA
agrees and is adding paragraph (b)(2), which states that the inspection
must include any deficiencies identified in the annual inspection as
needing to be monitored.
Paragraph (c) Annual/Comprehensive
Proposed Sec. 1926.1413(c) required an annual inspection (at least
every 12 months) for wire rope, conducted by a qualified person. The
annual inspection would be considerably more thorough and comprehensive
than the shift and monthly inspections required by paragraphs (a) and
(b) of this section. In addition, it would be conducted by a
``qualified person,'' who would have greater expertise than the
``competent person'' who must conduct the shift and monthly
inspections. The timing and inspector qualifications for the annual
wire rope inspection coincide with those for the general equipment
annual/comprehensive inspection. C-DAC believed that the use of
corresponding timeframes and personnel will allow inspections to be
conducted efficiently and thereby promote effectiveness and compliance.
Under proposed paragraph (c)(1), all apparent deficiencies and
critical review items required to be checked in a shift inspection
would have to be checked in the annual/comprehensive inspection (see
paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3)). No comments were received on this
provision, and it is being promulgated as proposed.
Proposed paragraph (c)(2) provided for a more thorough inspection
than that required under paragraph (c)(1). Under proposed paragraph
(c)(2), a complete and thorough inspection, covering the surface of the
entire length of the wire ropes, would be required. One commenter,
which had nominated a member of C-DAC, stated that the entire length of
the rope needed to be inspected more frequently than annually and
suggested that this requirement should be included in the monthly
inspection provision. (ID-0 292.1.) This commenter did not provide any
evidence to support this assertion or explain why it was deviating from
the position its nominee took in favor of the provision in the C-DAC
negotiations. This comment is accorded diminished weight in light of
this inconsistency of position. OSHA defers to the expertise of the
full Committee and is retaining the requirement that the entire length
of the rope be inspected during the annual inspection; it is not adding
such a requirement to the monthly inspection provision.
As discussed in relation to Sec. 1926.1413(a)(3), OSHA has, in the
final rule, modified proposed Sec. Sec. 1926.1413(a)(3)(iv) and
(a)(3)(v) to read the same as proposed Sec. Sec.
1926.1413(c)(2)(ii)(C) and (F) (``Wire rope in contact with saddles,
equalizer sheaves or other sheaves where rope travel is limited'' and
``Wire rope at or near terminal ends''). Section 1926.1413(c)(2)(ii)(A)
now incorporates by reference the critical review items listed in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1413(a)(3)(iv) and (a)(3)(v), thereby making the items
listed in Sec. Sec. 1926.1413(c)(2)(ii)(C) and (c)(2)(ii)(F)
redundant.
Two commenters supported keeping paragraphs (c)(2)(ii)(C) and (F),
even though they are also included in paragraph (a)(3) of this section,
saying that annual inspections are more comprehensive and, in their
view,
[[Page 47978]]
should be treated separately. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) However, the
modification made by OSHA does not change the proposed requirements for
annual inspections; it only avoids redundant language. Accordingly,
OSHA is deleting proposed Sec. Sec. 1926.1413(c)(2)(ii)(C) and (F)
from the final rule and is renumbering proposed paragraphs (D) and (E)
to (C) and (D).
Proposed paragraph (c)(2)(iii) established an exception to the
timing of the annual/comprehensive inspection where that inspection is
infeasible due to ``existing set-up and configuration of the equipment
(such as where an assist crane is needed) or due to site conditions
(such as a dense urban setting).'' The provision sets a timetable for
annual/comprehensive inspections in such cases that requires the
inspection to be performed ``as soon as it becomes feasible, but no
longer than an additional 6 months for running ropes and, for standing
ropes, at the time of disassembly.'' The provision reflects C-DAC's
concern that, particularly in densely developed urban settings, the
inability to boom down would prevent the employer from completing a
comprehensive wire rope inspection.
Two commenters objected to the length of the six-month period and
suggested it be reduced to one month. (ID-0122.0; -0178.1.) Neither
commenter provided any evidence of explanation to support its
recommendation, so OSHA is deferring to C-DAC's collective judgment and
is retaining the six-month period in the proposed rule.
Proposed paragraph (c)(3) listed the next steps to be taken once
the qualified person performing the annual/comprehensive inspection
discovers a deficiency. The qualified person must immediately determine
whether the deficiency constitutes a safety hazard. If it does, under
proposed paragraph (c)(3)(i), the rope would either have to be replaced
or, if the deficiency is localized, the damaged part may be severed and
the undamaged portion may continue to be used. As with paragraph
(a)(4)(i)(B), joining lengths of wire rope by splicing would be
prohibited.
As discussed under paragraph (b)(3), a commenter recommended that
the requirement of paragraph (c)(3)(ii) should be explicitly referenced
in the monthly inspection reports, and OSHA has made an addition to
paragraph (b)(3) to accomplish this. (ID-0226.) Also, as discussed
under paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B), OSHA is adding a requirement to paragraph
(c)(3)(i)(B) that at least two full wraps of wire rope must remain on
the drum when the load and/or boom is in its lowest position.
Paragraph (c)(4) requires the annual/comprehensive inspection to be
documented according to Sec. 1926.1412(f)(7), which is the
documentation provision for the annual general inspection. As with
other parallel requirements in this section, C-DAC intended to ensure
consistency with other recordkeeping requirements and thus facilitate
compliance. Section 1926.1412(f)(7), which is incorporated by
reference, requires the employer that is conducting the inspection to
document and retain for 12 months, ``the items checked and the results
of that inspection'' and ``the name and signature of the person who
conducted the inspection and the date.'' No comments were received on
paragraph (c)(4), and it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)
Proposed Sec. 1926.1413(d) provided that employers may not use
rope lubricants that are of the type that hinder inspection.
This provision would prohibit, for example, rope lubricants that
are opaque or so dark that they mask the wire rope inside them. A
commenter suggested adding to this provision the following sentence:
``The rope surface and strand valleys must be cleaned of dirt,
lubricant or other material that will hinder inspection.'' (ID-0121.1.)
OSHA determines that this addition is unnecessary. Section 1926.1413
requires various inspections, and the requirement to conduct an
inspection inherently means that where foreign material that would
prevent the inspection is present, it must be removed. The prohibition
against rope lubricants that are of the type that hinder inspection is
needed because they are difficult to remove and pose an unnecessary
obstacle to compliance. Section 1926.1413(d) is promulgated in the
final rule as proposed.
Paragraph (e)
A commenter suggested adding that the competent person who conducts
the shift inspection must receive such information in writing. (ID-
0132.1.) Similarly, OSHA determines that the competent person or
persons who conduct shift and monthly inspections, and the qualified
person who conducts annual inspections, must have access to all written
documents produced under Sec. 1926.1413. In response to this comment,
OSHA is adding paragraph (e) to ensure that persons who conduct
inspections have access to documentation required by Sec. 1926.1413
during the period for which those documents must be retained. This
documentation serves as a reference for conditions that must be
monitored in subsequent inspections. OSHA concludes that this
documentation will ensure that only safe equipment is put into service.
Section 1926.1414 Wire Rope--Selection and Installation Criteria
This section sets forth requirements for selecting and installing
wire rope. C-DAC determined, and OSHA agrees, that the proper selection
and installation of wire rope is integral to the safe operation of
equipment that uses such rope. Improper selection or installation could
cause the wire rope to fail, resulting in any number of hazards from
uncontrolled movement of the equipment or the load. As discussed in the
proposed rule, Sec. 1926.1414, in addition to addressing safety
concerns related to wire rope selection and installation, provides
greater flexibility in the selection process than previous requirements
under subpart N (73 FR 59781, Oct. 9, 2008). This flexibility reflects
and takes advantage of new developments in wire rope technology.
Paragraph (a)
Proposed paragraph (a) of this section stated that ``selection of
replacement wire rope shall be in accordance with the requirements of
this section and the recommendations of the wire rope manufacturer, the
equipment manufacturer, or a qualified person.'' In the proposed rule,
OSHA noted that proposed paragraph (a)'s mention of only ``replacement
rope'' could mislead some readers to conclude that all of Sec.
1926.1414 applies only to replacement rope, whereas C-DAC clearly
intended that Sec. 1926.1414 would apply to both original equipment
rope and replacement rope. OSHA proposed to reword Sec. 1926.1414(a)
to read as follows: ``Original equipment wire rope and replacement wire
rope shall be selected and installed in accordance with the
requirements of this section. Selection of replacement wire rope shall
be in accordance with the recommendations of the wire rope
manufacturer, the equipment manufacturer, or a qualified person.''
OSHA requested public comment on such a revision. OSHA received no
comment on proposed Sec. 1926.1414(a) or on its proposed rewording.
Accordingly, OSHA modified Sec. 1926.1414(a) of the final rule to
reflect the proposed rewording.
[[Page 47979]]
Paragraph (b)
The proposed rule, in Sec. 1926.1414(c), included design factors
for rotation resistant rope but did not include design factors for
standard (that is, non-rotation resistant) rope. In the proposal, OSHA
stated its determination that, in light of the importance of design
factors for wire rope, the omission of design factors for standard rope
was inadvertent (73 FR 59781, Oct. 9, 2008). OSHA proposed to include
the design factors for standard rope in sec. 5-1.7.1 of ASME B30.5-
2004. OSHA requested public comment on the issue.
Comments were received from two parties, both of whom nominated C-
DAC members. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) They stated that the omission was
intentional, believing that C-DAC did not include design factor
criteria for standard wire rope because technology is continually
evolving and including design criteria in the rule may hamper future
crane operations. The commenters stated that the proposed rule had
provisions requiring end users to conform with requirements or criteria
established by the wire rope manufacturer, equipment manufacturer, or a
qualified person.
OSHA notes that C-DAC determined it was important for this rule to
allow flexibility to accommodate future technological changes. The
commenters on this issue reiterated that determination, and OSHA shares
that concern. Setting unduly restrictive specifications based on
current technology could unnecessarily impinge on the use of future
designs. The Agency also concludes, however, that some form of minimum
criteria is necessary so that those selecting wire rope have a minimum
benchmark available as a reference point.
To meet both of these objectives, the Agency has decided, in the
final rule, to add a new paragraph (b) to Sec. 1926.1414 to provide
employers with two options with regards to wire rope design criteria.
The first option would be to comply with an industry consensus standard
(sec. 5-1.7.1 of ASME B30.5-2004) on design factors for standard wire
rope. See Sec. 1926.1414(b)(1). This is a well-established benchmark
for standard wire rope design factors, and the Agency therefore
determined that it is appropriate to include it as an option. Paragraph
(c) of sec. 5-1.7.1 is excluded because that deals with rotation
resistant rope, which is addressed in Sec. 1926.1414(e).
The second option provides a performance benchmark that is based on
the rope's compatibility with the rated capacity of the equipment and
on the need to be able to rely on the inspections in Sec. 1926.1413 as
an effective means of ensuring the continued safety of the rope. See
Sec. 1926.1414(b)(2). Specifically, the design must be sufficient to
ensure that, when the equipment is used in accordance with its rated
capacity, the employer will be able to prevent a sudden failure of the
rope by meeting the inspection requirements in Sec. 1926.1413.
This concept reflects the underlying premise of Sec. 1926.1413
that regular inspection of the rope can prevent catastrophic failure
because the rope's degradation will take place over time and will be
accompanied by indications of wear. Therefore, if the rope is
appropriate for the equipment, the degradation that occurs with use
will be sufficiently gradual so that its development can be identified
in the required inspections and the rope can be removed from service
before safety is compromised.
Paragraph (c)
The benchmarks in the two options in paragraph (b) of this section
do not address an additional design issue, which is the suitability of
the wire rope with respect to the proper functioning of the equipment.
For example, selecting a rope with a diameter that is too large for a
particular machine can result in the rope jumping a sheave. Such a
condition could, among other adverse consequences, affect the
operator's ability to control the load. Therefore, OSHA has added an
additional provision, in new Sec. 1926.1414(c), that requires the rope
to be compatible with the safe functioning of the equipment.
Paragraph (d) Boom Hoist Reeving
With the addition of the two new paragraphs, (b) and (c), OSHA is
redesignating proposed paragraphs (b) through (f) of this section as
paragraphs (d) through (h) in the final rule.
Proposed paragraph (b) would have prohibited the use of fiber core
ropes for boom hoist reeving, except for use on derricks. In the
Committee's view, the composition of fiber core ropes makes them prone
to degradation that is not completely detectable by normal inspection
techniques. Nothing in the record contradicts that conclusion.
One commenter stated that there was no practical reason to allow
the use of fiber core ropes for boom hoist reeving on derricks but not
in other boom hoist applications. (ID-0121.1.) However, as explained in
the proposed rule, the distinction between derricks and cranes is
warranted because the sheaves on derricks are smaller than those on
cranes and therefore require ropes that can accommodate reverse bending
better than ropes used on cranes. Fiber core ropes are more pliable
than ropes with a metal core and are therefore suited to applications
requiring greater reverse bending, such as use on derricks. Moreover,
the distinction between derricks and cranes is consistent with current
national consensus standards. The 2004 version of ASME B30.5, in sec.
5.1.7.2(b), prohibits the use of fiber core wire ropes for boom hoist
reeving for mobile and locomotive cranes. By contrast, the standard in
the ASME B30 series that applies to derricks, ASME B30.6-2003, does not
prohibit the use of fiber core wire rope for boom hoist reeving.
Permitting the use of fiber core ropes for boom hoist reeving on
cranes, as the commenter suggests, would reduce protection over that
currently considered prudent in the industry, and OSHA is therefore
promulgating paragraph (b)(1) as proposed, renumbering it as paragraph
(d)(1).
Proposed paragraph (b)(2) prohibited the use of rotation resistant
rope for boom hoist reeving except where the requirements of paragraph
(c) (renumbered paragraph (e) in the final rule), are met. No comments
were received on this paragraph (b)(2), and it is being promulgated as
paragraph (d)(2) with the reference to paragraph (c) in the proposed
rule changed to paragraph (e)
Paragraph (e) Rotation Resistant Ropes
Paragraph (e)(1)
Proposed paragraph (c)(1) of this section classified rotation
resistant ropes into three ``Types'' (``Type I'', ``Type II'', and
``Type III''). Proposed paragraph (c)(2) specified use limitations and
requirements for each type of wire rope. This approach differed from
former subpart N, ANSI B30.5-1968 and ASME B30.5-2004, which did not
distinguish between types of rotation resistant rope. By distinguishing
between different types of rope, the Committee sought to ensure that
ropes with different internal structures were subject to appropriate
requirements and limitations that would enable them to be used safely.
Types I, II, and III, which have different capabilities, were described
in proposed paragraph (c)(1).
ASTM A 1023/A 1023M-02 has a similar classification system,
although it divides rotation resistant ropes into ``categories'' rather
than ``types.'' One commenter noted that there is no meaningful
difference between the classification in the proposed rule and that in
ASTM A 1023. (ID-0060.1.) This
[[Page 47980]]
commenter urged OSHA to incorporate by reference the ASTM definitions
rather than to state the definitions in the final rule. This would, the
commenter suggested, avoid confusion among manufacturers and users who
rely on the ASTM's classification system.
Although the provisions in the final rule are substantively similar
to those in the ASTM standard, the Agency uses the term ``category'' in
the wire rope provisions of subpart CC that relate to the
classification of apparent deficiencies (see, e.g., Sec.
1926.1413(a)(2)). Therefore, to avoid confusion with those provision,
OSHA uses the term ``type'' in classifying rotation resistant rope in
Sec. 1926.1414. OSHA concludes that the use of ``category'' in the
ASTM standard would cause considerable confusion if OSHA were to
incorporate the ASTM definitions directly. Accordingly, OSHA is
promulgating proposed paragraph (c)(1) as paragraph (e)(1) of the final
rule.
Paragraph (e)(2)
Paragraphs (e)(2) of this section sets forth use requirements of
the three types of rotation resistant rope in terms of operating design
factors (and in some instances activity). The purpose of these
provisions is to ensure that the selection of the type of rotation
resistant rope is suitable, in terms of safety, to its use.
These requirements are identical to those in proposed paragraph
(c)(2). The preamble to the proposed rule explained in detail the basis
for setting these design factors for rotation resistant rope (see 73 FR
59782-59783, Oct. 9, 2008). One commenter, stated that rotation
resistant ropes should have a design factor of less than 5 only for
single engineered lifts, but provided no rationale for this position.
No other comments addressed the proposed design factors, and OSHA is
deferring to the expertise of C-DAC and incorporating the design
factors in paragraph (e)(2) of the final rule.
As discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule, paragraphs
(e)(2)(i)-(iv) use the phrase ``operating design factor.''
``Operating'' is included to show that the factors specified in these
provisions are to reflect how the rope is installed on the specific
piece of equipment in which it is used. In other words, the operating
design factor is calculated based on numerous considerations associated
with both the rope's design and how it is installed on the equipment.
The prohibition on the use of rotation resistant rope for duty
cycle and repetitive lifts does not apply to Type I rope because the
Committee determined that such rope is significantly more resistant to
rotation or torque compared with Types II and III. This reduces Type
I's potential for internal wear during use and moves degradation from
the inner wires to the outer wires, where damage is more easily
detected during wire rope inspections. Accordingly, the Committee
concluded that Type I rope can safely be used for duty cycle and
repetitive lifts at an operating design factor below 5 (but no less
than 3.5), as specified in proposed paragraph (c)(2)(ii). No comments
addressed the distinction between the types of wire rope in paragraph
(e)(2)(i) of this section.
In the proposed rule, OSHA noted that C-DAC did not include
definitions for ``duty cycle'' or ``repetitive lifts.'' The Agency
asked for comment on whether definitions of these terms should be
included in Sec. 1926.1401 and proposed definitions that it determined
were consistent with C-DAC's understanding and widely understood in the
industry. OSHA proposed to define ``duty cycle'' as ``a continuous
operation in which approximately the same type and weight of load is
handled.'' It gave dredging with a clamshell as an example of duty
cycle work. OSHA proposed to define ``repetitive lifts'' as ``a
continuous operation with loads that may vary in size and weight.'' For
an example, it noted that steel erection work typically involves
repetitive lifts of various size and configurations of structural steel
members.
Three commenters agreed that ``duty cycle'' and ``repetitive
lifts'' should be defined, and no commenters suggested otherwise. (ID-
0205.1; -0213.1; -0226.) The commenters on the subject did not object
to OSHA's proposed definition of ``repetitive lifts,'' but two
recommended that OSHA's proposed definition of ``duty cycle'' be
replaced with the following:
A type of crane service in which bulk material is transferred
from one point to another by rapidly lifting, swinging, booming, and
placing the material. Typical types of duty cycle service are
dragline, clamshell, grapple, and magnet. This type of service is
differentiated from standard crane ``lift service'' in that cycle
times are very short and continuous, often less than 1 minute per
load, and loads are lifted and placed in general areas rather than
precise positions to permit such rapid cycles.
(ID-0205.1; -0213.1.)
OSHA determines that in most respects the commenters' suggested
definition is clearer and better reflects the intent of the Agency.
Therefore, OSHA is adopting their definition with only minor
modification (the reference to ``lifting, swinging, booming and
placing'' is not necessary, since those actions simply describe typical
crane movements). OSHA is therefore adopting a slightly modified
version of the definition suggested by the commenters. This definition
is being included in Sec. 1926.1401, as is the definition for
``repetitive lifts'' proposed by OSHA and quoted above.
Paragraph (e)(3)
This proposed paragraph specified additional requirements that must
be met when Types II and III rotation resistant wire rope are used with
an operating design factor of between 3.5 and 5 (for non-duty cycle,
non-repetitive lifts). The Committee concluded that these additional
requirements are needed to ensure that use of such ropes would be safe.
Due to renumbering, proposed paragraph (c)(3) corresponds to final
paragraph (e)(3). One commenter believed that the reference to ``these
provisions'' in proposed paragraph (c)(3)(iii) was unclear and should
be clarified to state whether it refers to the entire subpart CC or to
specific provisions. (ID-0214.1.) As used here, ``these provisions''
refers to lifts under final paragraph (e)(3). To avoid any ambiguity,
``these provisions'' is being changed to ``Sec. 1926.1414(e)(3).''
The same commenter who stated in regard to final paragraph (e)(2)
that rotation resistant rope should have a design factor of less than 5
only for single engineered lifts recommended that paragraph (e)(3) also
be changed to reflect its recommendation. (ID-0292.1.) OSHA is
rejecting that suggestion for the same reason given in relation to
paragraph (e)(2). No other objections to proposed paragraph (c)(3)
(final paragraph (e)(3)) were received. Accordingly, with the single
exception just mentioned in regard to final paragraph (e)(3)(iii),
proposed paragraph (c)(3) is being promulgated as final Sec.
1926.1414(e)(3).
Paragraph (e)(4) Additional Requirements for Rotation Resistant Rope
for Boom Hoist Reeving
Paragraph (e)(4)(i) of this section prohibits rotation resistant
rope from being used for boom hoist reeving except where the
requirements of paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of this section are met. C-DAC
members determined that the general prohibition was necessary because,
in their experience, rotation resistant rope used for boom hoist
reeving tends to twist and thereby suffer internal damage when it
passes over sheaves that are close together. However, C-DAC concluded
that safety would not be compromised when
[[Page 47981]]
rotation resistant rope is used for boom hoist reeving as long as the
conditions in paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of this section are met.
The Committee also determined that the exception would serve a
practical purpose, especially when using attachments such as luffing
jibs. The auxiliary hoist is typically used as a boom hoist for such
attachments, and is normally rigged with rotation resistant rope. The
exception enables the employer to avoid the need to change the rope
when using such attachments when safety could be assured by meeting the
specified conditions for its use.
The conditions under which rotation resistant rope may be used for
boom hoist reeving were contained in proposed paragraph (c)(4). No
substantive objections to that proposed paragraph were received. Two
commenters stated that the phrase ``rated capacity'' in proposed
paragraph (c)(4)(ii)(F) should be replaced with ``rated load
capacity.'' (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) As noted in the proposed rule, the C-
DAC proposal attributed the same meaning to both ``rated capacity'' and
``rated load capacity,'' and OSHA is consistently using the term
``rated capacity'' wherever C-DAC used either term to avoid any
confusion (see 73 FR 59738, Oct. 9, 2008). Accordingly, proposed
paragraph (c)(4) is being promulgated as final paragraph (e)(4) without
substantive change.
Paragraph (f)
Proposed paragraph (d) of this section specified that wire rope
clips used with wedge sockets may only be attached to the unloaded dead
end of the rope, except that devices specifically designed for dead
ending rope in a wedge socket are also permitted.
The Committee concluded that this provision was necessary to ensure
attachment strength, reliability and prevention of cable damage. No
comments concerning this provision were submitted, and OSHA is
promulgating it as Sec. 1926.1414(f).
Paragraph (g)
Proposed paragraph (e) of this section stated that socketing must
be done according to the specifications of the manufacturer of the wire
rope or fitting. No comments regarding this provision were received,
and OSHA is promulgating it as Sec. 1926.1414(g).
Paragraph (h)
Proposed paragraph (f) of this section specified that seizings must
be placed on each side of the point to be cut before the wire rope is
cut. It also specified that the length and number of seizings must be
in accordance with the instructions of the wire rope manufacturer.
Seizings are needed to hold the wire in the strands and the strands
in place during handling while cutting, thereby keeping the rope beyond
the area of the cut intact. In the Committee's experience, the
instructions and procedures for seizing differ among various wire rope
manufacturers. The Committee decided to require employers to follow the
manufacturer's instructions because it concluded that wire rope
manufacturers have the knowledge and expertise to best determine the
length and number of seizings that are needed to maintain the integrity
of their wire ropes during cutting. No comments regarding this
provision were received, and OSHA is promulgating it as Sec.
1926.1414(h).
Section 1926.1415 Safety Devices
This section sets forth the requirements for equipping cranes and
derricks with certain safety devices and prohibits the use of the
equipment if those devices are not working properly.
The safety devices addressed by this section are devices that C-DAC
determined are essential for the safe operation of cranes and derricks
and therefore, required to be present and in proper working order
during all equipment operations with no alternative measures permitted.
Those devices considered less critical to equipment safety are
designated as operational aids and are governed by Sec. 1926.1416.
That section allows equipment to continue operating if the operational
aid fails or malfunctions but requires certain temporary alternative
protective measures in such cases. Those devices designated as safety
devices in this section, however, are so essential and integral to safe
equipment operation that C-DAC determined that there is no acceptable
alternative to having them in proper working order.
Paragraph (a) Safety Devices
Paragraph (a) of this section lists the safety devices that are
required on all equipment covered by this subpart and specifications
and conditions applicable to those devices (including the exemption of
certain equipment from the requirements of the listed devices).
Crane Level Indicator: Paragraph (a)(1) requires that a crane level
indicator be on all equipment covered under this subpart. C-DAC
determined that level equipment is a key factor in ensuring equipment
safety. Using a crane level indicator is necessary because it has the
requisite accuracy for leveling the equipment. C-DAC members stressed
the need to use a crane level indicator because, if the equipment is
not properly leveled, it will not have all the capacities indicated in
the load charts. Reliance on the charts in such situations could cause
the equipment to overturn or otherwise fail.
Section 1926.1415(a)(1)(i) specifies that a crane level indicator
must either be built into the equipment or available on it. One
commenter requested clarification of whether the rule allows for the
use of a carpenter's level to satisfy the requirements of proposed
Sec. 1926.1415(a)(1)(i). (ID-0292.1.)
A carpenter's level of sufficient length (such as a four-foot
level), available to the operator, that gives an accurate reading,
meets the requirements of this paragraph as proposed; such a level is
typically used in the industry for this purpose. Therefore, it is not
necessary to revise the text of the rule and OSHA is promulgating
paragraph (a)(1)(i) as proposed.
Section 1926.1415(a)(1)(ii) addresses the hazard posed by false
readings from non-operational crane level indicators remaining on the
equipment. The Agency is requiring built-in (i.e., integral) crane
level indicators that are not working properly to be tagged-out or
removed. Similarly, removable crane level indicators must be removed
from the equipment if they are not working properly. Both requirements
are intended to avoid confusion and the operator's inadvertent reliance
on a device that is not working correctly. OSHA received no comment on
this provision. Therefore, OSHA promulgated it as proposed, with the
additional specification that a removable crane level indicator must be
removed prior to operation if it is not working properly.
Paragraph (a)(1)(iii) exempts portal cranes,\78\ derricks, floating
cranes/derricks and land cranes/derricks on barges, pontoons, vessels,
or other means of flotation from the requirements of Sec.
1926.1415(a)(1). C-DAC members indicated that these types of equipment
are leveled and then fixed in place when installed, precluding the need
for a crane level indicator.\79\ OSHA
[[Page 47982]]
received no comment on this provision. Therefore, OSHA is promulgating
paragraph (a)(1)(iii) as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ Section 1926.1401 defines ``portal crane'' as a ``type of
crane consisting of a rotating upperstructure, hoist machinery, and
boom mounted on top of a structural gantry which may be fixed in one
location or have travel capability. The gantry legs or columns
usually have portal openings in between to allow passage of traffic
beneath the gantry.''
\79\ Note that, Sec. 1926.1437(e) requires barge, pontoon,
vessel or other means of flotation list and trim device for floating
cranes/derricks and land cranes/derricks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boom Stops: Paragraph (a)(2) requires boom stops on all equipment
except for derricks and hydraulic booms (see the discussion of this
provision in 73 FR 59785, Oct. 9, 2008). ``Boom stop'' is defined in
Sec. 1926.1401 as a device that restricts the boom from moving above a
certain maximum angle and toppling over backwards. OSHA received no
comment on this provision or definition. Therefore, OSHA is
promulgating paragraph (a)(2) as proposed.
Jib Stops: Section 1926.1415(a)(3) requires jib stops on all
equipment where a jib is attached, except for derricks (see the
discussion of this provision in 73 FR 59785, Oct. 9, 2008). The
standard defines ``Jib stop (also referred to as a jib backstop)'' in
Sec. 1926.1401 as the ``same type of device as a boom stop but used
for a fixed or luffing jib.'' OSHA received no comment on this
provision or definition. Therefore, OSHA is promulgating paragraph
(a)(3) as proposed.
Foot Pedal Brake Locks: Proposed paragraph (a)(4) required that
equipment with foot pedal brakes have locks, except for portal cranes
and floating cranes. Such locks prevent the unintentional disengagement
of a foot pedal brake, which could lead to unintended equipment
movement and consequent injuries and fatalities. Due to the physical
effort needed to keep the pedal engaged, this is particularly important
where the brake is applied for long periods.
The rationale for exempting portal cranes and floating cranes from
this requirement discussed by C-DAC was that there are instances in
which, due to the pitching of a floating crane and the pitching of the
vessel or object in the water with which a portal crane works, the
operator may have to immediately release the brake. The concern is
that, if the foot pedal brake lock has been activated, the operator may
not be able to release the brake quickly enough to prevent the
equipment from being overloaded or to prevent unintended movement of
the load.
As explained in the proposed rule, upon review of the exemption in
the provision, the Agency realized that C-DAC assumed that the locking
device would always be of the type that is located on the brake pedal.
That type of device can be difficult to disengage, thereby delaying the
operator's ability to release the brake. However, there are other types
of brake locking mechanisms that do not present this problem (for
example, a brake lock that is hand-actuated). This raised the issue of
whether the exemption is needed. Consequently, OSHA asked for public
comment on whether to change proposed Sec. 1926.1415(a)(4) by deleting
the exemption and requiring a hoist brake locking mechanism for all
cranes.
OSHA received no comment on this issue. Therefore, OSHA has not
included the exemption in the final rule. The final paragraph (a)(4) is
published as proposed except that OSHA has removed the phrase ``except
for portal cranes and floating cranes.''
Integral Holding Device/Check Valve: Paragraph (a)(5) requires that
hydraulic outrigger jacks have an integral holding device/check valve.
Such a device is necessary to prevent the outrigger jack from
collapsing in the event of a hydraulic failure. (See the discussion of
this provision in 73 FR 59786, Oct. 9, 2008.) OSHA is promulgating this
provision as proposed.
Two commenters, both of which had nominated C-DAC members,
suggested moving this requirement to Sec. 1926.1433 (Design,
construction and testing) due to their belief that an integral holding
device/check valve is a design feature. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) Neither
of these organizations' nominees dissented on this issue. Both
organizations indicated in their comments that they supported the
recommendations of C-DAC and were not providing any negative comments
on provisions that mirrored the C-DAC consensus document. Since this
provision is unchanged from the C-DAC consensus document, the Agency
assumes that the commenters believe that they are suggesting a non-
substantive formatting change.
The commenters are mistaken in that regard. By locating this
provision in the Safety Devices section of the standard, the employer
is required to inspect the integral holding device/check valve (see,
e.g., Sec. 1926.1412(d)(1)(xiv)) and, if it is not functioning
properly, to not use the crane until it is repaired (see Sec.
1926.1415(b)). If this provision were moved to the Design, construction
and testing section, it would no longer be considered a safety device.
If it was not functioning, it would be left to the competent person
conducting the shift and monthly inspections (and the qualified person
conducting the annual inspection) to determine if the deficiency
constituted a safety hazard (see, e.g., Sec. 1926.1412(d)(2)). C-DAC
determined, and OSHA agrees, that an integral holding device/check
valve is essential for the safe operation of hydraulic outrigger jacks
and therefore needs to be designated as a safety device.
Rail Clamps and Rail Stops: Paragraph (a)(6) specifies that
equipment on rails have rail clamps and rail stops, except for portal
cranes. (See the discussion of this provision in 73 FR 59786, Oct. 9,
2008.) OSHA received no comment on this provision. Therefore, it is
promulgated as proposed.
Horn: In the proposed rule, a horn was not listed as a safety
device. One commenter requested that the standard require a horn. (ID-
0156.1.) ASME B30.5-2004 requires that an ``audible signal device'' be
provided, within reach of the operator. OSHA agrees that a horn is an
important safety feature; it is typically a standard feature on cranes
and is used to warn workers of imminent dangers. Therefore, OSHA has
included a horn in the list of safety devices in Sec. 1926.1415(a)(7)
of the final rule.
The horn need not be permanently installed on the equipment, but it
must be in a location where the operator can access and use it
immediately to warn workers of imminent danger. An operator may use a
removable device, such as a hand-held air horn that is stored near the
operator in a manner that would not interfere with the operation of the
equipment, if it satisfies those requirements.
OSHA is also requiring in Sec. 1926.1415(a)(7)(ii) that built-in
(i.e., integral) horns be removed or tagged out when they are not
working properly. Similarly, a removable horn must be removed from the
equipment when it is not working properly. As noted in the previous
paragraph, the operator would be permitted to resume operation if an
operational horn, such as a hand-held air horn, is added to the cab in
the proper location. It is therefore critical that the operator, and
operators in subsequent shifts, not be confused about which horn is
operational. A non-operational horn must be tagged out or removed,
prior to the resumption of operation, to avoid the operator's
inadvertent reliance on the nonoperational horn. The horn is often
required when an unexpected hazard presents itself, and the operator
must therefore locate and use it quickly.
Paragraph (b) Proper Operation Required
Paragraph (b) prohibits the operation of the equipment if any of
the safety devices listed in this section are not in proper working
order. Under OSHA's existing Sec. 1926.20(b)(3), employers must tag
out or remove any equipment that is not in compliance with any
applicable requirement in part 1926. In Sec. 1926.1417(f), OSHA makes
it clear that when equipment is ``taken out of
[[Page 47983]]
service,'' the employer must place a tag in the cab to provide clear
notice to all employees that the equipment is out of service. To avoid
any potential ambiguity about whether equipment is ``taken out of
service'' when its operation is prohibited because of an inoperational
safety device, OSHA is inserting new text in Sec. 1926.1415(b) and a
cross reference to Sec. 1926.1417 (Operation). Specifically, final
paragraph (b)(2) requires that equipment be ``taken out of service''
when one of the safety devices in Sec. 1926.1415 is not operating
properly. The general tagout requirement in Sec. 1926.1417(f)(1) will
apply whenever any of the safety devices are not operating properly.
The Agency notes that the specific tagout/removal requirements for
crane level indicators (Sec. 1926.1415(a)(1)(ii)) and horns (Sec.
1926.1415(a)(7)(ii)) are intended to supplement this general
requirement. Unlike the safety devices addressed in Sec. Sec.
1926.1415(a)(2) through (a)(6), which are not as likely to be left on
the equipment once they are non-operational, Sec. Sec.
1926.1415(a)(1)(ii)) and 1926.1415(a)(7)(ii)) address the additional
hazard that non-operational equipment might remain in the cab, and be
accidently relied on by the operator, once an operational version of
the same device has been placed in the cab.
Section 1926.1416 Operational Aids
This section sets forth the requirements for equipping cranes and
derricks with certain operational aids. ``Operational aids'' are
defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as ``devices that assist the operator in the
safe operation of the crane by providing information or automatically
taking control of a crane function. These include, but are not limited
to, the devices listed in Sec. 1926.1416 (`listed operational
aids').''
As discussed above regarding Sec. 1926.1415, OSHA determines that
the devices addressed in Sec. 1926.1416 enhance safety. However, they
are less essential to the safe operation of equipment than the safety
devices addressed by Sec. 1926.1415 because sufficient temporary
alternative measures are available. Crane operators historically used
these temporary alternative measures as safety precautions prior to the
widespread availability and use of these operational aids.
Paragraph (a)
Proposed paragraph (a) of this section provided that the
operational aids listed in this section are required on all equipment
covered by subpart CC, unless otherwise specified.
Other sections of this rule provide exceptions for various types of
equipment. Under Sec. 1926.1435(e)(1), this section does not apply to
tower cranes. Instead, the operational aids required for tower cranes
are specified in Sec. 1926.1435. Under Sec. 1926.1436(f)(1),
Sec. Sec. 1926.1416(d)(1), (e)(1), and (e)(4) do not apply to
derricks.
This section also does not apply to existing equipment manufactured
before certain dates. Those dates are keyed either to the time an
operational aid was first required by a national consensus standard or
to the effective date of the standard. One year after the effective
date of this final rule, the proposed rule would have required all
operational aids on all equipment, with a single exception: proposed
paragraph (e)(4) did not require load weighing or similar devices on
derricks.
A trade association asked that articulating cranes be exempt from
certain requirements of this section: the requirement for a boom angle
or radius indicator in paragraph (e)(1) of this section; the
requirement for a jib angle indicator in paragraph (e)(2) of this
section; the requirement for a boom length indicator in paragraph
(e)(3) of this section; and the requirement for an outrigger position
sensor/monitor in paragraph (e)(5)(i) of this section. (ID-0206.1.) As
to the first three, the commenter stated that these would not be
practical on articulating cranes because of the boom configuration on
such cranes. The commenter said that a boom angle indicator or jib
angle indicator could not be used because articulating cranes can have
up to three boom sections at different angles. Unlike cranes with
straight booms, their capacity is determined by the combination of boom
angles rather than a single angle. Similarly, the commenter stated,
boom length indicators are not practical on articulating cranes because
their lifting capacity is based on the position of the boom sections
rather than the boom length. Finally, the commenter asserted that
articulating cranes should be exempt from the requirement for outrigger
position sensor monitors because such cranes use stabilizers rather
than outriggers.
OSHA agrees with the commenter that boom angle indicators, jib
angle indicators, and boom length indicators are not appropriate for
articulating cranes for the reasons given by the commenter.
Accordingly, OSHA is adding Sec. 1926.416(a)(1), which excludes
articulating cranes from the requirements in Sec. Sec.
1926.1416(e)(1), (e)(2), and (e)(3).
OSHA is not exempting articulating cranes from the requirement of
Sec. 1926.1416(e)(5)(i). As discussed under Sec. 1926.1404, for
certain types of cranes, stabilizers serve the same function as
outriggers and, where appropriate, provisions of the proposed rule that
applied to outriggers are being changed in the final rule to also apply
to stabilizers. One such provision is paragraph (e)(5)(i) of this
section, which, as discussed below, has been modified from the proposed
rule to require outrigger/stabilizer position sensor monitors rather
than outrigger position sensor monitors on equipment manufactured more
than one year after the effective date of the standard. As so modified,
the provision appropriately applies to articulating cranes.
Another commenter stated that digger derricks do not typically have
anti-two blocking devices (paragraph (d)(3)), radius indicators
(paragraph (e)(1)), load weighing devices (paragraph (e)(4)), outrigger
position indicators (paragraph (e)(6)(i)), and hoist drum rotation
indicators (paragraph (e)(5)(ii).\80\ (ID-0155.1.) This commenter does
not state that such devices would be impractical on digger derricks but
only that they are not currently equipped with the devices. OSHA notes
that the ANSI standard applicable to digger derricks, ANSI/ASSE A10.31-
2006, does not require the devices listed by the commenter. As noted
above, this final rule is exempting certain older or existing equipment
from the need to be equipped with certain operational aids when the
consensus standard for such equipment has not required those devices.
Consistent with this policy, OSHA is specifying that only those digger
derricks manufactured more than one year after the effective date of
this standard must be equipped with anti-two blocking devices, boom
angle or radius indicators, and load weighing devices. Under Sec.
1926.1416(e)(5), outrigger position indicators and hoist drum rotation
indicators are not required on any equipment until one year after the
effective date of the standard, so it is not necessary to single out
digger derricks for special treatment for these devices. Accordingly,
OSHA is adding Sec. 1926.1416(a)(2) to the final rule, which provides
that the requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1416(d)(3), (e)(1), and (e)(4)
only apply to those digger derricks manufactured more than one year
after the effective date of this standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ The term ``digger derrick'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401.
As discussed in Sec. 1926.1400, digger derricks are not covered by
the standard when used for work related to utility poles but are
subject to this final rule when used covered for general lifting
activities unrelated to utility poles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 47984]]
Paragraph (b)
Proposed paragraph (b) of this section stated that operations shall
not begin unless the listed operational aids are in proper working
order, except where the employer meets specified temporary alternative
measures. If the crane or derrick manufacturer specified more
protective alternative measures, the employer would have to follow
those measures.
Upon reviewing the proposed paragraph, OSHA believes it does not
state its requirement as clearly as possible. As subsequent provisions
of this section make clear, employers may only use temporary
alternative measures while listed operational aids are being repaired,
and then only for limited times. OSHA is rewording paragraph (b) in the
final rule to make these requirements clearer.
Two hearing participants requested that, in general, OSHA remove
any provision in the proposed rule that would require strict adherence
to manufacturer's procedures. (ID-0341; -0342.) Compliance with
manufacturer procedures is addressed in the discussion of Sec.
1926.1417. In addition, OSHA determines that the rule addresses the
hearing participants' concerns. Employers can fully comply with the
standard by maintaining the listed operational aids in proper working
order. For brief periods while such aids are being repaired, employers
can generally comply by following the temporary alternatives listed in
the rule. Only if manufacturers recommend safer alternatives, which
OSHA concludes will rarely occur, will employers need to look to those
recommendations rather than the precautions specified in the rule.
Paragraph (c)
Paragraph (c) of this section states that if a listed operational
aid stops working properly during operations, the operator must safely
stop operations until the temporary alternative measures are
implemented or the device is again working properly. Further, if a
replacement part is no longer available, a substitute device that
performs the same type of function may be used, and the use of such a
device is not considered a modification under Sec. 1926.1434,
Equipment modifications. Section 1926.1434 applies to modifications or
additions that affect the capacity or safe operation of the equipment
except where the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3)
of Sec. 1926.1434 are met. OSHA determines that it is unnecessary to
apply Sec. 1926.1434 to the use of a substitute operational aid
because, as long as the substitute device works properly, its use will
not affect the capacity or safe operation of the equipment. No comments
were received on this paragraph, and it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d) Category I Operational Aids and Alternative Measures
The standard categorizes operational aids by the amount of time
permitted for the use of temporary alternative measures in place of the
listed operational aids. Employers must ensure the repair of Category I
operational aids, addressed by paragraph (d), no later than 7 days
after the deficiency occurs. Category II operational aids, addressed
below by paragraph (e), have a 30-day time limit for repair. Except
where noted, C-DAC recommended each of these aids for the reasons set
forth below. The Committee further determined that each of the
temporary alternative measurers would be safe to use until the
deficient operational aid was restored to proper service within the
time required under the section. OSHA agrees. (For purposes of
clarification, the Agency has added a reference to Sec. 1926.1416(d)
noting that the requirements of Sec. 1926.1417(j) are applicable. See
further discussion at Sec. 1926.1417(j).)
Both Category I and II have an exception to the repair time limits.
For Category I, if the employer documents that it has ordered the
necessary parts within 7 days of the occurrence of the deficiency, the
repair must be completed within 7 days of receipt of the part. For
Category II, if the employer documents that it has ordered the
necessary parts within 7 days of the date on which the deficiency was
discovered, and does not receive the part in time to complete the
repair in 30 days, the repair must be completed within 7 days of
receipt of the part. OSHA determines that these time limits are both
feasible and reflective of the amount of time that it is appropriate to
rely on the temporary alternative measures in each category.
During the SBREFA Panel process, one Small Entity Representative
stated that an extended time limit might be required to determine the
appropriate part number for older equipment. Therefore, it might not be
possible to order a replacement within 7 days of the occurrence of the
deficiency. OSHA sought public comment on the extent to which this is a
problem. OSHA further sought comment on how to accommodate employers
when the unavailability of a part number hinders them from ordering a
replacement part. OSHA did not receive comments on these issues.
The SBREFA Panel also questioned whether the number of ``days'' for
ordering parts and completing repairs for operational aids refers to
calendar days or business days. Absent a different definition in the
standard, OSHA interpreted the word ``days'' to mean ``working days''
which, as discussed above in relation to proposed Sec. 1926.1407(e),
would mean Mondays through Fridays, excluding Federal holidays. OSHA
sought public comment on whether a different definition of ``days''
should apply under this section.
One commenter stated that the use of the term ``days'' is unclear.
(ID-0143.1.) Two commenters stated it was C-DAC's intention that the
term ``days'' mean calendar days as opposed to business days. The
commenters stated that the circumstances in Sec. 1926.1407(e), where
the rule uses business days, are unique because power companies are not
open/available on weekends.
OSHA concludes that the 7 and 30 day time frames should refer to
calendar days. The periods correspond to one calendar week and one
typical calendar month, and it is, therefore, easy to determine when
the period ends if they mean calendar days. Moreover, referring to
``calendar'' days will lead to faster repairs and help promote safety.
Therefore, OSHA has clarified by adding the word ``calendar'' before
each use of the word ``days'' in this section; the remainder of
paragraph (c) is identical to the proposed rule.
Paragraph (d) lists the required Category I operational aids and
the acceptable temporary alternative measures for these aids.
Boom Hoist Limiting Device: Paragraph (d)(1) requires that all
equipment manufactured after December 16, 1969, have a boom hoist
limiting device. As defined in Sec. 1926.1401, a boom hoist limiting
device ``disengages boom hoist power when the boom reaches a
predetermined operating angle'' and also ``sets brakes or closes valves
to prevent the boom from lowering after power is disengaged.'' Section
1926.1401 also defines the term ``boom hoist limiting device'' to
include ``boom hoist disengaging device, boom hoist shutoff, boom hoist
disconnect, boom hoist hydraulic relief, boom hoist kick-outs,
automatic boom stop device, or derricking limiter.'' A boom hoist
limiting device automatically prevents the boom hoist from pulling the
boom past the minimum allowable radius (maximum boom angle). If the
boom hoist pulls the boom past that point, a failure is likely (for
example, the boom
[[Page 47985]]
could buckle from being forced against the boom stop).
The December 16, 1969, date reflects the effective date of ASME
B30.5-1968. This was the first national consensus standard to require a
boom hoist limiting device, and C-DAC regarded that date as a
reasonable indicator of when the industry began to widely manufacture
or equip cranes and derricks with such devices. OSHA agrees. Although
the ASME standard only applies to crawler, locomotive, and truck
cranes, OSHA is extending this provision to all equipment based on
prevailing industry practice.
The standard includes three temporary alternative measures in
paragraphs (d)(1)(A)-(C), of which the employer must use at least one
if the boom hoist limiting device malfunctions: (A) Use of a boom angle
indicator; (B) clearly marking the boom hoist cable at a point that
will give the operator sufficient time to stop the hoist to keep the
boom within the minimum allowable radius; and, (C) if a spotter is
used, clearly marking the boom hoist cable at a point that will give
the spotter sufficient time to signal the operator and have the
operator stop the hoist to keep the boom within the minimum allowable
radius. C-DAC recommended these measures because historically they were
used by employers prior to the development of the boom hoist limiting
device.
In the proposed rule, Sec. 1926.1416(d)(1)(ii) specified that
employers must, on a permanent basis, use at least one of these
measures for equipment manufactured on or before December 16, 1969 that
``was not originally equipped'' with a boom hoist limiting device. OSHA
notes that equipment not originally equipped with a boom hoist limiting
device might have one added later, and that such a piece of equipment
should be treated the same as equipment originally equipped with such a
device. Accordingly, OSHA has modified Sec. 1926.1416(d)(1)(ii) by
replacing ``was not originally equipped'' with ``is not equipped'' and
removing ``on a permanent basis.'' If and when the equipment is
modified to include the limiting device, it would fall under Sec.
1926.1416(d)(1)(i). Until that point, it would remain under Sec.
1926.1416(d)(1)(ii), and at least one of the measures in paragraphs
(d)(1)(A)-(C) would be required at all times.
Luffing Jib Limiting Device: Paragraph (d)(2) requires that
equipment with a luffing jib have a luffing jib limiting device. As
defined in Sec. 1926.1401, a luffing jib limiting device ``is similar
to a boom hoist limiting device, except that it limits the movement of
the luffing jib.'' These devices function similarly and are
distinguished only as to the type of crane extension they are designed
to limit automatically, the jib or the boom. The temporary alternative
measures for a luffing jib limiting device are the same as those for a
boom hoist limiting device in paragraphs (d)(1)(i)(A)-(C). For clarity,
the Agency added the words, ``rather than the boom hoist'' to paragraph
(d)(2)(i).
Anti Two-Blocking Device: Paragraph (d)(3) sets forth the
requirements for anti two-blocking devices. Section 1926.1401 defines
``two-blocking'' as ``a condition in which a component that is
uppermost on the hoist line such as the load block, hook block,
overhaul ball, or similar component, comes in contact with the boom
tip, fixed upper block or similar component. This binds the system and
continued application of power can cause failure of the hoist rope or
other component.'' As the definition indicates, two-blocking can cause
the crane to drop the load, the headache ball, or another component,
creating a hazard to employees below. When hoisting personnel, an anti
two-blocking device had been required by former Sec.
1926.550(g)(3)(ii)(C) since October 3, 1988, but was not otherwise
required under subpart N. OSHA concludes that requiring the use of anti
two-blocking devices will reduce the number of crane-related injuries
and fatalities.
There are two forms of anti two-block devices: an automatic
prevention device or a warning device. The automatic prevention device
automatically stops two-blocking from occurring. The warning device
warns the operator when two-blocking is about to occur. OSHA determines
that an automatic prevention device provides better protection than a
warning device for employees, since it automatically stops two-
blocking. As discussed below, the standard ultimately requires
automatic prevention devices on all equipment manufactured after
February 28, 1992, under a phase-in schedule. The standard takes into
account of the date the national consensus standard, ASME B30.5, began
to require such devices for telescopic boom cranes, and that B30.5
continues to allow lattice boom cranes to be equipped with either
automatic prevention devices or warning devices.
ASME B30.5, effective February 28, 1992, states that telescopic
boom cranes must have automatic prevention devices. For lattice boom
cranes, ASME B30.5 states that they must have two-block protection but
allows greater flexibility, allowing them to be equipped with either
automatic prevention devices or warning devices. The additional
protection for telescopic boom cranes in the ASME standard reflects the
fact that such cranes are more likely to two-block because telescoping
the boom out (an action that does not occur with lattice boom cranes)
moves the boom's block closer to the load end of the hoist cable, which
can cause two-blocking.
Because February 28, 1992 is the date that ASME B30.5 first stated
that telescopic boom cranes must have anti two-block devices and is
when the industry first began widely manufacturing or equipping such
cranes with such devices, proposed paragraph (d)(3)(i) requires
automatic prevention devices on all telescopic boom cranes manufactured
after February 28, 1992. However, because ASME B30.5 allows lattice
boom cranes to have either an automatic prevention device or a warning
device since February 28, 1992, paragraph (d)(3)(ii)(A) gives employers
the option of using either device on lattice boom cranes manufactured
between February 28, 1992, and one year after the effective date of
this standard.
OSHA concludes that an automatic prevention device provides better
protection than a warning device because it directly addresses the
hazard, rather than alerting an operator and requiring an additional
step by the operator to address the hazard. Therefore, lattice boom
cranes manufactured more than one year after the effective date of this
standard must be equipped with an automatic prevention device.
Paragraph (d)(3)(ii)(C) excludes lattice boom equipment used during
certain activities from the anti two-block requirements of (d)(3)(A)
and (B). The provision exempts lattice boom equipment when used for
dragline, clamshell (grapple), magnet, drop ball, container
handling,\81\ concrete bucket, marine operations that do not involve
hoisting personnel, and pile driving work. C-DAC indicated that most of
these operations involve heavy repetitive motion, and anti-two-block
devices used during these activities consistently malfunction (that is,
the device ``trips'' even though two-blocking has not occurred) and are
frequently damaged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ In most situations hoisting containers are regulated under
29 CFR part 1918; this standard applies to hoisting containers only
where that activity is construction work. For example, hoisting a
container of construction material from a ship onto a concrete pier
that is part of a bridge construction project is a construction
activity covered by this standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, note that Sec. 1926.1437(f)(1) requires anti two-block
devices on floating cranes/derricks and land
[[Page 47986]]
cranes/derricks on barges when hoisting personnel or hoisting over an
occupied cofferdam or shaft. The Agency determines that cranes need
anti two-block devices to prevent employees from being dropped and to
prevent loads from striking employees in the confined work environment
of a cofferdam or shaft. These safety considerations outweigh any
concern for damage to a device or unnecessary ``tripping'' during
marine operations.
The temporary alternative measures available when an anti two-block
device on a lattice-boom crane or derrick malfunctions are to clearly
mark the cable so that it can easily be seen by the operator at a point
that will give the operator sufficient time to stop the hoist to
prevent two-blocking, or to use a spotter to warn the operator to stop
the hoist.
For telescopic boom cranes, the temporary alternative measures
required are to clearly mark the cable so that it can easily be seen by
the operator at a point that will give the operator sufficient time to
stop the hoist to prevent two-blocking and to use a spotter when
extending the boom. OSHA determines that the alternative measures for
telescopic boom cranes must require the use of a spotter when extending
the boom because two-blocking can occur even when the cable hoist is
not being operated. As noted above, telescoping the boom out moves the
boom's block closer to the load end of the hoist cable, which can cause
two-blocking. A mark on the hoist cable in such instances will not warn
the operator that two-blocking is about to occur. Therefore, when
extending the boom, a spotter is required.
The proposed rule did not address the issue of anti two-block
protection for articulating cranes. Many such cranes are equipped with
forks at the end of the boom and do not have the potential for two-
blocking. However, those equipped with a load hoist present the same
potential for two-blocking as other cranes with load hoists. A trade
association pointed out that the ASME standard for articulating cranes,
ASME B30.22-1998, first required two-block protection effective
December 31, 1999. (ID-0206.1.) OSHA infers that articulating cranes
with boom hoists manufactured after December 31, 1999, were routinely
equipped with automatic two-block protection after that date.
Therefore, to treat such cranes in a manner similar to lattice boom
cranes and telescopic boom cranes, OSHA is adding Sec.
1926.1416(d)(3)(iii) to the final rule.
Paragraph (e) Category II Operational Aids and Alternative Measures.
Paragraph (e) of this section lists the required Category II
operational aids and the acceptable temporary alternative measures for
these aids. If any of these aids is not working properly, it must be
repaired no later than 30 days after the deficiency occurs. As noted
above, if the employer documents that it has ordered the necessary
parts within 7 calendar days from the occurrence of the deficiency, and
does not receive the part in time to complete the repair in 30 calendar
days, the repair must be completed within 7 calendar days of receipt of
the part. (For purposes of clarification, the Agency has added a
reference to Sec. 1926.1416(e) noting that the requirements of Sec.
1926.1417(j) are applicable. See further discussion at Sec.
1926.1417(j).)
Boom Angle or Radius Indicator: Paragraph (e)(1) requires a boom
angle or radius indicator that is readable from the operator's station
on all equipment. Section 1926.1401 defines ``boom angle indicator'' as
``a device which measures the angle of the boom relative to the
horizontal.'' This definition is identical to that in the SC&RF
Handbook. It is necessary to know the boom angle to determine the
crane's capacity from its load chart. The temporary alternative measure
is to measure the radii or boom angle with a measuring device.
Jib Angle Indicator: Paragraph (e)(2) requires a jib angle
indicator on all equipment with a luffing jib. The temporary
alternative measure is to measure the radii or jib angle with a
measuring device.
Boom Length Indicator: Paragraph (e)(3) requires a boom length
indicator on all equipment equipped with a telescopic boom. Section
1926.1401 defines a ``boom length indicator,'' as a device that,
``indicates the length of the permanent part of the boom (such as ruled
markings on the boom) or, as in some computerized systems, the length
of the boom with extensions/attachments.'' OSHA did not receive any
comments on the definition and is promulgating it as proposed. The
operator must know the length of the boom because it affects the
crane's capacity, as shown on the load chart. At least one of the
following must be used as a temporary alternative measures: mark the
boom with measured marks to calculate boom length; calculate boom
length from boom angle and radius measurements; or measure the boom
with a measuring device.
Load Weighing and Similar Devices: Proposed paragraph (e)(4)
required load weighing and similar devices on all equipment with a
rated capacity over 6,000 pounds and manufactured after March 29, 2003
(except derricks; a comparable provision for derricks is in Sec.
1926.1436(f)(3), discussed below). The framework of this proposed
paragraph was similar to the approach taken in sec. 5-1.9.9.2 of ASME
B30.5-2004, respecting these aids. The proposed standard permitted
employers to choose to outfit its equipment with either a load weighing
device, load moment (or rated capacity) indicator, or a load moment or
rated capacity limiter. The latter two terms are defined in Sec.
1926.1401. All three devices are intended to help the operator avoid
exceeding the equipment's rated capacity and thereby prevent the crane
from tipping over.
This proposed provision was limited to equipment (other than
derricks) manufactured after March 29, 2003. That was the date when
ASME B30.5 first called for all mobile cranes with a rated capacity
over 6,000 pounds to be equipped with load weighing devices. The
proposed provision was thus keyed to the date when the industry first
began widely manufacturing or equipping mobile cranes with load
weighing or load moment devices.
A trade association pointed out that ASME B30.5 does not apply to
articulating cranes and that the applicable consensus standard, ASME
B30.22, does not require the devices specified in paragraph (e)(4).
(ID-0206.1.) The commenter stated, however, that these are likely to be
required by the 2010 update of ASME B30.22.
As discussed in Sec. 1926.1400, evidence in the record shows that
many articulating cranes are currently equipped with automatic overload
prevention devices which, like the devices specified in this section,
are designed to avoid the possibility of tipover. Therefore, the
tipover hazard addressed by paragraph (e)(4) can be addressed for
newly-manufactured articulating cranes by requiring such cranes to be
equipped with either automatic overload prevention devices or one of
the devices specified in paragraph (e)(4). To achieve this objective,
OSHA is therefore revising proposed paragraph (e)(4). The requirement
in proposed paragraph (e)(4) is revised to exclude articulating cranes
and is renumbered paragraph (e)(4)(i) in the final rule. New paragraph
(e)(4)(i) includes temporary alternative measures based on calculations
from sources recognized by the industry. The proposed rule had provided
for calculations based on a ``reliable'' source or calculation method,
or ``by other equally reliable means.'' To avoid the
[[Page 47987]]
potentially subjective interpretations of ``reliable,'' OSHA is instead
requiring that the measurements be from a source typically relied on in
the industry.
A new paragraph (e)(4)(ii), applicable to articulating cranes, is
added. This new paragraph requires articulating cranes manufactured
more than one year after the effective date of the standard to be
equipped with either an automatic overload prevention device, a load
weighing device, a load moment (or rated capacity) indictor, or a load
moment (or rated capacity) limiter. Paragraph (e)(4)(ii) will protect
workers against articulating cranes tipping over while giving employers
a choice of means to achieve this objective. The temporary alternative
measure required under paragraph (e)(4)(ii) is the same as that
required under paragraph (e)(4)(i).
A commenter informed OSHA that New York City requires a load
weighing or similar device on cranes manufactured after December 30,
1993, and requested that the final rule allow local governments to
impose stricter requirements. (ID-0156.1.) Whether local governments
can impose stricter requirements than provided under this final rule is
discussed under federalism in section V.D of this preamble.
Proposed paragraph (e)(5) required two future operational aids--an
outrigger position sensor/monitor and a hoist drum rotation indicator--
on all equipment manufactured more than one year after the effective
date of this standard.\82\ As discussed in Sec. 1926.1404, certain
types of equipment are equipped with stabilizers rather than
outriggers, and OSHA is modifying the language of proposed
``outrigger'' provisions to clarify that such provisions also apply to
equipment with stabilizers. Therefore, paragraph (e)(5)(i) is being
reworded in the final rule to apply to equipment with stabilizers as
well as outriggers. Paragraph (e)(5)(ii), which requires hoist drum
rotation indicators, is promulgated as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ The proposed rule would have required these aids on
equipment manufactured after January 1, 2008. Here, as elsewhere,
OSHA believes that devices not commonly installed on equipment
should be not be required until more than one year after the
effective date of the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One commenter stated that deadman controls should be required on
all cranes. (ID-0156.1.) Section 1926.1435(d)(2)(viii) requires that
tower cranes have deadman controls, but C-DAC did not determined these
should be required on other types of cranes. This commenter has not
stated why it believes such controls are needed for safe operation of
other types of cranes. Accordingly, OSHA defers to C-DAC's judgment
that deadman controls should not be required on cranes other than tower
cranes.
Section 1926.1417 Operation
Section 1926.1417 addresses hazards associated with general
operation of equipment covered by this standard. Previously, 29 CFR
part 1926, subpart N primarily addressed safe operation by
incorporating national consensus standards and manufacturer
recommendations. For example, former Sec. 1926.550(b)(2) required
crawler, truck, and locomotive cranes to comply with the operation
requirements of ANSI B30.5-1968. The provisions in this section are
designed to update such requirements, make them more comprehensive, and
state them in a way that is clear and enforceable.
Paragraph (a)
Paragraph (a) of this section requires employers to comply with the
manufacturer procedures applicable to the operational functions of all
equipment covered by this standard, including the use of equipment with
attachments. ``Procedures'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 to include,
but not be limited to, ``instructions, diagrams, recommendations,
warnings, specifications, protocols, and limitations.''
Two commenters opposed this provision. The first, a representative
from the building industry, stated that it was ``problematic'' to
``literally require employers to become familiar with and obey to the
letter anything written by a manufacturer related to a crane, no matter
how unwise, unnecessary, or infeasible.'' (ID-0232.1.) The commenter
also explained that crane manufacturers fear tort liability, which
causes them to over-warn in their manuals, and suggested that employers
needed to be able to use common sense to separate over-warning from
serious recommendations. The commenter argued further that this
provision constituted a delegation of authority inconsistent with the
U.S. Constitution and the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and was
unsupported by the rulemaking record. A building industry trade
association agreed with the building industry representative's points
and advocated amending this provision to require operation of equipment
in a manner ``consistent with manufacturers' recommendations.'' (ID-
0214.1.) It also believed that the costs of complying with this
provision would be excessive.
OSHA disagrees with the suggestion that this provision is
problematic because of the possibility that some equipment manufacturer
may conceivably develop procedures which are ``unwise, unnecessary, or
infeasible.'' Neither commenter provided any specific examples or data
in support of this assertion, and it is unreasonable to think that
crane manufacturers would develop such procedures. Like all product
manufacturers, crane manufacturers want satisfied customers and repeat
business, and OSHA has no basis to conclude, as the commenters suggest,
that they will alienate their customers by recommending unnecessary
procedures that will reduce the usefulness and productivity of their
products. Moreover, there are sound reasons to determine that following
manufacturer procedures will result in both the safe and productive use
of cranes. The manufacturer of a large and complex piece of machinery
such as a crane is thoroughly familiar with the machine's design,
components, and capabilities and is well-positioned to develop the
procedures that enable the crane to be used effectively and safely. The
commenters provided no basis for OSHA to conclude that allowing crane
users to pick and choose which manufacturer recommendations to follow
will promote safety, and OSHA does not believe this is the case.
Moreover, C-DAC's members had vast experience in crane manufacturing
and use and were well-positioned to determine whether compliance with
manufacturer's recommendations will promote crane safety. They
concluded that it would. In the absence of additional evidence, OSHA
defers to C-DAC's experience.
OSHA also finds no merit in the building industry representative's
assertion that compliance with manufacturer recommendations should not
be required because manufacturers ``over-warn'' out of liability
concerns. The best way for manufacturers to avoid liability for
accidents involving their products is to recommend the precautions that
are needed to prevent such accidents, so their concern for tort
liability is fully consistent with the objective of this standard.
Regarding the delegation of authority issue, OSHA notes that
provisions similar to this one, including provisions in the prior
cranes standard in former Sec. 1926.550, have withstood judicial
scrutiny on every occasion on which they have been challenged.\83\ See,
e.g.,
[[Page 47988]]
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Miami-Dade County, 594 F.3d 1321;
Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. Brock, 862 F.2d 63, 68-69
(3d Cir. 1988); Towne Constr. Co. v. Occupational Safety & Health
Review Comm'n, 847 F.2d 1187, 1189 (6th Cir. 1988) (finding the
physical impossibility of requiring OSHA independently to set safety
standards for every industry job classification and industrial
substance in the country justifies reliance on the fruits of private
efforts as governmental standards).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ Among the many OSHA standards requiring compliance with
manufacturer information are: Sec. 1910.134, UI; Sec. 1910.184,
Slings; Sec. 1910.265, Sawmills; Sec. 1915.113, Shackles and
hooks; Sec. 1910.217, Mechanical power presses; Sec. 1926.451,
Scaffolds: General requirements; Sec. 1926.302, Power-operated hand
tools; and Sec. 1917.43, Powered industrial trucks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The requirement in Sec. 1926.1417(a) to comply with manufacturers'
operating procedures is essentially the same as that imposed by former
Sec. 1926.550(a)(1) of the prior rule. As the commenter from the
building industry notes, former Sec. 1926.550(a)(1) was upheld against
a challenge that requiring compliance with manufacturer's
specifications and operating limitations is an illegal delegation of
authority to private persons. (ID-0232.1, citing Towne Construction, 12
BNA OSHC 2185 (OSHRC 1986) aff'd 847 F.2d 1187 (6th Cir. 1988).) The
Review Commission and the Sixth Circuit found that the prior rule's
delegation to manufacturers was circumscribed by other regulatory
requirements governing the design and construction of cranes. (See,
e.g., 12 BNA OSHC at 2186 noting design specifications in 29 CFR
1910.180(c)(1) applied to cranes covered by former Sec. 1926.550.) The
final rule contains design, construction and testing requirements that
are more comprehensive than those applicable under the prior rule.
These limitations on manufacturers' discretion are sufficient to defeat
a facial delegation challenge. 12 BNA OSHC at 2186, 847 F.2d at 1189.
See also Associated Builders and Contractors, 2010 WL 276669 *3 (OSHA's
adoption of consensus specifications for safe operation of cranes
``conforms with an intelligible principle'' and is therefore valid). To
require OSHA to independently determine and codify every safety
procedure for every configuration of every make and model of crane or
other equipment covered by this standard, as well as every attachment
or device that could be used with that equipment, would be unrealistic,
inefficient, and contrary to all jurisprudence on this issue. In light
of C-DAC's recommendations to include manufacturer procedures in
subpart CC, and based on the record as a whole, OSHA concludes that
requiring compliance with manufacturer procedures is an efficient and
appropriate means of ensuring safe maintenance, assembly and
disassembly, configuration, and operation of equipment covered by this
subpart. Therefore, OSHA is incorporating manufacturers' procedures and
recommendations into Sec. 1926.1417, and several other provisions of
this standard, where the Agency determines that it is the most
effective and appropriate way to accomplish the OSH Act goals.
Two commenters objected to OSHA's inclusion of manufacturer
``recommendations'' in the definition for equipment criteria. (ID-
0205.1; -0213.1.) The commenters, however, provide no justification for
distinguishing manufacturer recommendations from other manufacturer
procedures. C-DAC determined that manufacturer recommendations were an
appropriate means of ensuring the safe use of equipment, and OSHA
agrees. Manufacturer recommendations, like procedures, specifications,
prohibitions, etc., instruct the user how to use the equipment safely
and in a manner most consistent with the equipment's design.
Moreover, there is nothing novel in OSHA's reliance on manufacturer
recommendations. A number of OSHA standards already require compliance
with manufacturer recommendations. See, e.g., Sec. 1910.134,
Respirator protection; Sec. 1910.184, Slings. As noted above, the
former crane standard (in former Sec. 1926.550(a)) replaced by this
final rule included a broad prohibition based solely on manufacturer
recommendations: ``Attachments used with cranes shall not exceed the
capacity, rating, or scope recommended by the manufacturer.'' Yet no
court has invalidated an OSHA standard requiring compliance with
manufacturer recommendations, even though several containing such
language have been challenged. The commenters offer no new compelling
legal arguments for why OSHA should delete provisions requiring
compliance with manufacturer recommendations, and do not identify a
meaningful distinction between a manufacturer's recommendation,
procedure, instruction, or specification. Accordingly, OSHA is
requiring compliance with manufacturer recommendations as proposed.
Finally, with respect to the suggestion to permit alternate
procedures provided they are ``consistent with'' manufacturers'
procedures, the Agency concludes that amending this provision in that
manner would be unacceptable because it would lead to uncertainty over
what procedures are ``consistent with'' the manufacturers' recommended
procedures. Therefore, this provision is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b) Unavailable Operation Procedures
Under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, in the event that the
manufacturer procedures for operation are unavailable, the employer
will be required to develop procedures necessary for the safe operation
of the equipment and its attachments. The employer will also be
required to ensure compliance with such procedures. ``Unavailable
procedures'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as procedures that are no
longer available from the manufacturer, or have never been available
from the manufacturer. For instance, procedures that are in the
employer's possession but are not on the job site, would not be
considered unavailable under Sec. Sec. 1926.1417(b) and
1926.1441(c)(2), where the same term is used.
An example of a situation where procedures might be unavailable is
old equipment where the manufacturer is no longer in business. Even
where the original manufacturer became part of another company that is
still in business, in some cases the successor company no longer has
the original manufacturers' procedures for that equipment. In such
instances the employer will be required to develop and follow
substitute procedures.
Paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this section specify qualifications
criteria for those who develop two aspects of the substitute
procedures. Under Sec. 1926.1417(b)(2), procedures for the operational
controls will have to be developed by a qualified person. As defined in
Sec. 1926.1401 of this standard, ``operational controls'' are levers,
switches, pedals and other devices for controlling equipment operation.
A qualified person has the requisite level of expertise to develop such
procedures in light of both the complexity of the factors that must be
considered and the nature of the operational controls.
Under paragraph (b)(3), operational procedures related to equipment
capacity would have to be developed and signed by a registered
professional engineer familiar with the equipment. The type and
complexity of engineering analysis that is needed to develop safe
procedures related to capacity necessitates that this work be done by a
registered professional engineer (RPE). In addition, because capacity
is so critical to safe operation, a signature by the RPE is needed to
ensure that this work is done with the requisite care. No comments were
submitted on this
[[Page 47989]]
provision; therefore, it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c) Accessibility of Procedures
Paragraph (c)(1) of this section requires employers to provide the
operator with ready access in the cab to the procedures applicable to
the operation of the equipment, including the following: Rated
capacities (load charts), recommended operating speeds, special hazard
warnings, and the instructions and operator's manual.
For the purposes of this standard, ``special hazard warnings'' are
warnings of site-specific hazards (for example, proximity of power
lines). This term is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 to differentiate these
site-specific warnings from all other general hazard warnings which are
common to typical construction worksites.
Previously, former Sec. 1926.550(a)(2) of subpart N required rated
capacities, recommended operating speeds, and special hazard warnings
to be posted on the equipment, and instructions and warnings to be
visible at the operator's station. Unlike Sec. 1926.1417(c)(1) of this
standard, it did not require the operator's manual to be accessible to
the operator.
OSHA concludes that the information in these materials, including
the operator's manual, is essential for safe crane operation. C-DAC
determined that this information is needed to help the operator avoid
performing operations beyond a crane's capacity and recommended
operating speed, and by increasing operator awareness of special
hazards related to a specific piece of equipment. In addition, C-DAC
determined that this information needs to be available to the equipment
operator in the cab so that the operator can obtain the information as
the need arises. If the information were not available in the cab,
operations would have to be delayed for the operator to leave the cab
and obtain the information elsewhere (or for someone else to obtain
them and bring them to the operator). The prospect of such a delay
would serve as a disincentive to obtaining the information and increase
the chance that operations would proceed without it.
A building industry trade association stated its belief that the
cost of obtaining and maintaining manufacturers procedures applicable
to operation of the equipment would be excessive, and stated that
OSHA's contention that such costs would be ``modest'' was not supported
by the rulemaking record. (ID-0214.1.) This commenter did not provide
any substantiation for this claim. Based on the absence of this
support, and on the absence of other comments raising a cost objection
related to this requirement, OSHA concludes that the cost of obtaining
and maintaining manufacturers' procedures for equipment operations is
not generally viewed as significant, especially when weighed against
the potential economic and human costs of a crane accident. Moreover,
as noted below, the trend toward providing operating manuals and
procedures via digital media and over the Internet is substantially
lowering costs for acquiring and maintaining such information.
Therefore, OSHA defers to C-DAC's experience and is promulgating this
provision as proposed.
It has become increasingly common for equipment to be supplied by
manufacturers with load capacities in electronic form. Because of the
potential for an electronic or other failure to occur that would make
that information inaccessible, Sec. 1926.1417(c)(2) addresses a
situation in which electronic or other failure makes such information
unavailable. Under this paragraph, where load capacities are available
in the cab only in electronic form and a failure makes the load
capacities inaccessible, this paragraph requires that the operator
immediately cease operations or follow safe shut-down procedures until
the load capacities become available again (in electronic or other
form). No comments were submitted on this provision; therefore it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)
This paragraph requires that operators refrain from engaging in any
practice that would divert their attention while operating the crane.
This includes the use of cell phones except when cell phones are used
for signal communications. Operating a crane is a complex task that
requires an operator's full attention to be performed safely. This
paragraph addresses the risk that an accident can occur if the
operator's full attention is not directed toward that task.
During the hearing, a witness from a lumber trade association
described the practice in which the operator controls an articulating
boom crane with a forklift attachment via remote controls and then
assists with the off-loading of the materials. (ID-0341.) He expressed
concern that the operator's participation in the off-loading of the
crane would violate Sec. 1926.1417(d)'s prohibition on ``any practice
that diverts his/her attention while actually engaged in operating the
crane.'' (ID-0341.) As a result, his company would need to use an
additional person for the delivery, raising costs. (ID-0341.)
Section 1926.1417(d) would not necessarily prohibit the activity
that the witness described. If the operator uses the remote controls to
position the articulating crane and lock it into position before off
loading the materials, and does not simultaneously operate the controls
and offload the materials, the operator would not be ``actually engaged
in operating the crane'' at the same time as he is off-loading the
crane. The operator would also not be considered to ``leave the
equipment unattended'' so long as the operator has immediate access to
the remote controls. See discussion of Sec. 1926.1417(e) below. No
other comments were submitted on this provision; therefore it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (e) Leaving Equipment Unattended
Paragraph (e)(1) of this section specifies when the operator must
be at the controls for safety-related reasons. These include making
necessary adjustments to keep the load in a safe position, moving the
load where necessary for reasons of safety (such as for the safety of
employees working with or near the load), and responding to emergencies
that may arise during lifting operations. Previously, under 29 CFR part
1926, subpart N, the operator of a crawler, locomotive, or truck crane
was prohibited from leaving the controls while a load is suspended.
In the experience of C-DAC members, this requirement was routinely
breached when the load is ``held suspended,'' that is, without need for
adjustment of the load's or the equipment's position for an extended
period. In such circumstances, the operator does not need to manipulate
the controls for the period of time that the load is suspended and it
was a common practice for the operator to leave the controls. To
address this problem, C-DAC proposed that OSHA establish criteria that
allow the operator to leave the controls when it is safe to do so
rather than to simply continue the existing rule unchanged. (Note that
the suspension of working gear, such as slings, spreader bars, ladders,
and welding machines, is addressed separately in Sec.
1926.1417(e)(2).)
Several commenters from the materials delivery industry noted that
various types of equipment in that industry can be operated by remote
control and expressed concern that Sec. 1926.1417(e)(1) would prohibit
the use of those remote controls and thereby require additional
personnel to perform the same task. (ID-0184.1; -0206.1.) To
[[Page 47990]]
be clear, the new standard does not prohibit the use of remote
controls. During the hearing on this rulemaking, a witness from a
lumber trade association testified that the use of portable radio
remote controls is common, and provided examples of operators with
their remotes strapped around their waists or their shoulders. (ID-
0341; -0345.13.) He explained that the ``operator is physically located
at the same location as the remote control and is therefore able to
perform controlled operations as quickly as an operator who is seated
at the top seat controls'' and ``can also be positioned to ensure that
there's no obstructed view.'' (ID-0341.) Such use would not be
prohibited. Where an operator takes the remote controls out of the cab,
keeps the controls within reach in the same manner as if in the cab,
and is able to use the remote controls to control the equipment as
effectively as if in the cab, the operator has not left the controls
within the meaning of Sec. 1926.1417(e). Therefore, the operator is
not subject to the conditions of Sec. Sec. 1926.1417(e)(1)(i) through
(iv).
Section 1926.1417(e) requires that the operator not leave the
controls while the load is suspended except when four conditions,
outlined in Sec. Sec. 1926.1417(e)(1)(i) through (e)(1)(iv), are met.
OSHA has revised the introductory text to make it clear that each one
of the conditions in Sec. Sec. 1926.1417(e)(1)(i) through (e)(1)(iv)
must be met for the operator to leave the controls.
Paragraph (e)(1)(i) requires the operator to remain adjacent to the
equipment and not engage in any other duties. This paragraph will not
only prevent unauthorized use of the crane by persons who are not
competent crane operators but also allow the operator to quickly access
the controls in case the equipment or load inadvertently moves.
Paragraph (e)(1)(ii) requires the load to be held suspended for a
period of time exceeding normal lifting operations. As explained above,
these are instances when the load is ``held suspended,'' that is,
without need for adjustment of the load's or the equipment's position--
for an extended period. These are circumstances in which the operator
will not need to manipulate the controls. Such circumstances must be
for a period of time in excess of the periods that occur during normal
lifting operations.
For example, during the construction of a structure, a large
subassembly is being attached to another part of the structure. After
the subassembly has been initially connected, it is held suspended
(that is, without need for adjustment of position) for support for
several hours while the final connections are made. This period exceeds
normal lifting operations. In this example, the criterion of Sec.
1926.1417(e)(1)(ii) would be met.
Another, contrasting example is the following: A steel structure is
being erected. When installing the steel beams, the operator holds the
beam suspended (typically for several minutes) while it is initially
connected. Holding the beam suspended in such instances is a normal
part of the steel erection process. In this example the criterion in
Sec. 1926.1417(e)(1)(ii) would not be met and the operator cannot
leave the controls.
Paragraph (e)(1)(iii) requires the competent person to determine
that it is safe for the operator to leave the controls and implement
measures necessary to restrain the boom hoist and telescoping, load,
swing, and outrigger functions. This provision addresses the hazard of
inadvertent movement while the controls are unattended.
Paragraph (e)(1)(iv) requires barricades or caution lines, and
notices to be erected to prevent all employees from entering the fall
zone. Furthermore, under this paragraph no employees would be permitted
in the fall zone, including those listed in Sec. Sec. 1926.1425(b)(1)
through (3), (d), or (e). This is necessary because the added margin of
safety that results from the operator being at the controls would not
be present in these circumstances.
A labor representative recommended retention of the previous
prohibition of leaving any unattended loads suspended because it
believed that the four conditions for the exemption were unclear and
unenforceable. (ID-0199.1.) Specifically, the commenter stated that (1)
The term ``adjacent to the equipment'' needed to be further explained
or quantified; (2) further guidance was needed to explain the meaning
of the phrase ``a period of time exceeding normal operations;'' (3) the
Agency needs to clarify that the equipment operator can be the
``competent person'' referred to in this section; and (4) the proposed
requirement to erect barriers or caution lines to prevent employees
from entering fall zones are infeasible in many construction zones.
Regarding the commenter's first two points, in light of the extreme
variability of equipment types, loads lifted, and construction site
conditions, OSHA determines it is not possible to use more precise
language without making the rule underinclusive and/or overinclusive.
Specifying a precise distance in lieu of saying ``adjacent to the
equipment,'' and a precise time in lieu of ``a period of time exceeding
normal operations,'' as the commenter suggests, would not be practical
in light of the numerous variables that affect these distances and
times on construction sites. OSHA also rejects the commenter's
suggestion that the previous prohibition be retained if it is not
possible to use more precise language. OSHA concludes that this is an
area where employers can be afforded flexibility without detracting
from safety, and that the limited conditions under which it is
permissible to leave a suspended load unattended will accomplish this
objective.
Regarding the third point, the answer is ``yes,'' an equipment
operator can be a ``competent person'' for purposes of this section if
he or she meets the requirements of the Sec. 1926.1401 definition of
that term. Finally, where conditions in a construction site exist that
prevent erection of barriers or caution lines as prescribed by this
section, Sec. 1926.1417(e) prohibits employers from using this
exception to the general prohibition of leaving suspended loads
unattended.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2) stated that the provisions in paragraph
(e) do not apply to working gear, which includes slings, spreader bars,
ladders, and welding machines, where the load is not suspended over an
entrance or exit.
The Agency noted in the proposal that the reference to paragraph
(e) was a drafting error and that the appropriate reference was to
paragraph (e)(1). In addition, the provision as proposed contained two
incidences of the word ``not'' which could lead to confusion.
Therefore, the Agency noted in the proposal that it was considering
changing the language to state that the provisions in Sec.
1926.1417(e)(1) do not apply to working gear where the working gear is
suspended over an area other than an entrance or exit.
In the proposed rule, OSHA noted that it was common practice for
employers to leave lightweight items suspended overnight to prevent
theft and stated that this provision was only intended to apply to
working gear whose weight was negligible relative to the capacity of
the equipment. Four commenters believed that the proposed wording of
Sec. 1926.1417(e)(2) was overly broad to accomplish this purpose
because it did not limit the weight of the suspended working gear
relative to the capacity of the equipment and could therefore allow a
load that placed a significant strain on the equipment to be suspended
overnight. (ID-0122.1; -0172.1; -0178.1; -0199.1.) OSHA agrees with
these commenters that this
[[Page 47991]]
provision should be clarified and, in the final rule, has made explicit
what was stated in the preamble to the proposed rule: that the
provision only applies where the weight of the working gear is
negligible relative to the lifting capacity of the equipment.
Paragraph (f) Tag-Out
Paragraph (f)(1) Tagging Out of Service Equipment/Functions
Where the employer has taken the equipment out of service, this
paragraph requires that the employer place a tag in the cab stating
that the equipment is out of service and is not to be used. Where the
equipment remains in service but the employer has taken a function out
of service, this paragraph requires that the employer place a tag in a
conspicuous position stating that that function is out of service and
is not to be used. This paragraph is designed to prevent hazards
associated with workers inadvertently attempting to use out-of-service
equipment or a function that is out of service.
Paragraph (f)(2) Response to ``Do Not Operate''/Tag-Out Signs
If there is a warning sign on the equipment or starting control,
paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section prohibits the operator from
activating the switch or starting the equipment until the sign is
removed by someone authorized to remove it or until the operator can
verify that (A) no one is servicing, working on, or otherwise in a
dangerous position on the machine, and (B) the equipment has been
repaired and is working properly. Similarly, under Sec.
1926.1417(f)(2)(ii), when there is a warning sign on any other switch
or control, the operator will be prohibited from activating that switch
or control until the sign has been removed by an individual authorized
to remove it, or until the operator meets the two requirements of Sec.
1926.1417(f)(2)(i), described above.
These provisions will prevent two types of hazards. First, since
the machine is out of service, there is a risk that an employee
servicing, working on, or otherwise in a dangerous position on it is
not expecting it to be activated and would be injured if it were
activated. Second, if an employee does not know that the equipment is
malfunctioning or has a function that is not working properly, an
employee could inadvertently try to operate it with the result that the
equipment will not work as intended, causing unintended movement or a
collapse.
Subpart N of the former rule addressed this issue through sec. 5-
3.1.3g of ANSI B30.5-1968, which states: ``If there is a warning sign
on the switch or engine starting controls, the operator shall not close
the switch or start the engine until the warning sign has been removed
by the person placing it there.'' Instead of requiring that the sign be
removed by the person who placed it, Sec. 1926.1417(f)(2) permits it
to be removed by an authorized person and, as an alternative, permits
the operator to start the equipment after verifying that no worker is
in a dangerous area and that the equipment has been repaired and is
working properly. OSHA concludes that either alternative would achieve
the safety purpose of the tag-out because it would ensure that a
knowledgeable and responsible person, either the operator or another
authorized person, verifies that repairs are complete and all workers
are in a safe position before the equipment can be started.
As discussed above, the operator will be permitted to start
equipment that is tagged out, or activate a tagged-out switch, only if
the procedures specified in Sec. 1926.1417(f)(2)(i) are met. In
reviewing this provision during the proposal stage, the Agency noted
that these procedures were not as comprehensive as those in the general
industry standard for the control of hazardous energy (lockout/tagout),
which are listed in Sec. Sec. 1910.147(e)(3)(i) through (iii).\84\ The
Agency requested public comment on whether procedures similar to those
in Sec. Sec. 1910.147(e)(3)(i) through (iii) \85\ would be feasible
and appropriate for cranes/derricks used in construction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ Section 1910.147 is not applicable to construction (see
Sec. 1910.147(a)(ii)(A)).
\85\ These general industry provisions state:
(i) Verification by the employer that the authorized employee
who applied the device is not at the factory;
(ii) Making all reasonable efforts to contact the authorized
employee to inform him/her that his/her lockout or tagout device has
been removed; and
(iii) Ensuring that the authorized employee has this knowledge
before he/she resumes work at that facility.
Section 1910.147(e)(3)(i) through (iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two commenters opposed broadening the requirements along the lines
of the requirements in Sec. Sec. 1910.147(e)(3)(i) through (iii),
stating that the general industry standards were not appropriate for
cranes and derricks used in construction. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) A third
commenter believed that the Sec. 1910.147(e)(3) procedures were
feasible and appropriate. (ID-0144.1.) A fourth commenter recommended
that the tag-out requirements be upgraded to a lock-out requirement to
provide greater worker protection. (ID-0199.1.) A fifth commenter
agreed that a lock-out requirement would provide superior protection to
the proposed tag-out proposal, but that locking out was not feasible on
some equipment, especially older equipment. (ID-0187.1.) That commenter
recommended that the requirement be upgraded to a lock-out requirement
where feasible, but remain a tag out procedure where lock out was not
feasible. Upon consideration of all these comments, OSHA concludes that
the record does not clearly indicate that adding a lock-out requirement
as suggested by the last two commenters is needed to ensure safety and,
as the one commenter noted, would not be feasible on all equipment.
Instead, the Agency concludes that the tag-out requirement in the
proposed rule contains clear and concise restrictions on the conditions
under which equipment can be brought back into service and will ensure
that equipment is not started when employees are in a danger zone.
Therefore, this section is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (g)
This paragraph requires the operator to verify, before starting the
engine, that all controls are in the proper starting position and that
all personnel are in the clear. Requiring operators to check that all
controls are in their proper starting positions will prevent unintended
movement of the equipment when the engine is initially started.
Similarly, requiring operators to ensure that all personnel are in the
clear will prevent personnel from being injured in the event that some
aspect of the equipment moves upon start-up. No comments were submitted
on this paragraph; therefore it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (h) Storm Warning
When a local storm warning has been issued, this paragraph requires
the competent person to determine whether it is necessary to implement
manufacturer recommendations for securing the equipment. This provision
was designed to prevent hazards that could arise from severe weather
including inadvertent movement and crane collapse. High-speed winds in
particular can affect both the crane and the load, reducing the rated
capacity of the crane and affecting boom strength. No comments were
submitted on this paragraph; therefore it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (i) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (j)
Under paragraph (j)(1) of this section, when the operator
determines that an adjustment/repair is necessary, the
[[Page 47992]]
operator is required to promptly inform, in writing, the individual
designated by the employer to receive such information, as well as the
next operator in cases where there are successive shifts. OSHA revised
the organization of the proposed provision for clarity. This
reorganization involved removing the introductory sentence that
operators be familiar with the equipment and its proper operation
because this sentence merely described an enabling condition necessary
for operators to identify any necessary repairs and adjustments.
This paragraph addresses the need to identify problems that may
develop with the equipment during operations. Early recognition of such
problems by the operator will help prevent accidents that could result
from continued operation of equipment that needs adjustment and/or
repair. In the Committee's experience, operators who are familiar with
the equipment and its proper operation can recognize such equipment
anomalies and problems. By requiring that information about needed
adjustments and/or repairs be provided to the individual designated by
the employer to receive it, this paragraph will facilitate the
correction of those problems.
The rule does not specify any particular job title for the person
to whom the operator would be required to provide this information
because different employers may assign the responsibility of receiving
such information to different job classifications.
Providing this information to the next operator in cases where
there are successive shifts (that is, shifts that have no break between
them) will ensure that the next operator is aware of this information
and will be able to take appropriate action.
One commenter recommended that the information be transmitted in
written form. (ID-0132.1.) OSHA agrees with this comment primarily
because written information would be more easily passed on between
shifts. OSHA has, therefore, revised Sec. 1926.1417(j) to specify that
the notification of necessary adjustments or repairs must be in
writing.
Additionally, OSHA added Sec. 1926.1417(j)(2) to require employers
to notify, at the beginning of each shift, all affected employees of
any necessary adjustments or repairs. This requirement will allow all
employees affected by the operation of the equipment to be notified of
any outstanding repairs or adjustments, and provides them with
information about alternative measures implemented by the employer.
Affected employees are any employees exposed to equipment-related
hazards; such employees include, but are not limited to, any employee
in the fall zone of the load, signal persons, riggers, operators, load
handlers, and lift directors. OSHA concludes that this provision is
necessary to allow employees to adjust their work practices following
implementation of the alternative measures.
The Agency finds this modification to be consistent with the
requirements throughout this subpart with respect to sharing
information about equipment-related hazards. This added provision
merely requires employers to take the information acquired under Sec.
1926.1417(j)(1) and distribute it to affected employees. Employers may
distribute this information by any effective means available.
Paragraph (k)
This paragraph prohibits safety devices and operational aids from
being used as a substitute for the exercise of professional judgment by
the operator. Such devices and aids do not displace the need for
operators to apply their professional judgment because the devices and
aids can malfunction and lead to the types of safety hazards they are
designed to prevent. No comments were submitted on this paragraph;
therefore it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (l) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (m)
If the competent person determines that there is a slack rope
condition requiring re-spooling of the rope, this paragraph requires
that before starting the lift, it must be verified that the rope is
seated on the drum and in the sheaves as the slack is removed. This
will prevent a loose coil of rope from becoming cross-coiled on the
drum, a portion of the rope coming off the drum altogether, or the rope
being pulled alongside (instead of seating in) a sheave. Each of these
conditions can lead to sudden failure of the rope. No comments were
submitted on this paragraph; therefore it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (n)
This paragraph requires the competent person to adjust the
equipment and/or operations to address the hazards posed by wind, ice
and snow on equipment capacity and stability. In the proposed rule, the
person would have been required to ``consider the effect'' of those
elements, but OSHA is clarifying in the final rule that the competent
person must actually take steps such as re-calculating a lower load
capacity, stabilizing the equipment, or even postponing a lift. Wind
can reduce capacity by imposing loads on the equipment, which can also
reduce stability. Ice and snow can also reduce capacity and stability
when it accumulates on the equipment. There are numerous variables
involved in determining the effects of wind, ice and snow in any
particular circumstance, (for example, the extent to which the crane is
operating below its rated capacity, the sail effect presented by the
load, the rate at which ice or snow is accumulating, and whether the
snow is wet or light). No comments were submitted on this paragraph;
therefore it is promulgated as proposed with the one change noted
above.
Paragraph (o) Compliance With Rated Capacity
Section 1926.1417(o)(1) requires employers to ensure that equipment
is not operated beyond its rated capacity. Overloading a crane or
derrick can cause it to collapse, with potentially catastrophic
consequences. This basic safeguard has long been recognized in the
industry as crucial and is designed to prevent such accidents. (See
additional discussion at 73 FR 59792, Oct. 9, 2008).
Section 1926.1417(o)(2) requires employers to ensure that operators
are not required to operate the equipment in a manner that would exceed
its rated capacity, in violation of Sec. 1926.1417(o)(1) above. This
provision reinforces the general prohibition of Sec. 1926.1417(o)(1)
by making it a separate violation for an employer to expressly require
an operator to exceed the equipment's rated capacity. It is designed to
avoid a situation where an employer pressures an operator to conduct a
lift that exceeds the equipment's rated capacity to avoid the time and
expense associated with bringing in larger capacity equipment.\86\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\86\ In some instances the overcapacity problem can be avoided
by repositioning the crane (for example, by moving the crane so that
the lift can be performed at a higher boom angle). However, even in
those instances some time (and associated expense) is involved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the experience of C-DAC members, employers sometimes will
attempt to lift loads that exceed a crane's rated capacity in the
belief that the rated capacity is sufficiently conservative to perform
the lift. In some such cases, the employer assumes that a safety factor
is built into the capacity rating and that the crane actually has a
higher capacity than its rating. In the C-DAC discussions of this
issue, members explained that while equipment capacity ratings are
developed with
[[Page 47993]]
consideration of a safety factor, that safety factor is not intended by
the manufacturer to be treated as excess capacity. There are numerous,
complex considerations used by manufacturers in setting the capacity
rating. Employers cannot safely assume that, in any particular
situation, they will not need the benefits conferred by the safety
factor.
There continue to be a significant number of injuries and
fatalities resulting from equipment overturning. Although it has long
been a requirement not to exceed the equipment's rated capacity, a
significant number of overturning incidents are caused by exceeding
rated capacity. A study of fatal accidents involving cranes in the U.S.
construction industry for 1984-1994, based on investigations of
reported accidents conducted by OSHA and states with OSHA-approved
safety and health programs, showed that 22 deaths resulted from
overloaded cranes. A. Suruda, M. Egger, & D. Liu, ``Crane-Related
Deaths in the U.S. Construction Industry, 1984-94,'' p. 12, Table 9,
The Center to Protect Workers' Rights (Oct. 1997). (ID-0013.) By
stressing the need both to comply with the rated capacity and to
separately preclude employers from requiring operators to exceed the
rated capacity, paragraphs (o)(1) and (o)(2) should prevent this type
of accident. No comments were received on these paragraphs, and they
are promulgated as proposed.
Another cause of injuries and fatalities from overturning equipment
is the use of unreliable information on load weight. OSHA concludes
that one of the ways these incidents can be reduced is to require that
load weight be verified by a reliable means.
Under Sec. 1926.1417(o)(3), Load weight, the operator is required
to verify that the load is within the rated capacity of the equipment
by using the procedures in either Sec. 1926.1417(o)(3)(i) or (ii).
Under Sec. 1926.1417(o)(3)(i), the weight of the load must be
determined in one of three ways: from a source recognized by the
industry, by a calculation method recognized by the industry, or by
other equally reliable means. An example of verifying the load weight
from a source recognized by the industry would be where the load is
mechanical equipment and the weight is obtained from its manufacturer.
The proposed rule had provided for the weight of the load to be based
on a ``reliable source.'' To avoid the potentially subjective
interpretations of ``reliable,'' OSHA is instead requiring in the final
rule that the measurements be from a source typically relied on in the
industry.
An example of a calculation method recognized by the industry would
be the following: The load is a steel I-beam. After measuring the
thickness of the steel and the I-beam's other dimensions, the operator
uses an industry table that shows weight per linear foot for a beam of
these dimensions. The operator then calculates the beam's weight using
that information. In the proposed rule calculations would be based on a
``reliable source.'' To avoid the potentially subjective
interpretations of ``reliable,'' OSHA is instead requiring in the final
rule that the calculations be based on a source typically relied on in
the industry.
If the weight of the load is determined under Sec.
1926.1417(o)(3)(i), the information about how the load weight was
determined must be provided to the operator, prior to the lift, upon
the operator's request. This provision is included to help ensure that
the operator has the information necessary to verify that the load is
within the rated capacity of the equipment.
One commenter suggested that this section be amended to
specifically include as a reliable source the personal experience of
the operator with loads of similar size and materials. (ID-0232.1.)
OSHA rejects that suggestion because it is not convinced by any
evidence in the record that all operators, regardless of whether the
operator is experienced or has been on the job for a few weeks, are
capable of producing an accurate, reliable estimate of the load
weights. For example, an operator may have recently lifted precast
concrete sections that, based on date provided by the manufacturer,
weighed 5 tons each. The operator may be called upon to lift other
precast concrete sections of unknown weight that are actually 10%
heavier than those lifted earlier. It is unlikely that the heavier
sections would be significantly different in appearance than those that
weigh 10% less, and the operator may mistakenly underestimate the
weight of the sections if permitted to estimate load weight based on
his or her personal experience with loads of similar size.
Paragraph (o)(3)(ii) establishes an alternative procedure that does
not require the employer to determine the actual weight of the load
under certain circumstances. Under paragraph (o)(3)(ii), the operator
would have to begin hoisting the load to determine if it exceeds 75
percent of the maximum rated capacity at the longest radius that will
be used during the lift operation, using a load weighing device, load
moment indicator, rated capacity indicator, or rated capacity limiter.
If the load does not exceed 75 percent of the maximum rated capacity,
the lift can be conducted without determining the weight of the load.
This verification procedure \87\ incorporates a sufficient margin of
error and would be adequate to ensure that the crane's rated capacity
will not be exceeded. If, however, the load does exceed 75 percent of
the maximum rated capacity, then the operator may not proceed with the
lift until he/she verifies the weight of the load in accordance with
Sec. 1926.1417(o)(3)(i). No comments were received on this paragraph,
and it is promulgated without change from the proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\87\ The operator would still be required to use his or her
professional judgment in determining whether the load exceeds the
capacity of the equipment. As discussed above, proposed Sec.
1926.1417 (k) would prohibit sole reliance by the operator on an
operational aid, such as a load weight device, for ensuring that the
equipment's capacity will not be exceeded. The procedure in proposed
Sec. 1926.1417(o)(3)(ii) is a verification procedure--it would
verify that the operator's estimate is at least correct in terms of
not exceeding 75% of the equipment's rated capacity (at the longest
radius that will be used). If, for example, the load weight device
yields a figure that is significantly below what the operator
estimates to be the true weight, the operator would need to reliably
determine the weight of the load before proceeding with the lift.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (p)
This paragraph requires that the boom or other parts of the
equipment not contact any obstruction. No comments were submitted on
this paragraph, and it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (q)
This paragraph requires that the equipment not be used to drag or
pull loads sideways. This is to prevent the sideloading that occurs
when a load is dragged or pulled sideways. Sideloading can buckle the
boom, damage the swing mechanism, or overturn the crane (such as when
the boom is at a high angle). No comments were submitted on this
paragraph, and it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (r)
Paragraph (r) of this section applies to wheel-mounted equipment
and requires that no loads be lifted over the front area, except as
permitted by the manufacturer. Wheel-mounted equipment typically is not
designed to lift loads over the front area. Equipment that is not so
designed will likely tip over or otherwise fail when lifting loads over
the front area. If the equipment is specifically designed for loads to
be lifted over the front area (such as where equipped with a front
outrigger for support and stabilization for this purpose), the operator
must follow the
[[Page 47994]]
manufacturer's procedures for doing so. No comments were submitted on
this paragraph; it is therefore promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (s)
Each time an operator handles a load that is 90% or more of the
maximum line pull, Sec. 1926.1417(s) requires the operator to test the
brakes by lifting the load a few inches and applying the brakes. In
duty cycle and repetitive lifts where each lift is 90% or more of the
maximum line pull, this requirement applies to the first but not to
successive lifts, because the operator would have already determined
from the initial test that the brakes are sufficient. The brake test
required by this paragraph is designed to ensure that the brakes are
sufficient to handle loads close to their design capacity before
lifting the load high off the ground. No comments were submitted on
this paragraph, and it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (t)
This paragraph requires that neither the load nor the boom be
lowered below the point where less than two full wraps of rope remain
on their respective drums. This provision is designed to ensure that
the rope is not unspooled to the point where the rope would become
disconnected from the drum. No comments were submitted on this
provision, and it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (u) Traveling With a Load
Paragraph (u)(1) of this section prohibits traveling with a load if
the practice is prohibited by the manufacturer. If the manufacturer
does not prohibit this practice, the equipment may travel with a load,
but only if the requirements of paragraph (u)(2) are met. Paragraph
(u)(2) of this section sets forth three procedures that employers would
have to follow when traveling with a load: a competent person must
supervise the operation; the determinations of the competent person
must be implemented; and for equipment with tires, the tire pressure
specified by the manufacturer must be maintained.
During discussions of this issue, C-DAC members noted the dynamic
effects of traveling with a load impose additional and/or increased
forces on crane components. Unless the crane has been designed to
handle these types of forces and force levels, they can cause component
failure, collapse, instability or overturning. The Committee concluded
that the manufacturer has the expertise to ascertain its equipment's
capabilities. Therefore, the Committee recommended that where the
manufacturer has prohibited traveling with the load, the operator must
comply with such a determination to ensure safety. (For additional
explanation, see 73 FR 59794, Oct. 9, 2008.) No comments were submitted
on these provisions and they are promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (v)
This paragraph requires that rotational speed of the equipment be
such that the load does not swing out beyond the radius at which it can
be controlled. Like paragraph (q) of this section, discussed above,
this provision is designed to prevent the hazard of sideloading, which
occurs when the load swings to either side of the boom tip, rather than
its appropriate position directly beneath the boom tip. When the load
is not directly under the boom tip, sideloading occurs and decreases
capacity. This hazard can lead to tip-over or boom failure. No comments
were submitted on this paragraph, and it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (w)
This paragraph requires that a tag or restraint line be used if
necessary to prevent the load from rotating if that would be hazardous.
No comments were submitted on this paragraph, and it is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (x)
This paragraph requires that the brakes be adjusted in accordance
with manufacturer procedures to prevent unintended movement. This
requirement applies to all brakes on equipment covered by this
standard, including brakes used to control the lowering of the load and
those used to stop the equipment while it is traveling. C-DAC noted
that improper adjustment can cause a delay in the onset of braking
after the operator attempts to activate the brake and can also diminish
the brake's capacity. Brakes are critical to the safe operation of the
equipment and must be properly adjusted to serve their safety function.
(See additional explanation at 73 FR 59795, Oct. 9, 2008.) No comments
were submitted on this paragraph; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (y)
This paragraph requires that the operator obey a stop or emergency
stop signal, regardless of who gives the signal. Any person on a
worksite may observe a hazardous condition that is not visible to or
recognized by the crane operator and that can only be avoided if the
equipment stops immediately, so it is imperative that the operator
respond immediately to any such signal by anyone. No comments were
submitted on this paragraph; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (z) Swinging Locomotive Cranes
Pursuant to this paragraph, a locomotive crane must not be swung
into a position where railway cars on an adjacent track could strike
it, until it is determined that cars are not being moved on the
adjacent track and that proper flag protection has been established.
The Agency is including this paragraph to prevent contact between the
locomotive cranes and railway cars, and notes comparable requirements
in Sec. 1910.180(i)(6) and sec. 5-3.4.4 of ANSI B30.5-1968. No
comments were submitted on this paragraph, and it is promulgated with
only one modification. The proposed rule incorporated an additional
determination of whether it would be ``reasonably foreseeable'' that
other railway cars on an adjacent track could strike the locomotive
crane. OSHA concludes that when a locomotive crane swings into a
position where it is physically possible for a railway car on an
adjacent track to strike it, a hazard is present and the additional
language would serve only to generate confusion about the appropriate
response to that hazard. The concepts of reasonableness and
forseeability are typically raised during legal processes and would be
factored into those processes in accordance with law.
Paragraph (aa) Counterweight/Ballast
Section 1926.1417(aa)(1) contains counterweight/ballast
requirements that apply to equipment other than tower cranes and are
intended to prevent unintended movement, tipover, and collapse. As
noted in Sec. 1926.1417(aa)(2), requirements regarding counterweight/
ballast for tower cranes are found in Sec. 1926.1435(b)(8).
Section 1926.1417(aa)(1)(i) requires that equipment not be operated
without the counterweight or ballast in place as specified by the
manufacturer.
Section 1926.1417(aa)(1)(ii) prohibits the employer from exceeding
the maximum counterweight or ballast specified by the manufacturer for
the equipment. Exceeding that maximum could result in component
failure, which could cause unintended movement, tipover or collapse. No
comments were submitted on this provision, and it is promulgated as
proposed.
[[Page 47995]]
Section 1926.1418 Authority To Stop Operation
This section provides that whenever there is a concern as to
safety, the operator has the authority to stop and refuse to handle
loads until a qualified person has determined that safety has been
assured. Section 1926.1401 defines ``qualified person'' as a person
who, by possession of a recognized degree, certificate, or professional
standing, or who by extensive knowledge, training and experience,
successfully demonstrated the ability to solve/resolve problems
relating to the subject matter, the work, or the project.
Section 1926.1418 continues the long-standing requirements under
subpart N and current consensus standards. (See former Sec.
1926.550(b)(2), incorporating by reference ANSI B30.5-1968, sec. 5-
3.1.3(d).\88\) As discussed in the proposed rule preamble, a capable
equipment operator is highly knowledgeable in matters affecting
equipment safety and is well qualified to determine whether an
operation presents a safety concern (see 73 FR 59795-59796, Oct. 9,
2008). Under the provision, operations would be prohibited from
resuming ``until a qualified person had determined that safety has been
assured,'' meaning that operations could resume only after the
qualified person either: (1) assesses the factors that led the operator
to stop and refuse to handle the load and determines that there is not,
in fact, a safety hazard, or (2) after corrective action has been
taken, determines that there is no longer a safety hazard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ Current consensus standards specify that an operator with a
safety concern must raise that concern with a supervisor before
proceeding with a lift. See sec. 5-3.1.3(d) of ASME B30.5-2004,
``Mobile and Locomotive Cranes,'' sec. 2-3.1.7 of ASME B30.2-2001,
``Overhead and Gantry Cranes,'' sec. 3-3.1.3(d) of ASME B30.3-1996,
``Construction Tower Cranes,'' sec. 6-3.2.3 of ASME B30.6-2003,
``Derricks,'' and other standards in the ASME B30 series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One commenter argued that OSHA lacks the authority to promulgate
Sec. 1926.1418.\89\ (ID-0232.1.) First, the commenter contended that
the provision exceeds the Agency's standards-setting authority under
sec. 3(8) of the OSH Act. Second, it expresses concern that Sec.
1926.1418 circumvents the limitations on OSHA's ability to grant
employees (i.e., crane operators) stop-work authority. In support of
its position, the commenter cited the U.S. Supreme Court opinions in
Industrial Union Dep't, AFL-CIO v. American Petroleum Institute \90\
and Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall \91\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ The commenter nominated a C-DAC member who did not dissent
on this section of the standard. The commenter has not explained why
it has changed its position from the one taken by their C-DAC member
during negotiations. In light of the unexplained inconsistency of
its position, the Agency accords diminished weight to the
commenter's comment and is hesitant to rely on it to undermine the
product of the negotiation.
\90\ 448 U.S. 607 (1980).
\91\ 445 U.S. 1 (1980).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA disagrees with the commenter's contention that OSHA lacks the
authority to promulgate Sec. 1926.1418. Under sec. 3(8) of the OSH Act
and applicable case law,\92\ the Agency has broad authority to
promulgate standards that are reasonably necessary or appropriate to
provide safe or healthful places of employment. In Whirlpool Corp., the
U.S. Supreme Court stated that the Act ``does not wait for an employee
to die or become injured.'' \93\ Section 1926.1418 is an essential
mechanism for preventing fatalities and injuries. It enables the person
who has the expertise to recognize a safety concern and is best
positioned to act quickly to do so where such a concern arises.\94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\92\ E.g., Indus. Union Dep't, AFL-CIO, 448 U.S. at 611-12.
\93\ 445 U.S. at 12.
\94\ As stated above, current consensus standards manifest the
industry's recognition of the necessity for a crane operator to have
such authority. In concert with Sec. 1926.1400(f), Sec. 1926.1418
requires the employer to authorize its crane operator to halt
operations upon a safety concern until a qualified person determines
that safety has been assured.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA also disagrees with the commenter's contention that Sec.
1926.1418 impermissibly grants stop-work authority, as well as a
different commenter who asserted that the wording of the provision is
too vague and could lead to an abuse of the operator's authority. Both
commenters suggested that OSHA limit the operator's authority to
specific reasons involving a potential violation of a requirement in
subpart CC. (ID-0218.1; 0232.1.)
The provision does not authorize an operator to stop operations for
reasons unrelated to a good faith belief that there may be a safety
problem. In this respect the provision is similar to other provisions
in the standard (and elsewhere in 29 CFR part 1926) in which an
employer is required to have a person in a specialized role perform
specific tasks involving the application of expertise (e.g., competent
and qualified persons performing inspections under Sec. 1926.1412). In
each case compliance with the standard is predicated on the good faith
application of that expertise.\95\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ Two organizations that nominated C-DAC members reminded the
Agency in their comments that OSHA had committed during the C-DAC
negotiations to include a discussion in the preamble regarding this
principle of good faith. (ID-0205.1; -213.1.) The Agency believes
that the foregoing paragraph satisfies that agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-DAC thoroughly discussed the wording of this provision, mindful
of the need for both clarity and sufficient flexibility to enable the
operator to address myriad circumstances. The Committee's wording
strikes an appropriate balance. The word ``concern'' refers to a good
faith belief that safety may be in jeopardy. The word ``assured'' means
that the qualified person has assessed whatever triggered the crane
operator's belief that there was a concern as to safety and either: (1)
Determines that there is not, in fact, a safety hazard, or (2) after
corrective action is taken, determines that there is no longer a safety
hazard.
OSHA disagrees with the commenter's suggestion to link the
authority to a violation of subpart CC. While C-DAC and the Agency have
made every effort to address the hazards associated with crane and
derrick operation, there may be circumstances that present hazards that
have not been anticipated here.
In addition, a particular situation may not be immediately
recognized as falling within one of subpart CC's provisions. An
operator's uncertainty in that regard could lead him/her to hesitate to
exercise the authority even where it needs to be applied. Also, the
determination by a qualified person to proceed with operations needs to
be based on whether safety is assured, not on the resolution of a
debate about whether the operator's concern fits within a provision of
this standard.
Another commenter expressed the following concerns: ``qualified
person'' should be better defined; the qualified person would feel
undue pressure from the controlling entity or crane employer to find
that safety had been assured, and that the qualified person's scope of
responsibility once operations resume is unclear. (ID-0218.1.)
As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, the definition
of ``qualified person'' in Sec. 1926.1401 corresponds to the
definition of ``qualified'' in Sec. 1926.32(m) and reflects the fact
that the duties assigned to ``qualified persons'' here are similar to
those assigned under other construction standards. The Committee
intentionally used the same definition to make it clear that employers
could rely on their current understanding of ``qualified person.'' OSHA
sees no reason to deviate from that definition where the commenter did
not explain how it viewed the definition as vague or provide
alternative language.
[[Page 47996]]
With respect to the issue of undue pressure on the qualified
person, C-DAC shared the commenter's concern; the Committee identified
pressure placed by some employers on operators to proceed with unsafe
lifts as a significant problem in the industry. This led C-DAC, for
example, to include the specific prohibition in Sec. 1926.1417(o)(2)
against requiring an operator to operate the equipment in excess of its
rated capacity (see the discussion of Sec. 1926.1417(o)(2) in 73 FR
59792-59793, Oct. 9, 2008). The commenter did not suggest, and OSHA is
not aware of, any additional measures that could be included in the
standard to help prevent the application of that type of pressure.
As to the commenter's final point, after a crane operator stops and
refuses to proceed with operations due to a concern as to safety, the
qualified person would then assess the situation and determine whether
or when safety has been assured. At that point, the qualified person's
responsibilities under Sec. 1926.1418 would be completed unless and
until the crane operator identifies another concern as to safety. The
Agency, therefore, is promulgating this provision as proposed.
Sections 1926.1419 Through 1926.1422 Signals
Sections 1926.1419 through 1926.1422 address the circumstances
under which a signal person must be provided, the type of signals to be
used, criteria for how signals are transmitted, and other criteria
associated with the use of signals.
OSHA has decided to replace the term ``lift supervisor'' with the
term ``lift director'' in Sec. Sec. 1926.1419(c)(2), 1926.1421(a), and
1926.1421(c). This decision was made to be consistent with the similar
change from ``A/D supervisor'' to ``A/D director'' in Sec.
1926.1404(a). For an explanation of the change, see the discussion of
Sec. 1926.1404(a).
Section 1926.1419 Signals--General Requirements
This section sets requirements regarding signals when using
equipment covered by this standard. C-DAC determined that addressing
these issues is one of the means by which the number of injuries and
fatalities caused by ``struck-by'' incidents, in which the equipment or
load strikes an employee, can be reduced.
Paragraph (a)
Paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) of this section address the
circumstances that require the use of a signal person: (1) When the
point of operation, meaning the load travel path or the area near or at
load placement, is not in full view of the operator (Sec.
1926.1419(a)(1)); (2) when the equipment is traveling and the
operator's view in the direction of travel is obstructed (Sec.
1926.1419(a)(2)); and (3) when, due to site specific safety concerns,
either the operator or the person handling the load determines it is
necessary (Sec. 1926.1419(a)(3)). The first two of these circumstances
involve an obvious hazard--limited operator visibility. With respect to
the third circumstance, C-DAC determined that other situations arise
that, from a safety standpoint, necessitate the use of a signal person
(see examples in the preamble to the proposed rule at 73 FR 59796, Oct.
9, 2008).
One commenter, representing the interests of the material delivery
industry, suggested that Sec. 1926.1419(a) be changed to specify that,
if a signal person is needed at the site due to the obstructed view of
the operator when delivering building materials, then the construction
site customer (not the material delivery employer) would be responsible
for providing the signal person. (ID-0184.1.) OSHA concludes that the
question of whether the material delivery employer or the construction
site customer should bear the cost of providing the signal person when
required is an economic issue that is most appropriately left to the
parties to resolve.
During the public hearing, a labor representative stated that his
organization believes that a signal person is always necessary when
working with cranes. (ID-0343.) Two commenters representing the
materials delivery industry disagreed (ID-0184.1; -0218.1.)
OSHA has decided to defer to the expertise of the Committee, which
found that a signal person should only be required in the three
circumstances listed in Sec. 1926.1419(a). Moreover, OSHA notes the
requirement in Sec. 1926.1419(a)(3), which provides that a signal
person must be provided if the crane operator or person handling the
load determines a signal person is necessary due to site specific
safety concerns. This provision, in particular, ensures that a signal
person will be required when necessary.
One commenter asked for clarification on the meaning of ``full view
of the operator'' in Sec. 1926.1419(a)(1). (ID-292.1.) In particular,
the commenter asked whether mirror or camera systems would meet this
requirement. Another commenter suggested adding language allowing the
use of boom mounted video cameras for blind lifts. (ID-0120.0.)
A live video system that provides a full view to the crane
operator--i.e., provides a sufficiently broad, clear and detailed view
to enable the operator to see all that is needed to operate the
equipment safely--would meet the ``full view of the operator''
requirement. Mirrors, on the other hand, typically distort images or
distances and thus would not normally be sufficient to provide a ``full
view.''
The sufficiency of any system will depend on the particular needs
posed by each situation. For this reason, OSHA has decided to rely on
C-DAC's clear and succinct phrase, ``full view of the operator,''
rather than to attempt to further define that concept or to list
acceptable devices in the regulatory text.
Paragraph (b) Types of Signals
As explained in the proposed rule preamble, under paragraph (b) of
this section, signals to crane operators would have to be by hand,
voice, audible, or ``new'' signals (see 73 FR 59796-59797, Oct. 9,
2008). As used in this standard, these terms refer to the type of
signal, not the means by which the signal is transmitted. For example,
signaling by voice refers to oral communication, not whether the oral
communication is done with or without amplification or with or without
electronic transmission. The manner of transmission of the signal is
addressed separately. No comments were received on this paragraph; it
is promulgated as proposed.
The criteria for the use of these signal types are set out in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1419(c)-(m) (additional voice signal requirements are
in Sec. 1926.1421, Signals--voice signals--additional requirements).
The Committee's intent was to reduce the potential for
miscommunication, which can lead to injuries and fatalities,
particularly from ``struck-by'' and ``crushed-by'' incidents. In
setting parameters for the use of the various types of existing signal
methods, and for signal methods that may be developed in the future,
the Committee sought to promote a degree of standardization while still
allowing appropriate flexibility. In addition, the provisions are
designed to ensure that the selection of signal type and means of
sending the signals are appropriate under the circumstances and
reliable.
Paragraph (c) Hand Signals
Paragraph (c) of this section addresses the use of hand signals.
The industry has long recognized the need for consistent, universal
hand signals to
[[Page 47997]]
minimize the potential for miscommunication between signal persons and
operators. ANSI B30.5-1968, ``Crawler, Locomotive and Truck Cranes,''
contains illustrations of hand signals that are the same as the current
2004 edition of ASME B30.5 and that are consistent with hand signals
for other types of cranes in ASME B30 standards. The same hand signals
have been expressed in similar charts published by a variety of other
groups. (See, e.g., Construction Safety Association of Ontario, MIOSHA,
MSHA.)
Because of the industry's long familiarity with these standard hand
signals, C-DAC determined that, when using hand signals, the
standardized version of the signals should continue to be required.
These signals, which are located in Appendix A, are referred to as the
``Standard Method,'' and this term is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as
``the protocol in Appendix A for hand signals.'' However, the Committee
recognized that there are instances when use of the Standard Method is
either infeasible or where there is no Standard Method signal
applicable to the work being done.
In such instances, under this paragraph, non-standard signals may
be used. To avoid confusion when non-standard signals are used,
proposed Sec. 1926.1419(c)(2) requires that the signal person, crane
operator, and lift director (where there is one) meet prior to the
operation to agree upon the signals that will be used.
At the public hearing, one witness commented that the use of non-
standard hand signals should not be allowed because it would
unnecessarily confuse contractors and utility workers, and because
standard signals are already used in the industry. (ID-345.17.) OSHA
defers to the expertise of the Committee, which found that a non-
standard signal may be needed on occasion (see 73 FR 59797, Oct. 9,
2008, in which the Agency described examples of such situations).
Additionally, it should be noted that Sec. 1926.1419(c) requires the
use of Standard Method hand signals and permits an exception only where
the Standard Method signals are infeasible or where there is no
Standard Method signal for the particular attachment.
One commenter pointed out that there are currently no hand signals
specific to articulating cranes and asked which signals OSHA intended
to be used with articulating cranes. (ID-0206.1.) The record contains
no information on the extent to which hand signals for articulating
cranes may differ from those used for other cranes. If the use of
Standard Method hand signals is either infeasible for articulating
cranes, or if the use or operation of an attachment is not covered by
the Standard Method, then the exception in Sec. 1926.1419(c)(1) and
the requirements for non-standard hand signals in Sec. 1926.1419(c)(2)
would apply.
OSHA is only making two changes, neither of which is substantive,
from Sec. 1926.1419(c) as proposed. The first is a grammatical
correction, and the second merely removes the superfluous direction
that ``[t]he following requirements apply to the use of non-standard
hand signals,'' which is already clear from the text of Sec.
1926.1419(c)(2).
Paragraph (d) New Signals
Paragraph (d) of this section allows signals other than hand,
voice, or audible signals to be used if certain criteria are met. As
explained in the discussion of Sec. 1926.1419(b) in the preamble to
the proposed rule, C-DAC included Sec. 1926.1419(d) to allow for the
development of new signals in the future (see 73 FR 59796-59797, Oct.
9, 2008). To ensure that any new signals developed by a particular
employer are as effective as hand, voice, or audible signals,
Sec. Sec. 1926.1419(d)(1) and (d)(2) require the employer to
demonstrate that the new signals are as effective as existing signals
for communicating. Alternatively, an employer may use signals that
comply with a national consensus standard.\96\ OSHA decided to change
the language of paragraph (d)(2) to clarify that an employer's signals
must comply with the national consensus standard signals. C-DAC
determined it was appropriate to allow reliance on signals in a
national consensus standard because their inclusion in such a standard
shows a high degree of standardization and widespread acceptance by
persons who are affected by the signals, thereby ensuring that the
signals can be used safely to control equipment operations and
preventing the ``on the fly'' development of signals cited as dangerous
by the commenter. (ID-0110.1.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\96\ The C-DAC draft refers to an ``industry consensus
standard.'' OSHA has changed this to ``national consensus standard''
to conform to the terminology used in the OSH Act. See definition in
section 3(9) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (e) Suitability
Under paragraph (e) of this section, the type of signal (hand,
voice, audible, or new) and the transmission method used must be
suitable for the site conditions. For example, hand signals would not
be suitable if site conditions do not allow for the signal person to be
within the operator's line of sight. Radio signals would not be
suitable if electronic interference on the site prohibits the signals
from being readily understood.
One commenter requested that the determination of which type and
means of signaling is appropriate for the site conditions be made by
the crane operator or other qualified person. (ID-0172.1.)
The Agency concludes that this is a straight-forward determination
that does not require the specialized expertise of a qualified person.
Also, the crane operator will typically be involved in this
determination, since there are several requirements relating to
effective communication that, as a practical matter, will typically
involve input from the operator (see, for example, Sec. Sec.
1926.1419(f), 1926.1420(a), and 1926.1421(c)).
Paragraph (f)
Paragraph (f) of this section requires the ability to transmit
signals between the operator and signal person to be maintained. If
that ability is interrupted, the operator is required to safely stop
operations until signal transmission is reestablished and a proper
signal is given and understood. No comments were received on this
provision; it is included in the final rule without change.
Paragraph (g)
As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, paragraph (g) of
this section requires the operator to stop operations if the operator
becomes aware of a safety problem and needs to communicate with the
signal person (see 73 FR 59797, Oct. 9, 2008). Operations may only be
resumed after the operator and signal person agree that the problem has
been resolved.
No comments were received on this provision; it is included in the
final rule without change.
Paragraphs (h) and (j)
Paragraph (h) of this section requires that only one person at a
time signal the operator. As explained in the preamble to the proposed
rule, C-DAC determined this provision was needed to prevent confusion
with respect to which signals the operator is supposed to follow (see
73 FR 59797, Oct. 9, 2008). An exception is provided in Sec.
1926.1419(j) to address situations when somebody becomes aware of a
safety problem and gives an emergency stop signal. Under Sec.
1926.1417(y), the operator is required to obey such a signal. No
comments were received on either of these provisions; they are
[[Page 47998]]
included in the final rule without substantive change. OSHA has
modified paragraph (h) to clarify that it is a requirement.
Paragraph (i) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (k)
As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, paragraph (k) of
this section requires that all directions given to the operator by the
signal person be given from the operator's direction perspective,
meaning that the signal person must provide the signals as if he or she
was sitting in the operator's seat and facing the same direction as the
operator (see 73 FR 59797, Oct. 9, 2008). In the Committee's
experience, the operator will tend to react to a directional signal,
such as ``forward,'' by acting on the signal from the operator's
perspective. This provision ensures that the signal that is given will
be consistent with that natural tendency. No comments were received on
this provision; it is included in the final rule without change.
Paragraph (l) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (m) Communication With Multiple Cranes/Derricks
Paragraph (m) of this section addresses a situation where one or
more signal person(s) is in communication with more than one crane or
derrick (for example, during multiple crane lifts). It requires each
signal person to use an effective means of identifying which crane or
derrick the signal is for. Sections 1926.1419(m)(i) and (ii) set out
alternate means of complying with this requirement. Under Sec.
1926.1419(m)(i), for each signal the signal person must, prior to
giving the function/direction, identify the crane/derrick for which the
signal is intended. Alternatively, under Sec. 1926.1419(m)(ii), the
employer could implement a method of identifying the crane/derrick for
which the signal is intended that is as effective as the system in
Sec. 1926.1419(m)(i). For example, under Sec. 1926.1419(m)(ii), the
signal person could simultaneously identify the crane and provide the
signal. Because of the potential for confusion, it is essential that an
alternative system under Sec. 1926.1419(m)(ii) be equally effective as
Sec. 1926.1419(m)(i) in clearly conveying, on a consistent basis, the
crane/derrick to which each signal is directed. No comments were
received on this provision; it is included in the final rule without
substantive change. The wording of the paragraph has been modified with
several minor grammatical changes.
Section 1926.1420 Signals--Radio, Telephone, or Other Electronic
Transmission of Signals
C-DAC concluded that certain criteria are needed to ensure the
reliability and clarity of electronically transmitted signals; these
criteria are listed in Sec. Sec. 1926.1420(a) through (c). Paragraph
(a) of this section requires the testing of the transmission devices
prior to the start of operations to make certain that the signals are
clear and that the devices are reliable. This helps ensure that the
operator receives, and can understand, the signals that are given, and
will prevent accidents caused by miscommunication.
One commenter, remarking that a second or two of delay may still
pose a significant safety hazard, suggested that Sec. 1926.1420(b) be
amended to read, ``Signal transmission must be through a dedicated
channel without noticeable delay * * *.'' (ID-0172.1.)
OSHA agrees that a noticeable delay in transmission of an
electronic signal could pose a significant hazard and has decided to
address this concern by adding the requirement that signal transmission
be ``effective.'' To be effective, a transmitted signal must produce or
be capable of producing the intended result. In other words, a signal
must be transmitted and understood by the crane operator in such a way
and within such a time as would allow the operator to respond to the
signal and operate the crane in a safe manner.
Paragraph (b) of this section requires that signals be transmitted
through a dedicated channel. As defined in Sec. 1926.1401, a
``dedicated channel'' is ``a line of communication assigned by the
employer who controls the communication system to only one signal
person and crane/derrick or to a coordinated group of cranes/derricks/
signal person(s).'' Use of a dedicated channel ensures that the
operator and signal person are not interrupted by users performing
other tasks or confused or distracted by instructions not intended for
them.
An exception to Sec. 1926.1419(b) allows more than one signal
person and more than one crane/derrick operator to share a dedicated
channel in multiple crane/derrick situations for coordinating
operations. The Committee determined, and OSHA agrees, that this
exception is needed because, in those situations, it may be
advantageous to share a single dedicated channel. For example, in some
situations several cranes may be operating in an area in which their
booms, loads or load lines could come in contact with each other. In
such cases it is crucial that the movements of each crane be properly
coordinated. By sharing a single channel, each operator can hear what
each crane is being asked to do, which can facilitate that
coordination.
Several commenters representing the railroad industry raised
concerns about the dedicated channel requirement as it relates to the
use of cranes on or adjacent to railroad tracks. (ID-0170.1; -0176.1; -
0291.1.) These commenters pointed out that the actions of crane
operators often have to be coordinated with other moving equipment
(e.g. trains) and that the use of a dedicated channel in these
circumstances would actually be more dangerous.
The commenters' points in this regard are persuasive; OSHA has
accordingly added Sec. 1926.1420(b)(2). This allows an exception to
the use of a dedicated channel when a crane is being operated on or
near railroad tracks and the crane operator must coordinate with the
movement of other equipment on or near the railroad tracks.
Paragraph (c) of this section requires that the operator's
reception be by a hands-free system. In other words, the operator must
not have to depress a button, manipulate a switch, or take any action
for the incoming signal to be received. C-DAC determined that this
provision is needed because the operator must have both hands free to
manipulate the equipment's controls. No comments were received on this
provision; it is included in the final rule without change.
Section 1926.1421 Signals--Voice Signals--Additional Requirements
C-DAC considered whether the rule should include a standardized set
of voice signals. Unlike hand signals, which have become standardized
to a large extent within the industry, in the Committee members'
experience there is significant variation in the phrases used to convey
the same instructions. Consequently, C-DAC was concerned that words or
phrases that it might have chosen to be ``standard'' voice signals
could be unfamiliar to many employees in the industry or contrary to
common usage in some parts of the country. In light of this, the
Committee determined that it would be better to use a different
approach to address the problem of miscommunication when using voice
signals. This approach, which establishes criteria for whatever voice
signals are used, is set out in Sec. Sec. 1926.1421(a)-(c).
Under paragraph (a) of this section, prior to beginning operations,
the personnel involved with signals--the crane operator, signal person
and lift director (if there is one)--are required to
[[Page 47999]]
meet and agree on the voice signals that will be used. Because of the
lack of standardization and the variety of languages that are in use in
the construction industry, the Committee concluded that it is essential
that the persons who give and/or receive voice signals agree in advance
on the signals that will be used to avoid miscommunication. OSHA
agrees. Once the parties have met and agreed on the voice signals,
another meeting is not required to discuss them unless another worker
is added or substituted, there is some confusion about the signals, or
a signal needs to be changed.
Section 1926.1421(b) requires that each voice signal contain the
following three elements, given in the following order: function (such
as hoist, boom, etc.), direction; distance and/or speed; function, stop
command. For example: hoist up; 10 feet; hoist stop. As discussed
above, the Committee considered it impractical to attempt to
standardize the voice signals themselves (that is, to require the use
of particular words to represent particular functions, directions or
other instructions). However, the Committee concluded that the chance
of miscommunication could nonetheless be reduced if certain parameters
were established for the type of information and order of information
that would be given. OSHA agrees.
Section 1926.1421(c) requires the crane operator, signal person,
and lift director (if there is one) to be able to effectively
communicate in the language used. Voice signals will not serve their
intended purpose if they cannot be understood, or can be
misinterpreted. The inability of these workers to understand each other
could lead to accidents that occur when, for example, the crane
operator moves a load in a different direction than the signal person
intends.
One commenter suggested that uniform verbal signals were necessary
to limit the likelihood of miscommunications resulting from language
barriers. (ID-0379.1.) Three commenters suggested that OSHA establish
uniform verbal signals enhanced by diagrams and pictures. (ID-0110.1; -
0115.1; -0178.1.) Two of these commenters suggested that OSHA require
these verbal signal charts to be conspicuously posted in the vicinity
of the hoisting operations. (ID-0110.1; -0115.1.)
As discussed above, C-DAC considered whether the rule should
include a standardized set of voice signals and decided that it would
not be practical to do so. It did, however, address the potential for
miscommunication by developing the requirements in Sec. 1926.1421(a)
(requiring a meeting between the operator, signal person and lift
director to determine which verbal signals will be used). Having
received no evidence to the contrary, OSHA has decided to defer to the
expertise of the Committee, and is promulgating this requirement
without substantive change. The word ``shall'' is replaced with
``must'' in paragraphs (b) and (c) to remove any doubt that the
sentences are imperative commands, rather than descriptive.
Section 1926.1422 Signals--Hand Signal Chart
Section 1926.1422 requires that hand signal charts be posted on the
equipment or readily available at the site. OSHA is requiring the
charts to be posted to serve as a reference for operators and signal
persons of the mandatory hand signals and thereby help avoid
miscommunication.
Three commenters suggested that Sec. 1926.1422 be rewritten to
require that the hand signal charts be ``conspicuously posted in the
vicinity of'' the hoisting operations, rather than merely making them
``readily available at the site'' as proposed. (ID-0110.1; -0115.1; -
0178.1.)
Upon further reflection, the Agency acknowledges that the original
language (that the hand signal chart could be ``readily available at
the site'') did not afford the same amount of protection afforded by
``conspicuously posted in the vicinity of the hoisting operations.''
For example, a hand signal chart stored in a shop trailer on the other
side of the site or obscured from sight by other objects might be
``readily available at the site,'' but it would do little to ensure
that the chart would be accessed by employees where it is needed. It is
the Agency's intent that employees be able to access the chart quickly.
OSHA therefore decided to modify the language of Sec. 1926.1422 to
require that signal charts be conspicuously posted in the vicinity of
hoisting operations, or on the equipment.
Section 1926.1423 Fall Protection
This section contains provisions designed to protect workers on
equipment covered by this subpart from fall hazards. (See Sec.
1926.1431, Hoisting Personnel, for fall protection provisions that
apply when equipment is used to hoist personnel).
Falls have traditionally been the leading cause of deaths among
construction workers. BLS data for 2004 and 2005, the latest years for
which complete figures are available, shows 445 fatalities from falls
in 2004 (ID-0023) and 394 in 2005 (ID-0024). In 2004, 20 fatalities
resulted from falls from nonmoving vehicles and in 2005, such falls
caused 18 deaths. A recent study of crane-related fatalities in the
U.S. construction industry found that 2% resulted from falls. J.E.
Beavers, J.R. Moore, R. Rinehart, and W.R. Schriver, ``Crane-Related
Fatalities in the Construction Industry,'' 132 Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management 901 (Sept. 2006). (ID-0012.) Falls from
cranes, particularly when the operator is entering or leaving the
crane, also cause numerous non-fatal injuries to construction workers.
(OSHA-S030-2006-0663-0422.)
As discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule, the Committee
determined that safety would be enhanced by addressing the problem of
fall hazards associated with cranes and derricks comprehensively and
that putting all such requirements in subpart CC would make it easier
for employers to readily determine the applicable fall protection
requirements (see 73 FR 59799, Oct. 9, 2008). Accordingly, under the
final rule, subpart M does not apply to equipment covered by subpart CC
except where Sec. 1926.1423 incorporates requirements of subpart M by
reference.
In this regard, the Agency has amended subpart M at Sec.
1926.500(a)(2)(ii) to make clear that subpart CC specifies the
circumstances in which fall protection must be provided to workers on
equipment covered by subpart CC. The Agency has also amended Sec.
1926.500(a)(3) to state that the criteria for fall protection systems
required under subpart CC are as set forth in Sec. 1926.1423 of
subpart CC. In addition, Sec. 1926.500(a)(4) has been amended to
specify that the training requirements in Sec. 1926.503 do not apply
to the use of equipment covered by subpart CC. These amendments to
Sec. 1926.500 are discussed in the explanation of amendments to
subpart M.
Definition of ``Fall Protection Equipment''
``Fall protection equipment'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401, and is
limited to guardrail systems, safety net systems, personal fall arrest
systems, positioning device systems, and fall restraint systems. One
commenter stated that this definition should be changed to that found
in ANSI/ASSE Z359.0--2007, Definitions and Nomenclature used for Fall
Protection and Fall Arrest, which defines ``fall protection'' more
broadly to include any equipment, device, or system that either
prevents a fall or mitigates the effect of a fall. (ID-0178.1.)
However, as OSHA explained in the proposed rule, the proposed
definition
[[Page 48000]]
was chosen to use the same terminology found in other OSHA standards to
ensure that employers would be familiar with the terminology (see 73 FR
59799, Oct. 9, 2008). Moreover, OSHA notes that sec. 1.3.1 of ANSI/ASSE
Z359.0--2007 provides that the scope of that standard does not include
the construction industry. Accordingly, OSHA is retaining the proposed
definition in the final rule.
Definition of ``Positioning Device System''
A trade association objected to the lack of definitions for ``fall
arrest'' or ``positioning systems.'' (ID-0178.1.) OSHA notes that
proposed Sec. 1926.1401 did contain a definition for ``personal fall
arrest system,'' and that definition is included in the final rule.
OSHA agrees that a definition of ``positioning device system'' is
needed and is adding a definition to Sec. 1926.1401 in the final rule
that is the same as the definition found in subpart M.
Paragraph (a) Application
Section 1926.1423(a) specifies which provisions in this section
apply to all equipment, including tower cranes (Sec. Sec.
1926.1423(c)(1), (c)(2), (d), (g), (j) and (k)); which provisions apply
to all equipment except tower cranes (Sec. Sec. 1926.1423(b), (c) (3),
(e) and (f)); and which provisions apply only to tower cranes
(Sec. Sec. 1926.1423(c)(4) and (h)).
Paragraph (b) Boom Walkways
For the reasons explained in the preamble to the proposed rule,
Sec. 1926.1423(b) addresses the hazard of falls from lattice booms by
establishing when walkways must be incorporated into lattice booms, and
the criteria for such walkways (see 73 FR 59799-59800, Oct. 9, 2008).
No comments were received on this paragraph; it is included in the
final rule without change.
Paragraph (c) Steps, Handholds, Ladders, Grabrails, Guardrails and
Railings
Section 1926.1423(c) in the final rule specifies criteria for the
use and maintenance of steps, handholds, ladders, grabrails, guardrails
and railings. The Agency notes that proposed paragraph (c)
inadvertently omitted ``ladders'' from the list of devices in the
paragraph's heading. Accordingly, OSHA has revised final paragraph (c)
to include the word ladders.
Section 1926.502(b) generally provides criteria for guardrail
systems, with some exceptions (see discussion of amendments to Sec.
1926.500). C-DAC concluded, however, that specific criteria for steps,
handholds, ladders, grabrails, guardrails and railings were necessary
to address the design characteristics of equipment covered by subpart
CC and the particular fall hazards associated with the use of such
equipment.
OSHA agrees, and is therefore adding Sec. 1926.1423(c)(1), which
states that Sec. 1926.502(b) (guardrail systems) must not apply to
equipment covered by subpart CC, to the final rule. It makes clear that
the guardrail criteria requirements in Sec. 1926.502(b) for those
items do not apply to equipment covered by subpart CC. Instead,
Sec. Sec. 1926.1423(c)(2), (3), and (4), discussed below, provide the
applicable criteria for such equipment. Because of the addition of
paragraph (c)(1), which was not in the proposed rule, paragraphs
(c)(2), (3), and (4) have been renumbered from the proposal, where they
were paragraphs (c)(1), (2), and (3).
Paragraph (c)(2) of this section requires that the employer
maintain in good condition originally-equipped steps, handholds,
ladders and guardrails/railings/grabrails.\97\ The failure to properly
maintain such devices could pose dangers to the workers who use them.
For example, a grabrail would not be maintained in good condition if it
has become weakened from rust. A weakened guardrail could fail when an
employee uses it, which could cause the employee to fall. Likewise, a
railing would not be maintained in good condition if all or part of the
railing is missing. A manufacturer that integrated a railing into its
boom design may have relied on the presence of the railing and provided
a walking surface that would otherwise be too narrow to be safe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\97\ OSHA has changed the location of the words ``in good
condition'' in Sec. 1926.1423(b) to make it clear that it applies
to maintenance of all of the listed items.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(4) of this section require that equipment
manufactured more than one year after the effective date of this
standard be equipped to provide safe access and egress on equipment
covered by this subpart by the provision of devices such as steps,
handholds, ladders, and guardrails/railings/grabrails. Tower cranes
must be equipped to provide safe access and egress between the ground
and the cab, machinery platforms, and tower (mast) (see below
discussion of paragraph (c)(4)). All other equipment covered by this
subpart must be equipped to provide safe access and egress between the
ground and the operator work station(s), including the forward and rear
operator positions. As discussed below, Sec. Sec. 1926.1423(c)(3)(i)
and 1926.1423(c)(4)(i) require the steps, handholds, ladders and
guardrails/railings/grabrails used to comply with this section to meet
updated design criteria.
Prior to this final rule, former Sec. 1926.550(a)(13)(i) in
subpart N required that guardrails, handholds, and steps be provided on
cranes for easy access to the car and cab and specified that these
devices conform to ANSI B30.5. The 1968 version of ANSI B30.5, which
was in effect at the time subpart N was issued, specifies that the
construction of these devices must conform to the 1946 U.S. Safety
Appliance Standard. C-DAC recognized that many pieces of equipment now
in use would have been manufactured with handholds and steps but was
concerned that the handholds and steps may have been designed to meet
outdated criteria.
The Committee determined, and OSHA agrees, that it would be unduly
burdensome to require all equipment to be retrofitted with new steps,
handholds, and railings simply because the existing design may vary
from what is required under the final rule. Accordingly, Sec.
1926.1423(c)(3) only applies to equipment manufactured more than one
year after the effective date of this standard. This gives equipment
manufacturers adequate time to incorporate the requirements of Sec.
1926.1423(c)(3)(i) into their new products.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\98\ OSHA had added the word ``devices'' in the last sentence of
paragraph (c)(3) for grammatical clarity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (c)(3)(i) requires that steps, handholds, ladders and
guardrails/railings/grabrails meet the criteria of SAE J185 (May 2003)
or ISO 11660-2:1994(E). As explained above in the discussion of
amendments to subpart X, OSHA amended subpart X to clarify that subpart
X does not apply to integral components of equipment covered by subpart
CC. The specifications in SAE J185 (May 2003) are referenced in other
industry consensus standards, such as ASME B30.5-2004, ``Mobile and
Locomotive Cranes'' and ASME B30.3-2004, ``Construction Tower Cranes,''
and crane manufacturers are familiar with those requirements. Section
1926.1423(c)(3)(i) alternatively allows compliance with ISO 11660-2
because those provisions are sufficiently protective and employers also
use equipment built by foreign manufacturers who have been following
that standard.
[[Page 48001]]
OSHA notes that proposed Sec. 1926.1423(c)(2)(i) \99\
inadvertently omitted handholds from the listed devices that must meet
the criteria of SAE J185 (May 2003) or ISO 11660-2:1994(E).
Accordingly, OSHA has added handholds to the final rule in Sec.
1926.1423(c)(3)(i). Additionally, OSHA has replaced the word
``requirements'' in proposed Sec. 1926.1423(c)(2)(i) with ``criteria''
in the final Sec. 1926.1423(c)(3)(i). The Agency determines this
change clarifies that the listed devices must comply with the design
criteria contained in the referenced standards and that, for the
purposes of Sec. 1926.1423(c)(3)(i), other provisions in the
referenced standards do not apply. To illustrate, both SAE J185 (May
2003) and ISO 11660-2:1994(E) contain provisions relating to the scope
of those standards. However, Sec. 1926.1400 sets forth the scope of
equipment covered by subpart CC (see discussion above of Sec.
1926.1400, Scope). Consequently, Sec. 1926.1423(c)(3)(i) requires that
steps, handholds, ladders, and guardrails/railings/grabrails on
equipment covered by subpart CC (other than tower cranes) meet the
criteria for such devices in SAE J185 (May 2003) or ISO 11660-
2:1994(E), irrespective of the scope provisions in those consensus
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\ Proposed Sec. 1926.1423(c)(2)(i) corresponds with Sec.
1926.1423(c)(3)(i) in the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section requires that walking/stepping
surfaces, except for crawler treads, have slip-resistant features/
properties (such as diamond plate metal, strategically placed grip
tape, expanded metal, or slip-resistant paint). Former Sec.
1926.550(a)(13)(iii) of subpart N required platforms and walkways to
have anti-skid surfaces. C-DAC recommended that OSHA retain this
requirement as a complement to the use of guardrails, handholds,
grabrails, ladders and other engineered safety features that are
required by new Sec. 1926.1423. OSHA concludes that compliance with
this provision will minimize the number of slips and falls for
employees who must travel point to point to access the operator
workstations on equipment covered by this section.
Paragraph (c)(4) of this section applies to fall protection on
tower cranes. For the same reasons explained above with respect to
Sec. 1926.1423(c)(3), Sec. 1926.1423(c)(4) likewise only applies to
tower cranes manufactured more than one year after the effective date
of this standard. Such equipment must be equipped so as to provide safe
access and egress between the ground and the cab, machinery platforms,
and tower (mast), by the provision of devices such as steps, handholds,
ladders, and guardrails/railings/grabrails. In the preamble to the
proposed rule, OSHA stated the Agency's intent to include a requirement
to provide safe access and egress on tower cranes, similar to the
requirement in final paragraph (c)(3) to provide safe access and egress
on other equipment covered by subpart CC, and requested public comment
on the issue (73 FR 59800, Oct. 9, 2008).
Three commenters responded, all stating that the final rule should
include the requirement to provide safe access and egress on tower
cranes. (ID-0182.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) Accordingly, OSHA has added
paragraph (c)(4) to the final rule.
Paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section requires steps, handholds,
ladders, and guardrails/railings/grabrails on these tower cranes to
meet the criteria of ISO 11660-1:2008(E) and ISO 11660-3:2008(E), or
SAE J185 (May 2003), except where infeasible. For the same reasoning
discussed above with respect to Sec. 1926.1423(c)(3)(i), paragraph
(c)(4)(i) allows employers to use equipment designed to the
specifications of SAE J185 (May 2003) or, alternatively, ISO 11660-
1:2008(E) and ISO 11660-3:2008(E).
The Agency notes that ISO 11660-1:2008(E) provides criteria
applicable to cranes in general while ISO 11660-3:2008(E) provides
criteria particular to tower cranes. The Agency reads the particular
criteria in ISO 11660-3:2008(E) as supplementing the general criteria
in ISO 11660-1:2008(E).\100\ Therefore, paragraph (c)(4)(i) would only
be satisfied under this alternative if the steps, handholds, ladders
and guardrails/railings/grabrails on the tower crane meet the criteria
in both ISO 11660-1:2008(E) and ISO 11660-3:2008(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\100\ The Agency notes that the approach for the 2008 editions
of ISO 11660-1 and ISO 11660-3 appears to differ from that of the
ISO 11660-2:1994(E). The Agency interprets ISO 11660-2:1994(E) as
addressing steps, handholds, ladders and guardrails/railings/
grabrails independent of ISO 11660-1:2008(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of this section requires walking/stepping
surfaces on tower cranes to have slip-resistant features/properties,
such as diamond plate metal, strategically placed grip tape, expanded
metal, or slip-resistant paint. Similar to paragraph (c)(3)(ii) (see
above discussion of paragraph (c)(3)(ii)), paragraph (c)(4)(ii) carries
forward the anti-skid protections from former Sec.
1926.550(a)(13)(iii).
Paragraph (d) Personal Fall Arrest and Fall Restraint Systems
Paragraph (d) of this section addresses personal fall arrest
systems and fall restraint systems used to satisfy the requirements
under subpart CC to provide fall protection.
Paragraph (d) was not in the proposed rule but has been added to
the final rule to make clear that certain appropriate requirements of
subpart M apply to subpart CC. Paragraph (d) requires the use of
personal fall arrest system components in personal fall arrest and fall
restraint systems required by subpart CC. These systems must conform to
all of the criteria in Sec. 1926.502 of subpart M, except Sec.
1926.502(d)(15). Section 1926.502(d)(15) provides general criteria for
anchorages for personal fall arrest systems, but OSHA is choosing to
apply the anchorage criteria in Sec. 1926.1423(g)(3) rather than the
criteria in Sec. 1925.502(d)(15). This approach is consistent with the
approach to requirements for personal fall arrest and fall restraint
systems provided in Sec. 1926.760(d)(2) of subpart R, except for the
exclusion of Sec. 1926.502(d)(15).
Paragraph (e) Fall Protection Requirements for Non-Assembly/Disassembly
Work
Paragraph (e) of this section addresses fall protection
requirements for employees engaged in work other than assembly/
disassembly work (``non-A/D'' work). For such work, in certain
circumstances, employers are required to provide and ensure the use of
fall protection equipment for employees who are on a walking/working
surface with an unprotected side or edge more than 6 feet above a lower
level.
C-DAC discussed different trigger heights for fall protection
requirements for particular types of cranes and derricks. Ultimately,
C-DAC concluded that the requirements for fall protection should remain
consistent with 29 CFR part 1926 subpart M, which generally requires
fall protection at heights at and above 6 feet, as much as possible.
(As discussed below, for assembly/disassembly (A/D) work, the Committee
recommended fall protection beginning at 15 feet.) C-DAC also
determined that operators do not need to be tied off while moving to
and from their cabs, and paragraph (e)(1) of this section, discussed
below, therefore requires fall protection equipment only when employees
are moving point-to-point on booms or while at a work station (with
certain exceptions). The Committee determined that the steps,
handholds, and railings required under
[[Page 48002]]
Sec. 1926.1423(c) protect operators moving to and from their
workstations and eliminate the need for additional fall protection
equipment.
Paragraph (e)(1) Non-Assembly/Disassembly: Moving Point to Point
Paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section requires employers to provide
and ensure the use of fall protection equipment at 6 feet and above
when an employee is moving point to point on non-lattice booms (whether
horizontal or not horizontal). Moving point to point is defined in
Sec. 1926.1401 and refers to when an employee is going to or coming
from a work station.
C-DAC determined that non-lattice booms generally present more
hazards to workers who must walk them to reach other work areas,
devices, and equipment attached to it than lattice booms. Non-lattice
booms are typically of the extensible type. As a result, as members
noted, the walking/working surfaces on these types of booms are often
oily (from the hydraulic mechanisms). Also, since the boom sections
extend and retract, it is typically infeasible to provide boom walkways
and other safety features. Because they tend to be slippery from oil,
the Committee concluded that they are especially hazardous to move
across even when horizontal. Therefore, where an employee is required
to move point to point on a non-lattice boom, the Agency decided to
remain consistent with the requirements in 29 CFR part 1926 subpart M
to require fall protection at heights at or above 6 feet and the final
rule requires fall protection when the fall distance is greater than 6
feet.
Paragraph (e)(1)(ii) applies the same fall protection requirements
to point to point movement on lattice booms that are not in a
horizontal position. The Committee found that in non-A/D work, an
employee may, for example, need to move point-to-point on a lattice
boom to inspect a part that is suspected to need repair, or to make a
repair (such as replacing a broken or missing cotter pin). In many of
these situations, the boom will not be horizontal, since space
limitations often make it difficult to lower the boom to do this work.
The Committee determined that it is both necessary and feasible for
fall protection to be used in such instances. Typically, the fall
protection that would be used would consist of a double-lanyard or
similar personal fall arrest system. Since the boom in these instances
would be elevated, there would usually be a point on the boom above the
level of the employee's feet to which the lanyard could be attached.
In contrast, it is uncommon for an employee to need to move point-
to-point on a horizontal lattice boom for non-A/D work. If work does
need to be done, such as making an inspection or repair as discussed
above, the employee would usually get access to their work station with
a ladder. In those instances when the employee must traverse the boom
itself, the Committee concluded that it would be inappropriate to
require fall protection for the reasons discussed below.
The key difficulty in providing fall protection in such instances
stems from the lack of a tie-off point above the level of the
employee's feet. The Committee discussed that most lattice booms when
horizontal would be less than 15 feet above the next lower level. At
heights below 15 feet, a personal fall arrest system tied off at the
level of the employee's feet, with a lanyard long enough to afford the
employee the range of movement necessary for this work, might not
prevent the employee from falling to the next lower level.
In construction work the problem of providing personal fall
protection in this height range, when there is no higher tie-off point,
is usually solved in one of three ways (apart from the use of ladders,
scaffolds, aerial lifts, and similar devices). One way is to use a
restraint system, which is anchored at a point that prevents the
employee from moving past an edge. The Committee discussed that this
type of system could not be used while on a boom because the boom is
too narrow. Another method is to set up a personal fall arrest system
that would arrest the employee's fall before hitting the next lower
level by using stanchions to support an elevated, horizontal life-line.
However, such stanchions must be securely fastened and whatever they
are fastened to must be able to withstand considerable forces in an
arrested fall. On a crane's lattice boom, the stanchions would have to
be attached either to the chords or the lacings.
The chords and lacings are engineered to be as light as possible,
and an engineering analysis would be needed in each case to determine
if the attachment point was sufficiently strong to withstand those
forces. Also, the Agency determines that manufacturers would be
unlikely to approve clamp-on type systems because of the likelihood of
the clamping forces damaging these critical structural components.
Similarly, the Agency determines that manufacturers would not approve
the repeated weld/removal/re-weld cycles that would be involved in
attaching and removing stanchions because this could adversely affect
the boom's structural components.
The third method commonly used in construction work is a temporary
guardrail system, but that also would require attaching stanchions to
the boom, which would be infeasible for these same reasons.
The Committee concluded that, in light of such factors, it would
not be appropriate to require fall protection when an employee moves
point-to-point on horizontal lattice booms. However, in the preamble to
the proposed rule, the Agency noted that, although it may rarely be
necessary for an employee moving point-to-point on a horizontal lattice
boom to be 15 feet or more above the next lower level, there is the
possibility of such an occurrence, such as where a horizontal boom
spans a large gap in the ground surface. At such heights a personal
fall arrest system tied off at the level of the employee's feet would
allow sufficient room for the arrest system to operate without allowing
the employee to strike the next lower level. Therefore, the Agency
requested public comment on whether proposed Sec. 1926.1423(d)(1)(ii)
\101\ should be expanded to require fall protection when an employee,
engaged in non-A/D work, is moving point-to-point on a boom that is
horizontal and the fall distance is 15 feet or more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\101\ Proposed Sec. 1926.1423(d)(1)(ii) corresponds with final
Sec. 1926.1423(e)(1)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA received three comments on this issue. (ID-0182.1; -0205.1; -
0213.1.) These commenters stated that the final rule should require
fall protection when an employee, engaged in non-A/D work, is moving
point-to-point on a boom that is horizontal and the fall distance is 15
feet or more. Accordingly, the Agency has added paragraph (e)(1)(iii)
to the final rule to require fall protection under these circumstances.
No comments were received on proposed paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii),
and they are included in the final rule without change as paragraphs
(e)(1)(i) and (ii).
Paragraph (e)(2) Non-Assembly/Disassembly: While at a Work Station
Paragraph (e)(2) of this section requires employers to provide and
ensure the use of fall protection while an employee is at a work
station on any part of the equipment (including the boom, of any type),
except when the employee is at or near draw-works (when the equipment
is running), in the cab, or on the deck (see the discussion of this in
the preamble of the proposed rule, where this paragraph was denominated
as Sec. 1926.1423(d)(2); 73
[[Page 48003]]
FR 59802, Oct. 9, 2008). No comments were received on this paragraph;
it is included in the final rule without change other than its
redesignation.
Paragraph (f) Assembly/Disassembly
Paragraph (f) of this section requires the employer to provide and
ensure the use of fall protection equipment during assembly and
disassembly (A/D) work for employees who are on a walking/working
surface with an unprotected side or edge more than 15 feet above a
lower level, except when the employee is at or near draw-works (when
the equipment is running), in the cab, or on the deck (see the
discussion of this in the preamble of the proposed rule, where this
paragraph was denominated as Sec. 1926.1423(e); 73 FR 59802, Oct. 9,
2008). No comments were received on this paragraph; it is included in
the final rule without change other than its redesignation.
Paragraph (g) Anchorage Criteria
Paragraph (g) of this section requires the use of, and specifies
criteria for, anchorage points in personal fall arrest systems,
positioning device systems, and fall restraint systems.\102\ Paragraph
(g)(1) provides that Sec. Sec. 1926.502(d)(15) and 1926.502(e)(2) of
subpart M apply to equipment covered by subpart CC only to the extent
delineated in paragraph (g)(2). Sections 1926.502(d)(15) and
1926.502(e)(2) provide, respectively, anchorage criteria for personal
fall arrest systems and positioning device systems. As discussed below
with respect to paragraph (g)(2), C-DAC determined that the particular
circumstances associated with the use of personal fall arrest systems
and positioning device systems on equipment covered by subpart CC
necessitate specific criteria for the anchorages of such systems.
Therefore, OSHA added paragraph (g)(1) to this section of the final
rule to make clear that the general anchorage criteria in Sec.
1926.502 apply to equipment covered by subpart CC only as delineated in
paragraph (g)(2), discussed below (see also discussion above of Sec.
1926.500).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\102\ ``Personal fall arrest system'' and ``Positioning device
system'' are defined in Sec. 1926.1401. These definitions parallel
those in Sec. 1926.500(b) of subpart M. ``Fall restraint system''
is also defined in Sec. 1926.1401. This definition parallels the
one in Sec. 1926.751 of subpart R. As with other definitions
applicable to this section, C-DAC endeavored, to the extent possible
and appropriate, to use terminology that is familiar to the
industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (g)(2) of this section, Anchorages for personal fall
arrest and positioning device systems, contains requirements for
anchorage points used in personal fall arrest and positioning device
systems (this was denominated paragraph (f) in the proposed rule).
Sections 1926.1423(g)(2)(i) and 1926.1423(g)(2)(ii) permit personal
fall arrest systems and positioning systems to be anchored to any
apparently substantial part of the equipment unless a competent person,
from a visual inspection, without an engineering analysis, would
conclude that the applicable criteria in Sec. 1926.502 of subpart M of
this part would not be met. An apparently substantial part of the
equipment is a part that would appear substantial to a reasonable
competent person. The subpart M criteria include, for personal fall
arrest systems, 5,000 pounds per employee or twice the potential impact
load of an employee's fall (in addition to other requirements) (Sec.
1926.502(d)(15)); for a positioning device, 3,000 pounds or twice the
potential impact load of an employee's fall, whichever is greater (in
addition to other requirements) (Sec. 1926.502(e)(2)).
Most of the equipment covered by the standard is designed to lift
and support weights much heavier than these. Apparently substantial
parts of the equipment are, therefore, typically capable of meeting the
subpart M capacities. Consequently, C-DAC determined that the criteria
in Sec. Sec. 1926.1423(g)(2)(i) and 1926.1423(g)(2)(ii) are
appropriate and would avoid burdening employers with what it considered
to be the unnecessary expense of obtaining engineering analyses for
each part that would serve as an anchor. (See the discussion of these
provisions in the preamble of the proposed rule under proposed rule
paragraph (f) of this section, 73 FR 59802, Oct. 9, 2008.)
One commenter suggested revising the provision to require a
competent person to supervise the selection, use, and inspection of
fall arrest and positioning anchorages. (ID-0178.1.) This commenter
suggested that this revision was needed to avoid compatibility issues
and to emphasize the competent person's planning role. OSHA declines to
adopt the commenter's suggestion. As explained above, this provision is
included because the suitability of substantial parts of the equipment
for anchoring fall arrest and positioning device systems will often be
readily apparent, and the employer will only need to seek a competent
person's judgment if there is some question as to the anchorage's
suitability. The revision suggested by the commenter would contravene
this intent.
Paragraph (g)(2)(iii) requires that attachable anchor devices
(portable anchor devices that are attached to the equipment) meet the
applicable anchorage criteria in Sec. 1926.502(d)(15) for personal
fall arrest systems and Sec. 1926.502(e)(2) for positioning device
systems. These criteria are the same as those discussed with respect to
paragraph (g)(2) for personal fall arrest and positioning device
systems.
Paragraph (g)(3), Anchorages for fall restraint systems, requires
fall restraint systems to be anchored to any part of the equipment that
is capable of withstanding twice the maximum load that a worker may
impose on it during reasonably anticipated conditions of use. Since
fall restraint systems do not arrest a worker's fall (instead they
prevent a fall from occurring), the anchorage does not need to be able
to support the significantly greater force generated during an arrested
fall. OSHA relies on C-DAC's determination that having the anchorage
support twice the maximum anticipated load provides an adequate margin
of safety when a fall restraint system is used.
The Agency made several changes to text originally proposed as
paragraph (f) of this section, and now designated as final paragraph
(g) for the purposes of clarity and consistency. OSHA devoted final
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) to personal fall arrest systems and
positioning device systems, respectively, and added references to
Sec. Sec. 1926.502(d)(15) and 1926.502(e)(2) to specify which of the
criteria in Sec. 1926.502 of subpart M are applicable to anchorages
used to comply with this section. OSHA concludes these changes improve
the clarity of the final rule. In addition, final paragraph (g) uses
the terms ``personal fall arrest'' instead of ``fall arrest'' and
``fall restraint systems'' instead of ``restraint systems'' to use the
defined terms from Sec. 1926.1401 and maintain consistency with other
construction standards.
Paragraph (h) Tower Cranes
Paragraph (h) of this section specifies fall protection
requirements specific to tower cranes. Note that the final rule uses
the terminology ``erecting, climbing, and dismantling'' with regard to
tower cranes rather than ``assembly'' and ``disassembly;'' or the term
``erecting/dismantling'' used in the proposed rule, because this
terminology reflects the industry's use of these terms.
Paragraph (h)(1) Work Other Than Erecting, Climbing, and Dismantling
Paragraph (h)(1) of this section addresses fall protection
requirements for work other than erecting, climbing, and dismantling.
The employer is required to provide and ensure the use
[[Page 48004]]
of fall protection equipment for employees who are on a walking/working
surface with an unprotected side or edge more than 6 feet above a lower
level. The exceptions to this requirement would be when the employee is
at or near draw-works (when the equipment is running), in the cab, or
on the deck. (See the discussion of this provision in the preamble of
the proposed rule at 73 FR 59803, Oct. 9, 2008, where it was designated
as paragraph (g)(1)). No comments were received on this paragraph; it
is included in the final rule without change other than its revised
heading and redesignation from paragraph (g)(1) in the proposed rule to
(h)(1) in the final rule.
Paragraph (h)(2) Erecting, Climbing, and Dismantling
Proposed Sec. 1926.1423(g)(2) (redesignated Sec. 1926.1423(h)(2)
in the final rule) specified that, for erecting/dismantling work,
employers must provide, and ensure the use of, fall protection
equipment for employees who are on a walking/working surface with an
unprotected side or edge more than 15 feet above a lower level. (See
the discussion of that provision in 73 FR 59803, Oct. 9, 2008.) OSHA
noted in the proposed rule that C-DAC did not include the exceptions
that were included in proposed Sec. 1926.1423(g)(1) for when the
employee is at or near draw-works (when the equipment is running), in
the cab, or on the deck. The Agency stated that it was unaware of any
reason why those exceptions would not be equally applicable for Sec.
1926.1423(g)(2), and asked for public comment on this issue (see 73 FR
59803, Oct. 9, 2008).
OSHA received responses from three commenters, all of whom stated
that this exception should be added to the final rule. (ID-0187.1; -
0205.1; -0213.1.) Accordingly, OSHA has included the exception in Sec.
1926.1423(h)(2) of the final rule.
Paragraph (i) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (j) Anchoring to the Load Line
Paragraph (j) of this section permits an employer, under prescribed
conditions, to anchor a fall arrest system to the hook or other part of
a load line of a crane or derrick. Previously, Sec. 1926.502(d)(23) of
subpart M prohibited personal fall arrest systems to be attached to
``hoists except as specified in other subparts of this part.'' Former
Sec. 1926.550 in subpart N did not contain any provisions specifically
addressing this issue. Therefore, since the hook or other part of a
load line is connected to a hoist in the crane or for the derrick,
attaching a personal fall arrest system in this manner had been
prohibited by subpart M.
Prior to this rulemaking, OSHA received inquiries asking whether a
crane's hook or load line may be used as an anchorage point for fall
protection. Using a crane for such purpose would be particularly useful
in many situations, especially where establishing a suitable anchor
point would be otherwise very difficult. OSHA asked C-DAC to consider
whether there is any reason to prohibit using a crane or derrick for
such purpose. C-DAC determined that the hook or load line of a crane
could be used safely as an anchor point under the conditions set forth
in paragraph (j).\103\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ OSHA modified the language from the proposed rule so that
final paragraph (j) of this section refers to a ``personal fall
arrest system'' rather than a ``fall arrest system.'' This
modification was made for the purpose of clarity to use the terms
defined in Sec. 1926.1401, Definitions, and to maintain consistency
in the construction standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (j)(1) allows the hook or load line to be used as an
anchorage point when a qualified person has determined that the set-up
and rated capacity of the crane/derrick (including the hook, load line
and rigging) meets or exceeds the requirements in Sec.
1926.502(d)(15). C-DAC concluded that, as long as the crane or derrick
has sufficient capacity to meet those criteria, there is no reason to
prohibit its use for this purpose.
C-DAC did conclude, however, that the expertise of a qualified
person is required to determine whether specific criteria are met when
anchoring to the hook or load line. The criteria in Sec.
1926.502(d)(15) were developed to ensure that fall protection
anchorages provide adequate employee protection. Anchorages used for
personal fall arrest systems must be capable of supporting at least
5,000 pounds or designed, installed, and used as part of a complete
personal fall arrest system which maintains a safety factor of at least
two. A number of factors related to the crane's capacity in the
particular configuration and set-up involved would need to be
considered, including, in some cases, the angle of the fall arrest
lanyard to the boom if a fall were to occur. In addition, the qualified
person would need to determine whether the set-up is such that it would
not cause an equipment failure, such as a broken cable or chain, for
the load line to serve as an anchorage for a personal fall arrest
system. These determinations necessarily would include consideration of
the characteristics of the particular equipment involved and the
limitations of its operation. OSHA agrees that a qualified person must
determine whether the criteria are met, and has included that
requirement in paragraph (j)(1).
Paragraph (j)(2) requires that the equipment operator be at the
work site and informed that the equipment is being used to anchor a
personal fall arrest system. This would ensure that the operator is
available to make any necessary adjustments, such as moving the boom or
load lines. Further, in the event of an emergency that results in a
tied-off employee being suspended from the hook or load line, the
operator would be available to bring the worker to the ground safely.
OSHA received three comments on the provisions relating to
anchoring to the load line, and one member of the public submitted
written testimony on the provisions prior to the hearing on the
proposed rule. Two of the commenters responded positively to the
provisions (ID-0155.1; -0203.1) and one commenter stated the provisions
were a necessary improvement that would allow employers to provide fall
protection in the narrow circumstances where there are no viable
options other than the crane hook (ID-0203.1).
The third commenter was opposed to the provisions and stated that
anchoring to the load line should be prohibited. (ID-0178.1.) This
commenter stated that cranes are only engineered to lift straight up
and straight down and that retracting a hook at any other angle may jam
or break the cable or chain, which would result in a dropped load. OSHA
concludes paragraph (j) addresses this concern for the reasons
discussed below.
Written testimony submitted prior to the hearing expressed the
concern that, under Sec. 1926.1417(e), which allows a suspended load
to be left unattended by the equipment operator under certain
conditions, an employee's personal fall arrest system could be anchored
to a load line at the same time a load is unattended. (ID-0333.2.) This
party suggested that the rule make clear that fall protection should
never be anchored to the load line when the load is unattended.
OSHA disagrees. In fact, the intent of Sec. 1926.1423(j) is to
allow an employee's personal fall arrest system to be anchored to the
load line only when there is no load suspended from the line. This is
implicit in the requirement of paragraph (j)(1) that the qualified
person determine that the set-up and rated capacity (including the
hook, load line, and rigging) meets or exceeds the requirements of
Sec. 1926.502(d)(15). If it
[[Page 48005]]
were permissible for there to be a suspended load, the parenthetical
would include the word ``load,'' for the weight of any load would
certainly affect the ability of the hook or load line to serve as a
fall protection anchorage. To make the rule's intent clear, OSHA is
adding paragraph (j)(3), which states that no load may be suspended
from the load line, as an additional condition that must be met when
anchoring a personal fall arrest system to the hook or load line.
Paragraph (k) Training
In the preamble to the proposed rule, the Agency requested comments
on its proposed training requirements. One commenter pointed out that a
requirement for fall protection training had not been included in the
proposed rule and is needed. (ID-0178.1.) While training is already
required under Sec. 1926.21(b)(2),\104\ OSHA has determined that
including a more specific training requirement regarding fall
protection in subpart CC will highlight the requirement and facilitate
compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\104\ That provision states: ``The employer shall instruct each
employee in the recognition and avoidance of unsafe conditions and
the regulations applicable to his work environment to control or
eliminate any hazards or other exposure to illness or injury.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, in the final rule, paragraph (k) has been added to this
section. It requires employers to ensure that each employee who may be
exposed to a fall hazard while on, or hoisted by, equipment covered by
this subpart is trained on the requirements in subpart CC that address
fall protection and the applicable requirements of Sec. Sec. 1926.500
and 1926.502 in subpart M. This provision supplements other applicable
training provisions in Sec. 1926.1430 (see discussion below of Sec.
1926.1430, Training). As noted above, OSHA has made a conforming
amendment to Sec. 1926.500(a)(4) to make clear that the fall
protection training requirements in Sec. 1926.503 of subpart M do not
apply to fall protection systems used to comply with subpart CC. As a
result, the training requirements applicable to Sec. 1926.1423 are
found exclusively in Sec. 1926.1423(k).
General Comment
OSHA received a comment from a safety association generally
objecting to the adequacy of the fall protection required under this
section. (ID-0178.1.) The commenter stated that OSHA should reference
certain ANSI/ASSE standards addressing fall protection in construction
work, including: ANSI/ASSE A10.32--2004, Fall Protection Systems for
Construction and Demolition Operations; ANSI/ASSE A10.18--2007, Safety
Requirements for Temporary Roof and Floor Holes, Wall Openings,
Stairways, and Other Unprotected Edges; and ANSI/ASSE A10.28--1998 (R
2004), Safety Requirements for Work Platforms Suspended from Cranes or
Derricks. However, the commenter has not pointed to which particular
provisions of these consensus standards it believes are appropriately
included in this rule or that it believes would better effectuate the
purpose of this section than those developed by C-DAC.
As discussed above, C-DAC determined that fall protection from
cranes and derricks presented unique problems and that this section
should address those problems while only incorporating limited
provisions of OSHA's general fall protection standard in subpart M.
Upon reviewing the record, including the comments submitted by the
commenter and others on the specific provisions contained in the
proposal, OSHA continues to conclude this approach is appropriate.
Absent additional information as to why OSHA should adopt or reference
provisions in the standard the commenter has cited, OSHA is unable to
assess whether any such provisions would better address fall protection
issues than the provisions of this final rule.
Section 1926.1424 Work Area Control
Section 1926.1424(a) addresses the hazard of employees being
struck, pinched or crushed within the swing radius of the equipment's
rotating superstructure. Paragraph (a)(1) states that the precautions
in paragraph (a)(2) must be taken when there are accessible areas in
which the equipment's rotating superstructure (whether permanently or
temporarily mounted) poses a reasonably foreseeable risk of either: (i)
striking and injuring an employee; or (ii) pinching/crushing an
employee against another part of the equipment or another object.
Paragraph (a)(1) is adopted as proposed.
Included in Sec. 1926.1401, Definitions of this rule is the
definition for ``upperworks'', which C-DAC identified as a synonym for
the term ``superstructure'', used in the regulatory text of paragraph
(a)(1) of this section, as well as the term ``upperstructure''.
However, two commenters noted that the proposed definition for
``upperworks'' did not take into consideration the fact that many
rough-terrain cranes have the engine mounted in the carrier, or lower
carriage of the crane, instead of the superstructure. (ID-0292.1; -
0131.1.) In response, OSHA modified the definition of ``upperworks'' to
acknowledge that the presence of an engine is not always a defining
characteristic of that portion of the crane.
Under paragraph (a)(2), the employer is required to institute two
measures to prevent employees from entering these hazard areas.
Specifically, under paragraph (a)(2)(i), the employer must train
employees assigned to work on or near the equipment in how to recognize
these areas.
Paragraph (a)(2)(ii) requires the employer to erect and maintain
control lines, warning lines, railings, or similar barriers to mark the
boundaries of the hazard areas, but contains an exception when such a
precaution is infeasible. If it is neither feasible to erect such
barriers on the ground nor on the equipment, the employer is required
to mark the danger zone with a combination of warning signs and high
visibility markings on the equipment that identify the hazard areas. In
addition, the employer must train employees to understand what those
markings signify.
OSHA received comments advocating an exemption for cranes used in
the railroad industry, especially cranes moving along a track. (ID-
0170.1; -0176.1; -0342.) One commenter suggested that the requirement
for barriers was impractical for cranes moving along a track, as the
barriers would have to be continually reset.
These objections to the requirement for barriers are not
persuasive. First, the requirement for barriers is not a new
requirement. Former Sec. 1926.550(a)(9) required barricades to prevent
employees from being struck or crushed by the crane, including the
swing radius of the rear of the rotating superstructure. The railroad
employers did not provide any evidence that they were unable to comply
with the previous requirement.
Second, the rule already anticipates that for certain equipment a
traditional type of barrier might not be practical and instead permits
the use of a barrier that attaches directly to, and will move with, the
equipment.
Finally, paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section permits the employer
to identify these hazard areas with warning signs and high visibility
markings on the equipment when it is not feasible to erect a barrier on
the ground or the equipment.
Therefore, paragraph (a)(2) is being promulgated as proposed.
To prevent struck-by and crushed-by injuries and fatalities,
paragraph (a)(3) is designed to help protect employees who must
sometimes enter the hazard area to
[[Page 48006]]
perform work, by ensuring that there is adequate communication and
coordination between the operator and the employee in the danger area.
Under paragraph (a)(3)(i), before an employee goes in that area the
employee (or someone instructed by the employee) has to ensure that the
operator is informed that the employee is going to that location. This
is an essential first step in preventing the operator from moving the
superstructure and causing injury to that employee. This provision is
adopted without change from the proposal.
Paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A) of this section of the proposed rule stated
that the operator was prohibited from rotating the superstructure
unless and until he/she gave a warning that the employee in the hazard
area understood as a signal that the superstructure was about to be
rotated. This was intended to give the employee time to get to a safe
area. Alternatively, under proposed paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(B), the
operator could rotate the superstructure if he/she was informed, in
accordance with a prearranged system of communication, that the
employee who was in the hazard area had moved to a safe position.
Several commenters suggested that the compliance option in proposed
paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A) was insufficient to guarantee the safety of the
employee in the hazard area. (See, e.g., ID-0122.0.) A similar issue
was discussed in connection with Sec. 1926.1404(e) of the final rule.
Section 1926.1404(e) addresses employees in the swing radius area or
crush/caught-in-between zone during the assembly/disassembly process.
(See discussion of Sec. 1926.1404(e) for additional information.)
For the reasons discussed with regard to the issue raised under
Sec. 1926.1404(e), OSHA has removed proposed paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A)
from this section, revised proposed paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(B), and
renumbered it paragraph (a)(3)(ii).
Paragraph (a)(3)(ii) requires the operator to get information that
the employee has cleared the hazard area before rotating the
superstructure. The method of communication must be one that is pre-
arranged. Examples of such a system are provided in the discussion of
Sec. 1926.1404(e) above.
For a full discussion of C-DAC's rationale for the provisions in
paragraph (a), see the preamble to the proposed rule (73 FR 59803-
59804, Oct. 9, 2008).
Proposed paragraph (b) of this section addressed situations where
multiple pieces of equipment are located in such proximity that their
working radii overlap. Such situations pose the danger of employees
being pinched/crushed between the equipment and being injured as a
result of unintended movement or collapse when pieces of equipment
collide. To prevent such accidents, the proposal required the
controlling entity to coordinate the operations of these pieces of
equipment. In the event that there was no controlling entity, the
proposal required the employers operating the equipment to institute a
coordination system.
A commenter asked that Sec. 1926.1424(b) be deleted, or
alternatively, that an exemption be created for employers in the home
building industry. (ID-0232.1.) However, this commenter did not provide
evidence that equipment coordination is any less necessary on a
residential job site than it is on other construction job sites.
Another representative of the building industry also objected to
imposing obligations on a ``controlling entity,'' but did not dispute
the necessity of equipment coordination on construction job sites. (ID-
0214.1.) C-DAC concluded that the controlling entity, to the extent
there is one, is in the best position to take responsibility for the
coordination required by paragraph (b). OSHA has not been persuaded
otherwise.
Both commenters nominated members which served on the negotiated
rulemaking committee. Neither of their respective nominees dissented on
these provisions during the negotiated rulemaking meetings and neither
organization has explained why its position is different from that of
its nominated member. In light of this inconsistency, OSHA has given
diminished weight to these comments.
The C-DAC language for proposed paragraph (b) did not address a
situation in which only one employer is responsible for the operation
of multiple pieces of equipment. OSHA requested comment about revising
the C-DAC language to make clear that such an employer would be
required to institute a coordination system. No comments were received
on this issue. OSHA has therefore revised paragraph (b) to address
situations where one employer is operating multiple pieces of
equipment, without a controlling entity at the jobsite.
Section 1926.1425 Keeping Clear of the Load
This section addresses the hazards posed to employees from being
struck or crushed by the load. (See the preamble to the proposed rule
for a full discussion of C-DAC's rationale for the provisions in this
section (73 FR at 59805-59806, Oct. 9, 2008).)
Paragraph (a)
Paragraph (a) of this section requires the employer to use
available hoisting routes that minimize employee exposure to hoisted
loads to the extent consistent with public safety. No comments were
received on this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) of this section specifies that employees cannot be in
the fall zone when the equipment operator is not moving a suspended
load, with limited exceptions as described in paragraphs (b)(1)-(3).
Fall zone is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as ``the area (including
but not limited to the area directly beneath the load) in which it is
reasonably foreseeable that partially or completely suspended materials
could fall in the event of an accident.'' The fall zone thus includes
both the area directly under the load as well as other areas into which
it is reasonably foreseeable that suspended materials could fall. For
example, if wind is causing the load to swing, the employer would need
to consider the extent to which the load is swinging or may swing in
determining the extent of the fall zone. Another example is where a
bundle of materials is suspended, and some loose materials at the top
of the bundle may slide off sideways. In such a case those materials
would foreseeably fall outside the area directly beneath the load.
Paragraph (b)(1) permits employees engaged in hooking, unhooking or
guiding a load to be within the fall zone while engaged in these
activities. No comments were received on this paragraph; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b)(2) permits employees engaged in the initial
attachment of the load to a component or structure to be within the
fall zone. One example of this activity is: A subassembly of steel
members is hoisted for attachment to a structure. When initially
attaching the lower portion of that subassembly, an employee is within
the fall zone of the load. In this example, the employee engaged in the
initial attachment of the subassembly to the structure would be
permitted to be within the fall zone; that work cannot be done
otherwise. No comments were received on this paragraph; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b)(3) allows workers to be present in the fall zone when
operating a concrete hopper or concrete bucket. The employee operating
the hopper or bucket is necessarily in the fall zone
[[Page 48007]]
since the hopper or bucket is suspended while the employee operates the
releasing mechanism.
One commenter suggested adding a requirement that there be a
competent supervisor for these operations and a requirement for
employee training for activities covered by paragraph (b)(3). (ID-
0120.1.) However, that commenter did not provide an explanation of how
this would increase safety for the employee or any support for such
additional requirements. Nor did the commenter identify any reason why
the activities covered by paragraph (b)(3) would require different or
additional supervision or training requirements than the activities
covered by paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2). C-DAC did not recommend any
additional supervision or training requirements for paragraph (b)(3),
and OSHA is not persuaded that there is a safety justification for
deviating from C-DAC's determination. Therefore, this paragraph is
promulgated as proposed.
A representative of the building industry suggested in its comment
that an exception should be added for dedicated spotters and fall
monitors. (ID-0232.1.) This marks a change from the position of that
organization's nominated representative during the negotiated
rulemaking. (See discussion of this organization's comments under
paragraph (c) of this section.) C-DAC did not conclude that an
exception for spotters and fall monitors was warranted, and the NAHB
did not present evidence to persuade OSHA otherwise. OSHA defers to the
expertise of the Committee and this paragraph is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (c)
Paragraph (c) of this section deals with the work activities
addressed in Sec. Sec. 1926.1425(b)(1) and (b)(2). These requirements
were necessary to ensure employee safety, given the additional risks
posed while employees are performing those tasks in the fall zone.
Paragraph (c)(1) requires that the load be rigged to prevent
unintentional displacement, so that workers in the fall zone are less
likely to be struck by shifting materials. No comments were received on
this paragraph; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)(2) requires the use of hooks with self-closing
latches or their equivalent, to prevent accidental failure of the
hooks. However, the use of ``J'' type hooks is permitted for setting
wooden trusses. This exception is designed to enable the truss to be
unhooked without the need for an employee to go out on the truss. This
avoids the additional exposure to fall hazards that would otherwise
occur from going out on the truss to release a latched hook.
OSHA received a comment from the building industry requesting that
the exception permitting the use of J-hooks when lifting trusses be
extended to lifting wall panels as well; it asserts that the same
additional exposure to fall hazards would be present. (ID-0232.1.)
This commenter nominated a member who served on the negotiated
rulemaking committee. The member did not dissent during the negotiated
rulemaking to this provision. The commenter has not explained why it
has changed its position on this issue or why its current position
differs from that of its nominated member. In light of this
inconsistency, OSHA has given diminished weight to its comment.\105\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\105\ A further basis for according diminished weight to this
comment is that this commenter had a direct channel for presenting
its interests to the committee--its nominee member--and a
presumptive ability to direct its member's negotiating position.
When such an organization submits negative comments to the proposed
rule opposing both its own member's negotiating position and the
committee's consensus, it undermines the negotiating process in a
similar manner as when a member contravenes the ground rules. The
integrity of the negotiating process is central to effectuating the
purpose of the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990.
The Agency also notes that, in future negotiated rulemakings,
one of the factors that it plans to consider in assessing
nominations submitted by organizations is whether the nominee can
demonstrate that he/she has documented authority to bind the
organization to agreements and the position the nominee takes in
such negotiated rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, OSHA notes that there are two important distinctions
between setting roof trusses and setting wall panels. First, there is
no need for a worker to be exposed to a fall hazard to detach a hook
with a self-closing latch from a wall panel. Once the wall panel has
been set, a worker can readily reach the hook from a ladder on the
interior side of the panel. Second, wall panels typically often weigh
more than wooden roof trusses; they pose both struck-by and crushed-by
risks to workers if the hook becomes prematurely detached from the
load. Such unintended detachment is more likely to occur with a J-hook
because it lacks a hook gate.
One commenter suggested that the exception for J-hooks should
include requirements for training and rigging. (ID-0218.1.) This
commenter acknowledged that the use of J-hooks is prevalent in the
industry, and indicated that the specialized training and rigging
requirements it was proposing were intended to protect the component
being lifted. The commenter did not suggest that its proposed
requirements would enhance employee safety. Therefore, this paragraph
is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)(3) requires the use of a qualified rigger \106\ in
the rigging of materials in the situations addressed by paragraph (c).
Proper rigging reduces the risk for workers who must perform work in
the fall zone. No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\106\ Section 1926.1401 defines a ``qualified rigger'' as a
rigger who meets the criteria for a qualified person.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (d) Receiving a Load
Paragraph (d) prohibits all employees except those needed to
receive a load from being in the fall zone when it is being landed. No
comments were received on this provision; it is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (e)
Paragraph (e) concerns tilt-up and tilt-down operations. In these
operations, one end of a component, such as a precast panel, is either
raised, tilting the component up, usually from a horizontal position
(often on the ground) to a vertical position; or lowered, tilting the
component down, usually from a vertical position to a horizontal
position on the ground or other surface. Note that the requirements in
this paragraph do not apply when receiving a load.
As with any other suspended load, it is dangerous to be directly
beneath the load because of the possibility of a failure or error that
would cause the load to fall or be accidentally lowered onto an
employee. To minimize the risk of such accidents, paragraph (e)(1) of
this section provides that no employee must be directly under the load
during a tilt-up or tilt-down operation. Section 1926.1401 defines
``directly under the load'' to mean ``a part or all of an employee is
directly beneath the load.'' No comments concerning this provision were
received; therefore, it is promulgated as proposed.
While paragraph (e)(1) prohibits employees directly under the load,
paragraph (e)(2) of this section provides an allowance for employees to
be in the fall zone (but not directly under the load), when those
employees are ``essential to the operation'' during a tilt up or tilt
down operation.
In the preamble to the proposed rule, the Agency provided a list of
activities it determined to typically be infeasible to do outside the
fall zone and therefore an employee would be in the fall zone for these
activities. The Agency requested public comment on whether there were
additional activities that
[[Page 48008]]
would be infeasible to do from outside the fall zone, and whether it
would be appropriate to add a definition of ``essential to the
operation'' to the standard.
One commenter responded, asserting that the phrase ``essential to
the operation'' does not need to be defined. (ID-0205.1.)
No commenters disagreed with the three scenarios listed in the
preamble to the proposed rule describing instances where an employee is
``essential to the operation'' and must be within the fall zone.
However, one commenter suggested adding to the list the activities of
making initial connections and securing bracing. (ID-0205.1.)
OSHA believes that those two additional tasks--making initial
connections and securing bracing--fall within part of the third
scenario listed in the proposed rule preamble (i.e., to ``* * *
initially attach [the load] to another component or structure'').
For clarity, OSHA has decided to modify paragraph (e)(2) by adding
the operations listed in the proposed rule and including the
recommendation of the commenter.
One comment suggested that there might be some conflict between the
NOTE in this section, Sec. 1926.1426, and Sec. 1926.1433(b)(4). The
discussion of that comment may be found in the portion of the preamble
addressing Sec. 1926.1426 of the final rule.
Section 1926.1426 Free Fall and Controlled Load Lowering
This section addresses the hazards that can arise from free fall of
the boom (live boom) during lifts. Live booms are those in which the
rate of lowering can be controlled only by a brake; a failure of the
brake will result in a free fall (i.e., unrestricted lowering) of the
boom. In contrast, for equipment that has a boom that is not ``live,''
there is a mechanism or device other than the brake which slows the
boom's lowering speed.
The uncontrolled lowering of a boom could result in an accident
which could injure or kill workers in proximity to the load or hoisting
equipment. This section prohibits use of live booms in most
circumstances. An exception is provided in limited conditions that do
not pose hazards for employees with respect to the use of older
equipment manufactured before October 31, 1984. See discussion in Sec.
1926.1426(a)(2)(i) below.
Additionally, this section specifies the circumstances under which
free fall of the load line is prohibited at Sec. 1926.1426(d).
Paragraph (a) Boom Free Fall Prohibitions
Under paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the use of equipment in
which the boom is designed to free fall is prohibited under six
specified conditions.
Paragraph (a)(1)(i) prohibits the use of a live boom when an
employee is in the fall zone of the boom or load (see the explanation
of ``fall zone'' in the discussion above of Sec. 1926.1425(b)).
Section 1926.1425, Keeping clear of the load, of this standard
recognizes that there are some situations in which certain employees
need to be positioned in the fall zone to perform their assigned
duties. However, when equipment with a live boom is in use, the
likelihood that an employee would sustain a serious injury or be killed
by a free fall is very high when an employee is in the fall zone of the
boom or load.
Paragraph (a)(1)(ii) prohibits use of a live boom when an employee
is being hoisted by equipment. If a hoisted employee was dropped in an
uncontrolled fall, the likelihood of a serious injury would be high.
No comments were received for paragraphs (a)(1)(i) or (ii); they
are promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (a)(1)(iii) as set forth in the proposed rule, would have
prohibited the use of a live boom where the load or boom is directly
over a power line, or over any part of the area extending the Table A
of proposed Sec. 1926.1408 clearance distance to each side of the
power line. The diagram below illustrates a situation in which a load
on a live boom is over the area extending the Table A clearance
distance to each side of the power line:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09AU10.000
As discussed above in relation to Sec. Sec. 1926.1407 through
1926.1411, equipment making electrical contact with power lines is one
of the primary causes of equipment-related deaths on construction sites
and, to prevent such contact, those sections would require equipment to
maintain minimum distances from power lines.
In the proposed rule, OSHA determines that there are circumstances
where neither the boom nor the load are directly over the power line or
Table A clearance distance, but where the power line or the Table A
clearance distance is within the fall path of the boom or load. This
circumstance is depicted in the following illustrations:
[[Page 48009]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09AU10.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09AU10.002
In Illustration A, neither the boom nor the load is above the power
line or any part of the Table A zone. However, if the boom were to
fall, the boom would cross into the Table A zone. In Illustration B,
neither the boom nor load is above the power line or any part of the
Table A zone. However, if the boom were to fall, the load would cross
into the Table A zone.
OSHA requested comment in the proposed rule as to whether Sec.
1926.1426(a)(1)(iii) should be modified to also prohibit the equipment
from being positioned such that the fall path of the boom or load would
breach the Table A of Sec. 1926.1408 clearance distance. This
requirement was proposed to prevent the boom, hoist line, or load from
contacting an energized power line and carrying the electric current
back through the equipment. One commenter, in two comments, agreed with
the proposed change. (ID-0052.0; -0092.1.) No commenters disagreed.
Therefore, OSHA has modified Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1)(iii) to prohibit
free fall (live boom) where the power line or the Table A clearance
distance is within the fall path of the boom or the load.
Paragraph (a)(1)(iv) prohibits use of a live boom where the load is
over a shaft. Employees in a shaft receiving a load are at high risk of
death or injury from a free falling boom as the shaft severely limits
the ability to avoid the falling boom. Because this hazard only exists
when there is an employee in the shaft, OSHA has specified in Sec.
1926.1426(a)(1)(iv) of the final rule that the live boom prohibition
only applies when at least one employee is in the shaft. This language
is different from the language of Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1)(v), regarding
cofferdams, because a shaft is typically a smaller work space than a
cofferdam, thus, a shaft under a load is necessarily in the fall zone
of the boom or the load.
Paragraph (a)(1)(v) prohibits free fall of a boom when the load is
over a cofferdam, except where there are no employees in the fall zone
of the boom or load. Much like employees who must receive a suspended
load in a shaft, employees have limited ability to escape a free
falling boom or load in a cofferdam. However, cofferdams are typically
much larger work spaces than shafts, the fall zone of a falling boom or
load may only affect one part of the cofferdam. Therefore, this
provision only applies when employees are in the fall zone of the boom
or load.
OSHA noted an ambiguity in proposed Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1)(v). The
exception referred only to ``the fall zone''; OSHA determines that--to
make this provision consistent with Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1)(i)
(prohibiting the use of live booms when an employee is in the fall zone
of the boom or the load)--the words ``of the boom or load'' should be
added to the language proposed for Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1)(v).
Paragraph (a)(1)(vi) prohibits use of a live boom for lifting
operations in a refinery or tank farm. A free falling boom could strike
pipes or a tank in a refinery or tank farm. Such accidental impact
could cause a release of toxic materials or conflagration. No comments
[[Page 48010]]
were received for this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (a)(2) of this section is the exclusive list of
conditions under which the use of cranes with live booms is permitted.
C-DAC found that cranes with live booms can be used safely under some
circumstances and did not determine that the cost of replacing or
retrofitting all such equipment is justified as long as the use of live
boom equipment is limited to these conditions. However, none of the
conditions outlined in Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1) may be present.
Paragraph (a)(2)(i) allows the use of equipment with a live boom if
that equipment was manufactured prior to October 31, 1984, and none of
the circumstances listed in Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1) are present. ANSI
B30.5 first prohibited live booms in the 1972 version and reiterated
the prohibition in the 1982 edition, which was published on October 31,
1983, and became effective on October 31, 1984.
OSHA concludes that manufacturers would have begun to phase out
live-boom equipment when ANSI first prohibited its use in 1972 and that
few, if any, live boom equipment would have been manufactured after
October 31, 1984. Moreover, during this period, hydraulic hoisting
equipment, the design of which typically precluded boom free fall even
in its early designs, became more prevalent.
In light of these factors, the Agency concludes that most equipment
manufactured after October 31, 1984, would not have live booms. Section
1926.1426(a)(2) thus allows the older live boom equipment to be phased
out safely by restricting its use to situations in which none of the
circumstances listed in Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1) are present. However,
OSHA added a new provision to this paragraph that considers live-boom
equipment manufactured on or after October 31, 1984, and meeting the
requirements of paragraph (b) of this section, not to be subject to the
limitations of paragraph (a) of this section. OSHA considers such
equipment, when so modified, to be as safe as any equipment modified
under the requirements of paragraph (b).
Paragraph (a)(2)(ii) allows use of a live boom if the equipment is
a floating crane/derrick or is a land crane/derrick on a vessel/
flotation device and none of the circumstances listed in Sec.
1926.1426(a)(1) are present. The Committee found, and OSHA agrees, that
equipment used on the water commonly has a live boom because the
dynamics of load transfer while on water (from side to side), as well
as unexpected wave action can cause rapid changes in list and trim,
which sometimes necessitates that the operator have a free fall boom
system to compensate for these effects. Non-live systems are not fast
enough for this purpose. At the public hearing, a witness from the
maritime industry said that the ``unique tasks [associated with
operating cranes on the water] have often required and will continue to
require a modification of existing cranes and derricks so that they can
safely accomplish these specialized applications.'' (ID-0345.41.)
As a result, the Agency concludes that there is no need to modify
this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
One commenter suggested there is a conflict between the Sec.
1926.1426(a) allowance for the limited use of free falling booms and
Sec. 1926.1433(b)(4) incorporation of the ASME standard prohibition on
the use of free falling booms. (ID-0053.1.)
Section 5-1.3.1 of ASME B30.5-2004 has a paragraph (b), which
contains its own text, as well as two subsidiary paragraphs, enumerated
(1) and (2), each of which also contains text. The ASME prohibition
against live booms is in the text of paragraph (b) of ASME B30.5-2004
sec. 5-1.3.1. Free fall is not mentioned in subsidiary paragraphs
(b)(1) or (b)(2) of ASME B30.5-2004 sec. 5-1.3.1.
Section 1926.1433 incorporates the concepts in only subsidiary
paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2) of ASME B30.5-2004 sec. 5-1.3.1; it does
not incorporate the portions of paragraph (b) of ASME B30.5-2004 sec.
5-1.3.1 that would conflict with Sec. 1926.1433. There is, therefore,
no conflict between Sec. Sec. 1926.1426(a) and 1926.1433(b)(4).
Paragraph Sec. 1926.1426(a)(2) is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b) Preventing Boom Free Fall
Paragraph (b) of this section establishes criteria for the boom
hoist on equipment with a boom designed to free fall. Paragraphs (b)(1)
through (b)(4) specify the mechanisms or devices that a boom hoist can
utilize as a secondary means to prevent boom free fall when the primary
system fails. C-DAC determined that each of these were effective means
of preventing boom free fall, and OSHA agrees. The addition of a listed
secondary mechanism or device to prevent the fall of the boom changes
the characteristics of equipment designed with a live boom, decreasing
the risk of injury to employees. Therefore, if equipment has a boom
hoist with a secondary mechanism or device listed in paragraphs (b)(1)
through (4), it is not considered a live boom for purposes of the
limitations of (a) of this section. No comments were received on these
provisions; they are promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c) Preventing Uncontrolled Retraction
Paragraph (c) of this section requires hydraulic telescoping booms
(which are also referred to as hydraulic extensible booms) to have an
integrally mounted holding device to prevent the boom from retracting
in the event of hydraulic failure.
The C-DAC draft of this provision stated that the purpose of this
device was ``to prevent boom movement in the event of hydraulic
failure.'' OSHA determines that this language was unintentionally broad
in that it refers to any ``boom movement.'' In the proposed rule, OSHA
modified the language to state that the purpose of the integrally
mounted holding device is ``to prevent the boom from retracting'' in
the event of hydraulic failure and requested public comment on this
change.
Two commenters agreed with the modification and no commenters
disagreed. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) The text of Sec. 1926.1426(c) is
therefore promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d) Load Line Free Fall
Paragraph (d) of this section lists the circumstances under which
free fall of the load line hoist is prohibited, and controlled load
lowering must be used. ``Free fall (of the load line)'' is defined in
Sec. 1926.1401 to mean ``where only the brake is used to regulate the
descent of the load line (the drive mechanism is not used to drive the
load down faster or retard its lowering).'' ``Free fall'' is contrasted
with ``controlled load lowering,'' which Sec. 1926.1401 defines as
``lowering a load by means of a mechanical hoist drum device that
allows a hoisted load to be lowered with maximum control using the gear
train or hydraulic components of the hoist mechanism. Controlled load
lowering requires the use of the hoist drive motor, rather than the
load hoist brake, to lower the load.''
As with free fall of the boom, free fall of the load line hoist
presents a struck-by hazard to employees. One difference is that free
fall of the load line endangers a smaller area than boom free fall.
When a boom free falls, its tip (and any attached load) moves both
downward and outward. Because the load will be moving in at least two
directions simultaneously, the area that will be affected by the fall
is larger than the affected area from a load line free fall.
[[Page 48011]]
In contrast, if a load line free falls, the load will tend to fall
in a relatively straight path downward (as long as the boom is not
being moved and the load is not significantly affected by winds). Thus
the area affected will typically be smaller. As a result the
prohibitions for load line free fall are less than those affiliated
with boom free fall. No comments were received on paragraphs (d)(1) or
(d)(2); they are promulgated as proposed.
Proposed paragraph (d)(3) stated that the use of load line hoist
free fall is prohibited when the load is directly over a power line, or
over any part of the area extending the Table A clearance distance to
each side of the power line. OSHA requested comment on whether proposed
Sec. 1926.1426(d)(3) should be modified to also prohibit the equipment
from being positioned where the fall path of the load would breach the
Table A clearance distance. One commenter, in two comments agreed with
the change and no commenters disagreed. (ID-0052.0; -0092.1.)
Since this modification is consistent with the purpose of the
provision, OSHA has included this revised language in the final rule;
Sec. 1926.1426(d)(3) to prohibit load line free fall where the power
line or the Table A clearance distance is within the fall path of the
load.
Proposed paragraph (d)(4) stated that load line free fall is
prohibited when the load is over a shaft or cofferdam. OSHA noted that,
unlike the prohibition against live booms in Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1)(v),
proposed paragraph (d)(4) contained no exception regarding cofferdams
in which there are no employees in the fall zone. OSHA requested
comment on whether proposed Sec. 1926.1426(d)(4) should include the
same exception included in Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1)(v). Two commenters
agreed with the modification and no commenters disagreed. (ID-0205; -
0213.) Because the fall zone of a free falling load line is typically a
smaller area than the fall zone of a free falling boom, the Agency is
unaware of any reason to include the exception in Sec.
1926.1426(a)(1)(v) for live booms but omit it for load free fall.
Therefore, in the final rule, OSHA has modified the language in
proposed Sec. 1926.1426(d) by separately addressing shafts and
cofferdams, and adding an exception for the latter.
Section 1926.1427 Operator Qualification and Certification Introduction
Section 1926.1427 addresses the safety problems that result if
equipment operators lack the knowledge and skills necessary to perform
their duties safely. In C-DAC's collective experience, operator error
plays a role in a significant percentage of fatal and other serious
crane accidents because operators are not familiar with the precautions
needed to protect against hazards such as power line contact, crane
overloading and collapse, and loss of control of the load. C-DAC
concluded that a verified testing process is essential for ensuring
that crane operators have the requisite knowledge and skills and that
requiring crane operators to successfully complete such a process would
be an effective and efficient way to reduce crane-related accidents.
In the proposed rule, OSHA noted that C-DAC's finding in this
regard was supported by a study conducted over a 34-year period (1969-
2002) by the Construction Safety Association of Ontario that showed a
substantial decrease in crane and rigging fatalities in Ontario
beginning in 1979, when mandatory training and certification
requirements for Ontario crane operators went into effect. (ID-0009.)
In the ten-year period from 1969 through 1978, before Ontario's
requirements went into effect, 85 Ontario construction workers suffered
crane and rigging fatalities, amounting to 8.5 per year, or 19.8% of
all construction fatalities in Ontario. In the 24-year period from 1979
through 2002, there were 51 crane and rigging fatalities, or slightly
more than two per year. For this period, crane and rigging fatalities
equaled 9.6% of all Ontario construction fatalities. In the 12-year
period from 1991 through 2002, the total number of crane and rigging
fatalities was 9, or fewer than one per year. During this period, crane
and rigging fatalities amounted to 4.1% of total construction
fatalities. This study supports C-DAC's conclusion that third-party
certification is an effective means of promoting safe crane
operations.\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\107\ The Ontario system requires prospective or current crane
operators (referred to in Ontario as ``hoisting engineers'') to
either successfully complete an apprenticeship program or
demonstrate sufficient previous experience before seeking
certification as a hoisting engineer. The apprenticeship program
includes in-school training in a number of topics determined by the
Ministry of Education, a practical examination administered at
Ministry-designated sites, and a written examination administered by
the Ministry. Upon passing this examination and proving completion
of the requisite work hours, an apprentice receives a certificate of
qualification as one of three types of hoisting engineer from the
Ministry. (ID-0010.)
Hoisting engineers already qualified elsewhere must also obtain
a certification from the Ministry to operate cranes in the province.
These candidates must sit for the written examination and complete
the practical skills assessment required for qualification of
apprentices, but may demonstrate sufficient previous experience
instead of completing the number of work/training hours required by
the apprenticeship program, to receive a certificate of
qualification from the Ministry in one of the three hoisting
engineer categories. (ID-0011.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rulemaking record contains additional support for C-DAC's
conclusion. A study of crane accidents in California both before and
after that State adopted a mandatory certification requirement shows a
significant drop in crane-related fatalities and injuries after the
certification requirement went into effect on May 31, 2005. (ID-
0205.1.) For the three years prior to that date, California experienced
ten fatal accidents, while in the next three years, only two fatal
accidents occurred. The number of injury cases declined from 30 to 13
over the same two periods. The California data supports that from
Ontario and demonstrates that significant safety benefits can be
expected from a requirement for third-party certification.
The rulemaking record also contains substantial evidence regarding
the need for continued application of State and local laws. As several
commenters explained, State and local licensing requirements are backed
by the police power of that government. For example, New York law
states that the operation of a crane without a valid license in New
York City is a misdemeanor punishable by fines and imprisonment. (NYC
Administrative Code Sec. Sec. 28-405.1; 28-203.1.) Moreover, states
have the power to revoke previously issued licenses under appropriate
circumstances. (ID-0171.1.) In contrast, OSHA's enforcement of
certification or other qualification requirements would be limited in
most cases to a citation to an employer. Based on the record as a
whole, the Agency concludes that cooperative Federal-State enforcement
will increase the effectiveness of the new standard. See also
discussion of federalism in section V.D of this preamble.
The certification requirements in the final rule are therefore
designed to work in conjunction with State and local laws, and to
afford employers several options for ensuring operator abilities in
areas where there are no State or local operator licensing
requirements. For operation of equipment within jurisdictions where a
State or locality licenses crane operators, and the government entity's
licensing program meets certain criteria, OSHA is requiring operators
(with the exception of operators that are employees of and operating
equipment for the U.S. military) to be licensed by that government
entity. For operation in other areas, employers will have three
[[Page 48012]]
options for certification or qualification of their operators. Each of
these options will be explained and discussed in detail below. They
are:
1. Be certified by passing an examination administered by an
accredited testing organization.
2. Be qualified through the employer's in-house, but independently
audited, testing program.
3. Be qualified by the United States military.
While OSHA is requiring compliance with State and local licensing
laws immediately upon the effective date of this standard in
recognition of the existing force and effect of those laws, OSHA is not
requiring certification or qualification under the three options listed
above until four years from the effective date of this standard.
Moreover, there are limited exceptions to all of the licensing and
certification requirements, as specified in Sec. 1926.1427(a). Even
after the four-year phase-in period of the general certification
requirements, OSHA will continue to allow non-certified operators to
operate the equipment as operators-in-training in accordance with Sec.
1926.1427(f), discussed below.
Of the three options available in the absence of State or local
licensing laws, Option (3) of this section is available only to the
United States military for qualification of its employees. Further, as
discussed below, a number of commenters stated that Option (2) of this
section was not viable for many employers. However, Option (1) of this
section is available to all employers and will be the one that is most
widely used. Therefore, most of the public comments and evidence
presented at the hearing addressed Option (1).
At the hearing, a witness for an accredited testing organization
testified that the certification process embodied in Option (1)
originated in the 1990s when private industry groups began an effort to
improve crane safety. The witness explained that the industry
representatives involved with the organization are drawn from such
groups as contractors, crane rental firms, labor unions, owners, steel
erectors, manufacturers, construction firms, training consultants, and
insurance companies. (ID-0343.) The witness also explained that exam
management committees meet throughout the year to ensure the continuing
fairness and integrity of the testing process. Finally, the witness
explained that certification promotes safety by ensuring that the
training an individual has received has succeeded in giving that
individual the knowledge and skills to operate a crane safely. (ID-
0343.)
Many commenters and witnesses at the public hearing expressed
support for the proposed rule's approach of requiring third party
verification of an operator's qualifications and for the range of
options presented. A national safety organization expressed support for
the provision to ensure qualification and certification of operators.
(ID-0178.1.) A trade association stated that third party oversight was
critical to create an effective and legitimate testing process and to
ensure that the training portion did not have undue influence on the
testing process. (ID-0205.1.)
Similarly, another commenter supported the proposed Q/C
requirements, emphasizing the importance of independent certification
of an operator's skill and knowledge by an accredited nationally
recognized third-party entity or organization. (ID-0169.1.) Similar
views were expressed by other commenters. (ID-0158.1; -0160.1; -0173.1;
-0192.1; -0196.0; -0211.1; -0212.1; -0220.1; -0225.1; -0228.1; -
0241.1.)
A number of witnesses at the public hearing also supported the
proposed requirement for third-party verification. A representative
from a crane rental company said that, although they incur additional
cost to prove certification, they consider that cost an investment in
the safety of their employees. (ID-0344.) A major crane user observed
both certified and non-certified operators and found that the certified
operators operated far more safely because of the more comprehensive
training required to become certified. (ID-0344.)
An insurance company representative and former crane operator
stated that his company believes that employers who certify their
operators have fewer accidents and that, as a result, his firm offers
companies it insures a ten percent discount if they have their
operators certified. (ID-0343.) The representative believed that the
cost of certification was modest when compared to the cost of
accidents. (ID-0343.) A representative from a crane rental company
testified that preparing for the certification process allowed his
company to improve their operators' knowledge and ability to operate
cranes safely. (ID-0343.) A representative from a steel erection
company agreed that certification is important to both insurance
companies and employers because certification gives employers peace of
mind and reduces insurance costs. (ID-0344.)
Some commenters and witnesses opposed the proposed rule's
requirement for qualification or certification of operators. A trade
association commented that the requirements would not improve safety
more than having trained, qualified operators because many of the
operators in recent accidents were certified. (ID-0151.1.) The
commenter also questioned whether sufficient analysis had been done to
show that the proposed requirements would improve the safety of crane
operations. This commenter believed that the current requirement (Sec.
1926.20(b)(4)) for equipment operators to be qualified by training or
experience was sufficient. A witness from a similar trade association
expressed a similar view, stating that training, not certification, is
the answer to safe crane operations. (ID-0343.)
A representative of the building industry thought the requirements
were too restrictive and stated that OSHA failed to show that the
limited requirements would substantially reduces the risk of accidents
while other alternatives would not. (ID-0232.1.) The commenter asked
that its members have the option to self-evaluate their operators after
they have gone through a specified training program in lieu of the
third-party certification that would be required under proposed Option
(1) of this section for cranes of less than 35 ton capacity with a boom
length no greater than 120 feet. A witness who appeared on behalf of
the commenter criticized the proposal for imposing the same
requirements on employers engaged in residential construction as those
in commercial construction and said training and certification
requirements should be crane and industry specific. (ID-0341.)
Another trade association similarly recommended that its members be
given the ability to self-certify their operators. (ID-0218.1.) A small
business representative asked OSHA to assess whether it is feasible to
allow small employers to ``self-certify'' that an operator is trained
and competent to operate the equipment and perform the tasks being
conducted.\108\ (ID-0147.1.) A trade association suggested that OSHA
consider the feasibility of allowing small employers to ``self-
certify'' that their operators are trained and competent to operate the
equipment and perform their assigned tasks. (ID-0187.1.) Another trade
association believed that mandatory self-certification was a feasible
option for operators of what it characterized as ``light-duty'' cranes
used by its members. (ID-0189.1.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\108\ The commenter, however, also acknowledged that there are
small businesses that are in favor of third-party certification.
(ID-0147.1.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An energy association argued that firms engaged in wind turbine
[[Page 48013]]
construction should be permitted to self-certify their crane
operators.- (ID-0329.1.) The commenter stated that construction of wind
turbines requires the use of the largest and most complex cranes
available, and that some of its members had found that some operators
certified by NCCCO were not truly qualified to operate those cranes. It
therefore believed that firms in its industry should be able to self-
qualify their crane operators, but objected to the need for employers
in its industry who use Option (2) of this section to be required to
use the services of an auditor. The commenter said it did not believe
that there would be properly trained and qualified people available to
audit the wind industry. Instead of requiring auditors, the commenter
suggested that OSHA add to the find rule additional, detailed criteria
that an employer-sponsored program must contain to be acceptable.
OSHA rejects the suggestions of the commenters who argued that
employers should have the option of determining that their operators
are qualified without any form of third-party verification. Based on
the rulemaking record, OSHA is persuaded that the third-party
requirements in the proposed rule are an essential element in improving
crane safety. The members of C-DAC, who had vast collective experience
in all aspects of crane operations, reached a consensus (with two
members dissenting) \109\ that third-party verification was needed to
reduce the number of crane accidents and fatalities in the construction
industry. Their consensus was supported by a number of commenters,
including some employers who have already had their operators certified
through a third-party process and have found certification to be a
useful and cost-effective means of promoting safety.\110\ The reliance
of the insurance industry on third-party verification as such an
indicator of reduced risk that it warrants reduced premiums, is further
evidence of its value. Moreover, the fact that safety-conscious members
of private industry voluntarily helped to develop a third-party
certification process before there was a government mandate to do so is
further evidence that certification promotes safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\109\ As explained in the Introduction, under C-DAC ground
rules, a ``consensus'' was reached on an issue if there were no more
than two non-Federal dissenters.
\110\ It is also supported by the data from Ontario and
California showing that third-party certification can significantly
reduce crane-related fatalities and injuries, discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed earlier, a number of commenters urged OSHA to require
training rather than certification. But training alone is insufficient
without a means of verifying that each operator understands the
training well enough to operate safely and is sufficiently skilled to
implement what he/she has been taught. As Graham Brent, Executive
Director of NCCCO put it at the hearing, ``[c]ertification * * * is an
employer's, as well as the general public's, best assurance that the
required training has not only been effective, but that learning has
taken place during the training process.'' (ID-0343.) OSHA's current
training standard has not prevented the high number of crane-related
fatalities and serious injuries that have been occurring as a result of
improper operation.
OSHA acknowledges that many employers have effective training
programs and highly competent crane operators. However, the rulemaking
record shows that a training requirement alone is insufficient to
ensure that crane operators have the requisite level of competence.
This was the opinion of the members of C-DAC and is shared by many of
the members of the public who commented on the proposed rule and who
testified at the public hearing.
A representative of the building industry objects to OSHA's
reliance on the study by the Construction Safety Association of
Ontario, saying that it does not meet statutory and regulatory
information quality standards, including the Department of Labor's
Information Quality Guidelines.\111\ (ID-0232.1.) First, OSHA notes
that the Ontario study is only part of the record evidence on which the
Agency relies in promulgating this standard. In the preamble to the
proposed rule, OSHA stated that the Ontario study ``buttressed'' C-
DAC's experience and conclusions regarding the need for independent
testing of operator ability (see 73 FR 59810, Oct. 9, 2008). Second,
OSHA's reliance on that study does comply with the Department's
guidelines. Appendix II of the guidelines addresses the information
quality principles on which OSHA relies in setting health and safety
standards. For safety standards, such as this rule, OSHA must use ``the
best available statistical data from surveys of fatalities, injuries,
and illnesses, and the best available peer-reviewed science and
supporting studies that describe the nature of the safety risks being
addressed.'' OSHA determines that the Ontario study, though not peer-
reviewed, is the ``best available statistical data'' showing the
efficacy of third-party operator certification. The California study is
similarly supportive of the C-DAC conclusions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ ``Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality,
Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by
the Department of Labor,'' (Oct. 1, 2002), available on the
Department of Labor's Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In other respects as well, OSHA has complied with the Department of
Labor's Information Quality Guidelines. The guidelines state that
``[t]he goal of a safety risk analysis is to describe the numbers,
rates, and causal nature of injuries related to the safety risks being
addressed.'' To meet this goal, OSHA historically has ``relied on
injury and illness statistics from BLS, combined with incident or
accident reports from enforcement activities, incident or accident
reports submitted to the record from the private or public sectors,
testimony of experts who have experience dealing with the safety risks
being addressed, and information and data supplied by organizations
that develop consensus safety standards.''
In developing the proposed rule, and in issuing this final rule,
OSHA has relied on these types of evidence, including studies based on
BLS statistics and OSHA enforcement reports, as well as incident
reports from specific enforcement cases. (See 73 FR 59719-59723, Oct.
9, 2008.) On the specific question of the need for third-party
verification of a crane operator's qualifications, OSHA has relied
primarily on the opinions of experts with vast experience in crane
operations and the hazards presented by crane use, including the
members of C-DAC and construction industry employers who appeared at
the public hearing. OSHA is persuaded that third-party verification
will significantly reduce the number of crane-related injuries and is
confident that the information on which it relies to set this standard
is reliable, the best available, and meets the Department's guidelines.
A trade association also questioned OSHA's reliance on the Ontario
study, suggesting that Ontario's ability to issue citations to
employees is the likely cause of Ontario's decrease in fatal crane
accidents. (ID-0151.1.) OSHA notes, however, that the Construction
Safety Association of Ontario attributed the decrease to increased
operator skill, not employee citations. (ID-0009.) OSHA determines that
the Construction Safety Association of Ontario was well-positioned to
evaluate why Ontario was able to achieve a dramatic reduction in crane-
related fatalities and accepts its opinion on the question. Moreover,
the employee citations permitted under Section 66 of Ontario's
Occupational Health and Safety Act did not take effect until 1990.
These employee citations
[[Page 48014]]
appear to function primarily as a deterrent to non-compliance with
Ontario's construction safety standards, as opposed to the operator
certification requirements that are intended to verify knowledge and
skills necessary for safe operation. In that regard, the civil fine
provisions are similar to the licensing requirements (separate from
certification) that Ontario had required prior to 1979. There is no
indication in the record that the fines provided a greater level of
deterrence than the government's pre-existing authority to sanction an
individual operator through the revocation of an operator's license.
The representative of the building industry claimed that the rate
of accidents resulting from crane use in the residential construction
industry is too low to justify requiring homebuilders to comply with
the qualification/certification requirement in the proposed rule. The
commenter conducted a study, using fatality data from the Bureau of
Labor Statistics, which, according to the commenter, showed that 13 out
of 1385, or slightly less than 1%, of fatalities in the residential
construction industry from 2003-2006 were crane-related. (ID-0232.1.)
Because this percentage is substantially less than the more than 8% of
all construction fatalities that were found to be crane-related in the
Beavers study, the commenter suggests the risk of serious injury from
the smaller truck mounted telescopic boom cranes used in residential
construction is substantially less than the risk of injury from large
lattice boom and tower cranes used in commercial/industrial
construction. The commenter stated that a copy of its study was
attached to its comment and is available on its Web site. (ID-0232.1.)
In fact, a copy was not attached to its comment. OSHA has located a
document on the commenter's Web site entitled ``Residential
Construction Fatalities, 2003-2006'' that describes the causes of
fatalities in residential construction, but has found nothing in that
document to support the commenter's claim that only 13 of those
fatalities were crane-related.
Nevertheless, even if the commenter could support its claim of 13
crane-related fatalities, its conclusion that cranes present little
risk of serious injury in residential construction does not follow.
First, OSHA determines that 13 crane-related fatalities in homebuilding
in a four year period is significant and well worth trying to reduce.
Moreover, the commenter's comparison of percentages is not persuasive.
The fact that a smaller percentage of fatalities are crane-related in
residential construction than in commercial/industrial construction may
simply reflect lower crane usage in residential construction. A witness
who appeared on behalf of the commenter at the public hearing,
testified that cranes are typically used on a residential construction
project between two and six hours to lift objects like roof and floor
trusses. (ID-0341.) The witness noted that for commercial construction,
a crane might be on the job from six months to two years. (ID-0341.) In
light of the brief percentage of time cranes are used in residential
construction compared to the percentage of time they are used in
commercial construction, it would be expected that the percentage of
accidents they cause will similarly be lower even if, while they are on
the job, they present the same or even a higher degree of risk.\112\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\112\ Mr. Behlman testified that overhead power lines are ``very
seldom'' found on residential sites. (ID-0341.) However, the
document on NAHB's Web site showing the causes of residential
construction fatalities from 2003 to 2006 attributes 76 fatalities
to ``contact with overhead power lines.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA also rejects the commenter's suggestion that homebuilders
should be permitted to self-certify their crane operators. The
commenter states that the vast majority of the building association's
single-family home builders are very small, with 61% building ten homes
or fewer. The witness stated at the hearing that the home building
industry has many small operations and a few very large players. (ID-
0341.) In OSHA's experience, most small construction firms would not
have the expertise to develop or administer the types of tests
necessary to reliably assess operator ability (see the discussion of
the criteria applied by nationally recognized accrediting entities to
accredit certification organizations).
OSHA also does not conclude that such companies typically possess
the expertise to establish and implement the sophisticated type of
training program that the commenter suggests should be required for
employer self-certification. (ID-0232.1.) The same problem exists
throughout the construction industry, which includes numerous small
firms. Furthermore, as found by C-DAC, independent testing is essential
to ensure that operators have in fact attained the knowledge and
ability the training is supposed to impart.
A number of commenters suggested that the proposed requirements
should be modified in various ways. Some suggested exempting certain
equipment from the qualification/certification requirement or requiring
a form of qualification/certification that the employer could implement
without resort to third-party verification. Others suggested expanding
the range of options available to the employer, in particular allowing
accredited educational institutions to certify operators. These
comments will be discussed below in the sections of the standard that
address the issues raised by the commenters.
Paragraph (a)
In the final rule, paragraph (a) of this section specifies that the
employer must ensure that the operator of any equipment covered under
Sec. 1926.1400, with certain listed exceptions, is either qualified or
certified to operate the equipment in accordance with the provisions of
this section or is operating the equipment during a training period.
Paragraph (a)(1) requires compliance with State and local operator
licensing laws. For areas where State or local licensing is not
required, paragraph (a)(2) requires employers to use one of the three
options listed above to certify or qualify their operators. Paragraph
(a)(3) provides exceptions from all of Sec. 1926.1427's certification
and qualification requirements for operators of certain equipment,
regardless of whether State or local governments have licensing
requirements for operators of that equipment.\113\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\113\ These State and local licensing requirements would remain
in effect. See discussion of preemption of State and local law under
federalism in section V.D of this preamble. OSHA is simply choosing
not to require compliance with any such licensing requirements for
that equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (a)(1) Compliance With State and Local Licensing Requirements
The proposed rule included a fourth option to satisfy the operator
certification/qualification requirements of Sec. 1926.1427:
qualification through a government entity with a licensing program
meeting certain criteria. Several states submitted comments on the
proposed rule urging the Agency to preserve State and local operator
licensing laws. Some of these concerns are addressed in the discussion
of preemption under federalism in section V.D of this preamble. Two of
those commenters, each with its own statewide crane operator licensing
requirements, specifically requested that OSHA mandate compliance with
State requirements for crane operations within the jurisdiction of
those states (with the exception of operators who are employees of the
U.S. military). (ID-0171.1; -0237.) Three State governments argued
persuasively that if government licensing was presented merely as an
option, rather than required, many employers would simply by-pass these
[[Page 48015]]
licensing requirements in favor of less stringent, portable private
certification options. (ID-0171.1.) One State government also noted
that some states have proven, reliable licensing procedures already in
place. Where State and local licensing departments or offices are
already well established and staffed, and are already preventing deaths
or serious injuries through the use of effective licensing procedure,
there is little support in the record for disturbing them.
In light of the commenter's compelling arguments and the policy
considerations noted above, the Agency is convinced that the
governmental licensing requirements should be mandatory, rather than
optional. In response, the Agency is revising paragraphs (a) and (e) of
Sec. 1926.1427 to mandate compliance with State and local operator
licensing laws that meet a ``Federal floor'' established in paragraphs
(e)(2) and (j) of this section.\114\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\114\ This ``Federal floor'' refers to the minimum requirements
for license tests in Sec. 1926.1427(e)(2), and the minimum
knowledge and skills that must be tested as set forth in Sec.
1926.1427(j)(1) and (j)(2). Employers would not be required by OSHA
to comply with State or local government entity licensing
requirements that do not meet this ``Federal floor,'' but States and
local governments could still seek to enforce their own laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This mandatory compliance is set forth in the introductory text of
Sec. 1926.1427(a)(1) and paragraph (a)(1)(i). OSHA has added Sec.
1926.1427(a)(1)(ii) to clarify that employees of the U.S. military who
have been certified or qualified to operate equipment pursuant to Sec.
1926.1427(d) would not also be required to obtain an operator's license
from a State or local government for construction work on behalf of the
military employer. By requiring compliance with State and local laws,
the Agency is also complying with Executive Order 13132, which urges
agencies to preserve the full force and effect to State and local laws.
(See 64 FR 43225, Aug. 10, 1999.)
This decision is a logical outgrowth of the proposal. The proposal
identified a significant safety risk from improper operation of
equipment and proposed certification requirements as a means of
addressing that risk. Governmental licensing of crane operators has
existed alongside OSHA's prior crane rules at former Sec. 1926.550 for
many years, and C-DAC made them a significant component of the proposal
without any indication that the new standard would exempt employers
from compliance with those laws. The government licensing provision was
the subject of a number of comments, and was discussed during the
hearing in the context of comments requesting OSHA to make the
government licensing mandatory.
The preamble to the proposed rule noted C-DAC's opinion that some
States have ``effective, reliable, licensing procedures'' (73 FR 59814,
Oct. 9, 2008). The preamble to the proposed rule also specifically
cited the Department of Transportation's requirement that commercial
drivers also carry State drivers licenses issued in accordance with
Federal standards (73 FR 59810). The DOT licensing was provided as an
example of how State licensing, when required as part of a general
Federal compliance scheme, has been ``used in the past to prevent fatal
and other serious accidents that result when operators lack the
knowledge and skills needed to operate safely.'' Id. The only other
example of successful third-party certification provided as a basis for
the certification requirement was another government licensing
requirement: Ontario's licensing requirements for crane operators. Id.
The combination of OSHA's exclusive reliance on these examples and the
government licensing provision in proposed Sec. 1926.1427(e) provided
clear notice that the government licensing provision might develop
along the lines of the examples. While several commenters submitted
comments supporting mandatory compliance with government licenses,
thereby indicating that at least these parties viewed the mandatory
compliance as a possible outcome of the rulemaking, none of the
commenters objected to the government licensing provision or questioned
the validity of their tests. The Agency's choice to make compliance
with paragraph (e) mandatory, rather than optional, flows logically
from the proposal, the comments, and the discussion at hearing. See
National Mining Ass'n v. Mine Safety and Health Admin., 512 F.3d 696,
699 (DC Cir. 2008) (noting that the logical outgrowth test takes into
account the comments, statements and proposals made during the notice-
and-comment period).
The Agency's decision to mandate compliance with State and local
laws is not new. OSHA already relies on State licensing requirements in
its respirator standard when it provided for ``a licensed health care
professional'' to perform a medical evaluation of an employee's ability
to use a respiratory (see Sec. 1910.134(e)). This portion of the
standard was challenged and upheld in American Iron Steel and Steel
Institute v. OSHA, 182 F.3d 1261, 1278 (11th Cir. 1999). OSHA's choice
to mandate compliance with State or local law is also consistent with
the approach of other agencies. (See, e.g., Department of
Transportation regulations requiring State licensing of commercial
drivers, discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule at 73 FR 59810,
Oct. 9, 2008.)
Paragraph (a)(2) Options for Certification or Qualification Where
License Not Required by a Government Entity
As noted above, where a State or local license is not required,
employers have three choices for certification of operators. Those
choices are set out in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section and
discussed in detail below. It is important to note that these options
will not satisfy the requirements of Sec. 1926.1427 for operation of
equipment within a State or local government's jurisdiction when that
government entity has it's own licensing requirements that satisfy the
criteria in paragraphs (e) and (j) of this section.
Paragraph (a)(3) Exceptions
The exceptions in the proposed rule were for types of equipment
that are specifically excluded from the qualification/certification
requirement under sections of this standard that pertain to that
equipment, including derricks (see Sec. 1926.1436), sideboom cranes
(see Sec. 1926.1440), and equipment with a rated hoisting/lifting
capacity of 2,000 pounds or less (see Sec. 1926.1441).
A labor representative pointed out that the exception in Sec.
1926.1441 applies to equipment with a ``maximum manufacturer-rated''
hoisting/lifting capacity of 2,000 pounds or less, and it asked that
this same language be used in Sec. 1926.1427(a) to avoid suggesting
that the exception might apply to larger equipment when it is
configured to have a rated capacity of 2,000 pounds or less. (ID-0341.)
OSHA agrees that the suggested change better reflects the intent of the
provision and has modified the language of Sec. 1926.1427(a) in the
final rule by replacing the word ``rated'' with ``maximum rated.'' OSHA
notes that this change does not change the substantive requirements of
the rule in any manner.
A number of commenters asked that additional types of equipment or
activities be exempted from Sec. 1926.1427's qualification/
certification requirement.
A utility company recommended that cranes of 10,000 pound capacity
or less be excluded on the basis that most uses of these cranes are
highly repetitive and predictable. (ID-0144.1.) A trade association
suggested exempting cranes rated at less than 10 or 15 tons from the
[[Page 48016]]
requirement. (ID-0191.1.) It said that these types of cranes are often
used to deliver products to a jobsite or to place small rooftop HVAC
units on low rise buildings, and that they are used for simple lifts of
relatively light loads. This commenter also requested that OSHA add a
less restrictive certification level for cranes rated less than 30
tons, which it said are less complicated to assemble and set up and are
used during ``low risk'' lifts.
Another trade association suggested that the threshold for
requiring qualification/certification should exclude the 5,000 to
10,000 pound capacity cranes that its members typically use. (ID-
0189.1.) It said that this equipment is relatively simple to operate,
that the signs its members install rarely exceed 2,000 pounds, and that
the equipment is used intermittently on the job and only for brief
periods of time.
A third trade association believes that the size and scope of the
lifts its members make do not justify the qualification/certification
requirements in the proposed rule and suggested alternative
requirements for its members when they operate cranes of less than 35
ton capacity with a boom length no greater than 120 feet. (ID-0218.1.)
They ask that their members have the option to self-evaluate their
operators after they have gone through a specified training program
instead of the third-party certification that would be required under
proposed Option (1). A representative of the building industry made a
similar recommendation for cranes of less than 35 ton capacity with a
boom length no greater than 120 feet. (ID-0232.1.) A small business
representative suggested that OSHA consider exempting some small cranes
(based on vehicle weight or boom length) or routine lifts. (ID-0147.1.)
A witness for a labor representative testified in opposition to
excluding equipment rated over 2,000 pounds by the manufacturer. He
stated that some low-capacity cranes have long booms and are used to
lift loads to great heights, particularly when there is not sufficient
space for a larger crane. (ID-0341.) According to the witness, safety
concerns presented by low capacity cranes with a long boom are as
serious as the concerns presented by high capacity cranes. (ID-0341.)
He added that the danger of power line contact was present regardless
of the capacity of the crane.
A representative from a crane rental company also testified against
exempting low-capacity cranes from the qualification/certification
requirement. His company had a fleet of cranes ranging from 4 to 600
ton capacity, and in his experience the majority of accidents that his
customers experienced when they rented cranes but provided their own
operators occurred with cranes rated 35 tons or less. (ID-0344.) He was
aware of accidents on residential construction sites that resulted from
operating on unsuitable ground, not setting the outriggers properly,
and lifting too heavy a load for the crane's configuration,
deficiencies that he attributed to operators who did not appreciate the
hazards involved. (ID-0344.)
OSHA has carefully considered the comments asking for additional
types of equipment to be exempted from the qualification/certification
requirements of Sec. 1926.1427. For the following reasons, OSHA
declines to add such exemptions to the final rule.
The members of C-DAC, who had vast collective experience in all
aspects of crane operations, reached a consensus that third-party
verification was needed to reduce the number of crane accidents and
fatalities in the construction industry. They further determined that
such a requirement should apply to virtually all hoisting equipment,
with only the limited exceptions listed in the proposed rule. In
proposing to exempt equipment with a rated capacity of 2,000 pounds or
less, the Committee considered whether to establish a higher threshold
for the requirement but concluded that the operators of higher-capacity
cranes, including those in the 5,000-35,000 pound range that the
commenters ask to be exempted, needed to be well-qualified to reduce
the number of accidents involving such cranes. Ultimately, C-DAC
included the 2,000 pound cutoff to parallel ANSI B30.5 in this regard
(see 73 FR 59841, Oct. 9, 2008).
The rulemaking record shows that many of the same hazards presented
by larger cranes are present for cranes in this capacity range,
including operating in proximity to power lines, the potential for
collapse if the crane is overloaded, and the need for adequate ground
conditions to ensure the crane's stability during operation. As a labor
representative testified, these smaller cranes may be used in tight
spaces where larger cranes cannot be used. An operator's loss of
control of the load in a tight space would present a serious safety
hazard, and the potential for operating in tight spaces highlights the
need for operators of even relatively low-capacity cranes to be highly
skilled.
OSHA also rejects the suggestions by some commenters that
exemptions should be created for cranes that are typically used for
repetitive, predictable, intermittent, or light use.
The principal difficulty with this suggestion is that the
underlying causes of crane-related fatalities and injuries are not
necessarily diminished in such situations. For example, the presence of
power lines presents an electrocution hazard in all situations,
irrespective of how the equipment is used. Proper ground conditions,
which can change during crane use, are also as necessary for those
types of uses as others, and all cranes can be overloaded if operated
improperly. The knowledge and skill needed for attaining operator
qualification/certification under this section is a prerequisite for
being able to successfully address these and other hazards.
Furthermore, while an employer may initially plan to use a crane in
a repetitive or otherwise predictable manner, or to handle light loads,
unforeseen circumstances can arise that can alter those plans. Wind,
which can arise unexpectedly during a lift, can dramatically decrease
the capacity of a crane and increase the difficulty in properly
handling the load; a previously ``repetitive'' lift can change
unexpectedly when rain causes the ground supporting the crane to become
muddy and less able to support the crane; a rigging problem may arise
during one of the ``repetitive'' lifts, which could cause unexpected
load control problems during the lift; and hoisting a ``light'' load at
a low boom angle can pose similar overturning hazards to hoisting a
heavy load at a high boom angle. Nor are there fewer crane-related
hazards when a worker operates a crane only intermittently. For
example, that operator on one of those occasions may have to run the
crane near power lines, in the blind, with uneven winds, or at a low
boom angle; in such cases (as in many others) he/she needs to be as
fully capable as an operator who runs the crane regularly.
Paragraph (a)(4)
The Agency is adding this paragraph to the final rule to clarify
that operator certification or qualification as required under this
section must be provided at no cost to employees who are already
employed by the employer on November 8, 2010. This clarification is
consistent with the Agency's revision of the training requirements
throughout subpart CC to expressly state that employers must provide
all training at no cost to employees. The clarification is consistent
with the Agency's treatment of costs for operator qualification and
certification in the
[[Page 48017]]
preliminary economic analysis provided in the preamble of the proposed
rule. (See, e.g., 73 FR 59895, Oct. 9, 2008 (operator certification
training treated as cost to employer).)
Based on the testimony of several witnesses at the hearing, OSHA
concludes that imposing the operator qualification and certification
costs on the employer will not be overly burdensome to the employer. At
the hearing, a representative from a crane rental company said that,
although his company incurs additional cost to provide certification,
his company considers that cost an investment in the safety of their
employees. (ID-0344.) An insurance company representative and former
crane operator stated that the cost of certification was modest when
compared to the cost of accidents. (ID-0343.) This witness also stated
that his company believes that employers who certify their operators
have fewer accidents and that, as a result, his firm offers companies
it insures a ten percent discount if they have their operators
certified. (ID-0343.) A representative from a steel erection company
agreed that certification is important to both insurance companies and
employers because certification gives employers peace of mind and
reduces insurance costs. (ID-0344.)
In light of the need for clarification and witness support at the
hearing, OSHA is adding new paragraph (a)(4) to this section of the
final rule.
Paragraph (b) Option (1): Certification by an Accredited Crane Operator
Testing Organization
As noted above, the proposed rule provided four options for a crane
operator to be qualified or certified. Option (1) of this section, in
which the employee becomes certified to operate equipment of a certain
type and capacity by passing an examination administered by an
accredited testing organization, is the most broadly available option,
and OSHA expects it to be the one that most employers use outside of
jurisdictions with State or local licensing requirements.
Under Option (1), a crane operator becomes certified by a testing
organization that has itself been accredited by a ``nationally
recognized accrediting agency.'' Section 1926.1401 defines ``nationally
recognized accrediting agency'' as ``an organization that, due to its
independence and expertise, is widely recognized as competent to
accredit testing organizations.'' The use of a nationally recognized
accrediting agency to provide an independent, authoritative assurance
of a testing organization's competence is a well-established practice.
For example, for a number of years, the National Commission for
Certifying Agencies (NCCA), the accreditation body of the National
Organization for Competency Assurance (NOCA), has accredited testing
organizations in a wide variety of fields, including those that provide
crane operator certification. (ID-0021.) Also, in 2003, the American
National Standards Institute began accrediting personnel certification
entities. (ID-0022.)
Under Sec. 1926.1427(b)(1)(i), for a testing organization to
become accredited, the accrediting agency must determine that the
testing organization's written testing materials, practical
examinations, test administration, grading, facilities/equipment and
personnel meet industry recognized criteria. The accrediting agency
must determine that the written testing materials and practical
examinations are well designed and sufficiently comprehensive that an
individual who achieves a passing grade has demonstrated the skills and
knowledge needed to operate the equipment safely. The accrediting
agency must also determine that the testing organization's
administration and grading ensure the integrity of the test so that the
individual's grade truly represents the knowledge and skill level of
that individual.
A safety association believed that the criteria for accrediting
agencies in proposed Sec. 1926.1427(b)(1)(i) were not sufficiently
rigorous and suggested replacing that paragraph with a paragraph that
required the nationally recognized accrediting agency to use
certification criteria equal to or greater than that of the National
Commission of Certifying Agencies (NCCA), the Council of Engineering
and Scientific Specialty Boards (CESB), or ANSI/ISO/IEC 17024, General
Requirements for Bodies Operating Certification Systems of Persons.
(ID-0178.1.) This commenter expressed concern that, without this more
specific level of rigor, entities with little experience in
professional certification will be able to establish accrediting bodies
for certifications that do not adequately demonstrate professional
crane operator competence.
An operator certification organization stated that NCCA and ANSI
are nationally recognized accrediting agencies and that others should
only be designated as such by OSHA after a comprehensive review of its
accrediting protocols. (ID-0382.1.) It suggested changing the
definition of ``nationally recognized accrediting agency'' in Sec.
1926.1401 to specify that the only accrediting agencies are ANSI, NCCA,
and any other organization designated by OSHA as competent to accredit
testing organizations.
These commenters are concerned that an organization that applies
insufficiently stringent accrediting criteria might claim to be a
``nationally recognized accrediting agency'' and accredit testing
organizations that are less competent than those accredited by NCCA and
ANSI.
OSHA determines that the commenters are correct in suggesting that
some additional specificity is needed in the definition to ensure that
only entities using sufficiently stringent accrediting criteria are
included. In the preamble to the proposed rule, OSHA identified two
organizations that it determined were examples of a ``nationally
recognized accrediting agency''--the National Commission for Certifying
Agencies (NCCA) and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
(see 73 FR 59811, Oct. 9, 2008). No commenters have suggested that
these are inappropriate examples of this term. Therefore, to provide
greater specificity, OSHA has modified the language used in the
proposed rule's definition to include references to NCCA and ANSI as
examples of organizations that meet the final rule definition in Sec.
1926.1401.
Section 1926.1427(b)(1)(ii)(A) specifies that the written and
practical tests administered by the testing organization must, at a
minimum, assess the knowledge and skills listed in Sec. Sec.
1926.1427(j)(1) and (2). Those subjects are discussed below under Sec.
1926.1427(j).
Paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(B) provides that the testing organization must
provide different levels of certification based on equipment capacity
and type. This requirement is designed to ensure that a certified
operator has the knowledge and skill needed to safely operate equipment
of the type and capacity the employee will actually be operating while
avoiding the need for employees to know how to operate more complex
equipment.
In the proposed rule, OSHA gave examples of what this provision
means in practice. It stated, as one example, an employee who only
operates a hydraulic truck crane would not need to also have the
additional knowledge and skills necessary to operate a lattice boom
crawler crane. As another, it said that an employee who operates only a
22 ton capacity hydraulic truck crane would not need to also have the
additional knowledge and skills necessary to operate a 300 ton
hydraulic truck crane. The Agency further stated that
[[Page 48018]]
certification on a more complex type of equipment would typically
qualify an operator to operate lower-capacity equipment of the same
type, e.g., certification on a 300 ton hydraulic crane would qualify an
operator to operate a 22 ton hydraulic crane.
None of the commenters opposed allowing operators certified to
operate at a given capacity from also operating lower-capacity
equipment of the same type. Two commenters recommended that ``type,''
for purposes of paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(B), be defined for mobile cranes
as they are defined in ASME B30.5. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) These
commenters also stated that ``qualifications (and certification) should
be driven by the knowledge and skill required to operate a piece of
equipment. When a body of knowledge or a particular skill set for a
particular `type' of crane changes, then so should the appropriate
category of certification/qualification.''
The Agency concludes that a descriptive definition of ``type'' that
addresses the point raised by these commenters would better accomplish
the purpose of the term than tying it to specific examples of existing
technology. Therefore, OSHA has added a definition of the word ``type''
to Sec. 1926.1401 of the final rule.
Examples of many of the various types of cranes currently in use
are described in the ANSI B30 series (see, for example, ASME B30.5-2004
for mobile cranes and ASME B30.3-2004 for construction tower cranes).
For example, in this context, truck-mounted telescoping boom cranes,
truck-mounted non-telescoping boom cranes, and crawler cranes are three
different ``types,'' since the specific bodies of knowledge and skills
needed for the safe operation of each category is different (although
they are not completely distinct--the knowledge and skill sets overlap
to some degree).
Commenters and witnesses from the railroad industry believed that
certification based on ``equipment capacity and type'' did not address
unique conditions in their industry because current certification
examinations did not cover the types of cranes they use or the
circumstances under which they use them. A railroad company stated that
certification tests used by the two accredited testing organizations
require knowledge of skills that do not apply in the railroad industry.
(ID-0176.1.) A railroad association stated that railroads use cranes in
fundamentally different ways than construction companies and that
neither [currently] accredited testing organization has tests that
address the use of cranes on railroads. (ID-0170.1.) A representative
from another railroad company testified that some of the types of
cranes his railroad uses are fundamentally different from the typical
cranes used in the construction industry. Among the cranes that he said
are unique to the railroad industry are locomotive cranes and rubber-
tired cranes that can either run on the ground or travel on rails. (ID-
0342.) The representative stated that certification tests on typical
construction cranes were not suited to the types of cranes used in his
industry and asked that the rule offer the latitude for the industry to
train operators in a way that makes sense for railroads. (ID-0342.)
The comments and testimony by the railroad industry representatives
suggest the need for some flexibility in the certification requirement
to deal with specialized types of cranes or newly developed equipment
for which certification examinations might not be available. Another
aspect of this problem was raised by an energy association, which said
that the cranes used in erecting wind turbines are the largest and most
complex available, and that certification for such equipment is not
currently available. (ID-0329.1.)
C-DAC addressed one example of a type of equipment--dedicated pile
drivers--for which certification examinations were not available.
Section 1926.1439(e) of the proposed rule accommodated this problem by
providing that dedicated pile driver operators can be certified either
for operation of dedicated pile drivers or for equipment that is most
similar to dedicated pile drivers. OSHA concludes a similar approach is
appropriate for any equipment for which a certification is not
available. Accordingly, OSHA is adding Sec. 1926.1427(b)(2) to the
final rule, which allows an operator to be certified to operate a crane
if he or she is certified to operate a higher-capacity version of that
type of crane or, if no accredited certification entities offer
certification for that particular crane, if he or she is certified to
operate the type of crane most similar to the equipment in question.
In light of this change, OSHA is deleting Sec. 1926.1439(e) from
the final rule as it is no longer necessary. Paragraph (b)(2) will also
facilitate employers' compliance with the requirements of Sec.
1926.1427 by making it clear that the operator's certificate must
indicate the particular type and capacity of crane for which the
operator was certified.
As discussed in the proposed rule, during the SBREFA process,
several small entity representatives suggested that basing
certification on the type of crane might result in some capable
operators being denied certification. They described situations in
which an operator is knowledgeable and skillful with respect to one
particular model of crane but might be unable to obtain certification
based on equipment capacity and type. In response to this concern, OSHA
sought public comment on whether there should be a mechanism for an
operator to become certified on a particular model of crane.
Some commenters supported such a mechanism. (ID-0145.1; -0151.1; -
0194.1; -0214.1.) Several commenters who opposed the suggestion stated
that such certification would likely not be available from testing
organizations, that employers who use Option (2) would find it costly
and impractical to develop tests for each model of crane, and that
testing based on crane model was not appropriate because the skill set
and knowledge required for safe operation are not model-dependent. (ID-
0175.2; -0205.1; -0213.1.) Witnesses at the hearing also opposed model-
specific certification. (ID-0341; -0343.)
OSHA has concluded that expansion of the options to include
certification on a specific model of crane is not necessary. The body
of knowledge and skills required to be qualified/certified on a
particular model of crane is not less than that needed to be qualified/
certified for that model's type and capacity.
It may well be that an operator seeking certification is confident
about operating the particular model of crane he/she has been operating
but is concerned about being tested on another model of the same type
of crane. To the extent this is a concern, OSHA notes that at least one
accredited testing organization allows the practical test to be
administered at the employer's worksite using the employer's own
equipment. (ID-0343.) With this type of practical test available,
operators who feel confident that they can become certified on a
particular model can be tested on that model, and such certification
will allow them to operate any model of the same type (as long as they
also pass the written test). Therefore, certification on a specific
model would be more restrictive than is necessary, and OSHA sees no
benefit from providing for such a certification. OSHA has therefore
retained the requirement that certification is based on the ``type'' of
crane.
The SBREFA Panel also received comments from some SERs suggesting
that the standard should accommodate crane operators who were fully
capable of operating particular equipment in a
[[Page 48019]]
limited set of circumstances but who would be unable to pass
certification tests that required knowledge and abilities beyond those
circumstances. The Panel recommended that OSHA consider and solicit
public comment on expanding the levels of operator qualification/
certification to allow such operators to be certified for a specific,
limited type of circumstance defined by a set of parameters that, taken
together, would describe an operation characterized by simplicity and
relatively low risk. In response to the Panel's recommendation, OSHA
requested public comment on whether such parameters could be identified
in a way that would result in a clear, easily understood provision that
could be effectively enforced.
A number of commenters were in favor of a provision that would
allow certification in a limited set of circumstances. A labor
organization supported certification limited to the use of rail-bound
equipment used to install continuously welded rail and stick rail. (ID-
0145.1.) This commenter said that such operations involved dragging,
manipulating, and positioning rather than hoisting. Other commenters
also supported such a limited certification provision but did not
provide specific information about how to define those operations or
what aspects of the operations made them less risky than other crane
operations. (ID-0151.1; -0176.1; -0191.1; -0214.1.) Other commenters
opposed this type of ``restricted'' certification. (ID-0175.2; -0205.1;
-0213.1.) They said that the degree of risk in a given situation was
difficult to assess and could change due to unforeseen circumstances
arising on the job.
OSHA agrees with the commenters who opposed allowing a limited form
of certification based on perceived risk levels. As explained earlier
in the discussion of this section, the Agency found the argument that
certification should not be required to operate cranes that are
typically used for repetitive, predictable, intermittent, or light use
to be unpersuasive. OSHA did so because such uses are likely to involve
many if not all of the same hazards present in other situations.
Similar concerns apply to the concept of ``low risk'' operations.
First, even if such operations could be effectively identified, the
possibility of unforeseen events occurring during such a lift requires
that the operator have sufficient ability to handle such complications.
Second, as noted above, apart from the suggestion regarding certain
railroad operations, no commenter offered a means of setting the
parameters for defining this concept. OSHA has therefore rejected the
concept of a limited, ``low risk'' qualification/certification.
A labor organization recommended that OSHA require that applicants
for certification testing provide documentation that they have at least
1,000 hours of crane related on-the-job experience or training. (ID-
0341.) Such experience was necessary, in this commenter's view, because
neither the written nor practical exams tested an operator's ability to
handle unusual worksite conditions, such as adverse weather or working
on crowded jobsites, and did not test an operator's judgment.
As explained above, OSHA has included the qualification/
certification requirement to serve as a mechanism to help ensure that
operators have attained the level of knowledge and skill necessary to
safely operate the equipment. The record amply demonstrates the
sufficiency of the accreditation process that must be passed for a
testing organization to become accredited. That process is designed to
ensure that accredited testing organizations use a sufficiently
reliable process for certifying operators. The record also shows that
such a mechanism is an effective one for determining operator
competence (the record includes the support of the commenter and its C-
DAC nominee for that mechanism).\115\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\115\ OSHA also notes that the this commenter is, in this
regard, taking a position that is inconsistent with the one taken by
its C-DAC nominee, who had agreed to the C-DAC version of Sec.
1926.1427, which had no experience/training prerequisite. Nor has
this commenter explained why it has changed its position from that
of its C-DAC nominee. Due to this inconsistency in position, OSHA
accords reduced weight to this commenter's suggested change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is insufficient information in the record to include an
additional requirement for 1,000 hours of ``crane related experience or
training.'' The commenter does not specify what should be included in
``crane related experience,'' or why 1,000 hours would be the
appropriate amount of such experience for this purpose. The commenter
also does not specify if meeting the 1,000 hour prerequisite by
``training'' should mean hands-on (criteria for such training is
delineated in Sec. 1926.1427(f)) or classroom type training. OSHA
notes that the other commenters supporting this section have not
recommended adding an experience or training prerequisite. The Agency
has therefore declined to accept this suggested change.\116\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\116\ OSHA also notes that the commenter is, in this regard,
taking a position that is inconsistent with the one taken by its C-
DAC nominee, who had agreed to the C-DAC version of Sec. 1926.1427,
which had no experience/training prerequisite. Nor has the commenter
explained why it has changed its position from that of its C-DAC
nominee. Due to this inconsistency in position, OSHA accords reduced
weight to the commenter's suggested change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1926.1427(b)(1)(iii) requires that the testing organization
have procedures for operators to re-apply and be re-tested in the event
an applicant fails a test. This would help ensure that if the employee
initially failed to pass the test, the employee would be able to retake
the test and still have the opportunity to obtain the certification.
Section 1926.1427(b)(1)(iii) also requires that the testing
organization have procedures for operators to re-apply and be re-tested
in the event an operator is decertified.
Section 1926.1427(b)(1)(iv) specifies that the testing organization
must have procedures for re-certifying operators designed to ensure
that the operator continues to meet the requirements of Sec.
1926.1427(j). Under Sec. 1926.1427(b)(4), a certification is valid for
five years, after which the operator must again pass a certification
examination. Section 1926.1427(b)(1)(iv) is included so that
recertification procedures appropriate for those who have already been
certified will be available.
Under Sec. 1926.1427(b)(1)(v), the testing organization's
accreditation must be renewed by the accrediting organization at least
every three years to ensure continuing quality of testing materials and
administration.
No comments were received on Sec. Sec. 1926.1427(b)(1)(iii)-(v);
those provisions are promulgated as proposed.
Under Sec. 1926.1427(b)(3) (previously designated Sec.
1926.1427(b)(2) in the proposed rule), a certification is ``portable,''
which means that a certificate issued under Option (1) would meet the
requirements of Sec. 1926.1427(a)(2) (when State or local jurisdiction
does not require operator licensing) until the certificate expires. In
the final rule, OSHA is specifying that meaning directly in Sec.
1926.1427(b)(3) rather than in a separate definition in Sec.
1926.1427(m), as proposed. C-DAC determined that certification under
this option should be portable because the testing organization is
fully independent of all employers who may employ a crane operator and
there is no reason to limit the certification to a particular employer.
OSHA agrees.
Section 1926.1427(b)(4) (previously designated Sec.
1926.1427(b)(3) in the proposed rule) provides that a certification
under this paragraph is valid for exactly five years. The exact five
year period is intended to strike the
[[Page 48020]]
appropriate balance between ensuring that certified operators are re-
evaluated regularly, while reducing the burden of recertification on
operators.
No comments were received on the text that is now in paragraphs
(b)(3) and (b)(4). As noted, the definition of ``portable'' has been
moved from proposed (m)(1) to final (b)(3).
Paragraph (c) Option (2): Qualification by an Audited Employer Program
Paragraph (c) of this section sets out Option (2), in which the
employer determines, through its own audited testing program, that its
employee is qualified to operate the equipment. This option is designed
to enable employers to meet the Sec. 1926.1427 requirements through
their own in-house testing programs. As discussed above, however, C-DAC
determined that independent, third-party involvement was needed to
ensure the reliability and integrity of any testing program. Therefore,
to ensure that testing under Option (2) of this section is accurate and
reliable, Sec. 1926.1427(c)(1) requires that the tests must be
developed by either an accredited crane operator testing organization
(as described under Option (1)), or approved by an auditor who is
certified by an accredited crane operator testing organization. In
addition, the administration of the tests must be audited.
If the employer chooses to use tests approved by an auditor, the
auditor must, under Sec. 1926.1427(c)(1)(ii)(A), be certified as a
test evaluator by an accredited testing organization. To ensure that
the auditor's evaluation is independent and impartial, Sec.
1926.1427(c)(1)(ii)(B) prohibits the auditor from being employed by the
employer seeking evaluation of its qualification program. Also, Sec.
1926.1427(c)(1)(ii)(C) requires the auditor to determine that the
program meets nationally recognized test development criteria and
adequately assesses the criteria in Sec. 1926.1427(j).
The requirements for test administration that apply under Option
(2) of this section are set forth in Sec. 1926.1427(c)(2). These
requirements apply to both tests that have been developed by an
accredited crane operator testing organization or to those that have
been approved by an auditor. Section 1926.1427(c)(2)(i) requires that
the auditor find that the procedures for administering the test meet
nationally recognized test administration standards. This provision is
designed to ensure that the test results accurately reflect the
operator's performance on the test.
Under Sec. 1926.1427(c)(2)(ii), the auditor must be certified to
evaluate the administration of the written and practical tests by an
accredited crane operator testing organization. Section
1926.1427(c)(2)(iii) prohibits the auditor from being employed by the
employer seeking the auditor's approval of its test administration
procedures.
Proposed Sec. 1926.1427(c)(2)(iv) required that the audit be
conducted in accordance with nationally recognized auditing standards.
OSHA noted that the proposed rule, as drafted by C-DAC, required only
that the administration of the tests, and not the audit of the tests
themselves under paragraph (c)(1)(ii), would have to be conducted in
accordance with nationally recognized auditing standards. OSHA
determines that this was a drafting error and that the Committee
intended that the entire audit be conducted in accordance with
nationally recognized auditing standards. Therefore, the Agency
solicited public comment on whether a new Sec. 1926.1427(c)(1)(ii)(D),
reading as follows, should be added to Sec. 1926.1427(c)(1)(ii):
(D) The audit shall be conducted in accordance with nationally
recognized auditing standards.
Several commenters stated that the regulatory text should remain
unchanged because, the commenters believed, the nationally recognized
accrediting agencies that accredit testing organizations do not review
the examinations for content but only for examination design,
administration, and maintenance. (ID-0175.1; -0205.1; -0211.1; -
0213.1.)
The Agency concludes that the commenters have misunderstood OSHA's
intent in this regard. Under Option (1) of this section, Sec.
1926.1427(b)(1), the accrediting agency must evaluate the ``written
testing materials'' as well as the ``practical examinations, test
administration, grading, facilities/equipment and personnel'' to make
sure they all meet ``industry recognized criteria.'' The accrediting
agency therefore must evaluate the tests as well as their
administration to confirm that they meet industry recognized criteria.
Just as the accrediting agency under Option (1) of this section
assesses written testing materials and the practical test for
compliance with industry recognized criteria, under Option (2) of this
section, as drafted by C-DAC and as written in the proposed rule, the
auditor must determine ``that the written and practical tests meet
nationally recognized test development criteria and are valid and
reliable in assessing the operator applicants * * *.'' (see Sec.
1926.1427(c)(1)(ii)(C)). No comments were received objecting to those
requirements.
OSHA determines that C-DAC's intent in designing Option (2) was, in
essence, to have the auditor serve a role similar to that of the
accreditor in Option (1). The accreditor in Option (1) assesses the
tests as well as their administration to determine if they meet
``industry recognized criteria.'' As drafted by C-DAC, the auditor does
the same thing, both with respect to assessing the tests and their
administration.
The problem identified by OSHA in the proposed rule relates to
auditing procedure, not testing criteria. For example, the records that
the auditor would generate and maintain, the procedures he/she would
use for obtaining documents that need to be examined to conduct the
audit, the thoroughness of the audit, and similar procedural matters
regarding the conduct of the audit need to accord with nationally
recognized auditing standards. Section 1926.1427(c)(1)(ii)(C) shows
that C-DAC concluded that it was important that the audit meet
nationally recognized auditing standards to help ensure the integrity
of the audit of the administration of the tests. OSHA determines that
it is equally important that the audit of the tests themselves meet
those same procedural criteria. Therefore, the Agency has added new
Sec. 1926.1427(c)(1)(ii)(D).
Paragraph (c)(3) requires that the program be audited within three
months of its inception and every three years thereafter. The Agency
has added ``at least'' to the final rule to clarify that the auditor
has the flexibility to perform audits more regularly if it so chooses.
Paragraph (c)(4) of this section requires the employer's program to
have testing procedures for re-qualification designed to ensure that
the operator continues to meet the technical knowledge and skills
requirement in Sec. 1926.1427(j). The re-qualification procedures must
be audited in accordance with Sec. Sec. 1926.1427(c)(1) and (c)(2).
In the event an auditor discovers a deficiency in an employer's
operator qualification program, the employer must meet the requirements
set forth in paragraph (c)(5) of this section. Under paragraph
(c)(5)(i), no additional operators may be qualified until the auditor
determines that the deficiency has been corrected. Under paragraph
(c)(5)(ii), the program must be re-audited within 180 days of the
confirmation that the deficiency was corrected. Paragraph (c)(5)(iii)
requires
[[Page 48021]]
the auditor to file a report of any such deficiency with the
appropriate OSHA Regional Office within 15 days of discovery. In
addition, paragraph (c)(5)(iv) requires that records of the audits must
be maintained by the auditor for three years and must be made available
by the auditor at the request of the Secretary of Labor or a designated
representative. The auditor's maintenance of the records, and the
reporting requirement, are intended to preserve the independent
verification function of the auditor.
Paragraph (c)(6)(i) specifies that a qualification under Option (2)
is not portable. As defined in Sec. 1926.1427(m)(2), ``not portable''
means that only the employer issuing the qualification may rely upon
it. OSHA has added that statement of meaning directly in paragraph
(c)(6)(i) in the final rule and has removed paragraph (m). C-DAC
determined that portability should be limited to certification under
Option (1) because the degree of consistency in adhering to the
requirements of this section is likely to be highest among accredited
crane operator testing organizations because they are fully independent
and their business interest depends on their continued accreditation.
Under paragraph (c)(6)(ii), a qualification under Option (2) is valid
for exactly five years.
A trade association stated that qualification under Option (2) of
this section (as well as Options (3) and (4)) should, like
certification under Option (1), also be portable. (ID-0214.1.) The
commenter stated that there was no rational reason to adopt a rule
where portability is restricted to Option (1) certifications. However,
OSHA concludes that C-DAC's decision to accord full portability only to
a certification under Option (1) is sound. A certification issued under
Option (1) is based on tests that are completely independent of any
particular employer. Moreover, the commenter's nominee to C-DAC did not
dissent on this issue and the commenter has not explained the reason
for changing its position. OSHA gives reduced weight to comments by a
nominating organization that are inconsistent with the position its
nominee took on C-DAC.
A utility company suggested that electric utilities be able to use
Option (2) without an independent auditor by allowing for an internal
audit of the employee training program based on annual employee
inspections, as allowed in Sec. 1910.269(a)(2). (ID-0342.) Granting
this request would permit electric utilities to self-certify their
operators. OSHA has rejected this option above and does so here for the
same reasons given earlier.
Some commenters stated that Option (2) was impractical because
there are currently no individuals who are accredited to carry out the
duties of the auditor under the option (ID-0151.1; -0329.1.) OSHA
notes, however, that employers have four years from the effective date
of this standard to comply with Sec. 1926.1427, and the agency
anticipates that, if the demand exists for the services of accredited
auditors, they will become available during that time frame.
An operator certification company recommended eliminating Option
(2) because, in the commenter's view, it lacks sufficient safeguards to
ensure the integrity of the qualification process. (ID-0330.1.) The
commenter views this Option as a form of self-certification that is
generally inconsistent with the rule's principle of third-party
verification. It suggests that this Option presents an inherent
conflict of interest based on the incentive that employers have to pass
their employee-operators and that the conflict is not cured by an
auditor's oversight of the program. OSHA disagrees. Under this option,
the auditor must be independent of the employer and certified by an
accredited testing organization. In OSHA's view, these requirements
provide adequate assurance that a testing program approved by the
auditor is of high quality and reliability.
Paragraph (d) Option (3): Qualification by the U.S. Military
Proposed Sec. 1926.1427(d) provided that an operator who is an
employee of the United States military would be deemed qualified if he/
she had a current qualification issued by the U. S. military. The
criteria for qualification under Option (3) would be left to the
military to determine, including the length of time such a
qualification would be valid. Qualification under this option would not
be portable unless it meets the requirements of Option (1) of this
section.
Unlike Options (1) and (2), Option (3) is available, in accordance
with the requirements of paragraph (d), whether or not the equipment is
operated within the jurisdiction of a State or local government that
has its own operating licensing requirement. The Agency notes that in
its comments requesting mandatory compliance with State licensing
requirements, New York State noted that it did not intend to supplant
Option (3). (ID-0171.1.) There is nothing in the record to indicate
that employees of the U.S. military who are authorized by the U.S.
military to operate equipment covered by this subpart are currently
required to comply with State or local licensing requirements.
In the proposed rule, OSHA noted that OSHA standards did not apply
to uniformed military personnel and to civilian employees of the
military who are engaged in uniquely military equipment, systems, and
operations. Accordingly, Option (3) would apply only to civilian
employees of the Defense Department and Armed Forces who are engaged in
work that is not uniquely military. It does not apply to employees of
private contractors who are working under contract to the military. In
the proposed rule, OSHA noted that the C-DAC document did not clearly
exclude such employees even though that was C-DAC's intent.
To make this point clear, OSHA is adding the following
clarification to Sec. 1926.1427(d)(1): An ``employee of the U.S.
military'' is a Federal employee of the Department of Defense or Armed
Forces and does not include employees of private contractors. This
clarification was originally proposed in Sec. 1926.1427(m), which is
removed from the final rule. Two commenters supported the clarification
proposed by OSHA. (ID-0205.1; -0211.1.) Another said the provision
should be clarified but did not express an opinion on whether OSHA's
proposed clarification should be adopted. (ID-0122.) In the absence of
any reasons presented in opposition to the proposed clarification, OSHA
is retaining the clarification.
Paragraph (d)(2) specifies that qualification under Option (3) is
not portable. Because this option is designed specifically to
accommodate civilian employees of the U.S. military, and therefore is
not based on the same criteria and independent third-party
verification. However, if a U.S. military entity meets the requirements
of Option (1), OSHA would consider the operator certification provided
by that entity to be portable.
Paragraph (e) Option (4): Licensing by a Government Entity
Paragraph (e) of this section of the final rule addresses
government licensing departments/offices that issue operating licenses
for equipment covered by this standard. Paragraph (e)(1) makes it clear
that OSHA is only requiring compliance with State or local operating
licensing requirements when those licensing programs meet the
requirements specified in paragraphs (e)(2). These requirements are
commonly referred to as a ``Federal floor,'' meaning that they are the
minimum criteria necessary to trigger
[[Page 48022]]
employer compliance with those licensing requirement under this
standard. OSHA is including this ``Federal floor'' because it
determines, as did C-DAC, that some, but potentially not all, State/
local governments will have effective, reliable licensing procedures.
If OSHA determines that a State or local licensing department/office,
or its testing, does not satisfy the minimum requirements set out in
paragraphs (e) and (j), then employers would not be required by OSHA to
comply with the licensing requirements of that government entity. In
such cases, the employer would satisfy the requirements of this section
by ensuring that their operators are certified or qualified in
accordance with the options provided in paragraphs (b) through (d).
The requirement for the government licensing department/office to
meet the criteria in Sec. 1926.1427(e)(2) ensures that operators who
qualify under Option (4) have the requisite knowledge and skills to
operate safely. Paragraph (e)(2)(i) requires that the criteria used by
the licensing department/office address the knowledge and skill
requirements listed in Sec. 1926.1427(j). Section 1926.1427(e)(2)(ii)
requires that the government entity follow the same test content, test
administration and related criteria as required under Option (1).
Section 1926.427(e)(2)(iii) requires that the office with authority
over the licensing department/office assess the tests and procedures
used by the licensing office/department and determine that the
requirements of Sec. Sec. 1926.1427(e)(2)(ii) and 1926.1427(e)(2)(iii)
have been met. Also, the government licensing office must have re-
certification procedures in place as discussed in Sec. Sec.
1926.1427(b)(1)(iv) and 1926.427(c)(4).
Under Sec. 1926.1427(e)(3)(i), a qualification under Option (4) is
valid only within the geographic jurisdiction of the licensing entity.
However, if the qualifications of Option (1) in Sec. 1926.1427(b) are
met, OSHA would consider the operator certification provided by that
entity to be portable. Under paragraph (e)(3)(ii), the qualification is
valid for the time period specified by the licensing entity, but for no
longer than five years.
Several commenters expressed the concern that OSHA's new standard
would preempt existing State or local laws, particularly those relating
to licensing of crane operators. Others encouraged the Agency to
expressly preempt those laws. The preemption issue is discussed in full
at the end of this preamble within section V.D addressing federalism.
Other Recommended Options
Commenters recommended that OSHA offer employers two additional
options for qualifying or certifying operators. One is to allow
employers to self-certify operators based on their own evaluation of
the operator's ability. For the reasons discussed in the introduction
to this section, OSHA rejects that suggestion.
A number of commenters recommended that OSHA expand the range of
options by allowing an accredited educational institution to certify
operators. (ID-0105.1; -0147.1; -0151.1; -0187.1; -0193.1.) At the
public hearing, a witness for a trade association further recommended
an option whereby operators could be trained and qualified through an
employer program developed by an accredited educational institution.
(ID-0343.)
Some commenters believed that additional options were needed
because they believed that Option (1) was the only viable option for
many employers and that an insufficient number of accredited testing
organizations existed to meet the demand that an OSHA rule would
create. (ID-0165.1; -0187.1; -0193.1.)
OSHA notes that an educational institution, like any other testing
organization, may become an accredited testing organization under
Option (1) by becoming accredited by a nationally recognized
accrediting agency based on the criteria listed under that option and
complying with the ``firewall'' requirements of Sec. 1926.1427(g).
However, OSHA determines the comments favoring this concept were
addressing OSHA's request for comment on whether to allow an
educational institution to certify operators based solely on its
accreditation by an organization recognized by the Department of
Education (DoE) without the need to be accredited under Option (1) (see
73 FR 59812, Oct. 9, 2008).
OSHA concludes that accreditation of an educational institution
under DoE criteria is insufficient to ensure that a certification
issued by the institution would reliably demonstrate that the crane
operator has the knowledge and skills needed for safe operation. The
fundamental reason is that the accreditation process for educational
institutions does not include an assessment of an institution's ability
to assess personnel competency.
A representative from a consensus standard organization addressed
this issue at the public hearing. The representative had experience
both in accrediting educational institutions and personnel
certification organizations. (ID-0344.) He testified that the
accreditation of an educational institution under the DoE system is
designed to assess the quality of the education an institution offers
but does not determine whether the individuals who have attended that
institution possess the specific skills or competencies required for
particular jobs. Unlike an educational institution, which focuses on
the number of graduates, attrition rates, and the percentage pass rate
on any national certification or State licensure examinations, a
personnel certification program is designed to address competency for
job performance. Among the concerns cited by the representative were
that the accreditation for an educational program does not assess
competency, and that the tests administered by an educational program
are not held to the same psychometric standards as those administered
by an accredited personnel certification program. The commenter said
higher education accreditation is concerned with the quality of
education. Personnel certification accreditation, on the other hand,
evaluates the quality of assessments to measure the acquisition and
ongoing maintenance of valid job competencies. (ID-0344.) In addition,
personnel certification is time-limited and certifying entities retain
the ability to withdraw certification if the individual subsequently
demonstrates a lack of competency. (ID-0344.) Institutions of higher
education cannot revoke or repossess diplomas.
The representative explained that a key difference between
educational accreditation and personnel accreditation is surveillance
of the test administration process by the accrediting body to ensure
that an individual's score is not tainted by prior knowledge of the
examination or by lack of security during the test itself. Using the
ANSI accreditation process as an example, he explained that a
certification entity seeking accreditation will undergo annual
surveillance--onsite during the first and third years, which can
encompass multiple sites if the certification entity's structure merits
such review. ANSI examines the controls over test items and the
development of test items, to ensure that these items are not released
to the public. ANSI also looks to ensure that the organizational
structure of the certifying entity is reflective of the population it
is intended to serve, and that the administration is fair and equitable
among all the applicants.
[[Page 48023]]
These criteria are not required elements of accreditation for higher
education institutions, according to both the representative and
Department of Education materials (see 34 CFR part 602).
There is another reason why certification by an educational
institution would, in most cases, not be suitable for crane operators:
The need for personnel testing to be independent of the training that
precedes the testing. As discussed below, Sec. 1926.1427(g) of this
rule is designed to ensure that training is separate from testing to
prevent an organization that offers both services from defeating the
validity of the test by ``teaching to the test.'' OSHA acknowledges
that it might be possible for an educational institution to provide the
necessary ``firewalls'' between its training and testing, and obtain
the separate accreditation required under this section, such that it
could comply with Sec. 1926.1427(g). However, educational institutions
typically both teach and test, and may do so within their educational
accreditation without any requirement that the testing process be
insulated from the teaching process.
The purpose of a personnel certification test is different from a
test offered by an educational institution, which is to determine
whether the individual has mastered the material that was taught. As a
labor representative stated at the hearing, personnel certification
tests examine a random sampling of information that individuals must
know to perform the function being tested. (ID-0341.) The labor
representative pointed out that if the individual is tested only on the
material he or she has been taught, the individual learns only the
information needed to pass the test and the test is not a reliable
measure of the person's depth of knowledge on the subject. Therefore,
allowing educational institutions to certify crane operators based
solely on their DoE accreditation would be inconsistent with the
principle that testing for certification purposes should be independent
of any training that the individual has received and would severely
compromise the reliability of the certification process.
In sum, the DoE accreditation system for educational institutions
is not designed to assess the capabilities that are needed for
developing or administering personnel competency tests.\117\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\117\ At least one other Federal agency has also taken this view
of certification. The Department of Defense requires the
certification of certain personnel performing Information Assurance
functions within that organization. Appendix 2 to DoD 8570.01-M, the
directive addressing such certifications, requires that the
certifications must be accredited, and maintain accreditation, under
ISO 17024. (ID-0346.1.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, concerns about inadequate availability of certifying
entities are unfounded. At the time of the proposed rule, two testing
organizations, NCCCO and the Southern California Crane & Hoisting
Association, had been accredited (see 73 FR 59812, Oct. 9, 2008). By
the time of the hearing, four additional testing organizations had been
accredited: The Operating Engineers Certification Program, Union
Pacific Railroad, National Center for Construction Education and
Research, and Crane Institute Certification. (ID-0343.) Although some
of these are not available to all employers or crane operators, it does
not appear that there will be a lack of availability of testing
services under Option (1), particularly with the four-year phase-in
period for Sec. 1926.1427.
In addition, the record shows that testing organizations arrange
for testing to be available at convenient locations. For example, NCCCO
offers the written test anywhere in the country where it receives
adequate notice and an appropriate testing room is available. (ID-
0343.) NCCCO also sends examiners to an employer's worksite to
administer the practical tests. (ID-0343.) OSHA therefore concludes
that the current four options afford crane operators and their
employers sufficient opportunity to obtain qualification/certification
and that additional options are not needed to make such services
readily available.
Two building trade associations recommended that OSHA add an option
that combines aspects of Option (2) of this section with tests
developed by an accredited educational institution. (ID-0218.1; -
0232.1.) Under their recommendation, the educational institution would
develop written and practical tests, and the tests would be approved by
an auditor who is certified by an accredited educational institution as
qualified to evaluate such tests. The actual operator certification
would be issued by the accredited educational institution.
OSHA determines that this recommended program is, in practical
effect, not significantly different than the general recommendation for
OSHA to allow certification by an accredited educational institution.
First, it is likely that educational institutions would be
administering tests to individuals who have taken their training
courses without ``firewall'' separation between those functions,
thereby giving rise to the problem addressed above that testing would
not be independent of training and would therefore be of reduced
reliability. Second, although the commenters would not permit the
auditor to be employed by the employer, there is no prohibition against
the auditor being employed by the accredited educational institution
who certifies him/her. In OSHA's view, this creates the potential for a
conflict of interest because the auditor would not be independent of
the institution whose tests he or she is reviewing. OSHA finds that the
recommendation by the commenters does not contain sufficient safeguards
to ensure that the tests provide an indicator of operator competence
that is comparable to the other options permitted under this rule.
One commenter asked OSHA to prohibit different organizations from
administering the written and practical testing. (ID-0199.1.) The
commenter stated that it is necessary for one organization to maintain
oversight of the entire test process. The commenter did not provide any
support for this assertion, nor has OSHA identified any other evidence
in the record to support it. OSHA does not find the request persuasive
and is instead relying on the accreditation requirements to ensure that
the certifying entity administers all testing appropriately.
Paragraph (f) Pre-Qualification/Certification Training Period
Section 1926.1427(f) establishes a process by which operators who
are not certified or qualified can get experience operating the
equipment to help prepare for obtaining a certification/qualification.
Section 1926.1427(f) allows employees who are not yet qualified or
certified to operate cranes provided that they qualify as ``operators-
in-training'' in accordance with Sec. Sec. 1926.1427(f)(1) through
(5), which require appropriate monitoring of such operators-in-training
to ensure worksite safety and places limitations on the tasks they can
perform. OSHA revised proposed Sec. 1926.1427(f) to clarify that
employees who do meet the requirements of an ``operator-in-training,''
and who are not otherwise certified or qualified under this section,
are prohibited from operating equipment (except for maintenance, as
provided in Sec. 1926.1429 of this subpart). OSHA has removed the text
that was in proposed paragraph (f)(2) as redundant,\118\ and has
renumbered paragraph (f) of this section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\118\ Proposed paragraph (f)(1) of this section had provided
that ``[a]n employee who is not qualified or certified under this
section is permitted to operate equipment'' by satisfying the
requirements of proposed paragraph (f).'' Proposed paragraph (f)(2),
and an alternative also included in the proposed rule, had granted
the same permission to any employee who had not passed the written
exam or practical tests required under Sec. 1926.1427. While OSHA
still intends that employees who have passed either the written exam
or practical test be eligible to serve as an ``operator-in-
training,'' it is not including this text in the regulation because
these employees are already addressed by the language that was in
proposed paragraph (f)(1) (``an employee who is not qualified or
certified under this section'') and is included in the final rule as
the introductory text for paragraph (f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48024]]
The proposed rule used the phrase ``trainee/apprentice'' to
describe an operator-in-training, the word ``supervisor'' to describe
the individual responsible for monitoring the operator-in-training, and
the word ``supervise'' to describe that individual's oversight of the
operator-in-training. Several commenters suggested that the terms
``trainee,'' ``apprentice,'' and ``supervisor'' could be construed to
have labor/management consequences under the National Labor Relations
Act (NLRA). (ID-0182.1; -0199.1; -0341.0.) OSHA did not intend for
these terms to be construed as they are used under the NLRA, and, to
avoid any possible confusion on the subject, has changed ``supervisor''
to ``trainer,'' ``trainee/apprentice'' to ``operator-in-training,'' and
``supervise'' to ``monitor'' in the final rule.
Paragraph (f)(1) requires that the operator-in-training be provided
with sufficient training prior to operating the equipment to enable
him/her to operate it safely under the limitations listed in this
section and any additional limitations established by the employer.
This ensures that, before beginning to operate the equipment at the
site, the operator-in-training would have attained sufficient knowledge
and skills to operate the equipment safely within the limitations and
with the monitoring required by the remainder of Sec. 1926.1427.
Paragraph (f)(2) restricts the operator-in-training operation of
the equipment to those tasks currently within his/her ability. As the
operator-in-training gains experience and demonstrates increased skill,
this provision allows him/her to perform progressively more complex
tasks.
Paragraph (f)(3) sets forth the requirements that an employee would
have to meet to be permitted to monitor the operator-in-training's
operation of the crane. During the training period, the operator-in-
training must be closely monitored to ensure that he/she is operating
in accordance with the training he/she has received and is adhering to
the limitation in paragraph (f)(2) that he/she only performs tasks
currently within his/her ability.
Under paragraph (f)(3)(i) the operator-in-training's trainer has to
be an employee or agent of the operator-in-training's employer. This
ensures that the trainer has the authority to direct the actions of the
operator-in-training.
Paragraph (f)(3)(ii) requires that the operator-in-training's
trainer must be either a qualified/certified operator (in accordance
with Sec. 1926.1427), or to have passed the written portion of a
qualification/certification test under one of the Options in Sec.
1926.1427. In addition, the trainer must be familiar with the proper
use of the equipment's controls. This provision is designed to ensure
that the trainer has sufficient knowledge about the equipment to enable
him/her to effectively oversee the safe operation of the crane.
Paragraph (f)(3)(iii) requires that the trainer perform no tasks
that would detract from his/her ability to monitor the operator-in-
training. This provision ensures that the trainer is able to devote
sufficient attention what the operator-in-training is doing so that he/
she can intervene to prevent the operator-in-training from doing
anything unsafe.
Under paragraph (f)(3)(iv), for equipment other than tower cranes,
the trainer and the operator-in-training must be in direct line of
sight of each other and are required to communicate either verbally or
by hand signals. This provision ensures that the trainer monitor can
rapidly and effectively give instructions to the operator-in-training,
especially for purposes of correcting anything that the operator-in-
training may be doing incorrectly.
With respect to tower cranes, the height of the operator's station
will often make it infeasible to maintain direct line of sight between
the trainer and the operator-in-training. For the same reason, use of
hand signals is also often not feasible. Therefore, the provision
instead requires that they be in direct communication with each other.
For example, direct communication could be achieved by radio or other
instant electronic voice communication system.
Section 1926.1427(f)(4) permits the operator-in-training to
continue operating the crane in the absence of the trainer for short
breaks under criteria designed to result in safe operation. This
provision recognizes that monitoring 100 percent of the time is neither
practical nor is it necessary for safe operation if appropriate
limitations are imposed. Those limitations are listed in paragraphs
(f)(4)(i)-(iii):
Under paragraph (f)(4)(i), the break would be restricted to no more
than 15 minutes, with no more than one break per hour.
Under paragraph (f)(4)(ii), immediately prior to the break, the
trainer must inform the operator-in-training of the specific tasks that
the operator-in-training is authorized to perform and the limitations
that he/she must adhere to during the break.
Under paragraph (f)(4)(iii), the specific tasks that the operator-
in-training would perform during the break must be within the operator-
in-training's ability.
Proposed paragraph (f)(2)(v) \119\ stated that a ``* * * trainee/
apprentice shall not operate the equipment in any of the following
circumstances.'' This paragraph was followed by paragraphs
(f)(2)(v)(A)-(E). Of these, paragraphs (f)(2)(v)(A)-(D) contained
absolute prohibitions while paragraph (f)(2)(v)(E) contained a
conditional prohibition. To avoid inconsistency between paragraph
(f)(2)(v) and the paragraphs that followed, the paragraph, which is now
at Sec. 1926.1427(f)(5) has been modified to make clear that there is
an exception at (f)(5)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\119\ This requirement is now located at Sec. 1926.1427(f)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (f)(5) recognizes that certain tasks are too complex or
present such heightened risks that it would be unreasonably dangerous
if a less than fully qualified operator were to operate the equipment.
For the circumstances listed in Sec. Sec. 1926.1427(f)(5)(i)-(v), the
operator-in-training is prohibited from operating the equipment in all
cases. With respect to operations involving multiple-lift rigging, the
Committee determined that the difficulty and/or risk involved is not at
the same level as the operations listed in Sec. Sec.
1926.1427(f)(5)(i)-(iv). Consequently, while Sec. 1926.1427(f)(5)
contains a general prohibition against an operator-in-training
operating the equipment during multiple-lift rigging operations, an
exception would apply where the trainer determined that the operator-
in-training's skills are sufficient for this high-skill work.
A utility company objected to the requirement in proposed Sec.
1926.1427(f)(2)(v)(A) that operators-in-training who are performing
subpart V work (construction and improvement of power lines) maintain
at least a 20-foot distance from energized power lines, asking that
operators-in-training only be required to maintain the same clearance
from power lines (those listed in Table V-1 of subpart V) as certified
operators. (ID-0144.1.) This commenter claimed that the prohibition
would limit the ability of electric utility owners and operators to
provide operators-in-training with hands on training.
[[Page 48025]]
Based on the record as a whole, OSHA is convinced that the risk of
injury from contact with an energized power line is so great that it
warrants extra precautions, particularly with respect to operators who
are still learning how to operate their equipment. OSHA notes that the
other electric utilities and representatives who submitted comments and
appeared at the hearing did not voice a similar concern, nor did the
industry's representatives on C-DAC. OSHA also notes that the exclusion
of digger derricks from the scope of this subpart for pole work should
largely alleviate this commenter's concern. Accordingly, OSHA is
retaining paragraph (f)(5)(i) in the final rule.
Paragraph (g)
Paragraph (g) of this section provides that ``a testing entity is
permitted to provide training as well as testing services as long as
the criteria of the applicable accrediting agency (in the option
selected) for an organization providing both services are met.'' This
paragraph serves two purposes. First, it makes clear that an entity
providing qualification/certification testing may also provide training
to the individuals it tests, as well as others. Second, it establishes
a condition such entities must satisfy: the testing agency must meet
the criteria of its accrediting agency for an organization providing
both services.
For example, an industry consensus standard, the International
Organization for Standardization (``ISO'') 17024, requires that a
certifying entity only offer training if it can demonstrate that the
training is independent of both evaluation and certification. This is
intended to prevent the entity's training arm from ``teaching to the
test,'' which would detract from the test's ability to determine the
individual's true knowledge of the subject matter needed for safe
operation. It is also necessary to protect the integrity of the
testing. Therefore, with respect to those accrediting agencies that
apply the ISO standard, a testing entity may also conduct training as
long as an adequate ``firewall'' exists between the two functions.
Paragraph (h)
Paragraph (h) of this section addresses C-DAC's concern that some
competent crane operators may be hindered in obtaining qualification or
certification under this section because they have difficulty with
taking written tests even though they possess sufficient literacy for
reading and understanding safety-related material such as the crane's
operating manual and load chart. To avoid disqualifying individuals
solely because they have this type of difficulty, paragraph (h) permits
written tests under this section to be administered verbally, with
answers given verbally, where the operator candidate (1) passes a
written demonstration of literacy relevant to the work; and (2)
demonstrates the ability to use the type of written manufacturer
procedures applicable to the class/type of equipment for which the
candidate is seeking certification. These would typically include, for
example, the load chart and operator's manual for the crane the
candidate would be operating. Thus, paragraph (h) only permits tests to
be administered verbally where the individual demonstrates the literacy
needed to read and understand written material needed for safe
operation.
As explained in the proposed rule, neither of the demonstrations in
paragraphs (h)(1) or (h)(2) would have to be made in English (see 73 FR
59816, Oct. 9, 2008). As an example, under these provisions, an
employer could obtain a Spanish-language version of the load charts and
operator's manual, and arrange to have the literacy test administered
in Spanish. An operator able to meet the requirements of Sec.
1926.1427(h) using these Spanish language materials would have
demonstrated adequate literacy under the rule.
A trade association supported the provision allowing examinations
to be administered verbally. (ID-0151.1.) A testing organization
opposed the provision, believing it adds an unnecessary and potentially
harmful step in the qualification process. (ID-0343.) The testing
organization was concerned that the rule does not identify standards or
protocols by which the written demonstration of literacy relevant to
the work and the ability to use written manufacturer procedures are to
be made.
OSHA recognizes the testing organization's concern but concludes
that the rule must allow sufficient flexibility in the testing process
to enable individuals who have sufficient literacy skills and are
demonstrably competent to operate a crane, but are deficient in written
test-taking ability, to obtain qualification/certification under this
rule. Accordingly, OSHA is retaining the provision allowing tests to be
administered verbally if the specified demonstrations of literacy are
made.
OSHA requested comment on several issues arising under paragraph
(h), including (1) Whether, if an operator complies with paragraph (h)
by demonstrating proficiency in a language other than English, the
qualification/certification should be limited to the use of equipment
that is equipped with materials in the operator's language; (2) whether
the rule needs to incorporate safeguards to ensure that a translation
of manufacturer-supplied materials conveys the same information as the
original; (3) whether employers should be permitted to use manuals that
have been re-written in simplified language to accommodate individuals
whose literacy level does not permit them to understand the
manufacturer-supplied materials.
One trade association commented that, in many regions of the United
States, employers rely on non-English speakers to operate cranes and
stated that OSHA should require testing organizations to offer crane
operator certification in languages other than English. (ID-0231.1.)
OSHA's longstanding position is that workers must be trained and
provided with information in a language that they can understand. That
is particularly important for crane operators, who will be in control
of large pieces of equipment, with the potential to inflict major
damage and injury.
It was C-DAC's intent in the proposed rule, and it is OSHA's intent
in this final rule, that non-English speaking operators will have the
ability to become certified using languages other than English.
Paragraph (h)(2) of the rule, therefore, authorizes testing
organizations to administer tests in any language that the operator
candidate understands. Paragraph (h)(2) is intended to ensure that
crane operators are certified in a language that they comprehend, and
that the cranes they operate are equipped with the requisite materials
in that language. OSHA intends to work with certifying organizations to
ensure that examinations in appropriate languages are available within
the four-year phase-in period under this section.
OSHA expects employers who perform their own testing under
paragraph (c) to test candidates in the languages understood by their
workers. OSHA concludes that accredited testing organizations providing
certifications under paragraph (b) should likewise provide testing in
major languages understood by the relevant worker population of the
regions in which they do business. Doing so will maximize an
organization's share of the testing market. Moreover, OSHA expects that
employers who rely on testing organizations will demand testing in the
languages understood by their workforces.
[[Page 48026]]
Paragraph (i) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (j) Certification Criteria
Paragraph (j) of this section sets out the qualification and
certification criteria applicable to Options (1), (2), and (4) of this
section. These criteria address the knowledge and skills that are
fundamental to safe crane operation. As stated in the introductory
language in Sec. 1926.1427(j), these would constitute ``minimum''
criteria; the accredited testing organizations, employers, or local or
State licensing offices would not be precluded from adding additional
requirements to their certification or qualification programs.
Paragraph (j)(1) describes the criteria that must be covered by the
written examination portion of a qualification/certification program.
As stated above in the discussion of examination administration, the
written portion of the examination may be administered orally, so long
as the candidate has demonstrated sufficient literacy relevant to the
work (e.g., load charts and equipment manual).
Paragraph (j)(1)(i) states that the individual seeking
qualification or certification must know ``the information necessary
for safe operation of the specific type of equipment the individual
will operate * * *'' Paragraph (j)(1)(i) goes on to list specific types
of information the individual must know.
Paragraph (j)(1)(i)(A) requires that the written examination
address the candidate's knowledge of the equipment controls and
operational/performance characteristics of the specific type of
equipment. Operational/performance characteristics would include, for
example, the deflection characteristics of the boom, including how
deflection affects the positioning of the load and the extent to which
deflection varies with boom angle and length as well as load weight.
Also, equipment with lattice/cable supported booms has different
deflection characteristics than equipment with non-lattice booms (that
is, hydraulic ram extensible booms).
Paragraph (j)(1)(i)(B) requires the candidate to know the use of,
and be able to calculate (manually or with the use of a calculator),
load/capacity information on a variety of configurations of the
equipment. Such information is typically contained in load charts and
manuals. This provision ensures that the operator is able to accurately
determine, independently, the capacity of the equipment in each
situation that he/she might encounter and thereby avoid overloading the
equipment.
Paragraph (j)(1)(i)(C) requires the candidate to know procedures
for preventing and responding to power line contact. As discussed above
in relation to Sec. Sec. 1926.1407-1926.1411, electrical contact with
power lines is one of the principal causes of crane-related fatalities
and injuries, and those sections contain detailed requirements for
preventing such contact and for reducing the likelihood of death or
injury should such contact occur.\120\ Knowing how to prevent and
respond to power line contact is therefore critical knowledge for any
crane operator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\120\ As provided in Sec. 1926.1408(g)(1)(i)(A) on power line
safety, operators must be aware of the danger of electrocution if
they simultaneously touch energized equipment and the ground. They
must also, pursuant to Sec. 1926.1408(g)(1)(i)(B), be trained to
understand that when the equipment makes electrical contact with a
power line, the operator's safety requires him or her to remain
inside the cab except where there is an imminent danger of fire,
explosion, or other emergency that necessitates their leaving the
cab.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (j)(1)(i)(D) addresses the need for crane operators to
have technical knowledge similar to the subject matter listed in
Appendix C applicable to the specific type of equipment the individual
will operate. These criteria were selected by C-DAC because, in the
experience of the committee's members, they are critical knowledge and
skill areas for equipment operators. OSHA defers to C-DAC's experience
on this issue and notes that the Agency did not receive any comments
suggesting that a particular item be removed from this list. While
testing based on the specific list provided in Appendix C is not the
means of satisfying the requirements of Sec. 1926.1427(j)(1)(i)(D),
alternative criteria must be ``similar to'' that of Appendix C. The
appendix also serves as a ``safe harbor,'' meaning that testing on all
of the criteria provided in Appendix C would satisfy the requirements
of Sec. 1926.1427(j)(1)(i)(D).
In addition to the technical knowledge that is required under Sec.
1926.1427(j)(1)(i)(D), technical knowledge applicable to three specific
subjects is required under Sec. 1926.1427(j)(1)(i)(E). Paragraph
(j)(1)(i)(E)(1) requires that an operator have technical knowledge
about the suitability of the supporting ground and surface to handle
expected loads. Paragraph (j)(1)(i)(E)(2) requires operators to possess
technical knowledge applicable to site hazards, such as hazards posed
by excavations or vehicular traffic. Paragraph (j)(1)(i)(E)(3) requires
operators to have technical knowledge about site access so that the
operator can evaluate whether conditions at the point of access to the
site enable the equipment to travel safely onto or off of the site. For
example, where equipment must descend or ascend a dirt ramp, the
operator needs to be able to assess the effect of the ramp's steepness
and to detect signs of instability.
Paragraph (j)(1)(i)(F) requires operators to demonstrate a thorough
knowledge of this subpart, including incorporated materials. Operators
play a key role in the application of these requirements, and it is
therefore essential that they understand them. Paragraph (j)(1)(ii)
provides that the individual is able to read and locate relevant
information in the equipment manual and other materials containing
information referred to in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section. As
discussed above in relation to paragraph (h), the written materials to
which this paragraph refers must be in a language that the individual
can read and in which the individual is tested.
Paragraph (j)(2) requires that the qualification/certification
examination include a determination through a practical test that the
individual has the skills necessary for the safe operation of the
equipment. It also states criteria for such a test. Paragraph (j)(2)(i)
requires that an individual demonstrate the ability to recognize, from
visual and auditory observation, the items listed in proposed Sec.
1926.1412(d), which sets criteria for shift inspections. Paragraph
(j)(2)(ii) requires the operator to demonstrate operational and
maneuvering skills. Paragraph (j)(2)(iii) requires that the operator
demonstrate the ability to apply load chart information. Paragraph
(j)(2)(iv) requires that an operator be able to apply safe shut-down
and securing procedures.
One commenter suggested incorporating standard verbal operation
signals into the certification criteria. (ID-0110.1.) A different
commenter asked OSHA to require knowledge of the ``dynamics of boom
flex'' in its criteria for certification. (ID-0125.) To the extent that
knowledge of such signals and the dynamics of boom flex are required
for the safe operation of the type of equipment the individual will
operate, they would be covered under Sec. 1926.1427(j)(1)(i). The
examples of the types of information that would be required for
certification are not all inclusive. OSHA defers to C-DAC's experience
with respect to the determination of which examples should be
highlighted in paragraph (j).
No other comments were received on Sec. 1926.1427(j); it is
promulgated as proposed, except that OSHA has corrected ``audible
observations'' to read
[[Page 48027]]
``auditory observations (observations through the use of the ear).
Paragraph (k) Phase-In
As discussed above, a number of commenters believe that Option (1)
of this section (certification by an accredited testing organization)
is the only viable option for many employers and expressed concern
about the availability of sufficient accredited testing organizations
to meet the demand that this rule would create. Therefore, in the final
rule, OSHA has provided a four-year phase-in period for compliance with
paragraph (a)(2), which requires employers to have their operators
certified or qualified under Option (1) (independent certifying
organization), Option (2) (audited employer certification), or Option
(3) (U.S. military employees). Paragraph (k)(1) of this section of the
final rule sets out different effective dates for the different
provisions of Sec. 1926.1427: all provisions except paragraphs (a)(2)
and (f) of this section are enforceable as of the effective date of new
subpart CC, whereas the certification required under paragraph (a)(2)
will not be required until the end of the phase-in period, which is
four years after the effective date of subpart CC.
The phase-in period does not apply to compliance with licensing
requirements of government entities. Those government entities already
require compliance with their own licensing requirements, and OSHA sees
no rationale for delaying compliance with existing law. Employers would
be required to comply with State or local government entity licensing
requirements only to the extent that State or local government entity
licenses comply with the ``Federal floor'' established in paragraphs
(e)(2) and (j) of this section. The options available under Sec.
1926.1427(a)(2) would remain available, and the four-year phase-in
period would apply.
As already discussed, C-DAC determined that the market would
respond to a qualification/certification requirement, and the increase
in the number of accredited testing organizations since C-DAC completed
its consensus document validates that view (OSHA notes that several
more testing organizations have become accredited since the proposed
rule was issued). There is no evidence in the record that the available
testing organizations will be unable to meet the demand even if almost
all employers choose that option. The four year period will provide
time for additional testing organizations to become accredited for
purposes of Option (1).
A labor organization suggested that the four-year phase-in period
be reduced to two years. (ID-0409.1.) The commenter stated that C-DAC
agreed to the four-year period when it issued its report in 2004 to
allow sufficient time for additional certification services to become
available. It noted that several additional testing organizations had
become accredited since 2004 to meet the demand for certification under
various State laws and suggested that the number of accredited testing
organizations was now sufficient to meet the demand under this rule
within two years. Another commenter also suggested that the phase-in
period could be reduced to two or three years if sufficient certifying
organizations are available when the final rule is issued. (ID-0104.1.)
OSHA concludes that the rulemaking record supports the proposed
four-year phase-in period. While the availability of certification
services has increased since C-DAC issued its report, four years is a
reasonable amount of time to ensure that the supply of certification
services will be sufficient to meet demand. It will also provide time
for those operators who need additional training to pass qualification/
certification tests to complete that training, and for accredited
testing organizations to develop tests in languages other than English
to accommodate crane operators for whom English is not their first
language.
The four year period will also provide time for the market to also
respond to demand for certification programs for certified auditors as
described under Option (2) of this section (and for employers who so
choose to develop audited programs for use under Option (2)). Some
State and local government entities now offer licenses and, if those
licensing organizations do not already meet the criteria under Option
(4) of this section, the four-year phase-in period gives them time to
do so if they so choose. C-DAC's determination that four years is a
reasonable phase-in period was not based solely on the availability of
testing services under Option (1) of this section, and OSHA continues
to agree that period is appropriate.
Under paragraph (k)(1), during this four year period, Sec. Sec.
1926.1427(k)(1)(i) and (ii) address the qualifications and training an
operator must have before becoming qualified or certified under one of
the four options. Section 1926.1427(k)(1)(i) requires that operators be
competent for the purposes of operating the equipment safely. This
means that the operator must have the requisite knowledge and skill to
identify, anticipate, and avoid actions which could result in hazardous
conditions related to the equipment and job site.
Paragraph (k)(1)(ii) requires that employers ensure that operators
who do not already have sufficient knowledge or skill to operate the
equipment safely undergo training prior to engaging in operations. In
addition, the employer is required to ensure that the operator is
evaluated to confirm that he/she understands the information provided
in the training.
The interim measures in paragraph (k)(1) are not significantly
different from requirements that were effective under subpart N of this
part at former Sec. 1926.550, Sec. 1926.20(b)(4) (``the employer
shall permit only those employees qualified by training or experience
to operate equipment and machinery''), and Sec. 1926.21(b)(2)(``the
employer shall instruct each employee in the recognition and avoidance
of unsafe conditions . . .''). However, they are included in this final
rule to ensure that there will not be a gap with respect to operator
qualifications between the termination of the requirements under
subpart N of this part at former Sec. 1926.550 and the effective date
of Sec. Sec. 1926.1427(a) through (j) and (m).
Paragraph (l) [Reserved.]
Definitions
The proposed rule contained definitions of ``portable'' and ``not
portable'' in proposed Sec. 1926.1427(m). In addition, OSHA stated
that it was considering adding a definition of ``employee of the U.S.
military'' to paragraph (m). As noted above, OSHA has moved the
definitions of ``portable'' and ``not portable'' to the provisions
where those terms are used, and has added a definition of ``employee of
the U.S. military'' to paragraph (d). As a result, proposed paragraph
(m) is not needed and is removed.
Physical Qualifications and Substance Abuse Testing
Physical Qualifications
C-DAC considered whether to include in this standard provisions
that would require equipment operators to meet particular physical
qualifications. After considering various possible approaches,
including those in industry consensus standards, the Committee decided
that it would be very difficult, and likely unnecessary, to identify
minimum physical requirements that would be appropriate.
First, the physical demands of equipment covered by this rule vary
significantly depending on the type and,
[[Page 48028]]
in some cases, age of the equipment. For example, some equipment is
operated largely by electronic controls. In contrast, older ``friction
cranes'' have pedal controls that can require significant strength and
stamina to operate. Some equipment is air conditioned whereas other
equipment is not. Tower cranes can require very long climbs to the
operator station; small mobile hydraulic cranes typically have an
operator's station that is much more easily accessible. A requirement
regarding physical qualifications would have to account for these types
of differences.
Second, establishing physical qualifications that would
appropriately account for the effect of medical conditions would be a
complex undertaking. The Committee ultimately determined that, in light
of its members' experience that accidents caused by problems associated
with the operator's physical/medical condition are rare, the issue of
physical qualifications did not need to be addressed by this standard.
Several commenters suggested that OSHA should require operators to
undergo and pass medical examinations. (ID-0104.1; -0143.1; -0151.1; -
0152.1; -0187.1.) A trade association suggested that medical testing of
vision, hearing, and potential for seizures, epilepsy, emotional
instability, high blood pressure, and other physical impairments should
be part of requirements for safe crane operation. (ID-0187.1.) A safety
consultant stated that establishing physical qualifications that would
appropriately account for the effects of medical conditions would not
be a complex undertaking. (ID-0152.1.) This commenter suggested that a
doctor who performs an operator's physical and medical examination
could determine if an operator was medically qualified to operate a
crane.
OSHA is not persuaded by these comments. First, OSHA concludes that
it would not be reasonable to rely on the unguided discretion of
examining physicians to determine whether an operator is medically
qualified to operate a crane. Doing so would likely lead to a wide
variation in the medical conditions that different physicians believe
are either necessary or unnecessary for crane operation. Moreover,
individual physicians are unlikely to be aware of the variety of
conditions that may influence an individual's ability to operate a
crane safely, such as the variation in strength needed to operate the
controls on different types of cranes. Although physicians are able to
determine if an individual has a particular medical condition, they are
not well situated to determine if that condition should preclude the
individual from operating a crane.
OSHA also finds the comment by the trade association to be
unpersuasive. First, this commenter nominated a C-DAC member, who did
not dissent on this issue. The commenter did not explain why it is
deviating from the position its nominee took on C-DAC, and for that
reason OSHA gives reduced weight to its comment. Moreover, OSHA notes
that some of the criteria suggested by the commenter, particularly the
phrase ``other physical impairments,'' are of questionable value in
determining the physical qualifications of crane operators. Indeed,
OSHA determines that the commenter's inclusion of such a catchall
phrase highlights the difficulty of trying to list the medical
conditions that should preclude a person from operating a crane.
In short, OSHA has not been given any persuasive reason to deviate
from the considered judgment of C-DAC that this standard should not
address the issue of physical qualifications of equipment operators.
Substance Abuse Testing
As explained in the proposed rule, C-DAC considered whether to
include mandatory substance abuse testing for equipment operators and
others, such as signal persons, whose jobs affect safety. It decided
against doing so because of the procedural limitations such a
requirement would impose on employers who have voluntarily instituted
substance abuse programs; a government mandate for substance abuse
testing would have to meet constitutional safeguards.\121\ For example,
under a government-mandated testing program, an employer likely would
not be permitted to ``stand down'' an operator based on an unconfirmed
test result but would need to wait until a positive result is verified
by a medical review officer. The Committee did not want to restrict an
employer's ability to suspend an operator who tested positive pending
confirmation of the result.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\121\ See Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Ass'n, 489 U.S.
602 (1989); International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Department of
Transportation, 932 F.2d 1292 (9th Cir. 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In short, the Committee balanced the potential benefits from a
requirement for substance abuse testing that would have more
restrictive procedures against the fact that many employers already
have their own programs in place that, in C-DAC's view, may be more
protective than what could be enacted as an OSHA requirement. C-DAC
concluded that it would be better not to include a substance abuse
requirement.
Several commenters recommended that OSHA include substance abuse
testing in the final rule. (ID-0104.1; -0105.1; -0151.1; -0152.1; -
0187.1.) These commenters did not, however, address C-DAC's conclusion
that an OSHA mandate for such testing could have the adverse
consequence of limiting employers' ability to enforce their own
substance abuse testing programs and could thereby detract from
worksite safety. OSHA therefore defers to C-DAC's judgment and declines
to include a substance abuse testing requirement in the final rule.
Section 1926.1428 Signal Person Qualifications
As discussed under Sec. 1926.1419, Signals--general requirements,
the safety of equipment operations depends in many situations on
signals given to the operator. It is critical that the operator
understand the signals given, and the signal person must therefore be
able to give clear, accurate and appropriate signals that unambiguously
convey the needed information. The Committee, which included a number
of members with significant experience with signal persons, was
concerned that some signal persons are not able to recognize the
hazards involved with certain crane operations, do not, in some cases,
understand what it is that the crane needs to do to accomplish the
task, and do not know how to give the appropriate signals. This poses
hazards, such as struck-by and crushed-by hazards, due to either
miscommunication or the communication of instructions that are
inappropriate.
An example of the type of accident that can be caused by
miscommunication from not knowing the appropriate signals is as
follows: The signal person intends to indicate to the operator to hoist
up, since the load needs to be raised straight up. However, the signal
person uses the standard signal for booming up in the mistaken belief
that this signal is for hoisting up. A struck-by or crushed-by incident
could result because, when booming up, the load will move laterally as
well as vertically.
A failure to understand what it is that the crane needs to do to
accomplish a task can also lead to struck-by or crushed-by incidents.
For example, as a crane booms down, boom deflection tends to increase,
which has the effect of lowering the load more than if there were no
boom deflection. If the signal person is unfamiliar with this boom
characteristic, he or she may fail to
[[Page 48029]]
signal in time for the load to stop at the correct point or may cause
the load to descend too quickly.
The Committee concluded that to prevent such accidents it is
necessary to establish qualification criteria that would have to be met
for an individual to serve as a signal person (that criteria is set out
in proposed Sec. 1926.1428(c), discussed below). The employer would
have the option of using one of two methods for ensuring that these
criteria were met. Under Option (1) of this section (Sec.
1926.1428(a)(1)), the signal person would have documentation from an
independent ``qualified evaluator (third party),'' as defined in Sec.
1926.1401, showing that the evaluator had determined that the signal
person meets the requirements of Sec. 1926.1428(c).
This qualification would be portable, that is, any employer could
rely on such documentation to show that a signal person meets the
criteria. C-DAC determined that such portability would be appropriate
because of the independence and expertise of the third-party evaluator.
Under Option (2) of this section (Sec. 1926.1428(a)(2)), an
employer's own qualified evaluator (not a third party) would determine
that a signal person meets the qualification requirements. Since such a
determination would not be done by an independent entity, other
employers would not have a basis to assume that the assessment had been
done correctly. Therefore, a qualification under this option would not
be portable; other employers would not be permitted to rely upon it to
show that the signal person meets these requirements.
One commenter argued for the deletion of Option (2) of this section
(the employer option) altogether to ensure that an independent
evaluator trains signalpersons according to the established best
practices of the industry. (ID-0156.1.) The commenter did not explain
why employer evaluations were less effective. To the contrary, the
Agency notes that C-DAC experience indicated that employer evaluations
of signal persons were effective. The employer evaluation may in some
cases be even more effective and efficient than independent
evaluations, such as for the evaluation of employer specific signals.
Sections 1926.1428(a)(1) and (2) (Options (1) and (2)) are promulgated
as proposed.
The term ``qualified evaluator'' used in proposed Sec.
1926.1428(a)(2) was defined in proposed Sec. 1926.1401 as ``a person
employed by the signal person's employer who has demonstrated that he/
she is competent in accurately assessing whether individuals meet the
Qualification Requirements in this subpart for a signal person.'' In
reviewing the C-DAC document, the Agency realized that the Committee
had not provided a definition for the term ``third party qualified
evaluator,'' which was used in proposed Sec. 1926.1428(a)(1). OSHA
therefore added to the proposed rule a definition for this term.
The Agency requested public comment about whether this definition
is appropriate, and two commenters indicated support for the
definition. (ID-0187.1; -0205.1.) One commenter requested that, in the
phrase, ``due to its independence and expertise,'' the Agency add
``history in providing training'' as an additional criterion and
include labor-management joint apprenticeship training programs as an
example of an entity that meets this definition. (ID-0191.1; -0194.1.)
The role of the third-party qualified evaluator in Sec.
1926.1428(a)(2) is to assess the individual's competence. The expertise
needed for training is not the same as the expertise needed for
evaluating competence (see the explanation of the distinction between
training expertise and competence evaluation in the discussion of Sec.
1926.1427). Therefore, it would be inappropriate to require training
expertise as a prerequisite for being considered a third-party
qualified evaluator.\122\ Similarly, while labor-management joint
apprenticeship training programs that train and assess signal persons
would typically meet the definition for a third-party qualified
evaluator, OSHA concludes that including them as an example in the
definition could incorrectly imply that training expertise (as opposed
to assessment expertise) is a prerequisite.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\122\ A third party evaluator that did not have signal person
training expertise would nonetheless have to have substantive
expertise in signaling and the other subjects referred to in Sec.
1926.1428, as well as expertise in assessment, to meet the
``expertise'' criterion in the definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several other commenters expressed general support for the
definition of a third-party qualified evaluator but requested
clarifications. Two of these commenters proposed changing the
definition to specify that an ``individual'' could also qualify as a
third-party qualified evaluator. (ID-0205.1; -0222.1.) This is
unnecessary because the word ``entity'' already encompasses an
individual. The other commenters recommended that OSHA further clarify
the definition by requiring an evaluating entity to ``demonstrate'' its
competence through an independent body's audit, certification, or
accreditation. (ID-0169.1; -0211.1.) OSHA agrees with C-DAC that
competence can be demonstrated in a variety of ways and is not
establishing an accreditation requirement as for evaluators of crane
operators. The assessment of a signal person's qualifications is
inherently less complex than the assessment of a crane operator's
qualifications because the range of signals and their applications are
more finite than the wide assortment of scenarios and skills for which
a crane operator must be tested. As such, the need for independent
assessment of the evaluator is diminished. Therefore, the Agency has
not made the suggested changes; the definition is promulgated as
proposed except that the defined term is ``qualified evaluator (not a
third party)'' in the final rule.
Another commenter at the hearing, citing the availability of
experienced, trained signal persons in his organization, requested a
``grandfather'' clause for signal persons so that previous training and
proof of hands-on practical experience would qualify signal persons
under this rule, citing the availability of experienced, trained signal
persons in that organization. (ID-0345.17.) OSHA does not agree that a
``grandfather'' clause is necessary or appropriate. The experienced,
trained workers to which the commenter refers should be able to pass
the required assessment with little additional training.\123\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\123\ In many cases the only additional training that likely
will be needed for those experienced and trained workers will be to
become familiar with the relevant requirements of Sec. Sec.
1926.1419-1926.1422, and Sec. 1926.1428 (knowledge of that
information is required under Sec. 1926.1428(c)(4)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA concurs with the C-DAC Committee's determination that it is
important for employers to make the documentation of signal person
qualifications readily available to employees and others who need to
rely on those qualifications, such as crane operators who rely on
signal persons provided by a different employer, or OSHA for compliance
purposes. In proposed Sec. 1926.1428(a)(3), OSHA included C-DAC's
language requiring that the documentation be ``available,'' rather than
``available at the site,'' but noted that C-DAC intended that the
documentation be available at the site by, for example, the
documentation being physically present at the site or through use of an
on-site computer. OSHA asked for public comment on changing the term
``available'' to ``available at the site.''
Two commenters objected to the proposed change, indicating that it
is not necessary to have the documentation on site so long as it can be
readily produced. (ID-0205.1; -0222.1.) The commenters did not,
[[Page 48030]]
however, provide further explanation or cite any examples of how the
documentation would be ``readily produced'' quickly through means other
than via computer. Moreover, the commenter's suggestion that documents
be ``readily produced'' is vague and could encompass documents that
might be ``produced'' offsite quickly but not transmitted in a timely
manner to the work site. OSHA has decided to modify the language used
in the proposed rule and require in the final rule that the
documentation be available at the site, and is also adding language to
make it clear that the employer is responsible for making that
documentation available at the worksite.
In the proposed rule preamble, the Agency noted that the C-DAC
draft of Option (2) of this section did not explicitly state that
documentation of the signal person's qualification by this method is
required. However, proposed Sec. 1926.1428(a)(3) stated that ``the
documentation for whichever Option is used shall be available. * * *''
It was not clear to the Agency if C-DAC intended to require
documentation under Option (2) of this section as it did for Option
(1), or if it only intended that any documentation the employer chose
to create under Option (2) would have to be made available.
One reason to require documentation under Option (2) of this
section is the Committee's concern that, at present, the operator's
employer has no ready means of determining if the signal person (who is
typically a different employer's employee) has the necessary knowledge
and skill for signaling until after hoisting operations have begun. In
other words, a problem with the signal person's ability may not become
evident to an operator until a hazardous situation has already arisen.
Requiring documentation enables this determination to be made before
hoisting operations begin.
Requiring documentation under Option (2) of this section addresses
C-DAC's concern. Therefore, in the proposed rule, OSHA expanded the
first sentence of the C-DAC version of Sec. 1926.1428(a)(2) to clarify
that documentation is required under Option (2). The only comment
received on OSHA's inclusion of an explicit requirement for
documentation under Option (2) was from SC&RA, which supported its
inclusion. (ID-0205.1.) Therefore, in the final rule, documentation is
required under Option (2).
The Agency concludes that the rationale for including an explicit
requirement for documentation under Option (2) of this section--the
need for other affected employers at the site, such as the operator's
employer, to have a ready means of determining if the signal person has
the necessary knowledge and skill before beginning hoisting
operations--also necessitates that the documentation be available at
the site. OSHA is concerned that if it is not available at the site
(either in paper form or electronically), it is less likely that the
documentation will serve its intended purpose. Therefore, in the final
rule, the documentation required under both Option (1) and Option (2)
of this section must be available at the site.
OSHA is also adding a requirement in paragraph (a)(3) of this
section of the final rule that the documentation must specify each type
of signaling for which the signalperson has been tested and meets the
requirements of Sec. 1926.1428(c). This requirement parallels the
requirement in Sec. 1926.1427(b)(2) in which operator certification
documents must specify the type and capacity of the equipment for which
an operator is certified. This new provision fills a potential
communication gap that would have existed in the implementation of the
rule as proposed. As explained above, one of the main reasons that OSHA
is requiring the documentation to be available at the site is so that
the operator, or any person on the job site, who is unfamiliar with a
signal person may review that documentation to ensure that the signal
person is sufficiently qualified to provide the signals required for
that job. Because many of the qualifications that must be tested under
paragraph (c) of this section are conditional (e.g., if hand signals
are to be used, the signal person must understand the Standard Method
hand signals), and the proposed rule did not specify any content for
the documentation, the documentation provided by a third-party
qualified evaluator under Option (1) of this section might simply have
generally noted the satisfactory completion of testing in accordance
with Sec. 1926.1428(c). In that case, under the proposed rule, an
operator preparing for a job requiring the use of hand signals would
not have been able to use that documentation as intended to determine
whether the signalperson knew and understood the Standard Method for
hand signals. Under the final rule, the operator will be able to make
that determination quickly because the documentation must specify
whether the signalperson was examined on hand signals. This requirement
is not intended to require significant detail, such as specifying that
the signalperson knows the hand signals for ``hoist'' or ``stop.''
Rather, it is intended to identify satisfactory completion of testing
on different categories of signals, such as hand signals, radio
signals, or flag signals.
Paragraph (b) of this section addresses circumstances in which a
signal person who had been qualified under Sec. 1926.1428(a)
subsequently acts in a manner that indicates that he or she may not
meet the qualification requirements. Such an indication would result,
for example, where the use of Standard Method signals have been agreed
to but the signal person does not give a Standard Method signal.
Another example would be where the signal person gives inappropriate
signals (such as indicating to the operator to boom up when the action
that is needed is to hoist up).
In such circumstances the employer is prohibited from allowing the
individual to continue working as a signal person until he or she is
re-trained and has been requalified in accordance with Sec.
1926.1428(a). No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c) of this section sets forth the qualification
requirements for signal persons. Paragraph (c)(1) requires that the
signal person know and understand whatever signal method will be used
for that particular job site.
In addition, if hand signals are used, the signal person must know
and understand the Standard Method for hand signals. Hand signals are
widely used in this industry. As discussed above with respect to Sec.
1926.1419(c), C-DAC determined that accidents due to miscommunication
could be reduced if there were more widespread use of standardized hand
signals. C-DAC concluded that this provision will promote greater use
of standardized hand signals through the use of the Standard
Method.\124\ No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\124\ As discussed above with respect to Sec. 1926.1419(c),
there are circumstances when it would be permissible to use hand
signals other than the Standard Method signals. Also, under Sec.
1926.1419, signals other than hand signals can be used.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (c)(2) of this section will help prevent miscommunication
between the signal person and the crane operator by requiring the
signal person to be competent in the application of whatever signals
are used. No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)(3) of this section requires the signal person to have
a basic understanding of crane operation
[[Page 48031]]
and limitations, including crane dynamics involved in swinging and
stopping loads and boom deflection from hoisting loads. As explained in
the proposed rule preamble, it is critical that the signal person
understand how the crane and load will move in response to the various
signals he or she gives so that the signal person will give the most
appropriate signals and reduce the occurrence of struck-by, crushed-by
and other hazards (see 73 FR 59823, Oct. 9, 2008). No comments were
received on this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)(4) of this section specifies that signal persons must
know and understand the relevant requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1419-
1926.1422, which address the types of signals that may be used and the
circumstances surrounding their use, and the requirements of Sec.
1926.1428. C-DAC included the phrase ``relevant requirements'' to make
clear that a signal person's qualification could be limited with
regards to the use of a particular type of signal and associated
information.
For example: A crane operation is going to use Standard Method hand
signals. The signal person knows and understands all aspects of Sec.
1926.1419 that are relevant when using hand signals, as well as Sec.
1926.1422, Signals--hand signal chart. In addition, the signal person
meets the requirements in Sec. 1926.1428(c)(1) and (2) with respect to
the use of Standard Method hand signals. The signal person also has the
knowledge necessary to meet the provision in Sec. 1926.1428(c)(3), and
demonstrates through a verbal or written test, and through a practical
test, that he/she has this knowledge and capabilities. However, the
signal person is unfamiliar with the contents of Sec. 1926.1420,
Signals--radio, telephone or other electronic transmission of signals,
or of Sec. 1926.1421, Signals--voice signals--additional requirements.
In this example, it would be appropriate for the signal person to
be qualified under either Option (1) or Option (2) of this section (see
1926.1428(a)) so long as that qualification was limited to signaling
with Standard Method hand signals. Since the signal person would be
qualified only for Standard Method signaling, there would be no need
for that person to have the knowledge or capabilities associated with
other types of signaling. In such a situation employers, though, would
be precluded from using such a person if other types of signals were to
be used. No comments were received on this provision; it is promulgated
as proposed.
Paragraph (c)(5) of this section would require that the signal
person pass knowledge and practical tests to demonstrate that he or she
meets the qualification requirements. The knowledge test may be either
oral or written. C-DAC noted that signal persons normally need not read
or write to perform their jobs effectively. No comments were received
on this provision. Therefore, OSHA agrees with C-DAC that administering
the knowledge test orally, without a separate demonstration of
literacy, should be permitted. The provision is promulgated as
proposed, with one minor grammatical correction.
Section 1926.1429 Qualifications of Maintenance and Repair Workers
This section addresses the qualifications that the workers who
maintain and repair cranes/derricks must possess. Subpart N of this
part at former Sec. 1926.550 contained no provisions concerning the
qualifications of maintenance and repair workers.
The Committee had two basic concerns regarding maintenance and
repair work. First, it was aware of accidents that had occurred when
the equipment that was being maintained or repaired was operated
improperly. For example, a maintenance worker who booms down a mobile
hydraulic crane to one side without following the manufacturer's
instructions for deploying outriggers may overturn the equipment. C-DAC
concluded that placing restrictions on equipment operations during such
work would help prevent such accidents.
Second, the Committee sought to avoid hazards that can result from
maintenance and repair work that is done improperly by ensuring that
maintenance and repair workers are sufficiently qualified to perform
their work. For example, if a load-bearing component is removed for
maintenance or repair and re-installed incorrectly, unintended movement
of the load or even a collapse could occur during operations.
Paragraph (a)
The Committee was aware that maintenance and repair workers
sometimes need to operate equipment to perform maintenance, inspect the
equipment, or verify the performance of the equipment. This work
typically involves operating the equipment to get access to components,
diagnose problems and check repairs.
C-DAC did not determine it necessary for maintenance, inspection
and repair personnel to meet the requirements in proposed Sec.
1926.1427, Operator qualification and certification, when operating
equipment for such purposes. The operations involved for these purposes
are almost always done without a load on the hook. The only instance
when there is a load on the hook is if the equipment is load tested.
However, even when load testing, the operation is very limited, since
the load is not moved about as it would be during normal crane
operations.
While such limited operation does not, in C-DAC's view, necessitate
the maintenance, inspection or repair personnel to meet the proposed
Sec. 1926.1427 requirements, a failure to operate the equipment
properly even in these limited circumstances can result in accidents
from, for example, unintended movement or tip-over. OSHA agrees, and is
therefore permitting maintenance and repair workers to operate
equipment during their work only under specific restrictions designed
to ensure safety.
Specifically, under paragraph (a)(1) of this section, maintenance
and repair workers are permitted to operate the equipment only to the
extent necessary to perform maintenance, inspect the equipment, or
verify its performance. Under this provision, maintenance and repair
workers are not permitted to operate the equipment during regular
operations.
Paragraph (a)(2) of this section requires the maintenance and
repair worker who operates equipment to either (i) do so under the
direct supervision of an operator who meets the requirements of Sec.
1926.1427, Operator qualification and certification, or (ii) be
familiar with the operation, limitations, characteristics and hazards
associated with the type of equipment involved.
Paragraph (b)
In light of the safety hazards that could result from maintenance
and repairs that are performed improperly, C-DAC determined that it was
necessary for maintenance and repair workers to meet the ``qualified
person'' criteria. OSHA agrees. Paragraph (b) of this section therefore
provides that maintenance and repair personnel must meet the definition
of a qualified person with respect to the equipment and maintenance/
repair tasks they perform. As defined in Sec. 1926.1401, a ``qualified
person'' is ``a person who, by possession of a recognized degree,
certificate, or professional standing, or who by extensive knowledge,
training, and experience, successfully demonstrated the ability to
solve/resolve problems relating to the subject matter, the work, or the
project.''
[[Page 48032]]
Two commenters requested that maintenance and repair workers be
certified by a third party. (ID-0061; -0156.1.) As noted in the
preamble to the proposed rule and again here, C-DAC considered the
requirements for maintenance and repair workers and found that the term
``qualified person'' would adequately address these concerns. OSHA
agrees, and is promulgating paragraph (b) without substantive change.
OSHA is substituting the word ``must'' for ``shall'' in the last
sentence of that paragraph to avoid any implication that a maintenance
and repair worker is, by definition, a qualified person.
Section 1926.1430 Training
With a few exceptions, the requirements in this final rule for this
section are the same as those in the proposed rule (see 73 FR 59939,
Oct. 9, 2008). This section both references training criteria required
by other sections of subpart CC and sets forth additional training
criteria and requirements. Additionally, Sec. 1926.1430(h) requires
employers to evaluate employees' understanding of the training.
The Agency determined that both training and testing of certain
employees are critical to the safety of crane/derrick use in
construction.\125\ The requirements of this section and subpart with
respect to training do not replace those established by Sec. 1926.21,
Safety training and education, which requires the employer to (1)
``establish and supervise programs for the education and training of
employers and employees in the recognition, avoidance and prevention of
unsafe conditions in employments covered by the [OSH] Act,'' and (2)
``instruct each employee in the recognition and avoidance of unsafe
conditions and the regulations applicable to his work environment to
control or eliminate any hazards or other exposure to illness or
injury.'' Instead, they supplement and clarify the general training
requirements for particular conditions and activities. These specific
provisions ensure that employees have the necessary knowledge and skill
to work safely with and around cranes. Greater specificity highlights
the particular tasks (and the hazards associated with them) for which
certain types of training are necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\125\ With respect to operator testing, as discussed in
connection with Sec. 1926.1427, Operator qualification and
certification, this standard places special emphasis on ensuring
that equipment operators have acquired the knowledge and skills
necessary to operate their equipment safely. This standard also
includes specific assessment requirements for signal persons (see
Sec. 1926.1428(a)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Agency is also clarifying in Sec. 1926.1430 that employers
have a duty to train each employee covered by subpart CC, and to
provide that training at no cost to the employee. In the introductory
text to proposed Sec. 1926.1430, the Agency specified that the
employer ``shall provide'' all applicable training, which was included
to indicate that the employer would bear the cost of training. This is
consistent with the Agency's treatment of training costs in the
preliminary economic analysis provided in the preamble for the proposed
rule. (See, e.g., 73 FR 59895, Oct. 9, 2008 (operator certification
training treated as cost to employer).) In the final rule, OSHA is
rewording each of the training requirements to further clarify the
employer's responsibilities with respect to all training requirements
under subpart CC, and is adding new Sec. 1926.1430(g)(3) to expressly
state that employers must provide all training at no cost to the
employee.
Several commenters recommended that additional training be
required. (ID-0126.1; -0156.1;-0182.1; -0209.1.) One suggested that
maintenance and repair personnel be certified by either the
manufacturer or an independent third party that they are trained in the
maintenance and repair of the crane. (ID-0156.1.) However, under Sec.
1926.1429(b), maintenance and repair employees are required to be
qualified persons. Those employees must be trained on the requirements
of subpart CC as required by Sec. 1926.1430(d) and must have the
education or experience to be considered a qualified person as defined
in Sec. 1926.1401. This commenter has not presented evidence showing
that manufacturer or third party certification would significantly
improve the qualifications of maintenance and repair personnel who meet
the test of ``qualified person.''
Another commenter felt additional hazard awareness training should
be required for employees. (ID-0182.1.) OSHA determines that the
training requirements of this and other sections of subpart CC, along
with Sec. 1926.21, provide for adequate training of all employees and
allow employers flexibility to provide training as needed for each
employee at various worksites.
Proposed Sec. 1926.1430(a), Overhead powerlines, stated that
employees listed in Sec. 1926.1408(g) must be trained accordance with
the requirements of that paragraph. As discussed in Sec. 1926.1410,
OSHA has added Sec. 1926.1410(m), which requires that operators and
crew assigned to work with equipment that comes closer to power lines
than the minimum clearance distance permitted under Sec. Sec.
1926.1408 and 1926.1409, must also be trained in accordance with Sec.
1926.1408(g). To accommodate this change, Sec. 1926.1430(a) also
includes a reference to Sec. 1926.1410(m).
Under paragraph (b) of this section, Signal persons, employees
assigned to work as signal persons and need training to meet the
requirements of Sec. 1926.1428(c) must be trained in the areas
addressed in that paragraph. As discussed in Sec. 1926.1428(c), each
employee who serves as a signal person must pass a verbal or written
test, and a practical test demonstrating the required knowledge and
skills. One commenter believes the training requirement outlined in
this paragraph could be interpreted to mean that only training is
required and the qualification requirements of Sec. 1926.1428 are not
applicable. (ID-0292.1.) This is incorrect. This paragraph requires an
employer to ensure the employee assigned as a signal person receives
training, or re-training if needed, to be a signal person according to
Sec. 1926.1428. This is not a replacement for the qualification
requirements of Sec. 1926.1428. This provision is promulgated as
proposed except for the clarification of the employer's duty to train
each employee.
Proposed paragraph (c) of this section was entitled Operators, and
set forth training requirements for operators of equipment covered by
this subpart. Proposed Sec. 1926.1430(c)(1) stated that ``operators
who are not qualified or certified under Sec. 1926.1427 shall be
trained in the areas addressed in Sec. 1926.1427(j). * * *''
Several commenters believed that the language of proposed Sec.
1926.1430(c)(1) indicated that operators who have not been qualified or
certified under Sec. 1926.1427 may nonetheless operate cranes. (ID-
0156.1; -0182.1; -0208.1; -0292.1.) One commenter noted it could be
interpreted to mean that certification was not required, only training.
(ID-0182.1.)
Such interpretations are contrary to the Agency's intent. OSHA used
the word ``operator'' in the proposed Sec. 1926.1427(c) to refer to
any employee, with the exception of maintenance and repair workers, who
operates equipment, whether or not that employee has completed all
necessary training. It has the same meaning when used in final Sec.
1926.1427(c).
Proposed paragraph (c)(1) was intended to apply to operator
trainees who must be qualified or certified under Sec. 1926.1427 to
operate equipment, but
[[Page 48033]]
are not yet qualified or certified. Also in this category are employees
who need training to become re-qualified or re-certified, or who failed
to pass a qualification or certification test and need additional
training. Such employees are only permitted to operate cranes under the
conditions specified in Sec. 1926.1427(f), and the proposed rule
required them to be trained in the operator certification/qualification
criteria provided in Sec. 1926.1427(j).
Because the certification and qualification requirements of Sec.
1926.1427 will not be phased in until four years after the effective
date of the standard, see Sec. 1926.1427(k), OSHA specified in the
preamble to proposed paragraph (c)(1) that operator training during
this phase-in period would likewise be required to address the criteria
in Sec. 1926.1427(j) (see 73 FR 59826, Oct. 9, 2008).
To clarify its intent in the final rule OSHA has split proposed
paragraph (c)(1) of this section into three separate paragraphs, (c)(1)
through (3), and renumbered proposed (c)(2) as (c)(4). Revised
paragraph (c)(1) is intended to apply after the four-year phase in
period to employees who must be certified, or qualified, under Sec.
1926.1427 and are training to do so for the first time, and to
employees who are training for re-certification/re-qualification. These
employees, who will only be permitted to operate the equipment as
``operators in training'' and subject to several conditions, must be
trained in the areas addressed in Sec. 1926.1427(j) (criteria for
operator certification testing).
Paragraph (c)(1) also requires employers to provide the necessary
additional training if the operator-in-training does not pass a
qualification or certification test. C-DAC determined, and OSHA agrees,
that it is important for an employer to provide the training necessary
for its operators to be qualified or certified as required by this
subpart.
C-DAC selected the criteria in Sec. 1926.1427(j) as the minimum
knowledge and skill requirements necessary for safe operation of
equipment. OSHA is therefore requiring training in the same areas to
ensure consistency with the certification/qualification process and to
develop the trainee's knowledge and skills in the areas that the record
reflects are critical to the safe operation of equipment.
New paragraph (c)(2) addresses training during the 4-year phase-in
period in the same way for the same people as in paragraph (c)(1): Each
must be trained in the areas addressed in Sec. 1926.1427(j). Although
the certification/qualification requirements do not apply until four
years after the effective date of this standard, OSHA concludes that it
makes sense for two reasons to train employees in the same areas that
they will need to master to pass the certification/qualification
examinations: (1) It will facilitate their preparation for the
examination, and (2) these areas have been identified in the record as
the minimum knowledge and skill sets that all operators should possess.
Paragraph (c)(3) applies to operators of equipment covered by this
subpart but are expressly excepted from the certification and
qualification requirements of Sec. 1926.1427. This includes those
operators for whom the qualification or certification requirements of
Sec. 1926.1427 do not apply based on the type of equipment being
operated. Section 1926.1427(a) provides: ``Exceptions: Operator
qualification or certification under this section is not required for
operators of derricks (see Sec. 1926.1436), sideboom cranes (see Sec.
1926.1440), and equipment with a maximum manufacturer-rated hoisting/
lifting capacity of 2,000 pounds or less (see Sec. 1926.1441).'' For
the same reasons that the Agency has concluded that the operator
certification/qualification criteria in Sec. 1926.1427 are not
appropriate for these operators, the Agency concludes that training on
the same Sec. 1926.1427(j) criteria would also not be necessary.
Instead, these operators, must be trained in the safe operation of the
type of equipment they will be operating.
Proposed paragraph (c)(2) has been renumbered in the final rule as
paragraph (c)(4). Final rule paragraph (c)(4) applies to all persons
operating equipment under subpart CC, regardless of whether that person
must be certified or qualified under Sec. 1926.1427, and regardless of
whether it is during or after the four-year phase-in period, and
requires operators to be trained in two practices that C-DAC deemed
worthy of specific emphasis for the safe operation of any equipment.
Paragraph (c)(4)(i) requires training in the testing of the boom hoist
brake on friction equipment prior to moving a boom off a support to
determine whether the brake requires adjustment or repair. The purpose
of this procedure is to ensure that the brake is sufficient before the
boom is at too great an angle or height. Using this procedure, if the
brake is deficient, the boom will fall only a short distance. This
provides an additional safety measure related to the hazards resulting
from an uncontrolled boom. Moving the boom when the brake is not
working properly can result in uncontrolled lowering of the boom, which
can endanger workers in the proximity of the hoisting equipment.
Paragraph (c)(4)(i) also requires similar training for testing the
brake on all other equipment with a boom. Again, this procedure
provides an additional safety measure related to the hazards resulting
from an uncontrolled boom. For clarity, the Agency has added a
reference to Sec. Sec. 1926.1417(f) and (j) for additional
requirements related to tag-out procedures and communication for any
necessary repairs. See discussion of these requirements above at
Sec. Sec. 1926.1417(f) and (j).
Paragraph (c)(4)(ii) requires the operator to be trained in the
manufacturer's emergency procedures, when available, for stopping
unintended equipment movement. This provides another level of
protection to minimize employee injury resulting from unintended
equipment movement. OSHA recognizes that manufacturer's emergency
procedures for halting unintended equipment movement may not always be
available and therefore this training is required only when the
procedures are available.
One commenter requested that more specialized training, such as
model-specific training, should be required for newly hired operators
or operators assigned to new or different models of equipment. (ID-
0199.1.) OSHA determines that the rule addresses this commenter's
concern. An operator qualified or certified under Sec. 1926.1427 has
shown that he/she is qualified to operate any type of equipment covered
by the qualification/certification. Others must be trained in the type
of equipment they are operating under paragraph (c) of this section.
Paragraph (d) of this section, Competent persons and qualified
persons, requires competent persons and qualified persons to be trained
regarding the requirements of this subpart applicable to their
respective roles.
A person assigned by an employer to be a ``competent person'' or
``qualified person'' under this rule must already have had a certain
level of training (or, in the case of a competent person, either
training or experience) to meet the criteria applicable to such a
designation. This paragraph does not address such training--it does not
require the employer to provide the training needed for an employee to
meet the criteria to become a competent or qualified person. The sole
purpose of this paragraph is to require the employer to ensure that
both competent persons and qualified persons are trained on the
requirements of this subpart applicable to the person's role and
responsibility. For example,
[[Page 48034]]
under Sec. 1926.1430(d), a ``competent person'' assigned to conduct
shift inspections required in Sec. 1926.1412(d) must be trained in the
required elements of a shift inspection. This training is necessary to
ensure that the competent person or qualified person is aware of his/
her role under this subpart regarding finding/correcting hazardous
conditions.
Another example is maintenance and repair personnel, who may
operate equipment under limited conditions necessary to perform the
maintenance or repair (see Sec. 1926.1429(a)). Such an employee must
be a ``qualified person,'' Sec. 1926.1429(b), and must be trained in
accordance with Sec. 1926.1430(d) to operate the equipment as
necessary to perform the maintenance or repair. The Agency notes,
however, that maintenance and repair workers are not considered
``operators'' for the purposes of paragraph (c) of this section and are
therefore not required to be trained in all of the areas addressed in
Sec. 1926.1427(j), or as required under Sec. 1926.1427(c)(3).
No comments were received on this paragraph; it is promulgated
without change from the proposed rule except for the clarification of
the employer's duty to train each employee.
Paragraph (e) of this section, Crush/pinch points, provides that
employees who work with equipment covered by this subpart must be
instructed to stay clear of holes, crush/pinch points and the hazards
that are addressed in Sec. 1926.1424, Work area control. See the
discussion above of hazards and requirements addressed by Sec.
1926.1424. No comments were received on this provision, and it is
promulgated as proposed except for the clarification of the employer's
duty to train each employee.
Paragraph (f) of this section, Tag-out, states that operators and
other employees authorized to start or energize equipment or operate
equipment controls (such as maintenance and repair workers) must be
trained according to the tag-out and start-up procedures in Sec.
1926.1417(f) and (g). See the discussion above of these procedures in
Sec. 1926.1417.
On review of this paragraph, OSHA determines that a reference to
the start-up procedures was inadvertently omitted in the text of the
proposed rule since these employees are ``authorized to start/energize
equipment.'' OSHA has corrected this omission in the final rule by
adding a reference to start-up procedures in Sec. 1926.1417(g) in the
regulatory text.
Paragraph (g) of this section requires employers to ensure that
employees understand the required training and provide refresher
training when necessary. Specifically, Sec. 1926.1430(g)(1) requires
the employee to be evaluated to verify that he/she understands the
information provided in training required by this subpart. The Agency
determined that, to ensure that the training is effective, some means
of assessment for understanding is needed.
One commenter believed this requirement was unclear and did not
understand how an employer would determine if training was effective.
(ID-0232.1.) This commenter also indicated that it could be interpreted
that a test would always be required to determine whether training had
been effective.
The Agency purposely does not use the term ``test'' in this
paragraph. ``Test'' may be interpreted to mean a standardized written
or a structured oral exam, which may not be appropriate for all
situations. OSHA determines the method of evaluating an employee's
training for effectiveness will vary by the subject matter of the
training and the employee, and the Agency has therefore drafted this
paragraph to provide sufficient flexibility for the employer to
determine the most appropriate method of evaluation. Any number of
methods could be used to determine if an employee has understood the
training provided. For example, during assembly/disassembly a certain
method of blocking may be needed. The supervisor trains and instructs
the employee on the proper method. The supervisor can then evaluate the
employee's comprehension of training in a number of ways. One way could
be simply to ask the employee to orally describe how he/she would do
this task, or to have the employee physically emulate the blocking
method. Another would be to provide blocking to the employee and ask
the employee to arrange the blocking in the proper manner. Either
method can give the supervisor the necessary information to determine
if the employee understood the proper method or if additional training
is required.
Another commenter recommended the incorporation by reference of
ANSI/ASSE Z490.1-2001 for how to test trainees. (ID-0178.1.) Much of
sec. 6.2 of that standard reflects the same concepts referred to above
and may be useful to employers. However, a ``Note'' to sec. E6.2.2
suggests that self-evaluations may be adequate. OSHA does not conclude
that a self-evaluation is appropriate to meet the requirements of Sec.
1926.1430(g)(1). While other aspects of the ANSI/ASSE standard may be
useful as a guide to employers, it is not drafted in a way that is
suitable for enforcement of this provision. For these reasons, OSHA
declines to incorporate it by reference as a requirement.
Paragraph (g)(2) of this section requires the employer to provide
refresher training for an employee when, based on evaluation or
employee conduct, it is indicated that retraining is needed.
One commenter recommended a requirement for a minimum number of
continuing education courses each year for employees. (ID-0209.1.)
Another commenter recommended that refresher training be done every 3
years or earlier when based on evaluation of employee conduct. (ID-
0182.1.)
The Agency finds these comments to be unpersuasive. As proposed,
the employer is required to retrain an employee based on the
individual's conduct. OSHA determines this promotes a more effective
retraining requirement than one based on time or type of coursework.
Therefore, paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this section are
promulgated as set forth in the proposed rule. As noted above, the
Agency is adding new paragraph (g)(3) to clarify that employers are
responsible to provide the training required under subpart CC at no
cost to employees.
The following chart summarizes the location of the training
requirements in the final rule:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section Training requirement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. Sec. 1926.1408(g) and Power line safety.
1926.1410(m).
Sec. 1926.1424(a)(2)................. Swing radius hazards.
Sec. 1926.1437(c)(2)(ii)............. Swing radius hazards (floating
cranes & land cranes on
barges).
Sec. 1926.1430(e).................... Crush/pinch points (Work Area
Control).
Sec. 1926.1430(f).................... Tag-out.
Sec. 1926.1430(f).................... Start-up.
Sec. 1926.1430(d).................... Competent and Qualified
Persons.
Sec. 1926.1430(g)(2)................. Refresher training (general).
[[Page 48035]]
Sec. 1926.1430(b).................... Signal person training
(equipment with greater than
2,000 pound maximum rated
capacity).
Sec. 1926.1428(b).................... Signal person re-training.
Sec. 1926.1427(f).................... Operator-in-training.
Sec. Sec. 1926.1427(k), Operator training during
1926.1430(c)(2) and transitional period.
1926.1430(c)(4).......................
Sec. 1926.1430(c)(3)................. Operator training for equipment
where qualification or
certification is not required
by this subpart.
Sec. 1926.1430(c)(1)................. Operator training for
qualification or
certification.
Sec. 1926.1430(c)(4)(i).............. Operator training--boom hoist
brake test.
Sec. 1926.1430(c)(4)(ii)............. Operator training--emergency
procedures (halting unintended
movement).
Sec. 1926.1441(e).................... Operator training (2,000 pound
maximum rated capacity).
Sec. 1926.1441(f).................... Signal person training (2,000
pound maximum rated capacity).
Sec. 1926.1423(k).................... Fall protection training.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1926.1431 Hoisting Personnel
This section of the final rule sets forth additional requirements
when equipment is used to hoist employees. Because equipment covered by
this subpart is designed to move materials, not personnel, additional
requirements are necessary for employee safety. This section replaces
the requirements of subpart N, former Sec. 1926.550(g). Those
requirements have been effective in reducing accidents and as a result
most of the requirements have been continued in this rule. However,
while continuing most of the hoisting personnel requirements that were
in subpart N, subpart CC clarifies requirements where needed and has
added requirements for certain activities, such as hoisting personnel
in a drill shaft, as discussed below. With a few exceptions, the
requirements in this final rule are the same as those found in the
proposed rule (see 73 FR 59714, 59939-59943, Oct. 9, 2008). The
following discussion will primarily focus on the differences between
the proposed rule and this final rule.
OSHA stresses the provisions in this section are additional
requirements that must be met when equipment is used to hoist
personnel. During such use, all other applicable requirements of this
subpart must be met.
Paragraph (a)
This paragraph states that equipment may be used to hoist personnel
only when all other means of reaching the work area present a greater
hazard or is not possible because of the project's structural design or
worksite conditions. It reflects OSHA's longstanding recognition that
using cranes and derricks to lift personnel is inherently hazardous and
should only be done when it is either the least hazardous means or
when, in light of the configuration of the worksite, it is the only
means of performing required work.
This paragraph does not apply to work covered by 29 CFR part 1926
subpart R, Steel Erection. Subpart R, at Sec. 1926.753(c)(4), allows
the use of equipment to hoist personnel in a platform that complies
with subpart CC without the need for a showing that other means of
reaching the work area would create a greater hazard or is impossible.
OSHA's reasons for including this exception in subpart R are discussed
in detail in the preamble to the steel erection standard (66 FR 5196,
5209, Jan. 18, 2001).
One commenter asserted that employers engaged in work covered by 29
CFR part 1926 subpart V, Power Transmission and Distribution, should be
allowed to use equipment (with a boom attached platform) to hoist
personnel without showing that other means of reaching the work area
creates a greater hazard or is not possible. (ID-0144.1.) This
commenter bases this assertion on the premise that many manufacturers
offer a platform specifically designed to attach to the tip of the boom
which may include platform mounted controls. The commenter believes
that when using this type of platform, the equipment ``essentially
transforms the crane into a large aerial lift.''
The Agency finds this comparison unpersuasive. As stated above,
equipment covered by this section is primarily designed for hoisting
materials, not people. C-DAC concluded that it was important to
differentiate between equipment primarily designed for moving
personnel, such as an aerial lift, as compared to equipment that is
primarily designed to lift materials. In the judgment of the Committee,
a personnel platform attached to equipment covered by this section
presented a greater hazard than a machine that is designed for moving
personnel. Therefore, the proposed rule would have required an employer
to show that another means of reaching the work area presents a greater
hazard or is not possible. OSHA agrees, and is retaining the same
substantive requirement in the final rule.
Upon review of this provision, the Agency realized the use of the
word ``worksite'' in the phrase, ``conventional means of reaching the
worksite'' could be misleading. The Agency has changed the phrase to
``conventional means of reaching the work area.'' The term worksite
could be interpreted to mean the entire construction worksite. This
requirement is about an employee working in a particular area or place
on a larger worksite. OSHA finds the use of the phrase ``work area'' to
provide greater clarity. Therefore, the provision is promulgated as
proposed incorporating this terminology change.
Paragraph (b) Use of Personnel Platform
Paragraph (b)(1) of this section generally requires the use of a
personnel platform when hoisting employees and requires that criteria
specified in Sec. 1926.1431(e) be met for such platforms. Paragraph
(b)(2), Exceptions, sets forth the construction activities in which
hoisting personnel without using a personnel platform is allowed. These
activities are: hoisting employees into and out of drill shafts 8 feet
and smaller in diameter, pile-driving operations, marine worksites,
storage tanks (steel or concrete), shaft operations and chimney
operations. OSHA considers the use of a personnel platform in these
situations to be generally infeasible or more hazardous than other
means. This section contains specific requirements for hoisting
personnel during these operations at Sec. Sec. 1926.1431(o), (p), (r),
and (s), including alternatives to the use of a personnel platform.
Each of the exceptions is discussed below under the particular
paragraph related to that operation.
No comments were received on Sec. 1926.1431(b); it is promulgated
as
[[Page 48036]]
proposed except that ``must'' replaces ``shall'' to ensure that the
sentence is imperative, not merely descriptive.
Paragraph (c) Equipment Set-Up
This paragraph sets forth the basic criteria for equipment set-up
for personnel hoisting.
Paragraph (c)(1) of this section requires the equipment to be on
level, firm and stable footing. A qualified person must determine if
the footing is ``sufficiently firm and stable.'' Stable footing is
essential to minimize the hazard of the equipment tipping while
hoisting personnel. C-DAC determined that the danger of the equipment
potentially tipping when hoisting personnel justifies the need for a
qualified person to examine and approve the equipment's stability. OSHA
agrees.
Paragraph (c)(2) specifies that each outrigger must be both
extended and locked. The amount of extension must be the same for all
outriggers and also be in accordance with the manufacturer's
specifications. Proper placement and deployment of outriggers, C-DAC
concluded, is essential to prevent the hazard of equipment tipping
while hoisting personnel.
Equal extension of outriggers eliminates the hazard of the operator
forgetting that one or more outriggers has a shorter extension and
swinging into that area with a load that exceeds the crane's capacity.
The essential factor is to have each outrigger extended equally within
the manufacturer's specifications and procedures, whether it is a full
or partial extension. No comments were received on Sec. 1926.1431(c);
it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d) Equipment Criteria
This paragraph sets forth requirements for the equipment used to
hoist personnel.
Paragraph (d)(1) of this section, Capacity: Use of suspended
personnel platform, limits the total load to 50 percent of the
equipment's rated capacity and specifies that the total load includes
the hook, load line, and rigging. The 50 percent capacity limit does
not apply during equipment proof testing.
The 50 percent limit reflects C-DAC's conclusion that using this
equipment to hoist personnel requires a greater number of safety
precautions than when lifting materials. The limit provides for an
extra margin of safety to prevent overloading the equipment, which
could cause tip-over or structural collapse.
One commenter asserted that a specific boom limit of not less than
65 degrees should be added to the requirements of this paragraph. (ID-
0178.1.) The commenter did not provide any rationale for this
recommendation. Therefore, OSHA defers to C-DAC's expertise in this
area and is promulgating this provision as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(2), Capacity: Use of boom-attached personnel
platforms, establishes the load limit at 50 percent of rated capacity
for platforms that are attached to the boom. It also provides an
exception to the 50 percent capacity limit during equipment proof
testing. The same reasons for the 50 percent limit in Sec.
1926.1431(d)(1) apply here.
In the proposed rule, OSHA requested public comment on whether
additional requirements (i.e., requirements other than those specified
in the proposed rule for a suspended personnel platform) should apply
when using boom-attached personnel platforms. No comments were received
stating that this type of platform could present an additional hazard
to employees. One commenter stated that this type of platform is safer
than a suspended personnel platform. (ID-0144.1.) Since no comments or
information were received demonstrating that precautions beyond those
already proposed are needed for boom attached personnel platforms, OSHA
has not added any further requirements for this type of platform in the
final rule. Therefore, this paragraph is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(3), Capacity: Hoisting personnel without a personnel
platform, establishes the load limit at 50 percent of rated capacity.
In calculating the load, the weight of the personnel, including the
hook, load line, rigging and any other equipment that imposes a load
must be included. No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(4) requires engaging all the equipment's locking or
braking devices when the platform has reached its stationary work
position. The purpose is to minimize sudden and unintended movement or
tipping of the platform when employees have reached the work area. No
comments were received on this provision; it is promulgated as
proposed.
The provisions of paragraph (d)(5), Devices, require certain safety
devices for equipment addressed by this section (see 73 FR 59829-59830,
Oct. 9, 2008). OSHA received one comment on Sec. 1926.1431(d)(5)(i),
which stated that a boom angle indicator would not provide useful
information on an articulating crane because such cranes have up to
three boom sections at various angles and numerous combinations of boom
angles will achieve the same lifting capacities. (ID-0206.1.) OSHA
agrees that essential design of the articulating crane precludes the
use of a boom angle indicator. However, to provide some protection
against falling and tipover hazards, OSHA has determined that an
alternative device must be used on articulating cranes when they are
used to hoist personnel. As discussed under Sec. 1926.1400, Scope, the
record indicates that many articulating cranes are equipped with
automatic overload-prevention devices. Such a device provides
protection comparable to that provided by a boom angle indicator, which
helps the operator prevent the crane from becoming overloaded by
providing the boom angle information needed to apply the crane's load
chart. Because overload protection is particularly vital when equipment
is used to hoist personnel, OSHA is addressing the comment about
articulating cranes by adding Sec. 1926.1431(d)(5)(ii), which
specifies that articulating cranes must be equipped with a properly
functioning automatic overload protection device.
No comments were received on the remaining provisions of paragraph
(d)(5); they are promulgated as proposed, except that Sec. Sec.
1926.1431(d)(5)(ii)-(vi) have been renumbered as Sec. Sec.
1926.1431(d)(5)(iii)-(vii) because of the addition of new Sec.
1926.1431(d)(5)(ii). Additionally, with respect to paragraph
(d)(5)(vii), the following has been added: ``(See Sec. 1926.1417 for
tag-out and related requirements.)'' This sentence has been added to
ensure the reader is aware of the applicable tag-out and related
requirements of Sec. 1926.1417, Operation.
Paragraph (d)(6) prohibits the use of a personnel platform directly
attached to a luffing jib. In the experience of C-DAC members, a
complete prohibition of use of a boom-attached personnel platform to a
luffing jib was necessary in light of the range of motion of a luffing
jib and the fact that boom-attached personnel platforms are not
designed for attachment to a luffing jib. Thus, only a suspended type
personnel platform may be used on a luffing jib. OSHA defers to the
expertise of the Committee. No comments were received on these
provisions; they are promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (e) Personnel Platform Criteria
This paragraph establishes the minimum criteria for a personnel
platform. Paragraph (e)(1) of this section requires that both the
platform and its
[[Page 48037]]
attachment/suspension system be designed by a qualified person who
understands structural design and be designed for the particular
function of personnel hoisting. The purpose of this paragraph is to
clearly stipulate that the platform must be designed for employee
safety. This addresses the hazards of structural failure of the
platform, failure of the attachment/suspension system, and precludes
the use of designs that would be inappropriate for hoisting people.
Paragraph (e)(2) requires the system used to connect the personnel
platform to the equipment to be within 10 degrees of level. This
addresses the hazard of platform tipping by maintaining the platform
close to level.
Paragraph (e)(3) requires the platform designer to consider the
movement of employees on the platform and design the suspension system
to minimize platform tipping from such movement. The purpose is to
design the platform in such a way as to limit the likelihood of
platform tipping while employees are working from the platform.
Paragraph (e)(4) requires the platform to support its own weight
plus a minimum of five times the maximum intended load without failure.
C-DAC selected this minimum limit because it would provide an adequate
margin of safety for employee protection from structural failure of the
platform. The guardrail system and personal fall arrest system
anchorages are not subject to this requirement but instead are subject
to Sec. 1926.1431(e)(6).
Paragraph (e)(5) requires that welding of any part of the platform
or its component parts be performed by a welder who is certified and
familiar with the weld grades, types and material specified in the
particular platform's design. This requirement is designed to prevent
structural failure of the platform due to improper welding.
Paragraph (e)(6) details the requirements of the platform for
guardrails, fall arrest anchorage points and enclosure of the platform
between the toeboard and mid-rail. Proper guardrails and fall arrest
anchorage points are critical fall protection devices, and the required
platform enclosure is needed to protect employees below from falling
objects. In addition, points to which personal fall arrest systems are
attached must meet the anchorage requirements in 29 CFR part 1926
subpart M.
Paragraph (e)(7) requires the placement of a grab rail within the
entire perimeter of the personnel platform except for access gates/
doors where a grab rail can be impractical. The grab rail provides a
place for the employee to hold onto while in the platform instead of
using a guardrail as a hand hold. Using a guardrail as a hand hold
exposes the employee's hand to being smashed by external objects.
No comments were received on paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(7); they
are promulgated as proposed.
Paragraphs (e)(8)(i) and (ii), Access gates/doors, specifies that
access gates/doors must be designed to not swing outward and must also
have a mechanism that will keep the gate/door from being opened
unintentionally.
One commenter, a platform manufacturer, stated that generally their
platforms have doors that do not swing outward. (ID-0238.1.) However,
for certain custom platforms, such as a one-person platform, the size
and design of the platform makes it unsafe for a person to enter the
platform and close the gate behind the occupant when it is an inward
swinging gate. The commenter indicated that for this type of platform,
the gates are designed to swing outward to provide safe access for the
individual. To protect against accidental opening of the gate, a
positive latching system is included with an outward swinging gate.
The Agency agrees that certain types of personnel platforms could
be of a size or configuration that would necessitate an outward
swinging access gate or door to allow for safe entry and egress of an
occupant. Therefore, OSHA has revised this paragraph to include an
exception for this type of platform. When it is infeasible to have an
inward swinging gate due to the size or design of the platform, the
gate can swing outward. However, the additional feature of a positive
latching or similar system that prevents accidental opening must be
included. This conforms with the intent of this requirement to prevent
an occupant from falling from the platform due to an access gate or
door opening unexpectedly.
Paragraph (e)(9) requires adequate headroom to allow employees to
stand upright in the personnel platform. This provides adequate space
for the employee to work from the platform while keeping his/her entire
body within the platform, and contributes to greater stability during
platform movement. No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (e)(10) requires an overhead protective cover attached to
the platform when an employee is exposed to falling objects. It
mandates the overhead cover of the platform to be of such material and
design to provide visibility for both the operator and the employees on
the platform, while maintaining adequate protection from falling
objects. The reference to a wire mesh with \1/2\ inch openings is an
example of a type of material and design that could be used for the
platform cover. The nature of the worksite conditions and likely type
of falling objects determines the type of material and design needed to
protect the platform occupants. Full overhead protection (i.e., no
visibility through the protective cover) is allowed when conditions are
such that a full protective cover is necessary to protect employees
from falling objects.
Paragraph (e)(10) explicitly states that the protection provided by
the cover is supplemental to the protection provided by hard hats--the
use of hard hats does not obviate the requirement for the platform
cover.
One commenter noted that having overhead protection for employees
in the power line industry interferes with the ability to work
overhead, which is a routine occurrence. (ID-0144.) Additionally, at
the public hearing, a representative from a labor union noted that
typically an overhead cover would not be used on a personnel platform
when they are working near power lines, as it is desirable to minimize
the amount of conductive material. (ID-0344.) The Agency acknowledges
that it is common for those in the power line industry to work
overhead. However, the use of a personnel platform attached to a crane
is not the only means of reaching this work location. As noted in Sec.
1926.1431(a), the use of a personnel platform attached to a crane is
only permitted where the employer demonstrates that conventional means
of reaching the worksite, such as an aerial lift, would be either more
hazardous or impossible. OSHA notes that aerial lifts are commonly used
in utility work, and it therefore determined that crane-suspended
personnel platforms will be used rarely in such work. OSHA also notes
that paragraph (e)(10) mandates overhead protection only when an
employee is exposed to falling objects, and that should not be a common
occurrence in utility work. Therefore, the Agency does not determine
that this provision needs to make special accommodation for work near
power lines. Paragraph (e)(10) is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (e)(11) requires that all edges of the platform be smooth
enough to prevent injury. The purpose is to protect the employee from
injuries such as lacerations and puncture wounds.
Paragraph (e)(12) requires conspicuous posting of a plate or other
permanent written notice on the personnel platform listing the weight
of
[[Page 48038]]
the platform itself and the platform's rated capacity. The purpose of
the provision is to make employees aware of the platform's limits to
prevent overloading, which could result in structural failure of the
platform or equipment, and to facilitate compliance with Sec.
1926.1431(f)(1), which prohibits loading the platform in excess of its
rated capacity.
No comments were received on paragraphs (e)(11) or (e)(12); they
are promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (f) Personnel Platform Loading
Paragraph (f)(1) of this section prohibits loading the platform in
excess of its rated capacity.
Paragraph (f)(2)(i) requires the platform to be used exclusively
for personnel hoisting and not for hoisting materials. However, it does
allow the necessary materials and tools for the work activity to be
hoisted along with the employees. Using a personnel platform to hoist
materials can lead to damage of the platform due to materials shifting
or excessive loading. This can subject the platform to structural
stresses that may not be visible and contribute to platform structural
failure.
Paragraph (f)(2)(ii) provides an exception to paragraph (f)(2)(i)
to allow materials and tools on the personnel platform during the trial
lift as long as the materials/tools are properly secured and
distributed as specified in Sec. 1926.1431(f)(3).
Paragraphs (f)(3)(i) and (ii) require that any materials and tools
that are on the platform during the hoist be secured, and evenly
distributed within the platform itself while the platform is suspended.
These precautions are designed to prevent platform tipping and injury
to employees due to movement of materials or tools during the hoist.
OSHA concludes that the combination of paragraphs (f)(2)(ii) and (f)(3)
strikes the appropriate balance by accommodating the practical
requirements of the job while reducing the potential for overloading.
No comments were received on paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(3); they
are promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (f)(4) limits the number of employees on a personnel
platform to the lesser of either the number needed to perform the work
or the maximum number for which the platform was designed. The purpose
is to expose the fewest possible number of employees to the hazards
presented when hoisting personnel and to minimize the load on the
platform to the extent possible.
One commenter stated that boom attached personnel platforms should
be limited to a maximum of 4 employees. (ID-0178.1.) Because no reason
was provided to support this requirement, OSHA has not changed the
requirement that the maximum number of employees on a platform is
limited to the lesser of the number the platform was designed to hold
or the number required to perform the work. Therefore, paragraph (f)(4)
is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (g) Attachment and Rigging
Paragraph (g)(1) of this section establishes the requirements for
the device used to connect the personnel platform to the hoist line.
The nature and type of connector used is critical to the overall
safety of the suspended personnel platform. Under this paragraph, a
hook used to connect the hoist line and personnel platform must be the
type that can be closed/locked and must be closed/locked when attached
to the platform. When a shackle is used in lieu of a hook, it must be
of the alloy anchor type with either: A bolt, nut and retaining pin in
place; or: The screw type with the screw pin secured against accidental
removal. Any detachable device other than a shackle or hook that is
used must be closable and lockable to the same extent a hook or shackle
would be when in compliance with this section. When used to connect the
personnel platform, such a device must be closed and locked to ensure
that the platform is secured to the hoist line.
Paragraph (g)(2) requires that each bridle leg in a rope bridle be
connected to the master link/shackle in a manner that allows the
platform's load to be equally distributed among each bridle leg. The
purpose of this type of attachment is to avoid platform tipping.
Paragraph (g)(3) requires that all hardware used for rigging must
be able to support five times the maximum intended load applied to or
transmitted to that component. Additionally, slings using rotation
resistant rope must have a safety factor of ten. These measurements
continue the requirements that were in former Sec.
1926.550(g)(4)(iv)(C).
Paragraph (g)(4) requires the eyes in wire rope slings to be
fabricated with thimbles. The purpose of this requirement is to prevent
excessive wear to the eyes and possible failure of the platform's
rigging.
No comments were received on paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4); they
are promulgated as proposed with minor grammatical clarifications.
Paragraph (g)(5) requires that bridles and rigging used to suspend
the personnel platform be used exclusively for hoisting personnel
operations. Rigging components must be dedicated for the sole use of
personnel hoisting to help ensure that they are not damaged. Materials
hoisting can lead to damage of the rigging components due to material
shifting or excessive loading. This can make the rigging components
susceptible to structural stress that may not be visible, yet
contribute to failure. To clarify that the bridles and rigging used for
hoisting personnel may only be used if they have not ever been used for
other operations prior to being designated for the purpose of hoisting
personnel, OSHA has modified the regulatory text from the proposed rule
to state that the bridles and rigging ``must not have been used for any
purpose other than hoisting personnel.''
Paragraph (h) Trial Lift and Inspection
Paragraph (h)(1) of this section requires a trial lift without
occupants and with the platform loaded to at least the anticipated
liftweight. The purpose of the trial lift is to confirm that: The lift
set-up works properly; the lift route is free of obstacles; the work
location is accessible; no work location will place the crane or
derrick in such a configuration where the intended load would exceed 50
percent of the equipment's rated capacity; the soil or other supporting
surface is stable; and that the lift route is suitable for the intended
lift. The path of the trial lift must begin at the point the employees
enter the platform and end at the ultimate location the platform is
being hoisted to and positioned (end point). When there are multiple
destination locations from a single set-up point, the trial lift must
be conducted in one of two ways.
First, individual lifts may be conducted in which the platform is
moved to one of the end points from the starting point, returned to the
starting point, moved to a second end point, again returned to the
starting point, and the process repeated until each end point has been
reached. Alternatively, a single lift may be conducted from the
starting point to all of the end points in sequence, without returning
to the starting point until after the last end point has been reached.
OSHA determined that the phrase ``a single trial lift for all
locations'' in the text of the proposed rule for Sec. 1926.1431(h)(1),
based on C-DAC consensus language, was not sufficiently clear to
describe the intended meaning of this requirement (see 73 FR 59714,
59940-59941, Oct. 9, 2008). In addition, OSHA was concerned that
allowing the trial lift to be conducted in either of these two ways,
irrespective of how the personnel will actually be hoisted, may
[[Page 48039]]
result in the trial lift failing to reveal problems that would be
encountered in the actual personnel lift.
To address these concerns, OSHA suggested language in the preamble
to the proposed rule to clarify that the employer must use a lift path
and sequence of stops in the trial lift that will match the lift path
and sequence of stops when actually hoisting personnel. As noted above,
the purpose is to detect any problems that could arise before personnel
are hoisted. OSHA asked for public comment on these issues and the
suggested language (73 FR 59714, 59833, Oct. 9, 2008).
Two commenters stated that the language in the proposed rule was
sufficient and should not be changed (ID-0205.1; -0213.1); another
commenter stated that the text suggested by OSHA in the preamble to the
proposed rule should be used in the final rule (ID-0104.1). The Agency
concludes this suggested text provides a better description of what
needs to be done to ensure safety--i.e., that the trial lift method
needs to match the actual hoist method. Therefore, the provision in the
final rule includes this suggested language.
Paragraph (h)(2) requires the trial lift to take place immediately
prior to each shift when hoisting personnel, and each time the
equipment is moved and set up in a new location or a previously used
location. This is to ensure that the conditions for the trial lift will
be nearly identical to those of the actual personnel lift.
Additionally, a trial lift must be done each time the lift route is
changed, unless a competent person determines the new lift route does
not present new factors affecting safety.
Paragraph (h)(3) requires a competent person to ensure that all
required safety devices and operational aids required by this section
are activated and properly functioning, that nothing interferes with
the equipment or personnel platform during the trial lift, that the
lift load does not exceed 50 percent of the equipment's rated capacity,
and that the load radius used is accurately determined. These
requirements ensure that necessary safety measures are in place and
validated by a competent person for the trial lift. It is important for
this to be the responsibility of a competent person because such a
person not only has the knowledge necessary to make the determinations,
but also has the authority to take any necessary corrective action.
Paragraph (h)(4) establishes the duties of the competent person
immediately after the trial lift. It requires the competent person to
conduct a visual inspection of the personnel platform and equipment to
determine if there is any problem or defect resulting from the trial
lift or if it produced any adverse effect. In addition, the competent
person must ensure that the test weight used during the trial lift has
been removed prior to personnel loading.
The purpose of these requirements is to ensure that any defects in
the equipment, base support, or ground and personnel platform, revealed
by the trial lift are seen by a competent person prior to hoisting
personnel. (Note that, under Sec. 1926.1431(h)(6), any condition found
during the trial lift that fails to meet a requirement of this standard
or otherwise constitutes a safety hazard must be corrected before
hoisting personnel.) Paragraph (h)(4) continues the requirements from
former Sec. 1926.550(g)(5)(iv) while adding the requirement that the
competent person ensure that the test weight is removed. This is needed
because overloading the personnel platform can occur if the test
weights are not removed and left on the platform when hoisting
personnel.
No comments were received on Sec. Sec. 1926.1431(h)(2) through
(h)(4); they are promulgated as proposed.
Under paragraph (h)(5)(i), immediately prior to each personnel
lift, the competent person must inspect the platform while it is lifted
a few inches to ensure that the platform is secure and properly
balanced.
The purpose of this procedure is to ensure that, with the occupants
and materials/tools to be hoisted on the platform immediately before
the hoist is to take place, the platform is secure and properly
balanced. The purpose of having the occupants and materials/tools on
board during this check is twofold. First, it ensures that the check
takes place just before the personnel lift, which minimizes the chance
that damage or other problems affecting the platform's security will
occur after the check. In addition, it would be difficult to ensure
that the platform will be properly balanced when in actual use without
having the employees and materials/tools on board.
In the proposed rule, the text did not state that personnel and
materials were to be on board during the trial lift (see 73 FR 59941,
Oct. 9, 2008). In the preamble to the proposed rule, the Agency asked
for comment on adding the phrase ``with the personnel and materials/
tools on board'' to clarify the intent of this requirement (see 73 FR
59833, Oct. 9, 2008).
Three comments were received in response to the Agency's request
for comment on this issue. (ID-0104.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) All three
commenters agreed with the Agency's suggested revision. Therefore, the
final rule reflects this change in Sec. 1926.1431(h)(5)(i).
Paragraph (h)(5)(ii) requires a competent person to determine that
hoist ropes are free of defects, that multiple part lines are not
twisted around each other, and that the primary attachment is centered
over the platform. If the load rope is slack, the competent person must
inspect the hoisting system to ensure the rope lines are properly
seated on drums and in sheaves. Paragraphs (i) and (ii) continue the
requirements from former Sec. 1926.550(g)(5)(iii), with the additional
clarification that hoist ropes must be free of deficiencies (that is,
not just free of ``kinks,'' as was required in former Sec.
1926.550(g)(5)(iii)(A)). The purpose of these requirements is to
mandate an additional final review by a competent person to evaluate
the personnel platform, the balance of the load, and the lifting
devices to ensure that necessary safety requirements are met.
No comments were received on Sec. 1926.1431(h)(5) (ii); it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (h)(6) establishes that any condition that fails to meet
the requirements of this standard or otherwise creates a safety hazard
must be corrected before personnel are hoisted. This includes
conditions found during the trial lift or in any inspection or
subsequent review of the equipment, platform or rigging. No comments
were received for this provision. However, the following reference has
been added to this provision for clarification: ``(See Sec. 1926.1417
for tag-out and related requirements.).'' This sentence has been added
to ensure the employer is aware of the applicable tag-out and related
requirements of Sec. 1926.1417, Operation.
Paragraph (i) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (j) Proof Testing
This paragraph delineates the requirements of and method for proof
testing the personnel platform and rigging. It requires the proof test
to be done at each jobsite prior to hoisting personnel and after any
repair or modification of the platform. The proof test must be at 125
percent of the platform's rated capacity with an evenly distributed
test load. The platform must be lowered by controlled load lowering,
braked, and held in a suspended position for at least five minutes.
After this proof test, the competent person must inspect the platform
and rigging to determine if it has passed the proof test. If not, all
deficiencies that pose a safety hazard must be corrected and another
proof test performed. The competent
[[Page 48040]]
person must determine that the platform and rigging have successfully
passed the proof test before any personnel hoisting begins.
The purpose of this paragraph is to determine if the structural
integrity of the personnel platform is intact or if it has been
affected by any condition, damage, repair or modification which could
result in structural failure or other safety hazards from the platform
or rigging. This ensures the load lowering and braking mechanisms are
functioning properly before personnel are lifted. In addition, Sec.
1926.1431(j)(3) clarifies that only deficiencies that present a safety
hazard need be corrected; minor deficiencies bearing no relation to
safety do not need to be corrected.
In addition, the Agency is adding a reference to the requirements
of Sec. 1926.1417, Operation, to ensure the reader is aware of the
applicable tagout and startup requirements of Sec. 1926.1417,
Operation. Paragraph (j)(3) of this section is otherwise promulgated as
proposed.
One commenter stated that proof testing should not be required for
boom attached personnel platforms, since there is no rigging and a
simple visual inspection of the mounting hardware would be sufficient.
(ID-0144.1.)
OSHA disagrees with this comment. The purpose of this proof test is
to ensure the sufficiency and integrity of the system that will be
hoisted by the crane/derrick. In the case of a suspended platform, that
system consists of the platform and the rigging that attaches it to the
crane/derrick. In the case of a boom-attached platform, that system
consists of the platform with its boom-mounting hardware (in such cases
OSHA considers the boom-mounting hardware part of the platform itself).
Therefore, even when rigging is not used, the proof test still needs to
be performed to help ensure the adequacy of the platform, including its
attachment system.
Therefore, Sec. Sec. 1926.1431(j)(1), (2) and (4) are promulgated
as proposed.
Paragraph (k) Work practices
Paragraph (k)(1) of this section requires hoisting the personnel
platform in a slow, controlled, cautious manner, with no sudden
movements of the equipment or platform. This precaution minimizes the
likelihood of platform tipping, loss of footing, and loss of control of
the platform by the operator during hoisting.
Paragraph (k)(2)(i) requires that all occupants of the personnel
platform keep all parts of the body inside the platform while it is
being raised, lowered or moved horizontally. This does not apply when a
platform occupant must position the platform. Additionally, this does
not apply when a platform occupant is performing the duties of a signal
person. The purpose of this requirement is to prevent an employee from
having a body part struck by or caught in between the personnel
platform and another object.
Paragraph (k)(2)(ii) prohibits platform occupants from standing on,
sitting on, or working from any surface other than the floor of the
personnel platform during hoisting or when working from the platform.
It prohibits working from a railing or toeboard or the use of any means
or device to raise the employee's working height. The purpose is to
ensure that the occupants benefit from the protections of the guardrail
system and do not destabilize the platform.
Paragraph (k)(2)(iii) prohibits platform occupants from pulling the
platform out of plumb in relation to the hoisting equipment. The
purpose is to prevent tipping of the platform with employees on board,
which could exacerbate the fall hazard.
Paragraph (k)(3) requires a personnel platform that is not landed
to be secured to the structure, before employees enter or exit the
platform, to prevent dangerous movement of the platform at these times,
which could exacerbate the fall hazard or cause an employee's body part
to be struck by or caught in between the personnel platform and the
structure. Paragraph (k)(3) allows an exception when a greater hazard
is created by securing the platform to the structure.
Paragraph (k)(4) requires the operator to receive confirmation that
the platform is no longer tied to the structure and is freely suspended
before the operator moves the platform. This requirement prevents
structural damage to the platform and/or rigging and prevents the fall
hazard that could result from pulling the platform out of plumb if
there were an attempt to move it while it is still attached.
Paragraph (k)(5) requires the use of tag lines when necessary to
control the personnel platform. The purpose is to provide an additional
way to control platform stability to decrease the risk of injury from
loss of footing or from the platform striking an object.
Under paragraph (k)(6), where the platform is not equipped with any
controls, the equipment operator is required to remain at the equipment
controls at all times while the personnel platform is occupied. Because
there are no controls in the personnel platform, the equipment operator
must be available to make any necessary adjustments to protect the
employees from injury from any condition arising after the platform is
placed at the working location. Paragraph (k)(6) requires the operator
to stay at the equipment controls, and on site and in view of the
equipment, at all times the platform is occupied, whether or not the
crane engine is running. Equipment controls, as discussed here and in
Sec. 1926.1431(k)(7), include remote controls that are used to control
the boom and swing functions of the equipment. This subpart does not
prohibit the use of remote controls for equipment by an operator. See
discussion of the use of remote controls at the preamble for Sec.
1926.1417(e)(1). The Agency has added the ``on site and in view of the
equipment'' requirement in the final rule to address the situation
where the operator uses a remote control to operate the equipment. The
same requirement was included in proposed Sec. 1926.1431(k)(7) to
address the same issue, and is included in final Sec. 1926.1431(k)(7),
as discussed below.
No comments were received on paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(6); they
are promulgated as proposed with the exception of the addition noted
for (k)(6).
Paragraph (k)(7), Platforms with controls, applies when a personnel
platform has controls. Controls on certain personnel platforms enable a
platform occupant to move both the platform and the boom. Other
platform designs enable an occupant to control only the platform/basket
itself, for example, to level the basket as it is boomed up or down.
Paragraph (k)(7)(i) requires the platform occupant using the
platform's controls to be a qualified person with respect to their use,
including the safe limitations of the equipment and hazards associated
with its operation. Such knowledge and skill is essential for the
safety of the platform occupants and employees in the surrounding area.
Proposed paragraph (k)(7)(ii) required the equipment operator to be
at the equipment controls, in the personnel platform, or on site and in
view of the equipment. In the proposed rule, the Agency requested
public comment on whether this paragraph should be reworded to clarify
the circumstances for selecting a location for the equipment operator
(73 FR 59835, Oct. 9, 2008). Two commenters stated that, regardless of
which option is chosen, the operator must be in a position that allows
him to control the boom and swing functions of the equipment. (ID-
0205.1; -0213.1.) However, these commenters also stated that the
proposed regulatory text did not need to
[[Page 48041]]
be revised. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.)
Upon reviewing the paragraph as proposed and considering these
comments, OSHA finds that the language used in proposed
1926.1431(k)(7)(ii) needs to be changed to clearly specify that an
operator has to be able to control the boom and swing functions,
wherever the operator is located. If the platform does not have
controls for the boom and swing functions of the equipment, then it is
essential that the operator be at the set of equipment controls which
include these functions, because they are crucial for the safety of
personnel being hoisted. These equipment controls may be on the
platform, in the cab, or on a remote control. The operator must be able
to take immediate action when necessary (such as, for example, when
there is unexpected platform or equipment movement, a sudden change in
wind conditions, or an injury to a platform occupant). In the final
rule, OSHA has modified Sec. 1926.1431(k)(7)(ii) accordingly.
Paragraph (k)(7)(iii) requires the platform's operating manual to
be on the platform or on the equipment while the platform is occupied.
The purpose is to have ready access to manufacturer's operating
information when employees are on the platform. No comments were
received on this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (k)(8)(i), Environmental conditions--Wind, requires a
qualified person to determine if it is unsafe to hoist personnel when
the wind speed (gust or sustained) exceeds 20 mph. C-DAC selected this
triggering wind speed based in part on ASME B30.23-2005, which
prohibits personnel hoisting operations when wind speed exceeds 20 mph.
High winds increase the likelihood of platform tipping, sudden
unexpected movement of the platform, or structural failure of the
equipment. While OSHA is declining to set a specific wind speed
threshold at which all hoisting operations must cease, it agrees that
20 mph is an appropriate point at which a safety determination be
required. If the qualified person determines that hoisting personnel is
unsafe, hoisting operations must not begin or, if already in progress,
must be terminated.
One commenter questioned where and how the wind speed must be
determined. (ID-0120.) With respect to where the measurement must be
taken, the language of this provision refers to wind speed ``at the
personnel platform.'' This means that a safety determination is
required at any time at which the wind to which the platform is exposed
exceeds 20 mph, whether the platform is on the ground or suspended.
The provision does not specify any particular type of device or
protocol for taking the measurement. The Agency does not determine that
such specificity is needed; any generally accepted method that
accurately measures wind speed would suffice. Therefore, this paragraph
is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (k)(8)(ii), Environmental conditions--Other weather and
environmental conditions, requires a qualified person to determine if
it is not safe to hoist personnel when there are indications of
dangerous weather or any other impending/existing dangerous
environmental condition. Upon determination that it is unsafe,
personnel hoisting operations must not be started or must be terminated
if already in progress.
Paragraph (k)(9) requires employees being hoisted to remain in
direct communication with either the signal person (where used) or
equipment operator at all times. In some instances the platform
occupants are in a better position to see potential problems developing
than the operator, or to recognize there is some other safety-related
need for the operator to take action. In addition, there are instances
when the operator becomes aware of a developing problem and needs to
communicate that information to the employees being hoisted. This
provision ensures that such information can be communicated quickly
between the hoisted employees and operator.
No comments were received on paragraphs (k)(8)(ii) or (k)(9); they
are promulgated as proposed.
Paragraphs (k)(10)(i) and (ii), Fall protection, require employees
on the personnel platform to be provided with and use a personal fall
arrest system attached to a structural member within the personnel
platform. The fall arrest system (including the attachment point) must
comply with Sec. 1926.502, Fall protection systems criteria and
practices. When hoisting personnel over water, a personal fall arrest
system would not be required since, in the event that an error or
failure occurred resulting in the employees being in the water, being
tied-off exacerbates the drowning hazard. However, the requirements of
Sec. 1926.106, Working over or near water, do apply. Upon review of
the rule, the Agency determined that it would provide greater clarity
if the note referring to the requirements of Sec. 1926.106 was
included in paragraph (k)(10)(ii), instead of at the end of this
paragraph. The regulatory text of the final rule reflects this change.
The purpose of this requirement is to protect employees from a fall
hazard while in the personnel platform in the event of sudden movement,
tipping, or other circumstance in which a fall would not be prevented
by the platform's guardrail system.
Paragraph (k)(11)(i), Other load lines, mandates that while
hoisting personnel no other lifts may be made with any of the
equipment's other load lines. This provision serves several purposes.
First, it prevents platform tipping due to entanglement with other load
lines or loads. Second, it reduces the chance that the equipment could
be overloaded. Third, when hoisting personnel, it is essential that the
operator's full attention be devoted to the hoisted personnel; use of
another load line necessarily diverts his/her attention. An exception
applies for pile driving operations, as the pile driver is always
suspended on a load line and at times personnel have to be hoisted on
another line to conduct work during the pile driving operation.
In the preamble to the proposed rule, OSHA explained that the C-DAC
consensus language for this provision would have applied the
requirement only when personnel were suspended on a personnel platform.
However, the standard permits personnel to be hoisted without a
personnel platform under certain circumstances. Since the requirement
also needs to apply in those circumstances, OSHA expanded the language
so that, in proposed paragraph (k)(11)(i), it also applied in those
circumstances (see 73 FR 59836, Oct. 9, 2008). No comments were
received on this issue; the provision is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (k)(11)(ii), Other load lines, allows the use of a winch
line while hoisting personnel when all of the following factors are
present: the personnel platform is a factory-produced boom-mounted
personnel platform incorporating a winch as original equipment, the
load on the winch line does not exceed 500 pounds, and the load on the
winch line itself does not exceed the rated capacity of the winch and
platform. C-DAC selected these factors based on the experience of its
members, and determined that when all of these factors are present,
there is little chance that the use of the winch line will compromise
employee safety. OSHA agrees.
Paragraph (k)(12)(i), Traveling--equipment other than derricks,
prohibits any traveling by equipment with hoisted employees except in
two circumstances. The first is where the equipment is traveling on
fixed rails. The second is where the employer demonstrates that
[[Page 48042]]
there is no less hazardous way to perform the work than by traveling.
However, this second exception does not apply to rubber-tired
equipment, for which traveling is always prohibited. Traveling with
hoisted employees is also always prohibited for derricks, as set forth
under Sec. 1926.1431(k)(13). (See the discussion of these provisions
in the preamble to the proposed rule, 73 FR at 59836-59837, Oct. 9,
2008.)
No comments were received on paragraphs (k)(10), (k)(11)(ii) or
(k)(12)(i); they are promulgated as proposed. However, the note that
appeared at the end of (k)(10) has been added to (k)(10)(i) as
described above.
Paragraph (k)(12)(ii) (A)-(E), Traveling--equipment other than
derricks, establishes certain criteria that must be met when traveling
with employees in the situations permitted under paragraph (k)(12)(i).
One commenter stated the requirement to limit travel to the boom
length was unclear. (ID-0053.1.) This commenter believed it could be
interpreted to limit the length of the boom itself and not the distance
the equipment can travel. The Agency concludes the requirement as
written in the proposed rule, ``Travel shall be limited to boom
length,'' is clear. However, in the interest of providing additional
clarity, the Agency is adding the word ``equipment'' to the text of the
final rule so that it will read, ``Equipment travel must be limited to
boom length.'' The addition of this word makes it clear the focus of
the requirement is the distance of travel for the equipment.
Paragraph (k)(13), Traveling--derricks, prohibits a derrick from
traveling while it is hoisting personnel. In C-DAC's experience,
hoisting employees on a traveling derrick is dangerous because derricks
are not sufficiently stable when traveling. No comment was received on
this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (l) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (m) Pre-Lift Meeting
This paragraph requires a meeting prior to the trial lift at each
new work location to review the requirements of this section and the
procedures to be followed when hoisting personnel. The pre-lift meeting
would be attended by the equipment operator, signal person (when one is
used for the lift), employees to be hoisted, and the person responsible
for the task to be performed.
Also, this paragraph requires this meeting to be repeated when an
employee is newly assigned to the operation. The purpose of this
requirement is to make all employees involved in the personnel hoisting
operation aware of the requirements of this section and the plan for
the personnel lift. This provides an opportunity for all employees
involved to have a common and complete understanding of the hoisting
operation and to give uniform information and instructions immediately
prior to the lift. This addresses hazards which result from
misunderstanding of the requirements, particular lift conditions or
procedures. no comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (n) Hoisting Personnel Near Power Lines
This paragraph prohibits hoisting personnel within 20 feet of a
power line 350 kV and below or within 50 feet of a power line over 350
kV, except for work that is covered by 29 CFR part 1926, subpart V,
Power Transmission and Distribution.
The purpose of this requirement is to establish a safe clearance
distance from power lines to protect employees from an electrocution
hazard that could result if the personnel, a personnel platform, or
equipment makes electrical contact with a power line. The clearance
distances are similar to those in Sec. Sec. 1926.1407 and 1926.1408
for equipment operating near power lines. However, under Sec. Sec.
1926.1407 and 1926.1408, clearances less than 20 and 50 feet are
permitted for certain voltage ranges. However, C-DAC determined that
when personnel are hoisted near a power line it is necessary to require
the minimum distances of 20 feet for lines 350 kV or less and 50 feet
for lines over 350kV. Note that all other requirements in subpart CC
regarding power line safety must also be met, including Sec. Sec.
1926.1406-1409. No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (o) Hoisting Personnel in Drill Shafts
This paragraph provides requirements when hoisting personnel in
drill shafts that are 8 feet and smaller in diameter. Drill shafts of
this size may be either too small to use a personnel platform, or use
of a personnel platform might not allow the room needed to perform the
necessary work. Therefore, due to the limitations of a drill shaft of
this size, use of a personnel platform would typically be infeasible
and a boatswain's chair may be the only practical means of hoisting
personnel and performing the necessary work.
One commenter stated that personnel should not be hoisted into a
drill shaft unless the employer determined that use of a video camera
was both impractical and infeasible. (ID-0120.0.) However, this
commenter did not provide any explanation or supporting documentation
of how this would improve safety beyond what the proposed rule
required. As discussed at paragraph (a) of this section, equipment may
be used to hoist personnel only when all other means of reaching the
work area presents a greater hazard or is not possible because of the
project's structural design or worksite conditions.
Because no information was provided to justify an additional
restriction on an employer, OSHA is promulgating this provision as
proposed.
Section 1926.1431(o)(1) allows the employer to use either a
personnel platform or a boatswain's chair for hoisting personnel.\126\
When an employer elects to use a boatswain's chair instead of a
personnel platform, particular supplementary requirements in paragraph
(o)(3) must be met. Those requirements address the heightened danger
that the employee may fall from the chair or contact the wall of the
drill shaft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\126\ Note that, under Sec. 1926.1431(a), an employer may only
use equipment to hoist personnel when other means of reaching the
work area would present a greater hazard or would not be possible
because of the project's structural design or worksite conditions.
Therefore, before using either means to hoist personnel in drill
shafts, the employer would need to determine and demonstrate that
hoisting personnel instead of using other means of access to the
work area is the least hazardous, or the only, means to gain access
to the work area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (o)(2) requires the employer to follow requirements (a)
through (n) of Sec. 1926.1431 when using a personnel platform to hoist
employees.
Section 1926.1431(o)(3) sets out additional requirements that must
be met when the employer elects to use a boatswain's chair instead of a
personnel platform for hoisting personnel.
Paragraph (o)(3)(i) identifies which of the provisions in Sec.
1926.1431 (a)-(n) apply when using a boatswain's chair. For the
applicable provisions, the phrase ``boatswain's chair'' is substituted
for either ``personnel platform'' or ``platform.''
The Sec. 1926.1431 paragraphs not listed in Sec.
1926.1431(o)(3)(i) do not apply when a boatswain's chair is used. This
is because those requirements are either specifically applicable to
personnel platform design and use, or are otherwise not relevant when
hoisting personnel in a drill shaft.
Paragraph (o)(3)(ii) requires a signal person to be stationed at
the opening of
[[Page 48043]]
the shaft during personnel hoisting. The purpose is to ensure that a
signal person is used and stationed at the best position to watch the
employee being hoisted, since the hoisted employee is out of the view
of the operator.
Paragraph (o)(3)(iii) requires the employee to be hoisted in a
slow, controlled descent and ascent. This is to limit swinging or
sudden movement of the boatswain's chair to prevent a fall from the
chair or impact with the walls of the drill shaft.
Paragraph (o)(3)(iv) requires the employee in the boatswain's chair
to use personal fall arrest equipment, including a full body harness,
that is attached independent of the crane/derrick. The purpose of
requiring a tie off point independent of the equipment is to protect
the employee from a sudden drop or fall due to equipment failure or
other problem associated with the operation of the crane/derrick, and
to protect the employee from falls when accessing and egressing the
boatswain's chair.
Paragraph (o)(3)(v) requires fall protection equipment to comply
with Sec. 1926.502, Fall protection systems criteria and practices.
Paragraph (o)(3)(vi) requires the boatswain's chair (excluding the
personal fall arrest anchorages) to be capable of supporting, without
failure, its own weight plus a minimum of five times the maximum
intended load. This is similar to the requirement for personnel
platforms at Sec. 1926.1431(e)(4). The strength requirement applicable
to personal fall arrest anchorages is in Sec. 1926.502(d)(15).
Paragraph (o)(3)(vii) mandates that only one person can be hoisted
at a time when using a boatswain's chair. No comments were received on
paragraphs (o)(1)--(o)(3); they are promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (p) Hoisting Personnel for Pile Driving Operations
This paragraph provides requirements for hoisting personnel in pile
driving operations. Section 1926.1431(p)(1) requires the employer to
use either a personnel platform or boatswain's chair when hoisting
personnel in pile driving operations. As with drill shafts, use of a
personnel platform will often be infeasible in this type of operation,
and Sec. 1926.1431(p)(1) gives the employer the option of choosing
which method to use. No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Section 1926.1431(p)(2) delineates the alternatives to using an
anti two-blocking device during pile driving operations, since the
heavy vibrations of the pile driver typically damage this device. (See
Sec. 1926.1431(d)(45)(v), Anti two-block). The language C-DAC
developed for this provision did not distinguish between lattice boom
cranes and telescopic boom cranes. Its language would have required,
for either type of equipment, that the cable used to hoist personnel be
clearly marked so that they equipment operator would have sufficient
time to stop hoisting to prevent two-blocking, or to use a spotter to
warn the operator in time to prevent two-blocking. However, in
reviewing the C-DAC language, OSHA realized that marking the cable is
not a sufficient means of preventing two-blocking in telescopic boom
cranes when extending the boom because extending the boom while the
load hoist remains stationary can cause two-blocking. Instead, a
spotter is always needed to warn against two-blocking for telescopic
boom cranes.
Consequently, for the proposed rule, OSHA modified the language
used by C-DAC and addressed lattice boom cranes and telescopic boom
cranes separately. Proposed Sec. 1926.1431(p)(2) requires employers,
when using lattice boom cranes, to clearly mark the cable used to hoist
personnel at the point on the cable that allows the equipment operator
to stop hoisting in time to prevent two-blocking, or to use a spotter
to warn the operator in time to prevent two-blocking. When using
lattice boom cranes, in addition to marking the cable as above, a
spotter must also be used. (See the discussion of the proposed
provision at 73 FR 59838, Oct. 9, 2008.)
In the preamble to the proposed rule, OSHA asked for public comment
on this change to the C-DAC language, but no comments were received on
this issue. Therefore, the provision is promulgated as proposed.
Section 1926.1431(p)(3) requires the employer to follow Sec. Sec.
1926.1431(b) through (n) when using a personnel platform to hoist
employees. Section 1926.1431(a) does not apply because the employer is
not required to demonstrate that the other means of access listed in
Sec. 1926.1431(a) are infeasible before being permitted to hoist
personnel during pile driving operations. Demonstrating infeasibility
prior to using a personnel platform is not required because in most
instances another means of access is not feasible for this operation.
No comments were received on this provision; it is promulgated as
proposed.
Section 1926.1431(p)(4) establishes the requirements for use of a
boatswain's chair instead of a personnel platform for hoisting
personnel.
Section 1926.1431(p)(4)(i) identifies which of the provisions in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1431(a)-(o) apply when using a boatswain's chair in a
pile driving operation. For the applicable provisions, the phrase
``boatswain's chair'' is substituted for either ``personnel platform''
or ``platform.''
The Sec. 1926.1431 paragraphs not listed in Sec.
1926.1431(p)(4)(i) do not apply when a boatswain's chair is used. This
is because those requirements are either specifically applicable to
personnel platform design and use, or are otherwise not relevant when
hoisting personnel in a pile driving operation.
Section 1926.1431(p)(4)(ii) requires the employee to be hoisted in
a slow, controlled descent and ascent. This is to limit swinging or
sudden movement of the boatswain's chair to prevent a fall from the
chair or impact with equipment or other structures.
Section 1926.1431(p)(4)(iii) specifies that the employee in the
boatswain's chair use personal fall arrest equipment, including a full
body harness. The fall arrest system must be attached to either the
lower load block or the overhaul ball. The purpose of having the fall
protection equipment and tie off point independent of the boatswain's
chair and rigging used to hoist the employee is twofold: it protects
the employee from a sudden drop or fall due to failure of that
equipment and protects the employee when accessing and egressing the
boatswain's chair.
Section 1926.1431(p)(4)(iv) requires fall protection equipment to
comply with Sec. 1926.502, Fall protection systems criteria and
practices. This ensures that the fall protection equipment is
sufficient to safely arrest the employee's fall.
No comments were received on paragraphs (p)(4)(i)--(p)(4)(iv); they
are promulgated as proposed.
The C-DAC consensus document did not include provisions to require
a minimum strength for the boatswain's chair and to require that only
one person be hoisted at a time, when using a boatswain's chair in pile
driving operations. As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule,
the Agency determined these were unintended omissions by the Committee.
OSHA stated that it planned on including such provisions in the final
rule, and asked for comment. No comments were received on this issue.
Therefore, the final rule includes Sec. 1926.1431(p)(4)(v), which
requires the boatswain's chair to be capable of supporting its own
weight and at least five times the maximum intended load, and Sec.
1926.1431(p)(4)(vi), which states
[[Page 48044]]
that only one person may be hoisted at a time.
Paragraph (q) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (r) Hoisting Personnel for Marine Transfer
This paragraph addresses the particular hazards related to hoisting
personnel for transfer to or from a marine construction worksite. This
paragraph applies when hoisting employees solely for such transfer.
Section 1926.1431(r)(1) requires the employer to use either a
traditional personnel platform or a marine-hoisted personnel transfer
device. This paragraph allows an employer to use a marine-hoisted
personnel transfer device instead of a personnel platform for several
reasons. Transferring personnel to or from a marine construction site
poses special problems due to the effects of waves and gusting wind.
These effects, which can be unpredictable, can result in a situation
where the equipment operator will not be able to adequately control the
equipment. In such a situation, the device used to transfer the
employees may suddenly wind up in the water. Another situation is when
employees may need to jump into the water to avoid a collision with the
ship or an object on the construction site. A third situation is when
the operator is unable to control the equipment while the employees are
attempting to board or disembark. The longer it takes to get on or off,
the greater this risk becomes. In all of these scenarios the employees
need to be able to enter and exit the device being used to transfer
them quickly and easily.
A personnel platform, which is designed, in part, to keep the
employees inside, would, in most marine situations, compound the hazard
faced by the employees, since they can be difficult to enter and exit
quickly. In contrast, a marine-hoisted personnel transfer device is
designed specifically to facilitate the employees' rapid entry and
exit. The employer has the option of using such a device so that it may
be used when the conditions are such that the risk of being prevented
from entering or exiting quickly is greater than the risk of
unintentionally falling.
In the proposed rule, OSHA requested public comment on whether
paragraph (r)(1) should require the employer to first establish that
use of a marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device was not less safe
than a personnel platform. No comments were received on this issue.
Paragraph (r)(2) requires the employer to follow the requirements
of paragraphs (a) through (n) of Sec. 1926.1431 when using a personnel
platform to hoist employees. As discussed previously, these provisions
are designed to ensure that hoisting personnel is the safest means of
the employees gaining access to the work and that the personnel
platform's design and use are adequate from a safety standpoint.
Paragraph (r)(3) establishes the requirements when the employer
elects to use a marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device instead of a
personnel platform for hoisting personnel.
Paragraph (r)(3)(i) identifies which of the provisions in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1431 (a) through (q) apply when using a marine-hoisted
personnel-transfer device. For the applicable provisions, the phrase
``marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device'' is substituted for either
``personnel platform'' or ``platform.''
The Sec. 1926.1431 paragraphs not listed in Sec. 1926.1431
(r)(3)(i) do not apply when a marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device
is used. This is because those requirements are either specifically
applicable to personnel platform design and use, or are otherwise not
relevant when hoisting personnel at a marine worksite.
Paragraph (r)(3)(ii) requires the marine-hoisted personnel-transfer
device to be used exclusively for transferring employees. One purpose
of this provision is to prevent the device from being used as a work
platform. The device's design, which specifically facilitates easy and
rapid entry and exit, is ill suited to providing a safe work platform.
In particular, it is not designed to prevent a fall when an employee is
using his or her hands for working rather than holding on to the
device. Also, it is ill suited as a material transfer device because it
is not designed to prevent materials from falling from it, and could be
damaged by such use.
Paragraph(r)(3)(iii) limits the number of employees on the marine-
hoisted personnel-transfer device to the maximum number the device is
designed to hold. This prevents overloading, which can result in
structural failure of the device. It also prevents overcrowding, which
can cause an unintended fall or preclude a worker from entering or
exiting as rapidly as when used properly.
Paragraph (r)(3)(iv) requires each employee being transferred on a
marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device to wear a U.S. Coast Guard
personal flotation device that is approved for industrial use. The
purpose is to protect the employee from drowning if the device enters
the water, or if the employee falls or needs to jump into the water.
No comments were received on paragraphs (r)(1)--(r)(3); they are
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (s) Hoisting Personnel for Storage-Tank (Steel or Concrete),
Shaft and Chimney Operations
This paragraph establishes requirements when hoisting personnel in
storage-tanks (steel or concrete), shaft operations and chimney
operations. Use of a personnel platform, while usually feasible, is
infeasible in some circumstances involving these operations due to the
nature of the work activity. Consequently, boatswain's chairs are
allowed instead of a personnel platform in such instances, but only
when the employer can demonstrate that use of a personnel platform is
infeasible. For these reasons, Sec. 1926.1431(s)(1) allows the
employer to use a boatswain's chair only when the employer has
determined that use of a personnel platform is infeasible.
Section 1926.1431(s)(2) requires the employer to follow the
requirements of paragraphs (a) through (n) of Sec. 1926.1431 when
using a personnel platform to hoist employees. Under Sec.
1926.1431(a), an employer may only use equipment to hoist personnel
when other means of reaching the work area presents a greater hazard or
is not possible because of the project's structural design or worksite
conditions. Therefore, before using a personnel platform to hoist
personnel in storage tanks (steel or concrete), shaft operations and
chimney operations, the employer must determine that hoisting personnel
instead of using other means of access to the work area is the least
hazardous, or the only, means to gain access to the work area.
Section 1926.1431(s)(3) establishes the requirements when the
employer uses a boatswain's chair instead of a personnel platform for
hoisting personnel.
Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(i) identifies which of the provisions in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1431(a) through (r) apply when using a boatswain's
chair. For the applicable provisions, the phrase ``boatswain's chair''
is substituted for either ``personnel platform'' or ``platform.''
The Sec. 1926.1431 paragraphs not listed in Sec.
1926.1431(s)(3)(i) do not apply when a boatswain's chair is used. This
is because those requirements are either specifically applicable to
personnel platform design and use, or are otherwise not relevant when
hoisting personnel on a boatswain's chair in storage tanks (steel or
concrete), shaft operations and chimney operations.
[[Page 48045]]
Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(ii) requires the employee to be hoisted in
a slow, controlled descent and ascent. This is to limit swinging or
sudden movement of the boatswain's chair to prevent a fall from the
chair or impact with the walls or other areas or structures involved in
these operations.
No comments were received on paragraphs (s)(1) through (s)(3)(ii);
they are promulgated as proposed.
Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(iii) requires the employee in the
boatswain's chair to use personal fall arrest equipment, including a
full body harness, that is attached independent of the crane/derrick.
Having the tie off point independent of the equipment protects the
employee from a sudden drop or fall due to equipment failure or other
problems associated with the operation of the crane/derrick, and to
protect the employee from falls when accessing and egressing the
boatswain's chair.
One commenter noted that in certain construction projects there is
no structure in place for independent attachment of personal fall
arrest equipment. (ID-0130.l; -0343.1.) This commenter further
requested that for activities related to construction of storage tanks,
concrete shafts and chimneys, the requirement be changed to allow
attachment to the lower load block or overhaul ball. The Agency found
the information provided persuasive and has revised the regulatory
language for the final rule. The Agency is limiting the change to those
situations in which there is no adequate structure available for
independent attachment. While there may be no available tie-off point
during new construction, construction activities sometimes take place
in storage tanks, concrete shafts and chimneys after the structure is
in place. Therefore, the requirement has been changed to add a sentence
specifying that when there is no adequate structure for attachment of
personal fall arrest equipment as required in Sec. 1926.502(d)(15),
the personal fall arrest equipment should be attached to the lower load
block or to the overhaul ball.
Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(iv) requires fall protection equipment to
comply with Sec. 1926.502, Fall protection systems criteria and
practices. This ensures that the fall equipment is sufficient to safely
arrest the employee's fall.
Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(v) requires the boatswain's chair to be
capable of supporting, without failure, its own weight plus a minimum
of five times the maximum intended load. This is consistent with the
requirement for personnel platforms at Sec. 1926.1431(e)(4).
Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(vi) mandates that only one person be
hoisted at a time when using a boatswain's chair. No comments were
received on paragraphs (s)(3)(iv) through (s)(3)(vi); they are
promulgated as proposed.
Section 1926.1432 Multiple-Crane/Derrick Lifts
Final Sec. 1926.1432 lists additional requirements for operations
involving multiple cranes and derricks. As discussed in the proposed
rule preamble, this section addresses hazards arising from operations
that use more than one crane/derrick to lift a load (see 73 FR 59840-
59841, Oct. 9, 2008). After reviewing comments on the proposed rule,
the Agency is promulgating Sec. Sec. 1926.1432(a) and 1926.1432(b)(1)
as proposed. Section 1926.1432(b)(2) is nearly identical to the
proposed text, but includes the following changes: the use of the terms
``directed'' and ``lift director'' instead of ``supervised'' and
``supervisor,'' respectively, and language to clarify that the lift
director must review the multiple crane/derrick lift plan with all
workers ``in a meeting.''
Several commenters expressed the view that OSHA should add specific
requirements and procedures for the protection of employees engaged in
``critical lifts,'' which were not addressed separately in the proposed
rules. (ID-0182.1; -0207.1.) One of these commenters requested that
OSHA add ``critical lifts'' to the title of Sec. 1926.1432, and define
``critical lift'' to include any lift that exceeds 75 percent of the
rated capacity of the crane or derrick, requires the use of more than
one crane or derrick, involves hoisting personnel, or is otherwise
determined by a qualified person to involve an exceptional level of
risk. (ID-0182.1.) OSHA disagrees with these commenters for the reasons
discussed below.
C-DAC specifically considered whether to use the term ``critical
lift'' for triggering additional requirements, such as planning and
oversight. (OSHA-S030-2006-0663-0485.) There are a variety of differing
views as to what ought to be considered a critical lift in this regard.
For example, the Army Corps of Engineers, in its 2008 U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Safety and Health Requirements Manual, defines ``critical
lift'' as ``a non-routine crane lift requiring detailed planning and
additional or unusual safety precautions.'' This manual describes
critical lifts, in part, as lifts: (1) In which the load weighs 75% of
the rated capacity of the crane; in which the load is out of the
operator's view; involving more than one crane; involving non-routine
or technically difficult rigging arrangement; hoisting personnel with a
crane or derrick; or that the crane operator believes should be
considered critical. EM 385-1-1, pg. 293. The National Aeronautics and
Space Administration's definition is different:
Critical lifts are lifts where failure/loss of control could
result in loss of life, loss of or damage to flight hardware, or a
lift involving special high dollar items, such as spacecraft, one-
of-a-kind articles, or major facility components, whose loss would
have serious programmatic or institutional impact. Critical lifts
also include the lifting of personnel with a crane, lifts where
personnel are required to work under a suspended load, and
operations with special personnel and equipment safety concerns
beyond normal lifting hazards.
NASA Standard for Lifting Devices and Equipment, NASA STD-8719.9, pg.
5.\127\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\127\ In OSHA's steel erection standard, 29 CFR 1926 subpart R,
critical lift is defined as ``a lift that (1) exceeds 75 percent of
the rated capacity of the crane or derrick, or (2) requires the use
of more than one crane or derrick'' (See Sec. 1926.751). However,
the steel erection standard does not require planning or other
additional precautions whenever there is a critical lift. A critical
lift plan is only required in subpart R when the employer elects to
do a site-specific erection plan as an alternative to the
requirements of Sec. Sec. 1926.753(c)(5), 1926.757(a)(4), or
1926.757(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-DAC identified and addressed the particular situations that
necessitate special planning and procedures rather than using a more
generalized ``critical lift'' approach based on a percent of rated
capacity. For example, the Committee developed specific requirements
for hoisting personnel, operating equipment when power lines are
present, and in Sec. Sec. 1926.1417(o)(3)(ii) and 1926.1417(s), for
hoisting loads that exceed 75 percent of rated capacity or are 90
percent or more of rated capacity. This enabled the Committee to
separately address the specific hazards associated with each type of
operation. The advantage of this approach is that the standard's
requirements could be specifically tailored to each type of situation,
promoting both effectiveness and clarity. Therefore, OSHA defers to the
expertise of C-DAC and declines to adopt the commenters' suggestions.
Paragraph (a) Plan Development
Section 1926.1432(a) requires an employer to develop a plan before
beginning a crane/derrick operation in which more than one crane/
derrick will be supporting the load, the operation must be planned. The
planning must meet the criteria set forth in Sec. Sec. 1926.1432(a)(1)
through (3). The purpose of the requirement for a plan is to help
ensure that the hazards involved
[[Page 48046]]
with a multiple lift are identified and eliminated. The Committee
determined that a plan-based requirement would be the most appropriate
and effective means of reducing the risks associated with these
operations.
Section 1926.1432(a) does not, however, require the multiple crane/
derrick lift plan to be documented. One commenter suggested that the
final rule require the plan to be in writing to ensure that the plan
would be well designed and could be clearly communicated to all
affected personnel. (ID-0182.1.) C-DAC carefully considered where to
recommend including documentation requirements throughout the standard,
and did not recommend including one for this provision. The commenter
did not provide any explanation of how a documentation requirement
would enhance the review of the plan or the communication of the plan
to the parties involved, and OSHA has decided to defer to the expertise
of the Committee and declines to include a documentation requirement
for Sec. 1926.1432.
Paragraph (a)(3)
Section 1926.1432(a)(3) requires engineering expertise to be
provided by the employer whenever the qualified person determines that
it is necessary. One commenter believed that all multiple-crane/derrick
lifts should be planned by a licensed professional engineer due to the
technical complexity of such lifts. (ID-0156.1.) As discussed in the
preamble to the proposed rule, in the view of the Committee, some, but
not all, multiple-crane/derrick lifts need to be planned with
engineering expertise so that the lift can be performed safely (73 FR
59841, Oct. 9, 2008). Similarly, the Committee determined that it is
not practical to set criteria in the rule for identifying which lifts
need such expertise. OSHA defers to the expertise of the Committee on
this issue and has decided not to adopt the commenter's suggestion.
Paragraph (b) Plan Implementation
Under this paragraph, the employer is required to take specific
steps designed to ensure that the decisions and precautions built into
the plan are effectively implemented.
Section 1926.1432(b)(1) requires direction of plan implementation
by competent and qualified persons, or by one person who meets the
definitions of both. OSHA has decided to replace the word
``supervised'' in this paragraph with the word ``directed.'' (For a
detailed explanation of competent and qualified persons and the reason
for replacing ``supervised,'' refer to the preamble discussion of Sec.
1926.1404(a), Supervision--competent-qualified person).
One commenter suggested that the final rule require a ``lift
director'' for each multiple-crane/derrick lift and that the ``lift
director must be present for each critical lift.'' (ID-0178.1.) OSHA
agrees and, to also be consistent with the identification of the A/D
director in Sec. 1926.1404(a), has denoted the person directing the
multiple-crane/derrick lift as the ``lift director.''
Paragraph (b)(2)
OSHA has decided to replace the term ``supervisor'' in Sec.
1926.1432(b)(2) with the term ``lift director.'' This decision was made
to be consistent with the similar change from ``A/D supervisor'' to
``A/D director'' in Sec. 1926.1404(a) and the change from ``lift
supervisor'' to ``lift director'' in Sec. Sec. 1926.1419(c)(2),
1926.1421(a), and 1926.1421(c). (For a detailed explanation of this
change, refer to the preamble discussion of Sec. 1926.1404(a),
Supervision--competent-qualified person).
Section 1926.1432(b)(2) mandates that the director review the plan
with all employees who will be involved with the operation before lift
operations begin. The Committee determined that it is important for
employees to know how the plan will work, including their
responsibilities and the responsibilities of others, to help ensure
that the diverse aspects of the operation will be coordinated (see the
more complete discussion of this provision in the proposed rule
preamble at 73 FR 59841, Oct. 9, 2008).
One commenter suggested adding an additional provision to proposed
Sec. 1926.1432(b) to enable the person directing the lift, or the
operator, to halt operations if at any time the lift director
determined the lift could not be safely executed pursuant to the lift
plan. (ID-0182.1; -0357.1.) If such a halt to operations occurred, the
suggested provision would require the lift director to modify the lift
plan and review any such modifications with all workers involved with
the operation. (ID-0182.1.)
Adding such a provision is unnecessary because Sec. 1926.1432 and
other provisions in subpart CC already incorporate the commenter's
suggestions. As discussed above, Sec. 1926.1432(b) requires the lift
director to be a competent person. As defined in Sec. 1926.1401, a
competent person ``is a person who is capable of identifying * * *
hazards * * * and who has authorization to take prompt corrective
measures to eliminate them.'' This ensures that the lift director has
the authority to both halt operations and modify the plan if he or she
determined the lift could not be executed safely according to the lift
plan. Also, under Sec. 1926.1418, the equipment operator has the
authority to stop operations whenever there is a concern as to safety.
Thus, both the lift director and equipment operator have the authority
to halt a multiple-crane/derrick lift if either determines the lift
cannot be executed safely pursuant to the lift plan.
Furthermore, if the lift director modified the plan, a review of
the modified plan with the workers is required under Sec.
1926.1432(b)(2) because it is a different plan from the one that had
been used initially.
OSHA also received a comment suggesting that the plan-review
requirement in proposed Sec. 1926.1432(b)(2) did not make clear the
intention that the review take place in a meeting so that the plan
could be reviewed collectively with the workers as a group. (ID-
0182.1.) Because a collective review is more likely to be effective
than separate, individual reviews, OSHA agrees with the commenter's
clarification and has inserted the phrase ``in a meeting'' into final
Sec. 1926.1432(b)(2).
Other than this additional language, the replacement of
``supervised'' with ``directed,'' and the inclusion of the term ``lift
director,'' the Agency is promulgating this provision as proposed.
Section 1926.1433 Design, Construction and Testing
Previously, subpart N included design, construction, and testing
requirements for specific types of equipment that either incorporate
pre-1970 consensus standards or that require equipment to conform to
manufacturer's specifications. The former category includes: crawler,
locomotive, and truck cranes (ANSI B30.5-1968, incorporated by former
Sec. 1926.550(b)(2)); overhead and gantry cranes (ANSI B30.2.0-1967,
incorporated by former Sec. 1926.550(d)(4)); and derricks (ANSI B30.6-
1969, incorporated by former Sec. 1926.550(e)). The latter includes
hammerhead tower cranes (former Sec. 1926.550(c)(5)) and floating
cranes and derricks (former Sec. 1926.550(f)(2)(iii)). Except for
crawler, locomotive, and truck cranes, design, construction and/or
testing requirements for each of these categories of equipment is
addressed in a section of this standard that is dedicated to that type
of equipment. This section contains certain
[[Page 48047]]
requirements applicable only to crawler, locomotive, and truck cranes
and, in addition, contains requirements that apply to all of the
equipment covered by this subpart.
Paragraph (a)
Paragraph (a) of this section requires that crawler, truck and
locomotive cranes manufactured prior to the effective date of this
standard meet the applicable requirements for design, construction, and
testing prescribed in ANSI B30.5-1968, safety code for ``Crawler,
Locomotive, and Truck Cranes,'' PCSA \128\ Std. No. 2 (1968), the
requirements in paragraph (b), or the applicable DIN (Deutsches
Institut f[uuml]r Normung e.V., or German Institute for
Standardization) standards that were in effect at the time of
manufacture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\128\ ``PCSA'' is the acronym for the Power Crane Shovel
Association.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This provision allows employers to continue to use equipment that
complies with former Sec. 1926.550(b)(2) of subpart N and also gives
them the flexibility to use equipment that was built to conform to
applicable DIN standards.
One commenter objected to the inclusion of DIN standards, stating
that those standards are less stringent than the ANSI standard. (ID-
0178.1.) The commenter did not elaborate on this objection, and OSHA
does not find merit in it. Many cranes currently in use in the United
States were manufactured in Europe to DIN standards, and OSHA has no
reason to conclude that these cranes are any less safe than those
manufactured domestically. Accordingly, paragraph (a) is promulgated
without substantive change. OSHA has clarified the paragraph by
splitting the options for compliance into separate paragraphs (1)
through (4), but has not changed any of the requirements.
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) of this section uses the phrase ``mobile and
locomotive cranes'' to reflect the current terminology used in ASME
B30.5-2004. It specifies that such cranes must meet certain provisions
of ASME B30.5-2004.
As drafted by C-DAC, paragraph (b) required that mobile (including
crawler and truck) and locomotive cranes manufactured on or after the
effective date of this standard meet certain provisions of ASME B30.5-
2000 with addenda ASME B30.5a-2002, ``Safety Code for Mobile and
Locomotive Cranes.'' Here, as elsewhere in the proposal, OSHA updated
the provision to refer to the 2004 version of ASME B30.5, which was
published after C-DAC completed its draft and was the most current ASME
standard available at the time OSHA prepared the proposed rule for
publication. For the proposed rule, OSHA compared the 2004 and earlier
version and, as discussed below, requested public comment on whether
certain changes in the 2004 version should be adopted. Two commenters
objected to the revisions to incorporate the 2004 standards. (ID-
0205.1; -0213.1.) Neither of these commenters provided specific
reasoning or analysis for their positions beyond saying that the 2004
standard was not available at the time the consensus document was
created. OSHA concludes that in the absence of any reason for not
referring to the updated ASME standard, the most recent version of the
standard available prior to the publication of the proposed rule should
be used in this provision. Therefore, this provision is promulgated as
proposed.
The incorporation by reference of the listed provisions of ASME
B30.5-2004 in paragraph (b) of this section does not mean that other
provisions found in ASME B30.5-2004 do not apply to equipment under
this subpart. Some other provisions of ASME B30.5-2004 are not
incorporated into this section because they deal with issues addressed
elsewhere in this standard. For example, two-block protection, which is
required by sec. 5-1.9.9.1 of the ASME standard, is addressed in Sec.
1926.1416 of this proposed standard. In addition, the issues addressed
in paragraph (e) below are addressed in ASME B30.5-2004 but, instead of
making those provisions applicable solely to mobile and locomotive
cranes, C-DAC drafted corresponding provisions that would be applied to
all of the equipment subject to this proposed standard.
The sections of ASME B30.5 referenced in Sec. Sec. 1926.1433(b)(1)
and (b)(13) contain requirements for equipment with outriggers
partially extended that are not found in the earlier version of the
ASME standard. In the discussion of Sec. 1926.1433(b) of the proposed
rule, OSHA noted that Sec. 1926.1404(q)(1) permits partial deployment
of outriggers when manufacturer procedures permit, and expressed its
conclusion that incorporating the provisions on partially deployed
outriggers in the 2004 version of ASME B30.5 would be consistent with
Sec. 1926.1404(q)(1). OSHA requested public comment on this issue. In
response, one commenter recommended requiring a system or device that
would sense the positions of the outriggers and interact with the
crane's onboard computer system (LMI, RCL, etc.) to automatically
reduce the crane's capacity based on the outrigger positions. (ID-
0131.1.) Although this might well be a desirable addition, OSHA cannot
find evidence in this rulemaking record to indicate that such a system/
device is currently available and feasible. The Agency therefore
declines to add such a requirement.
Paragraph (c)
Proposed paragraph (c) of this section, Prototype testing, required
that mobile (including crawler and truck) and locomotive cranes
manufactured on or after the effective date of this standard meet the
prototype testing requirements in Sec. 1926.1433(c)(1), Test Option A
or Sec. 1926.1433(c)(2), Test Option B of this section. Test Option A
continues the prototype testing methodology that was previously
required under subpart N for crawler, locomotive, and truck cranes
through the incorporation of ANSI B30.5-1968. Test Option B permits, as
an alternative, the use of computer modeling technology for prototype
evaluation. C-DAC agreed to allow computer modeling testing under the
European CEN standard only on the condition that the requirements of
proposed Sec. 1926.1433(c)(2), discussed below, are met to ensure the
reliability of the computer modeling. OSHA is incorporating this option
into the final rule with the same condition. OSHA has updated the
reference to the CEN standard to BS EN 13000:2004. This change was made
because for purposes of incorporation by reference OSHA must point to a
specific document and OSHA has selected the English language version of
EN 13000. In addition, for clarity, a note to paragraph (c) states that
prototype testing of crawler, locomotive and truck cranes manufactured
prior to the effective date of the standard must conform to paragraph
(a). No comments were received on the provisions of paragraph (c) that
apply to mobile cranes.
OSHA noted in the proposal that neither proposed Sec. 1926.1433(c)
nor any other proposed provisions would apply prototype testing
requirements to tower cranes. It appeared to the Agency that this was
an oversight on the part of C-DAC. OSHA requested public comment on
whether there should be prototype testing requirements for tower
cranes, and, if so, what requirements should apply. All four commenters
on this issue recommended inclusion of computer modeling and/or
verification for tower crane prototypes in accordance with BS EN
14439:2006. (ID-0156.1; -0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) OSHA agrees with
these comments and
[[Page 48048]]
has added these requirements to the final version of Sec.
1926.1433(c).
Another commenter suggested that the standard require equipment
manufacturers to obtain independent verification that the prototype
testing was performed. (ID-0156.1.) C-DAC addressed the prototype
issues directly and did not recommend this approach. Based on the
evidence in the record, the Agency is not convinced that placing this
burden on the manufacturer is warranted.
Paragraph (d)
Paragraph (d) of this section mandates that all equipment covered
by this subpart meet the requirements listed in Sec. Sec.
1926.1433(d)(1) through (d)(13) of this section. The issues listed in
paragraph (d) are addressed by ASME B30.5-2004. However, as explained
in the proposed rule, C-DAC determined that these requirements were
also appropriate for other equipment, and the proposed rule applied
them to all equipment (see 73 FR 59843-59845, Oct. 9, 2008). The Agency
did not receive any comments opposing this approach. Therefore, instead
of applying these requirements solely to mobile and locomotive cranes,
paragraph (d) applies them to all equipment covered by this subpart.
Section 1926.1433(d)(1), Load capacity/ratings and related
information, requires the employer to ensure that the information
available in the cab (see Sec. 1926.1417(c)) regarding load capacity/
ratings and related information include the data listed in Sec. Sec.
1926.1433(d)(1)(i) through (d)(1)(xvi). These equipment specifications
need to be made available for the operator to reference in the cab so
that the operator has immediate access to information needed to ensure
safe operation.
Section 1926.1433(d)(2) requires that load hooks (including latched
and unlatched types), ball assemblies and load blocks be of sufficient
weight to overhaul the line from the highest hook position for boom, or
boom and jib lengths, and the number of parts of the line in use. This
requirement is necessary to prevent any incidents that could occur when
ball assemblies, load blocks, and load hooks are of insufficient weight
to keep the load line from being unintentionally pulled up the boom due
to the weight of the load line itself.
Section 1926.1433(d)(3) requires that hook and ball assemblies and
load blocks be marked with their rated capacity and weight. Marking
this equipment with their rated capacities and weights is needed to
help ensure that they are not overloaded and is necessary to help
enable employers to comply with proposed Sec. 1926.1433(d)(2).
Section 1926.1433(d)(4), Latching hooks, requires that hooks meet
the requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1433(d)(4)(i)-(ii) of this
section.\129\ Section 1926.1433(d)(4)(i) requires that hooks be
equipped with latches, except where the requirements of Sec.
1926.1433(d)(4)(ii) are met. It also requires that latches close the
throat openings of hooks and that they be designed to retain slings or
other lifting devices/accessories in the hooks when the rigging
apparatus is slack. This requirement is included to ensure that the
rigging will not be unintentionally dislodged from the hook when the
rigging apparatus is slack.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\129\ Pursuant to a commenter's suggestion on the structure of
this section as proposed (ID-0172.1), this section was reorganized
in the final rule for clarity but was not changed substantively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1926.1433(d)(4)(ii) prohibits hooks without latches, or
with latches removed or disabled, from being used unless two criteria
are met. First, to ensure that the hazards are weighed appropriately, a
qualified person must determine that it is safer to hoist and place the
load without latches (or with the latches removed/tied-back). Second,
routes for the loads must be pre-planned to ensure that no employee is
required to work in the fall zone except for employees necessary for
the hooking or unhooking of the load. The reason for generally
requiring hooks to be equipped with latches is to prevent the load from
accidentally disengaging from the hook. C-DAC determined that the use
of hooks with latches is an industry recognized practice, but also
recognized that there are some circumstances where the use of a hook
with a latch presents a greater hazard. The exceptions in Sec.
1926.1433(d)(4)(ii) are included to address the latter circumstances.
For example, if an employee would have to climb up or out onto an
unsecured, elevated member to unhook the load after its placement, the
employee would be exposed to a fall hazard. The criteria in Sec.
1926.1433(d)(4)(ii) for permitting a hook to be used without a latch
are designed to ensure that the operation can still be conducted
safely.
Section 1926.1433(d)(5), Posted warnings, states that posted
warnings required by this subpart, as well as those originally supplied
with the equipment by the manufacturer,\130\ must be maintained in
legible condition. Compliance with this requirement will increase the
likelihood that employees will recognize the hazard identified on the
posted warning and avoid or protect themselves from that hazard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\130\ Two commenters stated that posted warnings originally
supplied with the equipment by the manufacturer should not be
included in this provision and were not agreed to by C-DAC; they
believed that C-DAC required only original posted warnings related
to electrical hazards. (ID-0205.1; -0222.1.) These commenters are
mistaken; the proposed language is unchanged from the C-DAC
consensus document. In any event, OSHA believes that maintenance of
manufacturers' original posted warnings is critical to safe
operation of equipment and is promulgating this provision as
proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1926.1433(d)(6) requires that an accessible fire
extinguisher be on the equipment to eliminate small fires quickly. This
provision continues a similar requirement that was in the former Sec.
1926.550(a)(14)(i).
Section 1926.1433(d)(7), Cabs, states that equipment with cabs must
meet the requirements listed in Sec. 1926.1433(d)(7)(i) through (v) of
this section. These provisions ensure that the crane operator is
provided with a safe work station that has adequate ventilation, safe
means of access and egress, good visibility, protection against window
breakage, and sufficient roof strength. Most of these requirements
continue the protections provided under OSHA's prior rules for crawler,
locomotive, and truck cranes, which incorporated by reference various
sections of ANSI B30.5-1968.
Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(i) requires that cabs be designed with a
form of adjustable ventilation and method for clearing the windshield
for maintaining visibility and air circulation. Examples of means for
adjustable ventilation include an air conditioner or window that can be
opened (for ventilation and air circulation); examples of means for
maintaining visibility include heater (for preventing windshield
icing), defroster, fan, and windshield wiper. This provision ensures
adequate air circulation, both for the operator's health and for good
visibility.
Under Sec. 1926.1433(d)(7)(ii), cab doors (whether swinging or
sliding) must be designed to prevent inadvertent opening or closing
while traveling or operating the machine. Swinging doors adjacent to
the operator must open outward. Sliding operator doors must open
rearward. Standardization of the direction for opening doors helps
ensure that an operator will be able to exit the cab quickly in an
emergency.
Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(iii), Windows, requires that cab windows
meet the requirements listed in Sec. Sec. 1926.1433(d)(7)(iii)(A)
through (C).
Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(iii)(A) requires that the cab have windows
in front and on both sides of the operator. Forward vertical visibility
must be sufficient to give the operator a view of the boom point at all
times.
[[Page 48049]]
Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(iii)(B) allows windows to have sections
designed to be opened or readily removed. Windows with sections
designed to be opened must be designed so that they can be secured to
prevent inadvertent closure. Compliance with this provision ensures
that the operator can adequately ventilate the cab should conditions
within the cab affect the safe operation of the crane.
Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(iii)(C) specifies that windows be
constructed of safety glass, or material with similar optical and
safety properties, that introduces no visible distortion or otherwise
obscures visibility. In the final rule, OSHA has deleted the phrase
``that interferes with the safe operation of the crane'' from the end
of this paragraph as proposed to eliminate an ambiguity that might
arise in interpreting this provision.
Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(iv) requires that a clear passageway be
provided from the operator's station to an exit door on the operator's
side. This provision will enable the operator to enter and exit the
equipment safely and will enable the operator to escape from the cab
quickly in the event of an emergency.
Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(v) states that areas of the cab roof that
serve as a workstation for rigging, maintenance or other crane-related
tasks must be capable of supporting 250 pounds without permanent
distortion.
Section 1926.1433(d)(8) requires that belts, gears, shafts,
pulleys, sprockets, spindles, drums, fly wheels, chains, and other
parts or components that reciprocate, rotate or otherwise move be
guarded where contact by employees (except for maintenance and repair
workers) is possible in the performance of normal duties. The exception
permits maintenance and repair workers to remove the guards when their
work requires access to the parts being guarded.
Section 1926.1433(d)(9) requires that all exhaust pipes,
turbochargers, and charge air coolers be insulated or guarded where
contact by employees is possible in the performance of normal duties.
As with Sec. 1926.1433(d)(8), an exception is provided when
maintenance and repair workers need to remove the guards to perform
their work. This provision is included to protect workers against
injuries that can occur if they contact components that are hot enough
to cause burns.
Section 1926.1433(d)(10) requires that hydraulic and pneumatic
lines be protected from damage to the extent feasible. For example,
where hydraulic or pneumatic lines are subject to chafing from
vibration or movement of the equipment, they must be secured, protected
with anti-chafing gear, or otherwise protected from chafing damage.
Denting, crushing, puncturing, or nicking a hydraulic or pneumatic line
could adversely affect the structural integrity of the line and
compromise the safe operation of the affected systems and the crane as
a whole.
Section 1926.1433(d)(11) requires that equipment be designed so
that exhaust fumes are not discharged in the cab and are discharged in
a direction away from the operator. This provision ensures that exhaust
gases that are likely to adversely affect or incapacitate the operator
will not accumulate in the cab because of the design of the equipment.
For the same reason, OSHA is amending the final rule to clarify that
the exhaust fumes must also be discharged away from any air intake
source for the cab.
Section 1926.1433(d)(12), Friction mechanisms, states that where
friction mechanisms (such as brakes and clutches) are used to control
the boom hoist or load line hoist, they must be: of a size and thermal
capacity sufficient to control all rated loads with the minimum
recommended reeving; and adjustable to permit compensation for lining
wear to maintain proper operation. The words ``all rated'' have been
added back into paragraph (d)(12)(i) of this section in response to
several comments who correctly pointed out that the phrase was included
in the C-DAC consensus document. (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) This
phrase was inadvertently deleted from the proposal and is needed to
clarify the requirement.
Section 1926.1433(d)(13), Hydraulic load hoists, specifies that
hydraulic drums have an integrally mounted holding device or internal
static brake to prevent load hoist movement in the event of hydraulic
failure. This requirement will protect employees against unintended
movement of the load hoist caused by a hydraulic failure.
As noted above, Sec. Sec. 1926.1433(d)(7)(iii)(C) and
1926.1433(d)(11) were amended to clarify those provisions, and Sec.
1926.1433(d)(12)(i) was amended to address comments received. All other
provisions of paragraph (d) are promulgated as proposed with minor
grammatical corrections and changes in numbering.
Paragraph (e)
Section 1926.1433(e) permits employers to rely on documentation
from manufacturers to show that they are in compliance with Sec. Sec.
1926.1433(a)-(c) and 1926.1433(d)(7)-(d)(13) where the equipment has
not been modified \131\ since it was manufactured, except in accordance
with Sec. 1926.1434, Equipment modifications. Sections
1926.1433(d)(1)-(d)(6) are excluded from this provision because the
employer can easily verify compliance with them without recourse to
documentation provided by the manufacturer. An employer's failure to
have such documentation in its possession would not, in itself,
constitute a violation of these provisions. Rather, Sec. 1926.1433(e)
is intended to make clear that crane users need not independently
determine whether their equipment meets certain provisions of this
section but may rely on manufacturer documentation for that purpose. No
comments were received on this paragraph, and it is promulgated as
proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\131\ For clarification, the phrase in the final standard:
``where the equipment has not been modified'' replaces the phrase in
the proposed standard: ``where the equipment has not changed.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1926.1434 Equipment modifications
This section addresses the procedures an employer must follow when
equipment is modified in a way that affects its capacity or safe
operation. Its purpose is to safeguard against unsafe modifications and
to ensure that the equipment's instructions and specifications are
updated to reflect the modifications so that the equipment may be used
safely.
This section uses the term ``modification/addition'' to refer to
``modification or addition'' to clarify that an addition to the
equipment is a type of modification and needs to be subject to the same
approval procedures as other types of modifications. For example, the
addition of a generator to the back of the cab of a crane needs to be
subject to the approval procedures because it will alter the crane's
backward stability.
Paragraph (a)
Paragraph (a) of this section prohibits modifications or additions
to equipment which affect the capacity or safe operation of the
equipment except where any of five options set out in Sec. Sec.
1926.1434(a)(1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) are met. Options outlined in
(a)(4) and (a)(5) were not in the proposed rule; see discussion below.
Option (1)--Manufacturer Review and Approval
Under paragraph (a)(1)(i), the employer must get the manufacturer
of the equipment to approve the modifications/additions in writing.
[[Page 48050]]
Paragraph (a)(1)(ii) requires that load charts, procedures, instruction
manuals, and instruction plates/tags/decals be modified in accordance
with the modification/addition. Under (a)(1)(iii), the original safety
factor of the equipment must not be reduced. Meeting the requirements
of this paragraph ensures that the original safety factor is not
reduced and that all affiliated materials related to safe operation of
the equipment (instructions, charts) are updated to reflect the changes
made. Paragraph (a)(1) is promulgated as proposed.
Option (2)--Manufacturer Refusal To Review Request
Under paragraph (a)(2), the employer must provide a detailed
description of the proposed modification to the manufacturer and ask it
to approve the modification/addition. If the manufacturer declines to
review the technical merits of the proposal or fails, within 30 days,
to acknowledge the request or initiate the review, the employer may
proceed with the modification/addition if it complies with the other
requirements in paragraph (a)(2). In these conditions, the employer may
utilize a registered professional engineer who is a qualified person
with respect to the equipment to approve the modification/addition in
lieu of the manufacturer. See Sec. 1926.1401 for the definition of
qualified person. C-DAC found it important to clarify that this
individual needs to be a qualified person ``with respect to the
equipment involved,'' since specialized knowledge beyond that of a
general registered professional engineer is needed to make the required
assessments regarding the particular equipment that is being modified.
The Committee recommended this option because it determined that
the refusal of a manufacturer to review a request, or a manufacturer's
failure to act on the request within a reasonable time, would not
preclude an employer from making a modification if adequate precautions
are followed. The Committee concluded that 30 days would give the
manufacturer a reasonable amount of time to decide whether to simply
decline to review the request or to proceed with evaluating it. Also,
the Committee concluded that a failure to respond at all in this period
would fairly reflect an intention not to act on the request in a timely
manner.
Under paragraph (a)(2)(i)(A) OSHA requires that the approval by the
registered professional engineer specify the equipment configurations
to which it applies. Cranes typically can be configured in a variety of
ways. Modifications may have different effects depending on the
configuration. C-DAC determined that it was essential for purposes of
ensuring safe operation that the approval specify the configurations to
which it applies. An example of an approval satisfying this would be
the following: ``This is an approval to add an additional boom section
of the above-described design for a brand K lattice boom crane, model
1. This approval applies only when the crane is configured without a
jib.''
Paragraph (a)(2)(i)(B) requires that the registered professional
engineer modify load charts, procedures, instruction manuals, and
instruction plates/tags/decals as necessary to accord with the
modification/addition. Under paragraph (a)(2)(ii), the original safety
factor of the equipment must not be reduced.
One local jurisdiction commented that local governments should have
the option of reviewing and approving cranes that are not modified in
conjunction with the manufacturer. (ID-0156.1.) The commenter did not
explain how such a requirement would work in practice or how it would
enhance employee safety. OSHA defers to C-DAC's judgment that having a
registered professional engineer (who is a qualified person with
respect to the equipment involved) approve the modification in
accordance with the requirements of paragraph (a)(2) will provide
adequate protection. See, e.g., Building & Constr. Trades Dep't, AFL-
CIO v. Brock, 838 F.2d 1258, 1271 (DC Cir. 1988) (``[A] party
challenging an OSHA standard must bear the burden of demonstrating that
the variations it advocates will * * * provide more than a de minimis
benefit. * * *''). Paragraph (a)(2) is adopted without change from the
proposal.
Option (3)--Unavailable Manufacturer
Paragraph (a)(3) addresses a scenario in which the manufacturer of
equipment is unavailable to review proposed modifications/additions
because, for example, it has gone out of business (and has not been
taken over by a successor company). In this situation, if the employer
wishes to modify its equipment in a way that affects its capacity or
safe operation, it can get approval from a registered professional
engineer in accordance with the requirements of (a)(2)(i) and (ii)
above. This paragraph is adopted as proposed.
Option (4)--Manufacturer Does Not Complete the Review Within 120 Days
of the Request
Paragraph (a)(4) has been added to this section of the final rule
based on a particular scenario raised by a commenter where a
manufacturer agrees to review a proposed modification/addition, but
fails to complete that review within 120 days of the date on which it
was provided with a detailed description of the proposed modification/
addition. (ID-0187.1.) OSHA agrees with the commenter that in that
scenario the employer should have the option of seeking approval from a
registered professional engineer in accordance with the requirements of
(a)(2)(i) and (ii) above. OSHA concludes that 120 days will generally
be sufficient for manufacturers to complete reviews; for proposed
modifications/additions that are particularly extensive or complex,
OSHA assumes that the length of time needed to review the proposal will
be longer and will be addressed as a contractual matter between the
parties.
Option (5)--Multiple Manufacturers of Equipment Designed for Use on
Marine Work Sites
Paragraph (a)(5) has been added to this final rule in response to a
comment regarding equipment used on marine work sites. (ID-0187.1.)
According to this commenter, in the marine construction industry,
contractors routinely hire shipyards to build specialized barges or
modify existing barges used as floating platforms for hoisting
equipment. Custom-made hoisting equipment for such operations is
frequently assembled using component parts manufactured by multiple
manufacturers and then installed on the floating platform. In such
cases, it is impossible to identify a single ``manufacturer'' from
which to seek approval for a modification/addition; therefore OSHA
concludes that it was reasonable to provide employers in these
instances with the ability to seek approval for a proposed
modification/addition from a registered professional engineer in
accordance with paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii) above. The term marine
worksite is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as ``a construction worksite
located in, on, or above the water.''
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) of this section prohibits modifications or additions
which affect the capacity or safe operation of the equipment where the
manufacturer, after a review of the technical safety merits of the
proposed modification/addition, rejects the proposal and explains the
reasons for the rejection in a written response.
OSHA concludes, as did C-DAC, that it was important to expressly
state the need for the manufacturer to explain why it rejected the
employer's proposed modification. Such an explanation both
[[Page 48051]]
demonstrates that the manufacturer reviewed the technical safety merits
of the request and gives the employer the opportunity to modify the
proposal to address the manufacturer's objections. If the manufacturer
does not provide the reasons for its rejection in writing, the employer
may consider this a refusal to review a request under paragraph (a)(2)
above.
No comments were received for this paragraph; it is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (c)
Paragraph (c) of this section states that the provisions in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1434(a) and (b) do not apply to modifications made or
approved by the U.S. military. During C-DAC negotiations, a
representative of the U.S. Navy indicated to C-DAC that such an
exception is needed in the event of military exigencies. OSHA defers to
the Committee's expertise on this issue. No comments were received for
this paragraph; it is promulgated as proposed.
Section 1926.1435 Tower Cranes
Definition of Tower Crane
OSHA's proposed definition reflected three changes from the
Committee draft. First, a characteristic of tower cranes that was
missing from the C-DAC definition was that the working boom is in an
elevated position above the ground. Second, the working boom on some
tower cranes, even of the non-luffing type, may not be at a 90 degree
angle to the tower, and so the term ``fixed horizontally'' may not
always be appropriate for a non-luffing jib. Third, tower cranes do not
always rotate about the tower center to swing loads. There are ``top
slewing'' tower cranes--those in which the working boom rotates on the
top of a fixed tower, and ``bottom slewing'' tower cranes--those in
which the tower itself (with the working boom fixed to it) rotates on
its base, and for the latter, the boom does not rotate about the tower
center. OSHA requested public comment on the changes it made to the
Committee draft definition.
One commenter agreed with the proposed definition of ``tower
crane,'' saying that OSHA's changes removed any ambiguity in the
definition. (ID-0187.1.) Three commenters suggested adding the words
``or near vertical'' to the first sentence of the definition so that it
would say, ``a type of lifting structure which utilizes a vertical, or
near vertical, mast or tower. * * *'' (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.)
These commenters were evidently concerned that a tower crane could,
under Sec. 1926.1435(b)(5), Plumb tolerance, permissibly deviate from
being perfectly vertical by a slight amount. As explained below in the
discussion of Sec. 1926.1435(b)(5), the crane's tower must be plumb to
the manufacturer's tolerance or, where the manufacturer does not
specify the plumb tolerance, plumbed to a tolerance of at least 1:500.
OSHA concludes that adding the words ``or near vertical'' to the
definition of tower crane is not necessary. Although a tower crane may
deviate from being perfectly vertical by the amount of the
manufacturer's tolerance or, where the manufacturer does not specify a
tolerance, at least 1:500, the tower crane would still be ``vertical''
within the ordinary meaning of that word. Adding the words ``or near
vertical'' could create additional ambiguity and is not necessary to
avoid misleading tower crane users into thinking that their equipment
does not fall within OSHA's definition if the tower deviates from
perfect vertical by the amount permitted by the rule.
Two commenters suggested adding the following sentence at the end
of the definition:
Mobile cranes that are configured with luffing jib and/or tower
attachments are not considered tower cranes under this section.
(ID-0205.1; -0213.1.)
The provisions in this section for tower cranes are not appropriate
for application to a mobile crane configured with a luffing jib. This
conclusion is equally applicable to mobile cranes used with tower
attachments. Such attachments typically consist of devices that fix the
mobile crane's main boom at a near-vertical position and use of a
luffing jib. OSHA therefore agrees that a mobile crane configured in
either manner should not be treated as a tower crane, since the
supplemental provision for tower cranes in this section are not
designed for such applications.\132\ Therefore, the Agency has added
the language suggested by the commenters to the definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\132\ Note, however, that some tower cranes are mobile, i.e.,
truck-mounted (such as truck-mounted self-erecting tower cranes).
These are considered tower cranes under this standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (a)
Section 1926.1435(a) states that Sec. 1926.1435 contains
supplemental requirements for tower cranes and that all other sections
of this standard apply to tower cranes unless specified otherwise. This
paragraph makes clear that all provisions of this subpart apply to
tower cranes unless a specific provision states that they are
inapplicable. As discussed below, two sections of this standard that do
not apply to tower cranes are Sec. Sec. 1926.1415 (safety devices) and
1926.1416 (operational aids). Instead, this section lists the safety
devices and operational aids that are required for tower cranes. In
addition, this section contains additional requirements for erecting,
climbing, dismantling, and inspections that are specific to tower
cranes. No comments were received on this paragraph, and it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b) Erecting, Climbing and Dismantling
Section 1926.1435(b)(1) requires the employer to comply with the
assembly and disassembly requirements set out in Sec. Sec. 1926.1403-
1926.1406, except as otherwise specified in this section. Section
1926.1435(b)(1) notes that the industry generally refers to the
assembly and disassembly of tower cranes as erecting, climbing and
dismantling. Therefore, when the term ``assembly'' is used in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1403 through Sec. 1926.1405, it is replaced with
``erecting and climbing'' when referring to tower cranes. Similarly,
where the term ``disassembly'' is used, it is replaced with
``dismantling'' when referring to tower cranes.
Section 1926.1435(b)(2), Dangerous areas (self-erecting tower
cranes), addresses the hazards associated with crew members located in
certain areas. Employees must not be in or under the tower, jib, or
rotating portion of the crane during erecting, climbing and dismantling
operations until the crane is secured in a locked position and the
competent person indicates it is safe to enter these areas. The only
exception to this is where the manufacturer's instructions direct
otherwise and the employer limits access to necessary employees only.
These areas are hazardous because, in the event of unintended
movement of components, there is a heightened chance that an employee
could be struck or crushed. The exception accounts for those situations
in which, due to the design of the equipment, it is infeasible for all
employees to be out of these areas during erecting, climbing and
dismantling operations. No commenters addressed Sec. 1926.1435(b)(2).
It is promulgated without change.
Proposed paragraph (b)(3), Foundations and structural supports,
provided: ``Tower crane foundations and structural supports shall be
designed by the manufacturer or a registered professional engineer.''
When a tower crane is mounted to portions of a structure, it is
vital for safe operation that the structure be able to
[[Page 48052]]
withstand the forces imposed by both the crane and the loads the crane
will handle throughout the job. Accordingly, when portions of a
structure are used to support a tower crane, the manufacturer or
registered professional engineer who designs the crane's structural
supports must ensure not only that the structure is adequate to support
the crane when it is mounted but that it will continue to support the
crane under all anticipated conditions of use.
In the proposal, OSHA noted that it interpreted ``structural
supports'' in this provision to include both the portions of the
structure used for support and the means of attaching the tower to the
structure, and requested public comment on whether proposed Sec.
1926.1435(b)(3) stated this intent with sufficient clarity.
Five commenters recommended that OSHA clarify that ``structural
supports'' means both the portions of the structure used for support
and the means of attachment. (ID-0120.0; -0156.1; -0180.1; -0205.1; -
0213.1.) OSHA has modified paragraph (b)(3) of this section of the
final rule accordingly.
Section 1926.1435(b)(4), Addressing specific hazards, requires the
employer to comply with Sec. Sec. 1926.1404(h)(1) through (9), which
pertain to erecting, climbing and dismantling. In particular, Sec.
1926.1404(h) requires that the A/D Director address certain hazards,
which are discussed above in the discussion of Sec. 1926.1404. Section
1926.1435(b)(4) lists additional hazards, specific to tower cranes,
that the A/D Director also must address. These additional hazards are
those associated with (i) the foundations and structural supports for
tower cranes, (ii) the loss of backward stability, and (iii) wind
speed.
Proposed Sec. 1926.1435(b)(4)(i) required the A/D Director to
``verify'' that the foundation and structural supports are installed in
accordance with their design. This paragraph is designed to ensure that
the design of these components by the manufacturer or registered
professional engineer is followed when they are installed.
Three commenters stated that the A/D Director is not qualified to
perform this function and that the registered professional engineer who
designed the support should verify that the foundation and structural
supports are properly installed. (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.)
OSHA determines that the commenters are assuming that, by the use
of the term ``verify,'' the proposed provision meant that the A/D
Director would have to independently assess the foundation and supports
to determine if they were installed in accordance with their design.
OSHA is not, however, requiring the A/D Director to make such an
independent assessment. For example, the intent of the provision is met
when the A/D Director determines from the engineer of record that the
installation was done correctly. To make this clear, OSHA has, in the
final rule, changed the word ``verify'' to ``determine.''
Paragraph (b)(4)(ii) requires that the A/D Director address the
backward stability of the crane before self erecting tower cranes or
cranes on traveling or stationary undercarriages are swung. OSHA has
removed the words ``must be considered'' that were in the proposed
paragraph to avoid ambiguity. Paragraph (b)(4) requires the A/D
Director to ``address'' certain issues, including the stability issue
in paragraph (b)(4)(ii), and the words ``must be considered'' could be
read as limiting or modifying that duty. This provision is similar to
the assembly/disassembly requirement in Sec. 1926.1404(h)(11) except
that it applies only to self erecting tower cranes and cranes that are
on traveling or static (stationary) undercarriages. It applies to these
types of tower cranes to highlight the fact that, because they do not
have a base that is fixed to the ground, the backwards stability safety
issue needs to be addressed. No comments were received on this
provision, and it is promulgated with only the one revision.
Proposed Sec. 1926.1435(b)(4)(iii) provided that erecting,
climbing, and dismantling not take place when the wind speed
recommended by the manufacturer is exceeded. Where the manufacturer
does not recommend a maximum wind speed, a qualified person is required
to establish the maximum wind speed that must not be exceeded. This
provision was included because the horizontal force caused by wind
during erecting and dismantling can have a substantial effect on the
stability of a tower crane.
One commenter suggested that climbing should not be allowed if the
wind speed perpendicular to the jib is in excess of 20 miles per hour.
(ID-0137.1.) This commenter stated that most manufacturers will allow
climbing in winds up to 40 miles per hour but are not specific on winds
that are perpendicular to the jib. OSHA concludes that any manufacturer
who specifies wind speed will assume that the wind might be blowing in
any direction, including perpendicular to the jib, and take that into
account in the recommendation. OSHA further concludes that
manufacturers (and qualified persons) are well qualified to determine
the maximum wind speed and finds no basis in the record to set a
maximum wind speed during erection of 20 miles per hour. Accordingly,
OSHA is promulgating Sec. 1926.1435(b)(4)(iii) as proposed.
Paragraph (b)(5) of this section, Plumb tolerance, requires that
the crane's tower be plumb to the manufacturer's tolerance and verified
by a qualified person. Where the manufacturer does not specify the
plumb tolerance, this provision requires that the tower be plumb to a
tolerance of at least 1:500. The tower needs to be plumb within the
manufacturer's tolerance to ensure the crane's stability and prevent it
from collapsing. The Committee noted that a tolerance of at least 1:500
is generally what manufacturers specify and that for any type of
vertical structure this generally is the accepted plumb tolerance in
the engineering and construction industries. No comments were received
on this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b)(6), Multiple tower crane jobsites, requires
construction jobsites with more than one fixed jib (hammerhead) tower
crane installed to be located so that no crane can contact the
structure of another crane. However, the jibs of multiple hammerhead
tower cranes are permitted to pass over/under one another. This
provision is designed to ensure that multiple tower cranes on a
construction site do not collide with each other. No comments were
received on this paragraph. OSHA has replaced the word ``may'' with
``can'' in the final rule to clarify that it must be physically
impossible for the structure of one crane to contact the structure of
another. The text is otherwise unchanged in the final rule.
Paragraph (b)(7), Climbing procedures, contains special
requirements that have to be followed during the climbing process.
Climbing is defined in Sec. 1926.1401. Paragraph (b)(7) requires that
prior to, and during, all climbing procedures the employer (i) Comply
with all manufacturer prohibitions; (ii) have a registered professional
engineer verify that the host structure is strong enough to sustain the
forces imposed through the braces, brace anchorages and supporting
floors; and (iii) ensure that no part of the climbing procedure takes
place when wind exceeds the speed recommended by the manufacturer or,
where the manufacture does not specify the wind speed, the speed
determined by a qualified person. No comments were received on this
paragraph; it is unchanged in the final rule. The Agency notes that
several commenters did object generally to the mandatory compliance
with manufacturer
[[Page 48053]]
requirements. These arguments are addressed in the discussion of Sec.
1926.1417.
Paragraph (b)(7)(ii) requires the employer to have a registered
professional engineer verify that the host structure is strong enough
to sustain the forces imposed through the braces, brace anchorages and
supporting floors. Examples of typical host structures include a
building, parking garage, bridge or pier. If the host structure is not
strong enough, the host structure could collapse and cause the tower
crane to collapse as well. No comments were received on this paragraph;
it is unchanged in the final rule.
Proposed paragraph (b)(7)(iii) required the employer to ensure that
no part of the climbing procedure takes place when wind exceeds the
speed recommended by the manufacturer or by a qualified person if the
manufacturer does not specify this information. The Agency noted that
Sec. 1926.1435(b)(4)(iii) requires wind speed to be addressed during
erecting, climbing and dismantling in the same manner as Sec.
1926.1435(b)(7)(iii) and requested public comment on whether Sec.
1926.1435(b)(7)(iii) should be omitted as redundant. Three commenters
agreed that Sec. 1926.1435(b)(7)(iii) was redundant and should be
deleted. (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) OSHA agrees and has deleted
Sec. 1926.1435(b)(7)(iii) from the final rule.
One commenter suggested that all rigging used during the climbing
process should follow the rules provided in Sec. 1926.1431 (Hoisting
personnel), and in particular the requirement that the lift not exceed
50% of the equipment's rated capacity. (ID-0137.1.) This commenter said
that such a requirement is appropriate because climbing frames are
often hoisted or lowered by the crane while workers are on them. OSHA
is aware of no reason why workers need to be on a climbing frame while
it is being hoisted and it notes that such a practice would violate a
number of provisions of Sec. 1926.1431. As discussed in Sec.
1926.1431, cranes are designed to hoist material, not personnel, and
may only be used to hoist personnel when stringent requirements to
ensure safety are followed, including the requirement that the lift not
exceed 50% of the equipment's rated capacity. OSHA is not requiring
that all rigging used in climbing a tower crane meet this requirement
because it does not determine that workers should be, or commonly are,
hoisted while on the climbing frame.
The same commenter stated that the swing should be disabled during
climbing and that a pre-test of the hydraulic system should be
performed when the upper structure is initially raised. This commenter
did not offer any rationale in support of these suggestions, and OSHA
does not conclude they are needed to ensure the safety of the climbing
process.
Section 1926.1435(b)(8), Counterweight/ballast, addresses the
hazard of instability that can result from improper installation or
removal of counterweight/ballast, which can cause a collapse. Sections
1926.1435(b)(8)(i) and (ii) require that tower cranes not be erected,
dismantled or operated without the amount and position of counterweight
or ballast in place as specified by the manufacturer or a registered
professional engineer familiar with the equipment and that the maximum
amount of counterweight or ballast not be exceeded. No comments
addressed this paragraph, and it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c) Signs
Section 1926.1435(c) requires employers to comply with the
manufacturer's specifications regarding the size and location of signs.
This requirement addresses the hazards that can result from attaching
signs (such as signs with the company's name) to tower cranes. The
force of the wind bearing against a large sign can significantly
increase the horizontal force the wind exerts on the crane. According
to the Committee, most manufacturers specify the maximum size and
permissible location of signs so that the stability of the tower crane
is not compromised. Where the manufacturer does not specify this
information or where such information is unavailable, this provision
requires a registered professional engineer who is familiar with the
specific type of tower crane involved to give written approval of the
size and location of any signs. The provision applies irrespective of
whether the sign was installed during or after erecting/climbing. No
comments were received on this provision, and it is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraphs (d) Safety Devices and (e) Operational Aids
These paragraphs set out the safety devices and operational aids
that are required on tower cranes. Sections 1926.1415 and 1926.1416,
which require safety devices and operational aids on other types of
cranes, are not applicable to tower cranes. Instead, Sec. Sec.
1926.1435(d) and (e) apply. Although some of the safety devices and
operational aids for tower cranes are the same as those that Sec. Sec.
1926.1415 and 1926.1416 require for other equipment, others are unique
to tower cranes. C-DAC determined it would promote clarity to list all
the devices and aids for tower cranes in this section.
Safety devices must be in proper working order. Where a safety
device is not in proper working order, the crane must be taken out of
service until it is again functioning properly. The Committee
determined that the protection offered by safety devices is critical to
safe operation and that there is no alternative way to achieve the same
level of safety that the safety devices provide. By contrast, if an
operational aid is malfunctioning, operations may continue where the
employer implements specified temporary alternative measures. Where the
tower crane manufacturer specifies more protective alternative measures
than those specified in this section, the employer is required to
follow those more protective alternative measures.
Safety Devices: Paragraph (d)(2) requires the safety devices on
tower cranes discussed below.
Boom stops on luffing boom type tower cranes (Sec.
1926.1435(d)(2)(i)) and jib stops on luffing boom type tower cranes if
equipped with a jib attachment (Sec. 1926.1435(d)(2)(ii)) are
required. These are comparable to the boom and jib stops required for
other cranes under Sec. 1926.1415 (discussed above) and are intended
to prevent the boom and jib from being raised to too high an angle and
toppling over backwards.
Paragraph (d)(2)(iii) requires travel end rail stops at both ends
of the travel rail. These are comparable to the rail stops required for
equipment on rails under Sec. 1926.1415 and are designed to keep the
crane from overshooting the boundaries on the rail within which it is
supposed to operate, which could cause the crane to collapse.
Paragraph (d)(2)(iv) requires travel rail clamps on all travel
bogies. A ``travel bogie (tower cranes)'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401
as ``an assembly of two or more axles arranged to permit vertical wheel
displacement and equalize the loading on the wheels.'' When tower
cranes travel on rails, they are mounted on travel bogies. The rail
clamps that are required by this paragraph enable the bogies to be
clamped to the rail to prevent the crane from lifting off the rail.
Paragraph (d)(2)(v) requires integrally mounted check valves on all
load supporting hydraulic cylinders. A check valve permits fluid to
flow in one direction only. When installed on load supporting hydraulic
cylinders, such as
[[Page 48054]]
the cylinders used to climb the crane, they protect against the loss of
load support in the event of a hydraulic pressure failure by preventing
the reverse flow of the hydraulic fluid supporting the cylinder.
Paragraph (d)(2)(vi) requires a hydraulic system pressure limiting
device.
A pressure limiting device, such as a relief valve, would prevent
the pressure in a hydraulic system from exceeding its design limit,
which can cause the system to fail.
Paragraph (d)(2)(vii) requires the following brakes, which must
automatically set in the event of pressure loss or power failure: A
hoist brake on all hoists; a swing brake; a trolley brake; and a rail
travel brake. These types of brakes are needed to enable the motion of
the crane and load to be controlled safely. Under this paragraph, they
must set automatically to avoid uncontrolled movement of the crane or
load in the event of pressure loss or power failure that prevents their
operation.
Paragraph (d)(2)(viii) requires a ``deadman'' control or forced
neutral return control (hand) levers. These devices ensure that the
crane does not move unless the movement is being controlled by the
operator. In the case of a deadman control, the motion being
controlled, such as hoisting or trolleying, ceases when the operator
releases the control. Forced neutral return control levers
automatically return to the neutral position when they are released.
Paragraph (d)(2)(ix) requires an emergency stop switch at the
operator's station. This safety device is needed to enable the operator
to immediately stop all crane functions in the event of an emergency.
Paragraph (d)(2)(x) requires trolley end stops as safety devices
because trolley travel limiting devices, which are required by Sec.
1926.1435(e)(5)(i), will not work without trolley end stops.
Paragraph (d)(3) requires that all of the safety devices listed in
Sec. 1926.1435(d)(2) be in proper working order for the crane to be
operated. Where a device stops working properly during operations, the
operator would have to safely stop operations, and operations are
prohibited from resuming until the device is once again in proper
working order. In the final rule, OSHA is adding text and a cross-
reference to Sec. 1926.1417 to make it clear that the equipment must
be taken out of service, and tagged as such, when a safety device is
not operational.
Three commenters stated that several of the proposed safety
devices--the hydraulic system pressure limiting device required by
Sec. 1926.1435(d)(2)(vi), the brakes required by Sec.
1926.1435(d)(2)(vii), and the deadman control required by Sec.
1926.1435(d)(2)(viii), should be listed as design features rather than
safety devices because they cannot be checked every shift, as safety
devices must under Sec. 1926.1412(d)(1)(xiv). (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -
0213.1.) OSHA declines to adopt this suggestion because it agrees with
C-DAC's determination that these devices must be working properly for
the crane to operate safely, and they therefore need to be listed as
safety devices under the standard. Moreover, the commenters who said
these devices cannot be checked every shift did not explain why they
believed this was so, and C-DAC's inclusion of them as safety devices
shows that C-DAC determined that checking these devices for proper
operation, as Sec. 1926.1412(d)(1)(xiv) requires, is feasible.\133\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\133\ The three commenters included one C-DAC member and two
organizations that nominated members who served on C-DAC. As
discussed above, OSHA gives reduces weight to comments offered by C-
DAC members and organizations that nominated C-DAC members when
those comments oppose the position those members took in C-DAC
deliberations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operational aids: Like Sec. 1926.1416 for other equipment, Sec.
1926.1435(e) divides operational aids for tower cranes into Category I
aids and Category II aids, with the two categories differing in the
amount of time that temporary alternative measures can be used until
the aids are repaired. For Category I aids that period is seven days,
and for Category II it is 30 days. Also like Sec. 1926.1416, if a
required part is ordered within seven days of the occurrence of the
deficiency and not received in time to complete the repair in seven and
thirty days, respectively, the employer would have seven days from
receiving the part to complete the repair. The rationale for these time
periods is discussed under Sec. 1926.1416. For purposes of
clarification, the Agency has added a reference to Sec.
1926.1435(e)(3) noting that the requirements of Sec. 1926.1417(j) are
applicable. See further discussion at Sec. 1926.1417(j).
Section 1926.1435(e)(4) specifies that operational aids must work
properly during operations and, if an aid stops working, the operator
is required to safely stop operations until the aid is working properly
again or until the temporary alternative measures specified in this
section are implemented. Where a replacement part for an operational
aid is not available, the substitution of a device that performs the
same function would not be considered a modification subject to Sec.
1926.1434, i.e., it would not need to be approved by the manufacturer
or a registered professional engineer. (See the discussion above
regarding Sec. 1926.1416 for an explanation of the Committee's
rationale for this approach to operational aids.)
Three of the operational aids discussed below are required on tower
cranes manufactured more than one year after the effective date of the
standard. The remainder are required on all cranes. It was C-DAC's
understanding that the three aids not required on existing cranes
represent technology only recently available to the industry, while the
aids that are required on all cranes have routinely been used in the
industry for some time.
Paragraph (e)(5) requires the Category I operational aids discussed
below and specifies the alternative measures that would have to be
followed if they are not working properly. If these operational aids
are not working properly, they must be repaired no later than 7 days
after the deficiency occurs. However, if the employer documents that it
has ordered the necessary parts within 7 days of the occurrence of the
deficiency, the repair must be completed within 7 days of receipt of
the parts.
OSHA noted in the proposed rule preamble that the term ``days''
could mean either business days or calendar days. For the reasons
outlined in the discussion of Sec. 1926.1416 above, in the final rule
OSHA has changed ``days'' to ``calendar days'' to reflect the
Committee's intent.
Paragraph (e)(5)(i) requires trolley travel limiting devices. These
devices are required at both ends of the jib to prevent the trolley
from running into the end stops. If the trolley were to run into an end
stop, injuries or fatalities could result in a variety of ways. For
example, the sudden stopping of the trolley at the outward end stop
could cause the load to swing significantly past the crane's maximum
working radius, causing a collapse. Another example is where the load
swing from the sudden stopping of the trolley could cause the load to
fall and strike employees.
If this operational aid were not working properly, the employer
would have to use one of two temporary alternative measures: (A) Mark
the trolley rope so it can be seen by the operator at a point that will
give the operator sufficient time to stop the trolley prior to the end
stops, or (B) use a spotter who is in direct communication with the
operator when
[[Page 48055]]
operations are conducted within 10 feet of either end of the travel
rail end stops; the spotter must inform the operator of the distance of
the travel bogies from the end stops or buffers.
Proposed Sec. 1926.1435(e)(5)(i)(B) did not explicitly require the
spotter to be in direct communication with the operator. The Agency
proposed adding this language as necessary to make the provision work
effectively and as the Committee intended and requested public comment
on whether to add specific language to that effect. Five commenters
supported the addition of an explicit requirement that the spotter be
in direct communication with the operator; no commenters opposed the
change. (ID-0069.1; -0156.1; -0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) OSHA has
amended Sec. 1926.1435(e)(5)(i)(B) accordingly.
A similar change has been made to Sec. Sec. 1926.1435(e)(5)(ii),
(e)(5)(iii), (e)(5)(iv), and (e)(5)(vii) discussed below, which also
provide for the use of a spotter as a temporary alternative measure
when certain operational aids are not functioning.
In addition, one commenter suggested there should be visual acuity
requirements for spotters. (ID-0069.1.) For the reasons discussed
earlier under Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(ii), OSHA is not specifying such a
requirement in this rule.
Paragraph (e)(5)(ii) requires a boom hoist limiting device. As
defined in Sec. 1926.1401, the word ``boom'' used in reference to
tower cranes refers to a luffing boom. Therefore, under this paragraph,
a boom hoist limiting device would only be required on cranes with
luffing booms. A boom hoist limiting device automatically prevents the
boom hoist from pulling the boom past the minimum allowable radius
(maximum boom angle), which can result in boom failure (see the
discussion above of boom hoist limiting device with respect to Sec.
1926.1416(d)(1)). The temporary alternative measures for this
operational aid are similar to the ones for the trolley travel limiting
device and the boom hoist limiting device in Sec. 1926.1416(d)(1): the
employer has the option of clearly marking the cable at a point that
would give the operator sufficient time to stop the boom hoist within
the minimum and maximum boom radius or use a spotter who is in direct
communication with the operator to inform the operator when this point
is reached.
Paragraph (e)(5)(iii) requires an anti two-blocking device. This is
comparable to the requirement for anti two-blocking devices for other
cranes required by Sec. 1926.1416. This operational aid is required on
tower cranes to prevent damage from contact between the load block,
overhaul ball, or similar component, and the boom tip (or fixed upper
block or similar component). Where the operational aid is not working
properly, the employer has the option of clearly marking the cable at a
point that would give the operator sufficient time to stop the hoist to
prevent two-blocking, or use a spotter who is in direct communication
with the operator to inform the operator when this point is reached.
(See the discussion of the need for this type of device, and rationale
for including it as an operational aid, above with respect to Sec.
1926.1416(d)(3)).
Paragraph (e)(5)(iv) requires a hoist drum lower limiting device.
This paragraph requires that tower cranes manufactured more than one
year after the effective date of this standard be equipped with a
device that prevents the last two wraps of hoist cable from being
spooled off the drum. Such a device prevents the entire rope from being
spooled off the drum, which can cause the rope to separate (and the
load to fall) from the drum due to the shock from the load suddenly
stopping.
Paragraph (e)(5)(v) requires a load moment limiting device. ``Load
moment (or rated capacity) limiter'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401.
This type of device detects and prevents a potential overload condition
which could cause the load to fall, the crane to collapse or other
failure of the crane.
Where the load moment limiting device is not in proper working
condition, two types of measures are required. The first type of
measure is designed to ensure that the operator determines the radius.
If the crane is equipped with a radius indicating device, it is
required to be used. If the crane is not so equipped, the radius is
required to be measured (such as with a tape measure) to ensure that
the load is within the rated capacity of the crane.
The second type of measure is designed to ensure that the operator
accurately determines the weight of the load. The load weight is
required to be determined from a source recognized by the industry
(such as the load's manufacturer), or by a calculation method
recognized by the industry (such as calculating a steel beam from
measured dimensions and a known per foot weight). This information must
be provided to the operator prior to the lift. The proposed rule had
provided for calculations based on a ``reliable'' source or calculation
method, or ``by other equally reliable means.'' To avoid potentially
subjective interpretations of ``reliable,'' OSHA is instead requiring
that the measurements be from a source typically relied on in the
industry.
Paragraph (e)(5)(vi) requires a hoist line pull limiting device so
that the load applied to the hoist drum will not exceed the hoist's
capacity. If the hoist is equipped with a multiple speed hoist
transmission, the device would have to limit the hoist's lifting
capacity in each individual gear ratio. If the hoist line pull were to
exceed the hoist's capacity, the hoist could fail and unspool the line,
causing the load to drop suddenly.
The temporary alternative measure for this operational aid is that
the operator ensure that the weight of the load does not exceed the
capacity of the hoist, taking into account each individual gear ratio
if the crane is equipped with a multiple speed hoist transmission. For
example, this could be done by the operator checking the hoist capacity
in the equipment manual and verifying that the load will not exceed
that capacity.
Paragraph (e)(5)(vii) requires a rail travel limiting device in
each direction to prevent the travel bogies from running into the end
stops or buffers. As noted above, rail stops that keep the crane from
overshooting the section of rail within which it is supposed to operate
is one of the safety devices required for tower cranes that travel on
rails. A rail travel limiting device is a device that limits the
crane's travel to keep a travel bogie from running into a rail stop. C-
DAC determined that rail stops should not be the exclusive means of
ensuring that the crane stays within its intended limits because the
travel bogie could jump the tracks if it were to strike the rail stops
at a high enough speed. The temporary alternative to a rail travel
limiting device that is not in proper working order is to use a spotter
who is in direct communication with the operator when operations are
conducted within 10 feet of either end of the travel rail end stops;
the spotter must inform the operator of the distance of the travel
bogies from the end stops or buffers.
Proposed paragraph (e)(5)(viii) required the boom hoist drum to be
equipped with a device that would positively lock the boom hoist drum.
One example of such a device is a ratchet and pawl mechanism. The
purpose of the device is to prevent the boom hoist (and therefore the
load as well) from inadvertently lowering. The temporary alternative
measure that was proposed was to require the device to be set manually
if an electric, hydraulic, or automatic device is not working.
In the proposed rule, OSHA noted that the temporary alternative
proposed in paragraph (e)(5)(viii) addressed the
[[Page 48056]]
situation where the mechanism to automatically set the locking device
was malfunctioning but did not address the situation where the locking
device itself was not working properly. The Agency requested public
comment on whether this provision should include a temporary measure
that would be required if the positive locking device is not working
properly (regardless of whether it is attempted to be set automatically
or manually) and, if so, what temporary measure is available in such a
situation.
Several commenters responded that boom hoist drum should have
either a positive locking device, an integrally mounted holding device,
a secondary braking device, or an internal static brake to prevent boom
hoist movement in the event of hydraulic or main brake failure. (ID -
0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) According to these commenters, any of these
devices would prevent the boom hoist drum from spinning freely and
allowing the boom to free fall in the event the main boom hoist brake
(required by Sec. 1926.1435(d)(vii)(A)) fails.
OSHA concludes that any of the devices mentioned by these
commenters, if working properly, would comply with this provision.
However, the commenters did not address the question posed in the
proposal as to whether there is a temporary measure that should be
required if the device is not working properly. If the drum was, for
example, equipped with a ratchet and pawl locking device, the record
does not show that it would be practical to install another type of
device in the event the ratchet and pawl device is not working
properly.
Upon further reviewing proposed paragraph (e)(5)(viii), OSHA
determines it was C-DAC's intent to require a positive locking
mechanism that could be set from a control at the operator's station
and to require, as a temporary alternative measure if the control is
not working, that the device be set manually. Moreover, OSHA concludes
that such an alternative would provide an adequate temporary
alternative. Such a device would be analogous to the parking brake of a
car, which can normally be actuated from the driver's seat but, in the
event that control fails, the car can be kept from moving by chocking
the wheels. To express this intent more clearly, OSHA is modifying
paragraph (e)(5)(viii) accordingly.
Paragraph (e)(6) requires the category II operational aids
discussed below and specifies the alternative measures that would have
to be followed if they are not working properly. If these operational
aids are not working properly, they must be repaired no later than 30
days after the deficiency occurs. However, if the employer documents
that it has ordered the necessary parts within 7 days of the occurrence
of the deficiency, and the part is not received in time to complete the
repair in 30 days, the repair must be completed within 7 days of
receipt of the parts. As noted above, the word ``days'' in the proposed
rule has been changed to ``calendar days'' in the final rule.
Paragraph (e)(6)(i) requires a boom angle or hook radius indicator
as specified in Sec. Sec. 1926.1435(e)(6)(i)(A) and (B). Under these
provisions, luffing boom tower cranes are required to have a boom angle
indicator readable from the operator's station. Hammerhead tower cranes
manufactured more than one year after the effective date of this
standard are required to have a hook radius indicator readable from the
operator's station. These devices are needed because the information
they provide is necessary for the operator to determine the crane's
capacity under its load chart. As with the similar devices required
under Sec. 1926.1416, the temporary alternative is to measure the boom
angle or hook radius with a measuring device (Sec.
1926.1435(e)(6)(i)(C)).
Section 1926.1435(e)(6)(ii) requires tower cranes to have a trolley
travel deceleration device that would automatically reduce the trolley
speed before the trolley reaches the end limit in both directions.
Section 1926.1435(e)(6)(iii) requires tower cranes to have a boom hoist
deceleration device, which would automatically reduce the boom speed
before a luffing boom reaches the minimum or maximum radius limit.
Section 1926.1435(e)(6)(iv) requires tower cranes to have a load hoist
deceleration device, which would automatically limit the load speed
before the load hoist reaches the upper limit. In the proposed rule,
the temporary alternative measure for each of these operational aids
was for the operator to reduce the speed when approaching the limits.
In specifying temporary alternative measures generally for
operational aids, C-DAC sought to identify some measure in each
instance that would assist the operator in performing the necessary
task (in this case, slowing the action of a crane component before it
reaches a limiting point). However, in the case of these deceleration
devices, the Committee was unable to identify or develop that type of
alternative measure. The temporary alternatives listed in the proposed
rule instruct the operator to do manually what the operational aids are
supposed to do automatically but do not assist the operator in carrying
out this function. Because the temporary alternatives specified in the
proposed rule did not meet the usual criteria for temporary alternative
measures, the Agency requested public comment on whether there are any
alternative measures that could be used to assist the operators if
these deceleration devices malfunction.
Four commenters stated there are no temporary alternative measures
for these devices. (ID-0172.1; -0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) No
commenters suggested that there are available measures.
As neither C-DAC nor public commenters have been able to identify
appropriate temporary alternative measures, OSHA has considered whether
to continue to characterize these devices as operational aids or to
treat them as safety devices and prohibit operation of the equipment
unless they are working properly. OSHA has also considered whether to
retain them as Category II operational aids, which must be repaired
within 30 days, or to change them to Category I operational aids, which
must be repaired within 7 days. OSHA has decided to retain them as
Category II operational aids but to modify the temporary alternative
from that in the proposed rule to ensure that the operator is able to
operate the crane safely even if a deceleration device is not working.
As noted above, the proposed rule specified as a ``temporary
alternative measure'' that the operator reduce speed when approaching a
limit (such as a trolley's end limit) if a deceleration device is not
working properly. In fact, reducing the speed near a limit is a work
practice that crane operators generally follow even if the deceleration
devices are working properly because serious damage, such as the load
falling, can result if a deceleration device should fail suddenly while
the component is moving too fast at the end of its travel. The
deceleration devices serve as backup devices that slow down the
components in the event the operator fails to do so properly, but
operator control is the primary means of slowing the trolley, boom
hoist, and load hoist before they reach the end of their travel.
As noted above, OSHA is retaining C-DAC's characterization of these
deceleration devices as Category II operational aids. C-DAC determined
that the crane could be operated safely if the deceleration devices
were malfunctioning as long as the operator follows the normal practice
of manually slowing the trolley, boom hoist, and load hoist when they
are near the end of their travel. No commenter or witness
[[Page 48057]]
suggested that a different characterization was proper.
To address operations when the deceleration device is
malfunctioning, OSHA is requiring the employer to make sure that the
operator is aware of the malfunctioning deceleration device and of the
need to take extra care when the component is near the end of its
travel, instead of requiring the temporary alternative measures listed
in the proposed rule. OSHA is therefore specifying, in the final rule,
that as a temporary alternative measure for each deceleration device,
the employer must post a notice in the cab of the crane notifying the
operator that the device in question is malfunctioning and instructing
the operator to reduce speed when approaching a limit corresponding to
the malfunctioning device. OSHA concludes that an operator who knows
that the deceleration device is not working properly will take the
extra care needed to ensure that the component is moving at a safe
speed. OSHA modified paragraphs (e)(6)(ii)--(iv) in the final rule
accordingly.
Paragraph (e)(6)(v) requires tower cranes to have a device that
displays the wind speed, mounted above the upper rotating structure. On
self erecting tower cranes, which typically rotate at the tower base
and do not have an ``upper rotating superstructure,'' it would have to
be mounted at or above the jib level to be in a position to give a
useful reading. The temporary alternative measure is for the wind speed
to be obtained from a properly functioning device on another tower
crane on the same site or to be estimated by a qualified person.
One commenter suggested that paragraph (e)(6)(v) be modified to
make it clear that the qualified person performing the estimate of the
wind speed must be located at the same height as the operator of the
crane. (ID-0199.1.) OSHA does not determine such a change is needed.
First, the operator's station is not always at the level of the jib; in
some cranes the operator cab is well below the jib, and in others the
operator may even be at ground level. Second, a qualified person is
expected to use his or her judgment and expertise to perform numerous
functions throughout this rule, and OSHA concludes that the qualified
person at the site is best able to determine how best to estimate the
wind speed if called upon to do so under this paragraph.
Section 1926.1435(e)(6)(vi) requires tower cranes manufactured more
than one year after the effective date of this standard to have a
device that displays the magnitude of the load on the hook. This could
be either a separate device or one that is part of the load moment
limiting device (discussed above) that displays magnitude of the load
on the hook. By informing the operator of the weight of the load, this
device helps the operator ensure that the crane is operated within its
rated capacity. The temporary alternative is for the weight of the load
to be determined from a source recognized by the industry (such as the
load's manufacturer), by a calculation method recognized by the
industry (such as calculating the weight a steel beam from measured
dimensions and a known per foot weight), or by other equally reliable
means. This information must be provided to the operator prior to the
lift. The proposed rule had provided that the weight of the load and
calculations be based on a ``reliable source.'' To avoid the
potentially subjective interpretations of ``reliable,'' OSHA is instead
requiring in the final rule that these be from a source typically
relied on in the industry.
One commenter believed that most of the operational aids listed in
this section are so vital to safe operation that the crane should not
be operated if they are not functioning properly. (ID-0172.1.) In
effect, this commenter would convert these devices from operational
aids to safety devices. This commenter also believed the time period
for other operational aids to be repaired should be shortened.
It was C-DAC's considered judgment that safety would not be
compromised if the employer follows the temporary alternative measures
specified for the various operational aids and that the time periods
for getting malfunctioning devices repaired was reasonable. This
commenter has offered no basis for OSHA to override C-DAC's judgment on
these issues.
Paragraph (f) Inspections
Proposed paragraph (f)(1) of this section did not state that Sec.
1926.1413 (Wire rope--inspection) applies to tower cranes. OSHA notes
that the wire rope inspections required under Sec. 1926.1413 must also
be conducted for tower cranes and determines it is useful to reference
all tower crane inspection requirements in Sec. 1926.1435(f).
Therefore, OSHA modified Sec. 1926.1435(f)(1) of the final rule to
specify that 1926.1413 applies to tower cranes.
Under paragraph (f)(1), the post-erection, shift, monthly, and
annual inspections required under Sec. Sec. 1926.1412 and 1926.1413
must be conducted for tower cranes.
Proposed paragraphs (f)(2) and (f)(3) specified additional
requirements for the post-erection and monthly inspections for tower
cranes beyond those required under Sec. 1926.1412. OSHA received no
comments objecting to those requirements but did receive comments
suggesting that a pre-erection inspection should be required and
recommending that additional items be included in the monthly
inspection. OSHA will first address the pre-erection inspection issue.
Two commenters and witnesses at the hearing urged OSHA to add a
requirement for a pre-erection inspection of the crane's component
parts. (ID-0182.1; -0199.1.) One of the commenters reasoned that a
thorough inspection of a tower crane's component parts is more
difficult once the crane is erected because the inspector would have to
be jacked or hoisted into place and access to the parts would be more
restricted. (ID-0199.1.) A witness testified that shift inspections are
not adequate to detect damage from previous use, dismantling, handling,
or shipping, and such damage could remain undetected until the next
comprehensive inspection unless a pre-erection inspection is conducted.
(ID-0341.)
Several witnesses who use tower cranes also testified in favor of
pre-erection inspections and said that they routinely conduct such
inspections. (ID-0344.) For example, a representative from a steel
erection contractor and crane vendor was asked by a public participant
if there is a benefit to require a pre-erection inspection of all
component parts by a qualified person. In response, he testified that a
pre-erection inspection is done routinely anyway because his company is
required to inspect the crane components before erection to make sure
the components were not damaged during shipping. (ID-0344.)
In addition, one commenter noted that ASME B30.3 (2003),
Construction Tower Cranes, includes a provision on pre-erection
inspections, which suggests that such inspections are routinely
conducted in the industry. (ID-0405.1.) The ASME B30.3 provision reads:
3-1.1.2(g). Before crane components are erected, they shall be
visually inspected for damage from shipping and handling. Dented,
bent, torn, gouged, or otherwise damaged structural members shall
not be erected until repaired in accordance with the manufacturer's
or a qualified person's instructions, or replaced.
Although the record contains substantial support for pre-erection
inspections, it also reflects different views regarding the appropriate
scope of such an inspection. One commenter recommended an inspection of
``the
[[Page 48058]]
tower crane's component parts.'' (ID-0182.1.) As noted above, the ASME
B30.3 standard similarly refers to ``crane components.'' Another
commenter listed the turntable, jib, and boom as items to be inspected.
(ID-0199.1.) One witness at the hearing stated that the pre-erection
inspection should include the tower, turntable, jib, counterjib,
machinery, masts, boom, and pendants. (ID-0341.) However, the
organization represented by that witness submitted a considerably
longer list of items it believed should be inspected. (ID-0333.)
Another witness favored pre-erection inspections of ``major
components'' but could not offer a more specific definition than
``components that, if they failed, would have a catastrophic result.''
(ID-0344.)
In light of the record, OSHA concludes that pre-erection
inspections should be required for tower cranes, with such inspections
focused on discovering defects that would be difficult to detect during
the shift inspections that will be conducted regularly after the crane
is put in service. By focusing the inspection on such components, the
pre-erection inspection will address the concern expressed by
commenters that some defects will be difficult to detect during shift
inspections after the crane is erected.
OSHA is requiring the pre-erection inspection to be conducted by a
``qualified person.'' The final rule requires that certain other
inspections be conducted by a qualified person, including the post-
erection inspection required by Sec. 1926.1412(c) and the annual/
comprehensive inspection required by Sec. 1926.1412(f). As discussed
below, under the pre-erection inspection required by this final rule,
the individual conducting the inspection must make decisions similar to
those that must be made during the annual/comprehensive inspection,
i.e., deciding whether a deficiency would be an immediate safety hazard
or whether it requires scrutiny during the monthly inspections. Since
the pre-erection inspection requires the same degree of expertise as
the annual/comprehensive inspections, paragraph (f)(2) is similarly
requiring the pre-erection inspection to be conducted by a qualified
person.
Paragraph (f)(2)(i) requires the qualified person to pay particular
attention to components that will be difficult to inspect thoroughly
during shift inspections. As noted above, inspection of such components
was a special concern of commenters who believed that pre-erection
inspections should be required.
The shift, monthly, and annual inspections required under Sec.
1926.1412 leave it up to the individual conducting the inspection to
determine if a deficiency revealed by an inspection constitutes a
safety hazard that requires either immediate correction or further
scrutiny. In particular, Sec. Sec. 1926.1412(f)(4)-(6) on annual
inspections require the qualified person who conducts the inspection to
determine whether a deficiency is a safety hazard that requires
immediate correction or whether it is not yet a safety hazard but is of
sufficient concern to be monitored in the monthly inspections.
OSHA determines that a similar approach is appropriate here because
a deficiency revealed in a pre-erection inspection may be sufficiently
serious that a component should not be used at all, or it may not
presently be a safety hazard but may be a matter of concern to the
inspector so as to require periodic scrutiny. Accordingly, paragraph
(f)(2)(ii) requires the qualified person who conducts the inspection to
determine, before a component is erected, whether the component would
create a safety hazard if used on the crane. If so, the component
cannot be used unless it is repaired and upon re-inspection is found
not to constitute a safety hazard.
Paragraph (f)(2)(iii) specifies that, if the qualified person
determines that, though not presently a safety hazard, the component
needs to be monitored, the employer must ensure that the component is
checked in the monthly inspections. To ensure that any individual who
conducts a monthly inspection knows that the component must be
monitored during that inspection, paragraph (f)(2)(iii) requires that
any such determination be documented and the documentation made
available to any person who conducts a monthly inspection.
Proposed paragraph (f)(2) specified two additional post-erection
inspection requirements in addition to those required under Sec.
1926.1412(c). It required a load test using certified weights, or
scaled weights using a certified scale with a current certificate of
calibration, after each erection. It also specified that the load test
be conducted in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, or if
no instructions are available, in accordance with written load test
procedures developed by a registered professional engineer. No adverse
comment was received on these provisions, and proposed paragraph (f)(2)
is promulgated as proposed but renumbered as paragraph (f)(3).
Proposed paragraph (f)(3) required that additional items be
included in the monthly inspections of tower cranes. These include
tower (mast) bolts and other structural bolts (for loose or dislodged
condition) from the base of the tower up or, if the crane is tied to or
braced by the structure, those above the upper-most brace support
(Sec. 1926.1435(f)(3)(i)). The monthly inspection must also include
the upper-most tie-in, braces, floor supports, and floor wedges where
the tower crane is supported by the structure (Sec.
1926.1435(f)(3)(i)), for loose or dislodged components.
One commenter's suggestion addressed the suitability of the bolts
used to erect the tower and to support the turntable. (ID-0172.1.)
Although OSHA agrees with the commenter that these bolts serve an
important safety function, the commenter did not provide any supporting
information that would enable OSHA to evaluate whether the detailed
requirements proposed by the commenter are needed to improve tower
crane safety. However, OSHA does determine that the bolts should be
included as components to be inspected and is adding paragraph (f)(5)
requiring them to be inspected for proper condition and torque as part
of the annual inspection.\134\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\134\ Accordingly, OSHA is promulgating proposed paragraph
(f)(3) but renumbering it as paragraph (f)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A commenter suggested that the upper rotation structure should
undergo a special, thorough inspection before climbing. (ID-0137.1.)
This commenter did not state why it believed such an inspection was
needed. Accordingly, OSHA has no basis in the record to conclude that
the additional inspection requested by this commenter would improve the
safety of the climbing operation.
Proposal for Tower Crane Tracking System
A witness at the hearing suggested that OSHA adopt a tracking
system whereby any major part of a tower crane that suffered a
structural failure would be able to be identified even if that part was
moved to another jurisdiction. (ID-0342.) The witness explained that
the proposed system would require the serial number of parts that
failed to be reported to the manufacturer so that localities such as
New York City could contact the manufacturer to determine whether a
particular crane was safe to operate within that jurisdiction.\135\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\135\ This commenter also called for prototype testing of tower
cranes. (ID-0156.1.) As explained in Sec. 1926.1433, OSHA has added
such a requirement to Sec. 1926.1433(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48059]]
OSHA is not promulgating requirements to implement the system
proposed by this witness. Such a scheme is complex, and appears to
require the development of new tracking systems and required reporting
to manufacturers that might be beyond the scope of OSHA's authority. It
also goes far beyond any provisions of the proposed standard, and its
adoption would require OSHA to reopen the rulemaking record to allow
other interested persons to comment on it. OSHA does not conclude that
such a reopening is justified on the basis of the witness's testimony.
The Agency notes, however, that it is not preempting a locality's
authority to establish such a scheme within its jurisdiction. (See
discussion of preemption under federalism in section V.D of this
preamble.)
Section 1926.1436 Derricks
This section contains requirements for derricks that supplement the
other requirements of this standard. Subpart N, at former Sec.
1926.550(e), required derricks to comply with applicable provisions for
design, construction, installation, inspection, testing, maintenance,
and operation in ANSI B30.6-1969, safety code for ``Derricks,'' as well
as the general provisions of subpart N that applied to all equipment.
C-DAC's experience, and its review of injury and fatality
statistics, did not indicate a need to deviate significantly from the
requirements of subpart N. For the most part, the most recent version
of the ANSI standard, ASME B30.6-2003, does not differ substantively
from the 1969 version, so the requirements of this new section differ
substantively in only limited respects from previous subpart N. Where
substantive differences exist, they are discussed in the context of
that requirement.
Paragraph (a)
Section 1926.1436 contains supplemental requirements for derricks,
whether temporarily or permanently mounted; all sections of this
subpart apply to derricks unless specified otherwise. Section
1926.1436(a) defines a derrick as powered equipment consisting of a
mast or equivalent member that is held at or near the end by guys or
braces, with or without a boom, and its hoisting mechanism. The mast/
equivalent member and/or the load is moved by the hoisting mechanism
(typically base-mounted) and operating ropes. Derricks include: A-
frame, basket, breast, Chicago boom, gin pole (except gin poles used
for erection of communication towers), guy, shearleg, stiffleg, and
variations of such equipment.
Paragraph (a) excludes the gin poles when used for the erection of
communication towers. This mirrors the exclusion of such equipment from
the scope of the standard under Sec. 1926.1400(c)(12). See discussion
of this exclusion in Sec. 1926.1400(c)(12). No comments were received;
therefore this provision is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b) Operation--Procedures
Paragraph (b)(1) of this section states that Sec. 1926.1417
(Operation) of this standard applies to derricks except for Sec.
1926.1417(c) (Accessibility of procedures). C-DAC concluded and OSHA
agreed that it was appropriate to keep the operation requirements for
derricks consistent with those of cranes as much as possible because
they both present many of the same hazards and operational issues.
However, Sec. 1926.1417(c) requires the operating procedures,
including load charts, to be located in ``the cab'' of the equipment
and derricks often do not have a cab. Therefore, it was not appropriate
to require that Sec. 1926.1417(c) apply to derricks. The discussion of
Sec. 1926.1436(b)(3) sets forth the requirements for the accessibility
of the load chart for derricks.
Paragraph (b)(2) of this section, Load chart contents, lists the
information that must be included on load charts. Subpart N
incorporated similar load chart requirements via sec. 6-1.1.2 in ANSI
B30.6-1969, which remains the same in the 2003 version of the consensus
standard.
Paragraph (b)(2)(i) requires the load chart contain the rated
capacity at corresponding ranges of boom angle or operating radii. This
information is necessary to prevent overloading of the derrick.
Paragraph (b)(2)(ii) requires the load chart to list the specific
lengths of components to which the rated capacities apply. This
information is necessary because the derrick's load capacity varies
with different component lengths.
Paragraph (b)(2)(iii) requires the load chart to list required
parts for hoist reeving. By listing the reeving parts considered during
the tabulation of available load charts, the derrick operator can
determine if available load charts are applicable to the configuration
of the derrick at the work site. As with paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (ii),
meeting the requirement of paragraph (b)(2)(iii) will help prevent
accidents that could occur as a result of errors in determining the
equipment's rated capacity.
Paragraph (b)(2)(iv) requires the size and construction of rope to
be included on the load chart or in the operating manual. This
requirement prevents hoisting accidents that might occur if a rope
fails because it was the wrong size or construction for the load being
lifted.
Paragraph (b)(3) of this section, Load chart location, sets forth
the requirement for the location of load charts. Section
1926.1436(b)(3)(i), Permanent installations, requires permanently
installed derricks with fixed lengths of boom, guy, and mast, to have a
load chart posted where it is visible to personnel responsible for the
operation of the equipment. Section 1926.1436(b)(3)(ii), Non-permanent
installations, requires derricks that are not permanently installed to
have the load chart readily available at the job site to personnel
responsible for the operation of the equipment. These requirements
ensure the critical information contained on these charts is readily
available on the worksite enabling the calculation of the parameters
for a safe lift. No comments were received for Sec. 1926.1436(b); it
is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)--Construction
Paragraph (c) of this section contains supplemental engineering and
fabrication requirements that address hazards specific to derricks.
Paragraph (c)(1), General requirements, lists general construction
requirements that apply to the use of all types of derricks. These
requirements are similar to sec. 6-1.2.1 of ANSI B30.6-1969 and ASME
B30.6-2003 and would help the employer prevent accidents caused by
inadequate structural design and fabrication.
Paragraph (c)(1)(i) states that derricks must be constructed to
meet all stresses imposed on members and components when installed and
operated in accordance with the manufacturer's/builder's procedures and
within its rated capacity. ``Builder'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as
``the builder/constructor of equipment.'' This definition distinguishes
a ``builder'' of equipment (a derrick that is erected at the worksite
by an employer) from a manufacturer, who sells products that may be
used at any worksite. Section 1926.1436(c)(1)(i) uses the word
``builder'' in addition to ``manufacturer'' because it will often be
the builder's procedures, rather than the manufacturer's, that must be
followed to ensure that derricks are constructed properly. In the
proposed rule, the definition of builder included the word employer.
Upon review of the definition proposed, OSHA determines that the word
employer did not enhance the
[[Page 48060]]
definition and could possibly lead to confusion. Therefore, OSHA has
modified the definition in the final rule.
Paragraph (c)(1)(ii) specifies that the welding of load sustaining
members must conform to recommended practices in ANSI/AWS D14.3-94 or
AWS D1.1/D1.1M:2002. This is similar to sec. 6-1.2.1(b) of ASME B30.6-
2003 which relies on newer welding standards than ANSI B30.6-1969.
Paragraph (c)(1)(ii) will prevent structural failures when the derrick
is used within its rated capacity.
One commenter wanted the referenced consensus standards to be
included as an appendix for ease of compliance. (ID-0214.1.) Including
all the consensus standards relevant to this final rule would make the
regulatory text or an appendix cumbersome. Moreover, OSHA determines
that employers using this equipment are likely to have ready access to
the pertinent standards referenced in paragraph (c)(1)(ii). For these
reasons, OSHA is not adding the full text of referenced consensus
standards to the regulatory text or an appendix. This paragraph is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)(2) of this section, Guy derricks, lists the
additional requirements applicable to the construction of guy derricks.
(See the preamble to the proposed rule for a short description of guy
derricks, 73 FR 59853, Oct. 9, 2008.)
Paragraph (c)(2)(i) specifies the minimum number of guys to be six,
with equal spacing, except where a qualified person or derrick
manufacturer approves variations from these requirements and revises
the rated capacity to compensate for such variations. This requirement
is comparable to sec. 6-1.2.2 of ANSI B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003.
This paragraph is adopted as proposed.
Paragraph (c)(2)(ii) states that guy derricks must not be used
unless the employer has the following guy information from a
manufacturer or from a qualified person when not available from the
manufacturer: (A) The number of guys; (B) the spacing around the mast;
and (C) the size, grade, and construction of rope to be used for each
guy. Paragraph (c)(2)(iii) requires that for guy derricks manufactured
after December 18, 1970, in addition to the information required by
Sec. 1926.1436(c)(2)(ii), the employer must have the following guy
information from a manufacturer or from a qualified person when not
available from the manufacturer: (A) The amount of initial sag or
tension; and (B) the amount of tension in guy line rope at anchor.
These provisions are substantially different from requirements in
the relevant ANSI/ASME standards. The corresponding ANSI/ASME
provisions are sec. 6-1.2.2 of ANSI B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003. The
ANSI/ASME standards require the derrick manufacturer to furnish
complete information recommending the guy specifications listed in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1436(c)(2)(ii) and (c)(2)(iii).\136\ The OSHA standard,
by contrast, imposes an obligation on derrick users to possess the
necessary information. No comments were received on this deviation from
the consensus standard and OSHA has deferred to C-DAC's judgment that
it is better to place this responsibility on the derrick user rather
than the manufacturer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\136\ The 1969 version of the ANSI standard does not include the
pieces of information described in Sec. 1926.1436(c)(2)(iii), but
later versions of the B30.6 standard, including the 2003 version,
list those items.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraphs (c)(2)(ii) and (c)(2)(iii) have been revised from the
proposal. As proposed, these paragraphs simply required the employer to
have the listed pieces of information before using the guy derrick.
OSHA requested comments on whether the standard should require guy
specifications to be developed by a qualified person if they are not
available from the manufacturer. Several comments were received
supporting the proposed revision. (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) No
comments were received that opposed this proposed revision. In the
final rule the regulatory text in both paragraphs has been updated to
clarify that the required information must come from the manufacturer
or from a qualified person when that information is not available from
a manufacturer.
Paragraph (c)(2)(iv) states that the mast base must permit the mast
to rotate freely with allowance for slight tilting of the mast caused
by guy slack. No comments were received for this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)(2)(v) requires that the mast cap must: (A) permit the
mast to rotate freely; (B) withstand tilting and cramping caused by the
guy loads; (C) be secured to the mast to prevent disengagement during
erection; and (D) be provided with means for attaching guy ropes.
Paragraphs (c)(2)(iv) and (v) track similar provisions in secs. 6-
1.2.2(c) and (d) of ANSI B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003. No comments
were received on (c)(2)(v); it is promulgated as proposed
Additional installation requirements for guy derricks that are
specific to the anchoring of its guys are addressed in Sec.
1926.1436(d).
In the proposed rule, Sec. Sec. 1926.1436(c) and 1926.1436(d) both
contained requirements related to guy derricks. OSHA asked for public
comment as to whether having specifications for guy derricks in both
paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section could lead to confusion or
impede compliance with its provisions. Several commenters believed that
the two sets of proposed requirements for guy derricks should be
combined. (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) However, the commenters did
not offer an explanation for how this would prevent confusion or
enhance compliance. Upon consideration, OSHA disagrees with the
commenters and therefore, requirements for guy derricks will be found
in both paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, just as in the proposed
rule.
Paragraph (c)(3), Stiffleg derricks, provides additional
requirements specific to stiffleg derricks to help ensure their safe
use. These requirements which have not been changed from the proposal
are similar to those in secs. 6-1.2.2(c) and (d) of ANSI B30.6-1969 and
ASME B30.6-2003.
Paragraph (c)(3)(i) requires the mast to be supported in the
vertical position by at least two stifflegs; one end of each must be
connected to the top of the mast and the other end securely anchored.
Paragraph (c)(3)(ii) specifies that stifflegs must be capable of
withstanding the loads imposed at any point of operation within the
rated load chart range.
Paragraph (c)(3)(iii) specifies that the mast base must: (A) permit
the mast to rotate freely (when necessary); and (B) permit deflection
of the mast without binding.
Paragraph (c)(3)(iv) states that the mast must be prevented from
lifting out of its socket when the mast is in tension.
Paragraph (c)(3)(v) requires the stiffleg connecting member at the
top of the mast to: (A) permit the mast to rotate freely (when
necessary); (B) withstand the loads imposed by the action of the
stifflegs; and (C) be secured so as to oppose separating forces.
OSHA requested public comment on whether the provisions in
paragraphs (c)(3) and (d)(3), which both contained requirements for
stiffleg derricks, needed to be changed or modified to avoid potential
confusion. As discussed above, with respect to the requirements for guy
derricks in both paragraphs (c) and (d), OSHA has decided to adhere to
the proposal; requirements for stiffleg derricks will be found in both
paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section.
Paragraph (c)(4) of this section, Gin pole derricks, contains
additional requirements specific to gin pole
[[Page 48061]]
derricks to help ensure their safe use. Similar requirements are found
in sec. 6-1.2.4 of ASME B30.6-2003. No comments were received for
paragraph (c)(4); it is promulgated as proposed.
Under paragraph (c)(4)(i), guy lines must be sized and spaced so as
to make the gin pole stable in both boomed and vertical positions. If
the size and/or spacing of guy lines does not result in the gin pole
being stable in both boomed and vertical positions, the employer must
ensure that the derrick is not used in an unstable position.
Paragraph (c)(4)(ii) requires that the base of the gin pole permit
movement of the pole (when necessary).
Under paragraph (c)(4)(iii), the gin pole must be anchored at the
base against horizontal forces (when such forces are present).
Paragraph (c)(5) of this section, Chicago boom derricks, states
that the fittings for stepping the boom and for attaching the topping
lift must be arranged to: (i) Permit the derrick to swing at all
permitted operating radii and mounting heights between fittings; (ii)
accommodate attachment to the upright member of the host structure;
(iii) withstand the forces applied when configured and operated in
accordance with the manufacturer's/builder's procedures and within its
rated capacity; and (iv) prevent the boom or topping lift from lifting
out under tensile forces. Similar requirements, which will help ensure
that such derricks are used safely, are found in sec. 6-1.2.5 of ASME
B30.6-2003. No comments were received for paragraph (c)(5); it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d) Anchoring and Guying
Paragraph (d) of this section lists requirements for anchoring and
guying derricks to the surfaces that support them.
Paragraph (d)(1) requires the use of load anchoring data developed
by the manufacturer or a qualified person. Subpart N, via sec. 6-1.4.3
of ANSI B30.6-1969, required load anchoring data for non-permanent
installations, which include most derricks used for construction work,
to be determined by the user. The 2003 version of ASME B30.6 requires
the data to be determined by a qualified person. C-DAC concluded that,
to better ensure safety, a qualified person (as defined in Sec.
1926.1401) is needed to develop such data. The final rule affords the
employer the additional flexibility of relying on data provided by the
derrick manufacturer rather than relying exclusively on a qualified
person to develop such data.\137\ No comments were received for this
provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\137\ C-DAC believed that derrick users should be able to rely
on data developed by the manufacturer or a qualified person for any
type of installation and therefore did not distinguish between fixed
and temporary installations for this purpose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (d)(2) of this section, Guy derricks, lists additional
requirements, for anchoring and guying, that are specific to the use of
guy derricks. These provisions are similar to sec. 6-1.4.1 of ANSI
B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003. Under paragraph (d)(2)(i) the mast
based must be anchored. Paragraph (d)(2)(ii) provides that the guys
must be secured to the ground or another firm anchorage. And under
paragraph (d)(2)(iii) the anchorage and guying must be designed to
withstand maximum horizontal and vertical forces encountered when
operating within rated capacity with the particular guy slope and
spacing specified for the application. No comments were received for
paragraph (d)(2); it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d)(3) of this section, Stiffleg derricks, lists
anchoring and guying requirements that are specific to the use of
stiffleg derricks. This paragraph is similar to sec. 6-1.4.2 in ANSI
B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003.
Under paragraph (d)(3)(i) the mast base and stifflegs must be
anchored. Additionally, (d)(3)(ii) provides that the mast base and
stifflegs must be designed to withstand maximum horizontal and vertical
forces encountered when operating within rated capacity with the
particular stiffleg spacing and slope specified for the application.
Paragraph (d)(3) had no comments and is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (e) Swingers and Hoists
Paragraph (e) of this section lists requirements for swinger
mechanisms and hoists that are used as part of a derrick. Paragraph
(e)(1) requires that the boom, swinger mechanisms, and hoists be
suitable for the derrick work intended and be anchored to prevent
displacement from the imposed loads. This provision is similar to sec.
6-1.5.1 of ANSI B30.6-1969 and sec. 6-1.5 of ASME B30.6-2003. No
comments were received for paragraph (e)(1); it is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (e)(2) of this section, Hoists, specifies the minimum
requirements for hoists used for derricks. This paragraph of the
proposed rule was originally titled and related to base-mounted drum
hoists. However, a tank building institute whose members use derricks
routinely commented that confusion will result in their industry from
the use of the term ``Base-Mounted Drum Hoists,'' in this context. (ID-
0130.1.) Hoists used are not limited to the base-mounted type. The
commenter requested that the regulatory text of Sec. 1926.1436(e)(2)
be revised to replace the words ``base mounted drum hoists'' with the
word ``hoist'' to eliminate ambiguity.
OSHA determines that it is appropriate to revise Sec.
1926.1436(e)(2) to replace the reference to ``base-mounted drum hoist''
with the term ``hoist.'' This revision recognizes that there may be
designs of hoists, other than base-mounted drum, that are used with
derricks.
Additionally, the commenter suggested that Sec. 1926.553 be
revised in conjunction with this final rule. (ID-0130.1.) See
discussion in the preamble explanation of the amendment to subpart M.
Paragraphs (e)(2)(i)(A) through (D) require base-mounted drum
hoists to meet requirements in specified sections of ASME B30.7-2001.
Paragraph (e)(2)(i) does not apply to other types of hoists. No
comments were received on these provisions and the provisions are
adopted as proposed.
Paragraph (e)(2)(ii), Load tests for new hoists, outlines the
requirements for load testing new hoists used with a derrick. The
employer must ensure that new hoists are load tested to a minimum of
110% of rated capacity, but not more than 125% of rated capacity,
unless otherwise recommended by the manufacturer. This requirement is
met where the manufacturer has conducted this testing. ASME B30.7-2001,
in section 7-2.2.2(a), requires similar testing but requires the test
to be conducted by the manufacturer. OSHA recognizes that the
manufacturer will usually be the party who conducts the test and allows
the manufacturer to do so, but paragraph (e)(2)(ii) permits the test to
be conducted by any party as long as it is performed correctly. This
paragraph received no comments and it is adopted as proposed.
Paragraph (e)(2)(iii), Repaired or modified hoists, outlines the
requirements for use of a hoist that has been repaired or modified. If
a hoist has had repairs, modifications or additions that affect its
capacity or safe operation it must be evaluated by a qualified person
to determine if a load test is necessary If a load test is necessary,
load testing must be conducted in accordance with paragraphs (e)(2)(ii)
and (iv). This requirement parallels section 7-2.2.2(b)(1) of ASME
B30.7-2001. OSHA received no comments on
[[Page 48062]]
this provision and it is adopted as proposed.
Paragraph (e)(2)(iv), Load test procedure, outlines how tests
required by paragraphs (e)(2)(ii) or (iii) must be conducted. Under
paragraph (e)(2)(iv)(A) the test load must be hoisted a vertical
distance to assure the load is supported by the hoist and held by the
hoist brakes. Paragraph (e)(2)(iv)(B) requires the test load to be
lowered, stopped and held with the brake(s). These provisions are
comparable to section 7-2.2.2(b)(2) of ASME B30.7-2001.
Paragraph (e)(2)(iv)(C) states that the hoist must not be used
unless a competent person determines that the test has been passed.
ASME B30.7-2001 does not specify who must determine if a hoist passes
its load test. C-DAC concluded, however, that to ensure the load test
is properly assessed, this determination needs to be made by a
competent person. The requirement that a competent person determine
whether the hoist has passed a load test is consistent with the
requirement, discussed below under Sec. 1926.1436(g), that a competent
person determine whether a derrick has passed a load test.
A commenter recommended that Sec. 1926.1436(e)(2)(iv) be revised
to add a paragraph requiring derrick users to simulate test/trial lifts
in similar working cycle durations for actual field work cycles. (ID-
0120.1.) The commenter provided no explanation for this suggestion nor
any information on how the practice would improve safety beyond the
requirements proposed. OSHA defers to C-DAC's judgment that the load
test procedures specified in paragraph (e)(2)(iv) of this section will
provide the necessary level of safety to employees.
For these reasons, OSHA did not modify the proposed text of Sec.
1926.1436(e)(2)(iv) to add a paragraph (D). No other comments were
received on paragraph (e)(2)(iv); it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (f) Operational Aids
Paragraph (f) of this section specifies the types of operational
aids that must be used on derricks during construction activities.
Paragraph (f)(1) is adopted as proposed and states that Sec.
1926.1416 (Operational aids) applies, except for Sec. Sec.
1926.1416(d)(1), (e)(1) and (e)(4). Under Sec. 1926.1436(f)(1), two
operational aids--an anti two-block device and a hoist drum rotation
indicator (if the drum is not visible from the operator's station)--are
required on a derrick manufactured more than one year after the
effective date of this subpart. See discussion of Sec. 1926.1416 for
information about the safety functions served by these operational
aids.
Proposed paragraph (f)(2) of this section, Boom angle aid, provided
that the employer had to ensure that either: (i) the boom hoist cable
is marked with caution and stop marks, corresponding to maximum and
minimum allowable boom angles, that are within view of the operator or
a spotter who is in direct communication with the operator, or (ii) an
electronic or other device that signals the operator in time to prevent
the boom from moving past its maximum and minimum angles, or
automatically prevents such movement, is used.
C-DAC intended these precautions to be taken in lieu of requiring
boom angle indicators and that they are unnecessary if the derrick has
such a device. Therefore, OSHA requested public comment on whether
proposed Sec. 1926.1436(f)(2) should be modified by adding the words,
``If the derrick is not equipped with a functioning boom angle
indicator.''
Several commenters supported OSHA's recommended revision of Sec.
1926.1436(f)(2) but noted that the language should be more explicit in
stating that a boom angle indicator is not required. (ID-0180.1; -
0213.1; -0205.1.) They also asked OSHA to clarify that the options
provided in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section are not
required when boom angle indicators are used. To address these
concerns, OSHA has modified the language of Sec. 1926.1436(f)(2) to
clarify that while a boom angle indicator is not required, if the
derrick has a boom angle indicator, the employer need not use the
options provided in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) and (ii) unless the boom angle
indicator is not functioning.
Paragraph (f)(3) of this section, Load weight/capacity devices,
requires that derricks manufactured more than November 8, 2011 with a
maximum rated capacity over 6,000 pounds have at least one of the
following: load weighing device, load moment indicator, rated capacity
indicator, or rated capacity limiter. This paragraph adopts, for
derricks, a requirement comparable to that required for cranes under
Sec. 1926.1416(e)(4). Because this paragraph imposes a requirement not
previously applied to derricks by an industry standard, OSHA concludes,
as did C-DAC, that it is appropriate to allow one year after this
standard becomes effective for new derricks to be equipped with such
devices.
Paragraph (f)(3) sets temporary alternative measures that must be
used when the load weight/capacity device is not working properly. In
that case the weight of the load must be determined from a source
recognized by the industry (e.g., the load's manufacturer), or by a
calculation method recognized by the industry (e.g., calculating a
steel beam from measured dimensions and a known per foot weight). This
information must be provided to the operator before the lift. These
temporary alternatives are the same as those required by Sec.
1926.1416(e)(5) for equipment generally and under Sec.
1926.1435(e)(6)(vi) for tower cranes specifically. For purposes of
clarification, the Agency has added a reference to Sec.
1926.1436(f)(3)(i) noting that the requirements of Sec. 1926.1417(j)
are applicable. (See further discussion at Sec. 1926.1417(j).)
Under Sec. Sec. 1926.1416(e) and 1926.1435(e)(6), a load weight/
capacity device is a category II operational aid and, as such, it must
be repaired within 30 days if it is not working properly.
OSHA requested comment on whether to apply that same 30-day
requirement, along with the exception for a situation in which a part
is ordered within 7 days of the malfunction but is not received in time
to complete the repair within 30 days.
Several commenters supported a revision of paragraph (f)(3) of this
section to include the recommended time limits. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1; -
0343.) OSHA concludes it is reasonable to make this revision for
consistency with alternatives that are available to crane users during
the repair of similar operational aids. Section 1926.1436(f)(3) has
been revised to reflect this modification.
Paragraph (g) Post-Assembly Approval and Testing--New or Reinstalled
Derricks
Paragraph (g) of this section lists the minimum testing and
approval requirements that an employer must meet to assure that its
derrick will be structurally and functionally able to perform within
the manufacturer's specifications and recommendations. C-DAC determined
that by meeting these minimum requirements, the employer would provide
its workers with a safe derrick that will not endanger the workers
during hoisting operations.
Paragraph (g)(1), Anchorages, lists minimum requirements for an
anchor used to support a derrick. Section 1926.1436(g)(1)(i) requires
that the anchorages, including the structure to which the derrick is
attached (if applicable), be approved by a qualified person.
A commenter recommended that Sec. 1926.1436(g)(1)(i) be revised to
require design inspection by a registered
[[Page 48063]]
professional engineer instead of a qualified person as proposed. (ID-
0120.1.) However, the commenter submitted no explanation for the
recommendation nor any information as to why the use of a registered
professional engineer would result in a higher level of safety than the
use of a qualified person. Since no information supporting this
position was presented, OSHA finds no reason to modify the provision
based on this comment; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (g)(1)(ii) requires the qualified person to determine
whether any special testing of the anchorage is needed when rock or
hairpin anchorages are used. If so, it must be tested accordingly.
The provisions of paragraph (g)(1) are similar to what was required
by subpart N through its incorporation of section 6-2.2.1b in ANSI
B30.6-1969 and also what is currently in section 6-2.2.1(b) in its
newest revision, ASME B30.6-2003.\138\ These requirements will help the
employer ensure that the derrick does not collapse due to insufficient
anchoring and injure or kill workers who must use or be in the vicinity
of the derrick. Paragraph (g)(1) is adopted without change from the
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\138\ The OSHA standard differs from ASME B30.6-2003 in the
following respect: The ASME section states that rock or hairpin
anchorages ``may require'' special testing. C-DAC believed that it
is necessary to explicitly require that a qualified person determine
whether such testing is needed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA received no comments on paragraph (g)(2), Functional test, and
it is adopted as proposed. The provision requires that, prior to
initial use, new or reinstalled derricks must be tested by a competent
person with no hook load to verify proper operation as outlined in
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) through (v). The test must include (i) lifting and
lowering the hook(s) through the full range of hook travel; (ii)
raising and lowering the boom through the full range of boom travel;
(iii) swinging in each direction through the full range of swing; (iv)
actuating the anti two-block and boom hoist limit devices (if
provided); and (v) actuating locking, limiting and indicating devices
(if provided). These provisions are similar to section 6-2.2.1 of ASME
B30.6-2003.
OSHA received no comments on paragraph (g)(3), Load test, and it is
adopted as proposed. The provision requires that, prior to initial use,
new or reinstalled derricks must be load tested by a competent person.
Subpart N required operational tests prior to initial use of all new
and altered derricks through the incorporation of section 6-2.2.1 of
ANSI B30.6-1969, but a load test was not explicitly required. C-DAC
recommended that OSHA adopt the revised guidance provided in section 6-
2.2.2 of ASME B30.6-2003, which includes a requirement to load test all
new and reinstalled derricks prior to initial use and specifies the
elements such a test should include. OSHA determines, as did C-DAC,
that compliance with the load test requirements listed in paragraph
(g)(3) will help the employer identify defects in the derrick prior to
its actual use. The requirements for the load test are outlined in
paragraphs (g)(3)(i) through (g)(3)(iii).
Under paragraph (g)(3)(i) test loads must be at least 100% and no
more than 110% of the rated capacity, unless otherwise recommended by
the manufacturer or qualified person, but in no event must the test
load be less than the maximum anticipated load. Under paragraph
(g)(3)(ii) the test must consist of (A) hoisting the test load a few
inches and holding to verify that the load is supported by the derrick
and held by the hoist brake(s); (B) swinging the derrick, if
applicable, the full range of its swing, at the maximum allowable
working radius for the test load; (C) booming the derrick up and down
within the allowable working radius for the test load; and (D)
lowering, stopping and holding the load with the brake(s). Paragraph
(g)(3)(iii) provides that the derrick must not be used unless the
competent person determines that the test has been passed.
Paragraph (g)(4), Documentation, requires that tests conducted
under this paragraph must be documented. The document must contain the
date, test results, and the name of the tester. The document must be
retained until the derrick is re-tested or dismantled, whichever occurs
first. Because a load test meeting the criteria listed in the standard
is so important to the safe use of the derrick, C-DAC determined that
documentation of the test was needed to show that the test had been
conducted properly. Section 6-2.2.2(a)(1) of ASME B30.6-2003 similarly
requires that a written report of the load test be prepared and
maintained. OSHA received no comments on this paragraph. OSHA is adding
language to clarify that all inspection documentation must be available
to inspectors in accordance with Sec. 1926.1412(k).
Paragraph (h) Load Testing Repaired or Modified Derricks
Paragraph (h) of this section requires that derricks that have had
repairs, modifications, or additions affecting the derrick's capacity
or safe operation be evaluated by a qualified person to determine if a
load test is necessary. If so, load testing must be conducted and
documented in accordance with Sec. 1926.1436(g). Subpart N, through
incorporation of section 6-2.3.3 of ANSI B30.6-1969, required all
replaced and repaired parts to have at least the original safety
factor. However, there was no explicit requirement to load test the
derricks after parts were repaired or replaced. ASME B30.6-2003 does
address load testing of repaired, altered or modified derricks in
section 6-2.2.2(b), specifying that the need for such a test be
determined by a qualified person. Paragraph (h) is consistent with the
ASME requirement. Such testing will help the employer identify safety
defects in a repaired or modified derrick prior to its actual use. No
comments were received for (h); it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (i) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (j) Power Failure Procedures
Paragraph (j) of this section requires the derrick operator to
safely stop operation if the power fails during operations and lists
additional steps that must be taken. Section 1926.1436(j)(1) requires
setting all brakes or locking devices. Section 1926.1436(j)(2) requires
moving all clutch and other power controls to the off position. These
steps will prevent inadvertent movement of the load during the power
outage or upon restoration of power. These precautions are found in
section 6-3.2.3(h) of ANSI B30.6-1969 and are reiterated in ASME B30.6-
2003. No comments were received for (j); it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (k) Use of Winch Heads
Paragraph (k) of this section specifies minimum requirements for
the safe use of a winch during hoisting operations. Paragraph (k)(1)
requires that ropes not be handled on a winch head without the
knowledge of the operator. Section 1926.1436(k)(2) requires the
operator to be within reach of the power unit control while a winch
head is being used. These requirements are in sec. 6-3.3.5 of ANSI
B30.6-1969 and are continued in sec. 6-3.3.6 of ASME B30.6-2003. No
comments were received for (k); it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (l) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (m) Securing the Boom
Paragraph (m) of this section lists minimum requirements for
ensuring the stability of a derrick's boom when at rest to prevent
injuries and deaths that could occur if it inadvertently shifted or
fell.
[[Page 48064]]
Paragraph (m)(1) requires that when the boom is being held in a
fixed position, dogs, pawls, or other positive holding mechanisms on
the boom hoist be engaged. Section 1926.1436(m)(2) requires that when
taken out of service for 30 days or more, the boom be secured by one of
the following methods: (i) By laying down the boom; (ii) by securing
the boom to a stationary member, as nearly under the head as possible,
by attachment of a sling to the load block; (iii) for guy derricks, by
lifting the boom to a vertical position and securing it to the mast; or
(iv) for stiffleg derricks, by securing the boom against the stiffleg.
The comparable ASME B30.6-2003 provision (sec. 6-3.3.7) would
require the boom to be secured when the derrick is ``not in use.'' C-
DAC concluded the intent of the ANSI provision was to require the boom
to be secured when the derrick was not in service but concluded that
the ASME wording could be misconstrued to mean that the boom had to be
secured whenever the derrick was not in the process of lifting a load.
To avoid misunderstanding and establish an objective requirement for
when the boom had to be secured, C-DAC proposed that the boom be
secured whenever the derrick is taken out of service for 30 days or
more. No comments were received for paragraph (m); it is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (n)
``Jumping the derrick'' is the practice of moving structural
components of the derrick to different locations, such as to the upper
floors as a building is constructed, and is essential to some
construction activities. Section 1926.1436(n) requires that the process
of jumping the derrick be supervised by the A/D (assembly/disassembly)
director. As defined in Sec. 1926.1401, the A/D director must either
be a person who meets the criteria for both a competent person and a
qualified person, or a competent person who is assisted by one or more
qualified persons.
As discussed above, paragraph (g) of this section requires a
derrick to be load tested to confirm that the derrick and its support
can withstand rated loads. C-DAC discussed whether load testing should
be required when a derrick is jumped, but ultimately concluded that a
jumped derrick need not be load tested and determined that the A/D
director could be relied upon to see that the jumped derrick is
properly erected and anchored and complies with the applicable
requirements of this standard. OSHA is satisfied with C-DAC's rationale
and agrees that giving the A/D director the responsibility for
supervising the jumping of a derrick will ensure that the jumped
derrick is safe to use.
Several labor representatives objected to the use of the word
``supervisor'' in the term ``A/D supervisor'' used in proposed Sec.
1926.1404(a). (ID-0182.1; -0199.1; -0172.1.) As explained in the
discussion of assembly/disassembly, OSHA has decided to replace the
term A/D supervisor with ``A/D director'' in Sec. 1926.1404(a).
Accordingly, OSHA has revised this paragraph to replace the term A/D
supervisor with the term A/D director.
A commenter recommended that Sec. 1926.1436(n) be revised to add a
requirement to include a ``site-specific jumping plan approved by a
registered professional engineer.'' (ID-0120.1.) However, the commenter
provided no explanation for this recommendation, nor did the commenter
provide any information to establish how this would be an improvement
over the rule's requirement to have the jumping process directed by an
A/D director. Since no information supporting this revision was
presented, OSHA finds no persuasive reason to modify the provision
based on this comment; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (o)
Paragraph (o) of this section requires that derrick operations be
supervised by a competent person. No comments were received for this
provision; it is promulgated as proposed. Subpart N incorporated sec.
6.3.1.1 of ANSI B30.6-1969, which requires derrick operations to be
directed by a designated individual. ASME B30.6-2003 contains a similar
requirement, and both consensus standards specify the requirements and
practices of that designated individual. OSHA concludes, as did C-DAC,
that the definition of competent person meets the objectives of the
ANSI/ASME designated individual requirements to competently perform the
specific duties involved in supervising derrick operations. The
experience and knowledge possessed by the competent person and his/her
ability to recognize and correct potential hazardous conditions will
help ensure the safety of derrick operations.
Paragraph (p) Inspections
Under paragraph (p) of this section, the inspection requirements of
Sec. 1926.1412 apply to derricks. In addition to the items that must
be inspected under Sec. 1926.1412, this paragraph requires certain
additional items to be inspected. These additional items, when combined
with the items that must be inspected under Sec. 1926.1412, are
consistent with ANSI B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003.
Paragraph (p)(1), Daily, requires the inspection of guys for proper
tension. Guy wires are critical elements of the support system for
derricks.
Paragraph (p)(2), Annual, contains two requirements. Paragraph
(p)(2)(i) requires inspection of the gudgeon pin for cracks, wear, and
distortion. Paragraph (p)(2)(ii) requires inspection of the foundation
supports for continued ability to sustain the imposed loads. Since a
derrick is more likely to remain stationary and supported by the same
foundation throughout the duration of its use than the majority of the
equipment covered by this standard, C-DAC determined it was necessary
to require the foundation to be inspected annually in addition to the
items specified in Sec. 1926.1412. No comments were received for this
paragraph; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (q) Operator Qualification and Training
Paragraph (q) of this section, Qualification and Training, requires
that derrick operators be trained in the safe operation of the specific
type of equipment that operator will be using. Section 1926.1427 does
not apply.
C-DAC discussed whether there should be a certification requirement
for derrick operators, but decided against recommending such a
provision. The Committee noted that there are no accredited testing
criteria to use for testing derrick operators. Nor are there nationally
recognized accredited testing facilities readily available. C-DAC
questioned whether testing providers would find it cost-effective to
establish accredited testing programs for derrick operators, noting
that most training for derricks must be site specific because the types
of derricks used, their support structures, and the hazards associated
with specific projects vary from company to company. Moreover, the
accident investigation data reviewed by C-DAC did not indicate that
there was a need to require derrick operators to meet certification
requirements similar to those proposed for crane operators.
One commenter opposed excluding derrick operators from the
certification requirements of Sec. 1926.1427 of this subpart because
derrick operations require similar skills to make a safe pick as those
required for cranes. (ID-0172.1.) Testimony from hearing participants
confirmed that the industry was unable to accommodate a need for
accredited testing facilities or applicable
[[Page 48065]]
testing criteria for derrick operators. (ID-0343.) A commenter asserted
there were no organizations that provided accredited testing for
derrick operators in the industry. (ID-0130.1.) Overall OSHA did not
find sufficient evidence in the record to support a requirement for
derrick operators to meet the certification requirements of Sec.
1926.1427. More general discussion of this topic is provided in Sec.
1926.1427.
In reviewing the C-DAC language of Sec. Sec. 1926.1430 and
1926.1436, OSHA realized that the Committee did not specify any
training requirements for derrick operators, which OSHA concludes was
an inadvertent omission.
The Agency noted in the preamble to the proposed rule that it was
planning to add a training requirement to Sec. 1926.1436 and requested
public comment on the addition of such a provision.
Commenters supported OSHA's recommended addition, so this section
now includes a requirement that derrick operators be trained on the
specific type of equipment being used. (ID-0130.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.)
This provision has been modified from the proposed rule to specifically
address the training that is required for derrick operators.
A commenter asked that employers be allowed to train and qualify
their operators and that the qualification be valid for a limit of five
years. (ID-0130.1.) Since this final rule does not require
qualification for derrick operators beyond that of the training
requirement, OSHA disagrees with this proposition. For additional
information on comments received about training to particular types of
equipment, see the discussion at Sec. 1926.1427(j)(1)(i).
Section 1926.1437 Floating Cranes/Derricks and Land Cranes/Derricks on
Barges
Section 1926.1437 covers two types of equipment in a marine
environment. The first type is referred to as ``floating cranes/
derricks,'' defined in Sec. 1926.1401, Definitions, as ``equipment
designed by the manufacturer (or employer) for marine use by permanent
attachment to a barge, pontoons, vessel, or other means of flotation.''
The second type, ``Land cranes/derrick'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401
as ``equipment not originally designed by the manufacturer for marine
use by permanent attachment to barges, pontoons, vessels, or other
means of flotation. Section 1926.1437(m) applies only to floating
cranes/derricks, and Sec. 1926.1437(n) applies only to land cranes/
derricks used on barges, pontoons, vessels or other means of flotation.
Paragraph (a)
Paragraph (a) of this section specifies that the requirements of
Sec. 1926.1437 are supplemental requirements; therefore, all other
requirements of this subpart apply unless specifically noted otherwise.
Section 1926.1437(a) exempts equipment operating on jacked barges from
the requirements of Sec. 1926.1437 when the jacks are deployed to the
river, lake, or sea bed and the barge is fully supported by the jacks.
A jacked barge deployed in this manner has four ``spuds'' on its
corners that are grounded into the sea-bottom, providing a level and
stable platform on which employees work. This configuration results in
work conditions similar to a crane working on land, unlike the work
conditions pertinent to equipment covered by this section. Therefore,
equipment used on a jacked barge deployed in this manner is subject to
all other applicable requirements of this proposed subpart but not to
the requirements of this section.
One commenter raised a question as to whether the exclusion of
jacked barges would apply when the barge is supported by jacks anchored
to the river, lake, or sea bed, but not fully supported ``in a more
permanent condition.'' (ID-0172.1.) However, the commenter does not
explain what is meant by ``a more permanent condition.'' The test for
whether the jacks, on deployment in the river, lake, or sea bed, fully
support the barge.
OSHA received no substantive comments or information indicating
that the exception for jacked barges is unsafe for employees.
Therefore, OSHA is retaining the exception in the final rule because it
determines that employees on jacked barges will be protected by the
other provisions of this subpart. OSHA also is retaining the language
explaining the application of the section because it provides useful
explanatory information to the regulated community regarding compliance
obligations.
Paragraph (b) General Requirements
Paragraph (b) of this section specifies that paragraphs (c)-(k) of
this section apply to both floating cranes/derricks and land cranes/
derricks. As noted above and discussed below, Sec. 1926.1437(m)
applies only to floating cranes/derricks, and Sec. 1926.1437(n)
applies only to land cranes/derricks mounted on vessels/flotation
devices. OSHA received no comments on the proposed paragraph. OSHA is
retaining the paragraph as proposed because it provides useful
explanatory information to the regulated community regarding compliance
obligations.
Paragraph (c) Work Area Control
Paragraph (c) of this section provides that the requirements of
Sec. 1926.1424, Work area control, apply to equipment covered by this
section, except for the requirements of Sec. 1926.1424(a)(2)(ii).
Paragraph (c)(2) of this section closely parallels Sec.
1926.1424(a)(2)(ii) but omits the requirement that employers
demonstrate infeasibility before using a combination of warning signs
and high visibility markings in place of erecting and maintaining
control lines, warning lines, railings, or similar boundaries of hazard
areas. Because equipment covered by this section typically operates
within a very limited physical work space, employers often need
increased flexibility in determining which work area control method is
most appropriate in light of special site-specific circumstances. To
help ensure that employees are adequately protected if the employer
uses high visibility markings to supplement warning signs, this
paragraph requires the employer to train employees to understand the
meaning of the markings.
OSHA received no comments on this provision as proposed. Upon
review of this provision, the Agency determined the two examples
provided in the regulatory text were redundant. Therefore, except for
the removal of one of the examples, OSHA is retaining the provision as
proposed, because it will ensure maximum worker safety under the
limited space available on many of these vessels.
Paragraph (d) Keeping Clear of the Load
Paragraph (d) of this section states that the requirements of Sec.
1926.1425, Keeping clear of the load, do not apply to the equipment
covered by Sec. 1926.1437. Due to the limited space available for
equipment on worksites covered by this section (i.e., the decks of
barges and other vessels), the requirements of Sec. 1926.1425 are
infeasible under these worksite conditions, in the experience of C-DAC.
OSHA received no comments on this provision, and, therefore, is
promulgating it in the final rule as proposed because it strikes a
balance between the practicalities of the worksite and safety for
employees. Other provisions within this section provide other means of
protecting employees in the unique worksites covered by this section.
[[Page 48066]]
Paragraph (e) Additional Safety Devices
Paragraph (e) of this section lists additional safety devices
required for equipment covered by this section. Equipment covered by
Sec. 1926.1437 is required to have the safety devices listed in Sec.
1926.1415, Safety devices, unless otherwise noted in Sec. 1926.1415.
The additional safety devices required by Sec. 1926.1437(e) address
the special conditions of a marine worksite, especially with respect to
vessel stability, inadvertent movement due to water conditions, and the
greater effect of wind and other environmental conditions on equipment
operating at these sites. However, note that Sec. 1926.1415 excepts
floating cranes/derricks and land cranes/derricks on barges, pontoons,
vessels, or other means of flotation from having crane level indicators
and floating cranes from having foot pedal brake locks. (See the
discussion above under Sec. Sec. 1926.1415(a)(1)(iii) and
1926.1415(a)(4) for an explanation of these exceptions.)
Paragraph (e)(1) requires equipment covered by this section to have
a list and trim device. It is necessary to have this device since the
degrees of list and trim are directly related to the stability of the
vessel/flotation device and therefore to the stability of the equipment
and its safe operation.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2) required equipment covered in this
section to have a horn. In the experience of C-DAC, the sounding of the
equipment's horn is commonly understood in the marine industry as a way
to warn employees about the presence of or movement of the equipment or
its load. In the final rule, OSHA has added the requirement of a horn
to the general list of safety devices required in Sec. 1926.1415. See
Sec. 1926.1415(a)(7). As noted above, the requirements of Sec.
1926.1415 apply to floating cranes/derricks, so restating the
requirement in Sec. 1926.1437(e)(2) would be redundant. OSHA is
therefore removing the horn requirement from this section and
renumbering the remainder of Sec. 1926.1437(e).
Paragraph (e)(2), as renumbered in the final rule, now requires
that all equipment with a rotating superstructure have a positive crane
house lock. This device is necessary for equipment covered within this
section because it positively locks the rotating superstructure. The
lock provides additional protection from the superstructure's
accidental movement that can result due to the action of wind, waves,
or current.
Because the speed and direction of the wind can directly affect
equipment operations, such as by diminishing equipment capacity and
inducing unintended movement of the load, Sec. 1926.1437(e)(3)
requires equipment covered by this section to have and use a wind speed
and direction indicator when a competent person determines that wind is
a factor that needs to be considered during operations.
OSHA received no comments on proposed paragraphs (e)(1)-(e)(4), and
is retaining all of these provisions in the final rule, except for the
requirement of a horn and with renumbering, because they improve the
safety of the vessels, and, therefore, the safety of the employee
involved in crane/derrick operations onboard the vessel.
Paragraph (f) Operational Aids
Paragraph (f) of this section modifies the application of some of
the requirements in proposed Sec. 1926.1416, Operational aids, for
equipment covered by this section. Apart from these differences, Sec.
1926.1416 applies to equipment covered by this section.
Paragraph (f)(1) requires that equipment covered by this section to
be equipped with an anti-two-block device when hoisting personnel or
when hoisting over an occupied cofferdam or shaft. As discussed at
Sec. 1926.1416(d)(3), two-blocking can result in a sudden drop of the
load on the line. Anti-two-block devices protect against this danger.
However, anti-two-blocking devices have a high rate of failure in a
marine environment due to wind and other environmental factors. Also,
the equipment covered by this section is often performing live boom/
fast-moving functions, causing an anti-two-block device to consistently
malfunction. Therefore, an anti-two-block device is only required when
hoisting personnel or hoisting over an occupied cofferdam or shaft due
to the additional risk to employees during these operations.
Paragraph (f)(2) specifies that employers using equipment to
perform dragline, clamshell (grapple), magnet, drop ball, container
handling, concrete bucket, and pile driving work covered by this
section, are exempt from the requirements of Sec. 1926.1416(e)(4),
Load weighing and similar devices. These operations add heavy loads and
repetitive motion to the marine characteristics described above. As a
result, load weighing devices used during these operations consistently
malfunction. Additionally, the listing and tilting that is typical in
marine worksites often prevents these devices from providing accurate
load readings.
OSHA received no comments on these provisions as proposed. However,
OSHA is retaining these provisions in the final rule because the
provisions afford protection to workers involved in personnel lifting
operations or exposed to a load failure while working in cofferdams or
shafts. The provisions also prevent employers from relying on
malfunctioning equipment to the detriment of employees using or exposed
to the equipment.
Paragraph (g) Accessibility of Procedures Applicable to Equipment
Operation
Paragraph (g) of this section sets forth requirements regarding
accessibility of equipment operation procedures. The provision requires
equipment with a cab to comply with the requirements of Sec.
1926.1417(c), Operation--accessibility of procedures. If the equipment
does not have a cab then the requirements of this paragraph apply.
The Agency determined that it is necessary to have the load chart
located where the operator is stationed. Under Sec. 1926.1437(g)(1),
if the operator's station is movable, such as with pendant-controlled
equipment, the load chart must be posted on the equipment. Under Sec.
1926.1437(g)(2), the remaining procedures (other than load charts) must
be readily available on board the vessel/flotation device. Where there
is no cab for the equipment, it is impractical to require these other
procedures to be next to the operator; however, it is still necessary
for the operator to have easy access to these procedures for reference
during operations.
While OSHA received no comments on the proposed provisions, it is
retaining the provisions in the final rule because, as explained
elsewhere in this preamble, having this procedural information as
readily available as possible is critical to operating cranes/derricks
safely, thereby ensuring the protection of the workers involved in the
crane/derrick operations.
Paragraph (h) Inspections
Paragraph (h) of this section sets forth additional inspection
requirements applicable to equipment covered by this section. The
introductory sentence to this paragraph states that Sec. 1926.1412,
Inspections, applies to the inspection of the crane/derrick, and that
the additional inspection requirements in this paragraph apply to the
vessel/flotation device that supports the crane/derrick.
In the proposed rule, the Agency modified the language of the C-DAC
consensus document for this introductory sentence by including
[[Page 48067]]
coverage for floating cranes/derricks and requested comment on this
modification. Two commenters responded and both agreed with the
modified language as used in the proposed rule. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.)
OSHA is retaining this language in the final rule because the increased
coverage enhances employee protection, and the introductory language
provides useful explanatory information to the regulated community
regarding compliance obligations.
With respect to the requirements of Sec. 1926.1437(h)(2)(ii), a
commenter expressed concern that the Agency expected an employer to
physically open the hatch on a barge to inspect for ``taking on
water.'' (ID-0345.26.) The commenter further explained that hatch
covers are usually sealed, and generally are removed only if there is
suspected damage to the hull. (ID-0345.26.) Another commenter confirmed
that most non-freshwater vessels have permanently sealed hatches. (ID-
0344.1.)
Under this provision, as proposed, a competent person must inspect
the vessel for ``taking on water'' and does not specify any particular
method for making this determination. As one commenter suggested,
measuring freeboards is a way to determine if a vessel is listing more
than a couple of degrees and, therefore, possibly taking on water. (ID-
0344.1.) The requirement here is for the competent person to use an
effective means of determining if the vessel is taking on water, which
can vary depending on the type of vessel.
With respect to Sec. 1926.1437(h)(2)(iv), a commenter was
concerned that the requirement to check the ``fuel compartments * * *
for serviceability as a water-tight appliance'' included an expectation
that the hatch cover would be removed to inspect the fuel compartment.
(ID-0345.26.) The commenter further stated the usual means of checking
for water in a fuel tank is by using a plumb bob and clear coat that
changes color if water is present. The proposed provision requires a
competent person to inspect the fuel compartments, among other areas,
for ``serviceability as a water-tight appliance.'' The provision does
not specify any particular method for making this determination,
provided the competent person uses an effective method for doing so.
Based on the need to ensure the integrity of the vessel/flotation
device for employee safety, and the availability of nonintrusive means
of determining this integrity, OSHA is retaining Sec. Sec.
1926.1437(h)(2)(ii) and 1926.1437(h)(2)(iv) in the final rule. OSHA
received no comments on the remaining provisions proposed for
paragraphs (h)(2) and (h)(3) and OSHA is retaining these provisions to
ensure that vessels/flotation devices used for crane/derrick operations
remain safe for employees, and that the employer corrects deficiencies
in the vessels/flotation devices that are hazardous to employees.
Under Sec. 1926.1437(h), inspections are required at four distinct
times: Each shift, each month, annually, and every four years. As
specified in paragraph (h)(3), a competent person must conduct the
shift and monthly inspections. If the competent person identifies a
deficiency, an immediate determination by a qualified person is then
required to ascertain if the deficiency constitutes a hazard. If the
deficiency constitutes a hazard, the vessel must be removed from
service until the deficiency is corrected.
These requirements differ from the shift and monthly general
inspection requirements of Sec. 1926.1412, in which the competent
person who identifies a deficiency then determines whether the
deficiency is a safety hazard requiring immediate correction. The
reason for this difference is that the equipment covered under this
section is highly specialized and therefore requires a high level of
knowledge.
With respect to the annual inspections, Sec. 1926.1437(h)(4)
requires the equipment and vessel/flotation device to be inspected by a
qualified person with expertise with respect to vessels/flotation
devices. The Agency concludes it is important to state explicitly that
the qualified person conducting these inspections must have the
necessary expertise for the items listed for the annual inspection with
respect to barges, pontoons, vessels or other means of flotation.
Accordingly, OSHA is retaining the provision in the final rule.
The qualified person required for the shift and monthly inspections
must have expertise with respect to the work conditions, the crane/
derrick, and the vessel/flotation device. However, the annual
inspection is more extensive than the shift or monthly inspections. The
qualified person for the annual inspection must have a greater level of
expertise than the qualified person required for determining whether
deficiencies identified in shift and monthly inspections constitute
hazards. The qualified person for the annual inspection must have
expertise in all the areas covered by the annual inspection, in
addition to general expertise regarding the equipment and vessel/
flotation device. This expertise will ensure that the operational
conditions are safe for employees, and, therefore, OSHA is retaining
these requirements in the final rule.
Section 1926.1437(h)(4)(i)(C) requires an inspection of various
component parts of the vessel to determine if there is significant
corrosion, wear, deterioration or deformation. The use of the word
significant is to indicate that the functionality of these components
is not impaired in any way due to exposure to the elements or use. The
Committee determined, and OSHA agrees, that these components are
essential to safe operation of the vessel and therefore critical to
employee safety.
A commenter indicated that the requirement to check for ``external
evidence of leaks and structural damage'' in Sec.
1926.1437(h)(4)(i)(C) should not apply below the waterline of the hull.
(ID-0345.26.) That commenter suggested that applying the requirement
below the waterline would be unduly burdensome because it would require
dry-docking the vessel. Another commenter, indicated that dry-docking a
vessel is expensive--between $20,000 and $60,000 per dry-docking,
depending on the type of vessel. (ID-0344.1.) This cost estimate was
supported by another commenter, who noted the average cost for its
fleet was $50,000 to dry-dock a vessel. (ID-0383.1.) A commenter
indicated that industry practice is to conduct the routine annual
inspection from the waterline up, and that inspecting below the
waterline would not enhance safety. (ID-0344.1.)
The Agency agrees that it is not necessary to require dry-docking
on an annual basis. Instead, OSHA modified the language used in the
proposed rule to allow employers to check for leaks and damage below
the waterline inside the vessel/flotation device, by, for example,
opening hatches and access/inspection ports, but not by opening sealed
compartments or cutting openings.
Paragraph (h)(4)(iii)(A) requires the removal from service of any
vessel/flotation device when a qualified person determines a deficiency
in the equipment constitutes a immediate hazard. As with other removal
from service requirements, OSHA is including a cross-reference to the
tag-out requirement in Sec. 1926.1417(f), which is triggered when
equipment is removed from service.
Paragraph (h)(5) requires an inspection every four years of the
internal portion of the barge, pontoons, vessel, or other means of
flotation by a marine engineer, marine architect, licensed surveyor, or
other qualified
[[Page 48068]]
person who has expertise with respect to vessels/flotation devices. A
higher level of expertise is necessary for performing the four-year
inspection than the annual inspection. By listing ``other qualified
person'' together with ``marine engineer,'' ``marine architect,'' and
``licensed surveyor,'' the Agency clarifies that the expertise of the
``other qualified person'' must be equivalent to that of a marine
engineer, marine architect, or licensed surveyor. In this regard, the
proposal did not list inspection items for the four-year inspection.
Instead, OSHA determines (based on C-DAC's recommendation) that a
better approach is to rely on the expert knowledge of the marine
engineer, marine architect, licensed surveyor, or other qualified
person who has expertise with respect to vessels/flotation devices.
OSHA received two comments regarding the use of the term
``quadrennial'' in the proposed rule. (ID-0343; -0344.1.) Both
recommended using the term ``four-year'' because it is consistent with
current terminology used by the marine industry. In light of this
information OSHA revised the term ``quadrennial'' to ``four-year'' in
the final rule in paragraphs (h)(5) and (h)(6) of Sec. 1926.1437.
Paragraph (h)(6) sets forth the documentation requirements for the
monthly, annual, and four-year inspections, which follow those in Sec.
1926.1412, Inspections, at Sec. Sec. 1926.1412(e)(3) and
1926.1412(f)(7). However, with respect to four-year inspections the
written documentation of the inspection must be maintained for four
years. This provision enables the employer to track changes in the
condition of the vessel from the previous inspection, thereby
correcting hazards in a timely manner. Therefore, OSHA is retaining
this provision in the final rule. The Agency is adding language to
paragraph (h)(6) to clarify that all of the inspection documentation
(including the four year inspection documentation) must be made
available, for the duration of the document retention period, to
persons performing inspections, in accordance with Sec. 1926.1412(k).
Paragraph (i) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (j) Working With a Diver
Paragraph (j) of this section sets forth supplemental requirements
designed to ensure that a diver is hoisted safely from the vessel and
back onto the vessel when equipment covered by this section is used for
this purpose. Extra precautions and measures are needed when engaged in
this activity due to the drowning, struck-by, crushed-by, and other
hazards involved.
Marine environments and the condition of a diver can change quickly
and unexpectedly; the crane/derrick operator must be constantly aware
of the diving operation and in position to take immediate action when
necessary. Therefore, under proposed Sec. 1926.1437(j)(1), when one or
more divers are being hoisted into and out of the water, the employer
is prohibited from using the equipment for any other purpose until all
divers have returned back on board. This requirement ensures the
operator's attention is not diverted from the welfare of the divers.
Paragraph (j)(2) of this section requires the equipment operator to
remain at the equipment controls during the entire diving operation.
This provision ensures that the operator is able to respond when
necessary.
Paragraph (j)(3) requires that, in addition to the signal
requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1419-1926.1422, the diver tender must
be in direct communication with the equipment operator. This
communication must be done either through maintaining a clear line of
sight between the operator and tender or by electronic transmission
between the operator and tender. The tender is the individual
responsible for monitoring and communicating with the diver. In this
section, the diver tender is required to maintain effective
communication with the equipment operator when the equipment is used to
get the diver in and out of the water. The tender is the member of the
dive team who closely monitors the diver's condition during the dive
and checks the equipment prior to the dive. Therefore, the tender is
able to let the operator know when a diver needs to be lifted out of
the water or when other action by the equipment operator is needed.
Paragraph (j)(4) specifies that when using a crane/derrick to hoist
a diver, the crane/derrick must be secured in such a way that there is
no amount of shifting in any direction. A small shift of a crane/
derrick on a barge can result in movement that can injure the diver.
OSHA notes that Sec. 1926.1431, Hoisting personnel, applies when a
crane/derrick is used to hoist personnel. In most instances when
personnel are hoisted, they must be located in a personnel platform
that meets criteria specified in Sec. 1926.1431. However, Sec.
1926.1431(b)(2) contains exceptions to the use a personnel platform and
one such exception, specified by Sec. 1926.1431(b)(2)(iii), applies
when an employer transfers an employee to or from a marine worksite in
a marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device. Under the definition in
Sec. 1926.1401, ``marine worksite'' includes a worksite in the water;
therefore, the exception specified by Sec. 1926.1431(b)(2)(iii) to the
requirement to use a personnel platform applies when a diver is hoisted
into or out of the water in a marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device.
OSHA received no comments on any of the provisions in proposed
paragraph (j). Accordingly, OSHA is retaining these provisions in the
final rule because, in the Committee's view, use of a personnel
platform could be infeasible or more hazardous to employees than an
alternative means of hoisting personnel such as marine-hoisted
personnel-transfer devices (see the discussion above in this preamble
for Sec. 1926.1431(b)(2)(iii)).
Paragraph (k)
Paragraph (k) of this section requires the employer to adhere to
the specifications and limitations established by the manufacturer of
the barge, pontoon, vessel, or other means of flotation with respect to
imposed environmental, operational, and in-transit loads. The purpose
of this provision is to ensure that the equipment can operate safely
under the forces imposed on it. In its deliberations, the Committee
noted that the manufacturer is in the best position to determine the
maximum external loads the vessel/flotation device can withstand while
maintaining necessary stability and buoyancy, and that requiring
employers to adhere to the manufacturer's specifications and
limitations would provide employees with the requisite level of
protection.
The language of the proposed rule varied from the text in the C-DAC
consensus document. OSHA made this revision to clarify that it was an
employer's responsibility to follow the manufacturer's specifications
and limitations. OSHA requested public comment on this revision. OSHA
received two comments in response to this request. (ID-0205.1; -
0213.1.) Both commenters stated the C-DAC language showed the
Committee's ``original intent of this paragraph was a design
specification,'' and further stated that the revision as proposed by
OSHA did not consider the Committee's language was addressing design
specifications.
On reviewing these comments, the C-DAC consensus document, and
OSHA's proposed text, OSHA determines that paragraph (k) needs to
address both the commenters' position that there is a need for a design
specification, and OSHA's position in the proposed rule that employers
must comply to the manufacturer's
[[Page 48069]]
specifications and limitations. OSHA revised proposed paragraph (k)
accordingly.
In addition, another commenter raised the issue that, for many
vessels covered by this section, the manufacturer no longer exists, or
that the vessel has been modified and an expert has established the
appropriate specifications and limitations for the vessel. (ID-
0345.26.) One commenter noted the company's fleet had vessels that were
60 years old and the manufacturers of some of these vessels were no
longer in business. (ID-0344.1.) OSHA finds these comments persuasive,
and is adding a provision to paragraph (k) to require the employer to
follow specifications and limitations established by a qualified person
in such instances.
Paragraph (l) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (m) Floating Cranes/Derricks
Paragraph (m) of this section sets forth requirements with respect
to load charts, rated capacity, allowable list, allowable trim, wind
speed and related measures for floating cranes/derricks. The
requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1437(m)(1) through (5) address the
various hazards that contribute to instability of the vessel/flotation
device and the effect of marine conditions that can lead to boom/
equipment failure.
As defined in Sec. 1926.1401, a floating crane/derrick includes
equipment built either by a manufacturer or by the employer using the
equipment. Both types must meet the criteria in Sec. Sec.
1926.1437(m)(1) through (m)(3). These provisions are designed to
prevent the crane/derrick portion of the equipment from failure due to
overloading, thereby, preventing the vessel/flotation device from
capsizing.
Paragraph (m)(1) requires that load charts applicable to operations
on water not be exceeded. Paragraph (m)(2) establishes criteria (in
Table M1) for maximum allowable list and trim relative to the rated
capacity of the equipment. Section 1926.1437(m)(3) provides two charts
that set the stability criteria for specific conditions. The first of
these charts (Table M2) contains the minimum requirements to maintain
stability with respect to wind speed and freeboard distance of the
vessel/flotation device. The second chart (Table M3) addresses the
backward stability of the boom.
The Agency requested public comment on a definition of freeboard as
it is used in Table M2. In response, a commenter offered this
definition: ``Freeboard is the vertical distance between the water line
and the main deck of the vessel.'' (ID-0383.1.) This definition is
consistent with OSHA's review of the definition of freeboard;
therefore, OSHA is adding this definition to the regulatory text of
Sec. 1926.1437(m)(2) in the final rule and is including it in Sec.
1926.1401, Definitions.
Under paragraph (m)(4), employer-made equipment must meet the same
criteria specified by Sec. Sec. 1926.1437(m)(1)-(m)(3) for
manufacturer-made equipment. In addition, an employer using equipment
it builds is required to have documents demonstrating that these
criteria have been met. Such documents must be signed by a registered
professional engineer who is a qualified person with respect to the
design of the type of equipment involved.
Manufacturers have sufficient expertise with respect to the
development of load charts, rated capacities, and related operational
limitations, so there is no need for a documentation requirement for
manufacturer-built floating cranes/derricks. However, given the variety
of employer-made equipment, the Agency included this documentation
requirement to ensure that employer-made equipment has the same level
of safety as manufactured equipment.
Paragraph (m)(5) addresses structural and access requirements for
the barge, pontoon, vessel, or other means of flotation. These
requirements are related to the stability of the vessel, including
minimizing movement while operating equipment, thereby increasing
employee safety by reducing the likelihood of capsizing.
Paragraph (m)(5)(i) requires the vessel to be structurally
sufficient to withstand the stress of both static and dynamic loads of
the crane/derrick when operating at the crane/derrick's maximum rated
capacity with all planned deck loads and ballasted compartments. This
provision is necessary to minimize the likelihood of the vessel's
structure failing, which would expose employees to a drowning hazard,
or endanger them because of inadvertent movement during equipment
operations.
Paragraph (m)(5)(ii) requires a subdivided hull with at least one
longitudinal watertight bulkhead to reduce the free surface effect on
the vessel. Subdividing the hull limits the effects of liquid movement
on vessel stability, thereby, reducing the risk of the vessel
capsizing.
Paragraph (m)(5)(iii) requires void compartments to be accessible
for inspection and pumping. This requirement ensures that the employer
evaluates the amount of water in the compartments to determine the
potential free surface effect on vessel stability, and then to initiate
pumping when necessary to avoid capsizing.
OSHA received no comments were received on paragraphs (m)(3)
through (m)(5). OSHA is retaining these provisions in the final rule to
ensure the stability of vessels/flotation devices during crane/derrick
operations, thereby preventing employee exposure to drowning, impact,
and other hazards associated with crane/derrick operations onboard
vessels/flotation devices.
Paragraph (n) Land Cranes/Derricks
Paragraph (n) of this section sets forth the requirements for land
cranes/derricks when used on a barge, pontoons, vessel or other means
of flotation. As noted above, land cranes/derricks are not originally
designed for marine use but are covered by this section when they are
mounted on a vessel/flotation device and used on water. The Agency
determined that special requirements are needed to address the
distinctive safety issues presented when using such equipment.
The stability of the vessel/flotation device is affected by the use
of a land crane/derrick on board. Implementing a system that keeps the
equipment properly located on the vessel is essential for maintaining
stability. In addition, land cranes/derricks have less capacity when on
a vessel/flotation device than when on land, due to the fact that the
crane/derrick is not originally designed for the special conditions on
a vessel/flotation device. Consequently, the employer must adjust the
rated capacity of the crane/derrick when used on the vessel/flotation
device. If not properly determined, the land crane/derrick may be
overloaded, which can cause loss of stability (including tip-over) and
boom/equipment failure, thereby endangering employees.
Paragraph (n)(1) sets forth the requirements for determining the
rated capacity for land cranes/derricks used on a vessel/flotation
device. Load charts for this equipment developed for use on land do not
address the use of the equipment on a flotation device or the
environmental conditions of a marine worksite. Therefore, under Sec.
1926.1437(n)(1)(i), the rated capacity (as depicted in the load charts)
must be reduced for list, trim, wave action, and wind.
In establishing the rated capacity for use on the vessel/flotation
device, the capacity of the vessel/flotation device also must be
considered. Since some locations on the vessel/flotation device will
have less ability to support the
[[Page 48070]]
crane/derrick than others, under Sec. 1926.1437(n)(1)(ii), the rated
capacity must be applicable to a specified location(s) on the vessel/
flotation device. This assessment must be made considering the expected
and encountered environmental conditions.
Paragraph (n)(2) specifies that the modification to rated capacity
required by Sec. 1926.1437(n)(1) of this section must be performed
either by the manufacturer of the equipment or by a qualified person
with expertise in both land crane/derrick capacity and the stability of
vessels/flotation devices. Performance by a qualified person will
achieve equivalent operational safety conditions as for the modified
floating cranes/derricks. In the proposed rule, OSHA (at the request of
the SBREFA Panel) requested public comment as to whether qualified
persons are available in the industry with expertise in both land
crane/derrick capacity and the stability of vessels/flotation devices
with respect to equipment performing duty-cycle work (73 FR 59864, Oct.
9, 2008). Two commenters responded to this inquiry by stating that
qualified persons are available in the industry with expertise in both
land crane/derrick capacity and stability of vessels with respect to
equipment performing duty-cycle work. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.)
OSHA also requested comment from the public on whether the
requirements of (n)(2) are necessary for the safety of employees when
equipment is engaged in duty cycle work. Two commenters found that
these requirements are necessary for safety when equipment is engaged
in duty cycle work. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) Another commenter supported
this position by noting instances when the input of a qualified person
is needed since the list and trim of the vessel can affect the rated
capacity of the equipment. (ID-0345.26.) Based on these comments, and
the employee protection afforded by the requirements of paragraph
(n)(2), OSHA is including these requirements in the final rule as
proposed.
Paragraph (n)(3) sets parameters for the maximum allowable list and
trim for the vessel/flotation device and the land crane/derrick to
ensure vessel and crane/derrick stability and to prevent the crane/
derrick from exceeding its rated capacity. Under paragraph (n)(4), when
a land crane/derrick is used on a flotation device, all deck surfaces
must be above water and the entire bottom area must be submerged. This
provision is necessary to ensure a stable platform when operating the
land crane/derrick, to protect against loads that would cause the
system used to secure the land crane/derrick (see Sec.
1926.1437(n)(5)) to fail, and to protect against overloading the
vessel/flotation device land/crane derrick.
Even though OSHA received no comments on these two paragraphs, it
is retaining the paragraphs in the final rule because maintaining
proper list and trim, as well as buoyancy, is critical to the stability
of the vessel/flotation device, which will prevent the vessel/flotation
device from capsizing and endangering employees.
Paragraph (n)(5) sets forth four options for securing \139\ the
land crane/derrick on the vessel/flotation device. Providing several
options to employers addresses the various of work scenarios found in
the industry. Each option is effective in preventing the land crane/
derrick from rolling, sliding, or in any way shifting away from its
proper location. These horizontal movements can cause the vessel/
flotation device to become unstable, or the land crane/derrick to slide
or fall into the water. Additionally, OSHA determines that an exception
is appropriate for use of mobile auxiliary cranes on a vessel. The
requirements for this type of equipment are specified by Sec.
1926.1437(n)(5)(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\139\ In this preamble the Agency uses the term ``securing'' and
``secured'' to refer collectively to the systems described in
Options (1)-(4) in Sec. Sec. 1926.1437(n)(5)(i) through (iv). The
Agency notes that this definition differs from the term ``positively
secured'' in subpart N in former Sec. 1926.550(f)(1)(iv), which
required that ``mobile cranes on barges shall be positively
secured.'' As OSHA stated in a letter of interpretation, the term
``positively secured'' in the subpart N means ``physically
attached''--similar to the type of system described in Option (1) of
paragraph (n)(5)(i). (See OSHA's interpretation letter to Mr. Gary
C. Hay, October 12, 2004 (ID-0014).)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraphs (n)(5)(i) through (iv) provide the four options for
securing the land crane/derrick to the vessel/flotation device. The
options for preventing equipment shifting include direct physical
attachment, corralling, a rail system or a centerline cable system.
These options serve to prevent inadvertent movement of the equipment
away from its proper location on the vessel/flotation device, which can
harm employees working nearby, or such movement can endanger employees
by capsizing the vessel. However, it is not the purpose of these
options to prevent any portion of the land crane/derrick from pulling
vertically up from the deck when handling loads beyond the land crane/
derrick's rated capacity. Rather, these options will prevent horizontal
rolling or shifting away from the land crane/derrick's proper location.
Paragraph (n)(5)(v) requires that the option selected for securing
the equipment on the vessel be designed by a marine engineer, a
registered professional engineer familiar with floating crane/derrick
design, or a qualified person familiar with floating crane/derrick
design. The Agency determined that expertise in floating crane/derrick
design is necessary to design a securing system that meets the selected
option's requirements and to prevent inadvertent movement of the
equipment on the vessel/flotation device.
OSHA received no comments on any of the requirements in proposed
paragraph (n)(5). Consequently, OSHA is retaining this paragraph in the
final rule because properly securing land crane/derrick on the vessel/
flotation device will maintain the stability of the vessel/flotation
device, thereby preventing the vessel/flotation device from capsizing
and endangering employees.
Paragraph (n)(6) \140\ provides an exception stating that an
employer does not have to secure mobile auxiliary cranes as required by
paragraph (n)(5) when the employer demonstrates that specific
conditions have been met. Typically, the movement of the mobile crane
on these vessels does not adversely affect the stability of the
floating crane/derrick because of the large size, displacement and
design of the floating crane/derrick. The size and design of the
floating crane/derrick also makes it less susceptible than other
vessels to the effects of wind, waves, and other environmental
conditions. OSHA finds that when the employer demonstrates meeting the
criteria specified by Sec. Sec. 1926.1437(n)(6)(v) and (vi), employees
will receive adequate protection from inadvertent horizontal movement
of a mobile crane located on the deck of a floating crane/derrick.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\140\ Formerly paragraph (n)(5)(vi) in the proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under paragraph (n)(6)(i), a written plan that is developed and
signed by a marine engineer, or a registered professional engineer
familiar with floating crane/derrick design, is required. OSHA finds
that developing a written plan for the use of these cranes requires
specialized knowledge and skill because of the catastrophic
consequences to employees that could result if the task is not
performed correctly.
Paragraph (n)(6)(ii), requires that the written plan be developed
so that the applicable requirements of Sec. 1926.1437 are met despite
the position, travel, operation, and lack of physical attachment,
corralling, use of rails, or use of cable system of the mobile
auxiliary crane. For example, a section of the plan could address a
vessel's
[[Page 48071]]
stability while it is operating within specified dynamic and
environmental conditions (see Sec. Sec. 1926.1437(n)(6)(v) and (vi)),
i.e., that the movement of the vessel under these conditions does not
cause the mobile crane to shift horizontally, or that the maximum list
and trim specified for vessel and mobile crane are not exceeded.
Under paragraph (n)(6)(iii), the plan must specify the areas of the
deck where the mobile auxiliary crane is permitted to be positioned,
travel, and operate. It must also specify the parameters (that is,
limitations) of such movements and operation. For example, a section of
the plan could limit movement of the mobile crane to a specified area
without a load, and to another specified area while handling a load.
Under paragraph (n)(6)(iv), the employer must mark the deck to
identify the permitted areas for positioning, traveling, and operating
the mobile crane. This provision is necessary so that the operator
maneuvers and operates the crane within the permitted areas specified
by the plan, thereby ensuring the stability of the vessel/flotation
device and the safety of employees.
Under paragraph (n)(6)(v), the plan must specify the dynamic and
environmental conditions that have to be present for the mobile
auxiliary crane to move and operate on the vessel. Under Sec.
1926.1437(n)(6)(v), if the specific dynamic and environmental
conditions are not present, the mobile auxiliary crane must be secured
according to one of the four options outlined in Sec. Sec.
1926.1437(n)(5)(i) through (iv). For example, the plan must address
environmental conditions, such as the maximum amount of wind and wave
action permitted; if these conditions are exceeded, the mobile crane
must be secured using one of the four options specified by Sec.
1926.1437(n)(5). While OSHA received no comments on the requirements of
this paragraph in the proposal, it is retaining this paragraph in the
final standard as proposed because a properly prepared plan will ensure
the structural integrity and stability of the vessel/flotation device,
thereby protecting employees from drowning, impact, and other hazards.
Paragraph (n)(7) \141\ contains requirements regarding the barge,
pontoon, vessel or other means of flotation on which the land crane/
derrick is located. The requirements Sec. 1926.1437(n)(7) are
identical to those listed at paragraph (m)(5) of this section. These
requirements ensure the structural capacity of the vessel/flotation
device to support the land crane/derrick and the loads handled by this
equipment, as well as the stability of the vessel/flotation device.
These provisions are designed to help prevent unintended movement while
operating equipment and to prevent capsizing. OSHA finds these
requirements necessary to provide a safe, stable work environment. OSHA
received no comments on this paragraph in the proposed rule. However,
as with paragraph (m)(5), OSHA is retaining this paragraph in the final
rule to ensure the stability of vessels/flotation devices during crane/
derrick operations, thereby preventing employee exposure to drowning,
impact, and other hazards associated with crane/derrick operations
onboard vessels/flotation devices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\141\ Formerly paragraph (n)(6) in the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1926.1438 Overhead and Gantry Cranes
As defined in Sec. 1926.1401, overhead and gantry cranes include
overhead/bridge cranes, semigantry cranes, cantilever gantry cranes,
wall cranes, storage bridge cranes, launching gantry cranes, and
similar equipment, irrespective of whether it travels on tracks,
wheels, or other means. The Committee developed this definition to
reflect the wide range of this type of equipment.
Overhead and gantry cranes are commonly found on general industry
as well as construction worksites. Sometimes overhead and gantry cranes
installed in general industry facilities are used for construction
purposes (for example, the overhead/gantry crane in a factory is
sometimes used when a part of the factory is being renovated). The
Committee determined that applying the general industry standard for
overhead and gantry cranes, Sec. 1910.179, to the use of those cranes
for construction work, rather than the requirements of new subpart CC,
would reduce compliance burdens without jeopardizing employee
protection. All comments received agreed it is reasonable to require
cranes fitting this particular description to comply with Sec.
1910.179 in lieu of requirements imposed under this subpart.
The rule therefore distinguishes between permanently installed
overhead and gantry cranes and those that are not permanently
installed. Overhead and gantry cranes permanently installed in a
facility are considered an irremovable part of the property and are
primarily used in general industry but may, on rare occasions, be used
for construction activities. Generally, these cranes are installed in
facilities and are not easily assembled or disassembled. They are
typically physically fastened to a building and enhance the utility of
the property. The requirements of Sec. 1910.179, the general industry
standard, and not subpart CC, apply to these permanently installed
overhead and gantry cranes.
In contrast, overhead and gantry cranes used frequently for
construction activities are generally not permanently installed in a
facility. They tend to be more easily assembled or disassembled than
their permanently installed counterparts. The determining factor of
whether an overhead or gantry crane is or is not permanently installed
is whether or not it is regarded as a permanent part of the facility.
If it is intended as a temporary installation or meant to be removed
from the property, then the overhead or gantry crane is not considered
permanently installed, and subpart CC applies. For example, if an
employer attaches the base of a gantry crane to a concrete slab at a
building construction site for use in constructing the building, that
gantry crane would be covered by the provisions in subpart CC.
Paragraph (a) Permanently Installed Overhead and Gantry Cranes
Section 1926.1438(a) applies the requirements of Sec. 1910.179,
with the exception of Sec. 1910.179(b)(1), to six listed types of
cranes and ``others with fundamentally similar characteristics,'' when
they are used in construction and are permanently installed in a
facility. The requirements in subpart CC do not apply to these cranes.
Section 1910.179(b)(1) sets forth the scope of the general industry
standard as defined under 29 CFR part 1910. It is excluded to avoid any
confusion that might arise from having two separate scope provisions
applicable to Sec. 1926.1438(a). Nonetheless, the types of overhead
and gantry cranes covered under Sec. Sec. 1926.1438(a) and
1910.179(b)(1) are the same, in that they all share fundamental
characteristics. These cranes are grouped because they all have
trolleys and similar travel characteristics.
Paragraph (b) Overhead and Gantry Cranes That Are Not Permanently
Installed in a Facility
Paragraph (b)(1) of this section provides the scope of Sec.
1926.1438(b). By its terms, Sec. 1926.1438(b) pertains to overhead and
gantry cranes, overhead/bridge cranes, semigantry cranes, cantilever
gantry cranes, wall cranes, storage bridge cranes, launching gantry
cranes, and similar equipment having the same fundamental
characteristics, when they are used in construction and
[[Page 48072]]
are not permanently installed in a facility. The words ``having the
same fundamental characteristics'' have been added to be consistent
with the language in Sec. 1926.1438(a).
Paragraph (b)(2) specifies which requirements apply to the
equipment identified in Sec. 1926.1438(b)(1).
Paragraph (b)(2)(i) requires overhead and gantry cranes not
permanently installed in a facility to comply with Sec. Sec. 1926.1400
through 1926.1414; Sec. Sec. 1926.1417 through 1926.1425; Sec.
1926.1426(d); Sec. Sec. 1926.1427 through 1926.1434; Sec. Sec.
1926.1437, 1926.1439, and 1926.1441 of subpart CC. Sections 1926.1435,
1926.1436 and 1926.1440, entitled Tower cranes, Derricks, and Sideboom
cranes, respectively, are not applicable because they pertain to
different kinds of equipment. Sections 1926.1415, 1926.1416 and
1926.1426(a)-(c) do not apply because they refer to devices not used on
overhead and gantry cranes.
Paragraph (b)(2)(ii) requires employers to comply with the
requirements of Sec. 1910.179.
Paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(A) specifies the portions of Sec. 1910.179
that are applicable to the equipment identified in Sec.
1926.1438(b)(1). The Committee selected these requirements because each
is a safety requirement that applies to this type of crane regardless
of whether it is used in construction or general industry. Other than
certain definitions (described below), these are the only provisions of
Sec. 1910.179 that apply to the equipment identified in Sec.
1926.1438(b)(1). These requirements are:
Sec. 1910.179(b)(5)--Rated load marking
Sec. 1910.179(b)(6)--Clearance from obstruction
Sec. 1910.179(b)(7)--Clearance between parallel cranes
Sec. 1910.179(e)(1)--Trolley stops
Sec. 1910.179(e)(3)--Trolley bumpers
Sec. 1910.179(e)(5)--Guards for hoisting ropes
Sec. 1910.179(e)(6)--Guards for moving parts
Sec. 1910.179(f)(1)--Brakes for hoists
Sec. 1910.179(f)(4)--Brakes for trolleys and bridges
Sec. 1910.179(g)--Electric equipment
Sec. 1910.179(h)(1)--Sheaves
Sec. 1910.179(h)(3)--Equalizers
Sec. 1910.179(k)--Testing
Sec. 1910.179(n)--Handling the load
Section 1926.1438(b)(2)(ii)(B) states that the definitions in Sec.
1910.179(a), except for ``hoist'' and ``load,'' apply to equipment
covered by Sec. 1926.1438(b). For those words, the definitions in
Sec. 1926.1401 apply. Only three terms are defined in both Sec.
1926.1401 and Sec. 1910.179: ``hoist,'' ``load,'' and ``runway.''
With respect to ``hoist'' and ``load,'' the definitions in
Sec. Sec. 1926.1401 and 1910.179(a) are similar but worded
differently. ``Hoist'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as ``a mechanical
device for lifting and lowering loads by winding rope onto or off a
drum.'' In Sec. 1910.179, ``hoist'' is defined as ``an apparatus which
may be part of a crane, exerting a force for lifting and lowering.''
``Load'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as ``the object to be hoisted
and the weight of the object being lifted or lowered, including the
weight of the load-attaching equipment such as the load block, ropes,
slings, shackles, and any other ancillary equipment.'' Section 1910.179
defines ``load'' as ``the total superimposed weight on the load block
or hook.'' In both cases, the Sec. 1926.1401 definition is clearer and
more precise.
With respect to ``runway,'' the Sec. 1926.1401 and Sec. 1910.179
definitions address different subject matter. The definition in Sec.
1926.1401 addresses the criteria for a ground surface used as a path of
travel for a mobile crane traveling with a suspended personnel
platform. The definition in Sec. 1910.179 refers to the rails, beams,
and other structural components along which an overhead or gantry crane
travels. Because the Sec. 1926.1401 definition of ``runway'' does not
pertain to overhead and gantry cranes, the Sec. 1910.179 definition
applies under this section.
Paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(C) limits the application of Sec.
1910.179(b)(2) to equipment identified in Sec. 1926.1438(b)(1) that
was manufactured before September 19, 2001. Section 1910.179(b)(2)
requires cranes manufactured after August 31, 1971, to comply with the
design specifications in American National Standard Safety Code for
Overhead and Gantry Cranes, ANSI B30.2.0-1967. As discussed below,
equipment manufactured after September 19, 2001, must comply with the
updated provisions of ASME B30.2-2001. Section 1926.1438(b)(2)(ii)(C)
is a transitional provision covering equipment manufactured between
August 31, 1971 and September 19, 2001. OSHA has made minor grammatical
revisions to (b)(2)(ii)(C) for clarity.
Paragraph (b)(2)(iii) incorporates several sections of the 2001
version of ASME B30.2 into this section. Previously, ANSI B30.2.0-1967
applied through subpart N's former Sec. 1926.550(d). The Committee
agreed that the 2001 version should be used because it is more
comprehensive than the 1967 version and thus more conducive to safety.
The following sections are incorporated by reference: 2-1.3.1--
Foundations and Anchorages; 2-1.3.2--Crane Runways; 2-1.4.1--Welded
Construction; 2-1.6--Lubrication; 2-1.7.2--Ladders and Stairways; 2-
1.8.2--Bridge Bumpers; 2-1.9.1--Bridge Rail Sweeps; 2-1.9.2--Trolley
Rail Sweeps; 2-1.11--Truck Frame Drop; 2-1.12.2--Hoist Control Braking
Means; 2-1.13.7--Lifting Magnets; 2-1.14.2--Drums; 2-1.14.3--Ropes; 2-
1.14.5--Hooks; 2-1.15--Warning Devices or Means for a Crane with a
Power-Traveling Mechanism; 2-2.2.2--Load Test; 2-3.2.1.1--Planned
Engineered Lifts; and 2-3.5--Crane Lockout/Tagout, except that in 2-
3.5.1(b), ``29 CFR 1910.147,'' the OSHA general industry Lockout/Tagout
standard, is substituted for ``ANSI Z244.1.''
When C-DAC drafted Sec. 1926.1438(b)(2)(ii)(C), the current
version of ASME B30.2 was the 2001 edition. That has since been
superseded by a 2005 edition. OSHA notes that, in all material
respects, the 2001 and 2005 versions of the provisions listed in Sec.
1926.1438(b)(2)(iii) are the same. Except for sec. 2-1.8.2, the 2001
and 2005 provisions are identical.
Section 2-1.8.2 contains a wording change that does not
substantively alter that provision. The 2001 version of sec. 2-1.8.2
contains the following requirement, among others, for bridge bumpers:
``energy-absorbing (or [dash]dissipating) capacity to stop the bridge
when traveling with power off in either direction at a speed of at
least 40% of rated load speed.'' In the 2005 version ``(or
[dash]dissipating)'' is changed to ``(or energy-dissipating).'' This is
clearly a clarification rather than a substantive change. Accordingly,
OSHA has changed Sec. 1926.1438(b)(2)(iii) to refer to the 2005
version of ASME B30.2.
When employers engaged in construction work must lock or tag
components of overhead and gantry cranes during maintenance and repair
work, Sec. 1926.1438(b)(2)(iii) requires them to comply with OSHA's
general industry lockout/tagout standard at Sec. 1910.147 instead of
the ANSI lockout/tagout standard (ANSI Z244.1) referenced in sec. 2-
3.5.1(b) of ASME B30.2-2005. The Committee determined that the OSHA
general industry lockout/tagout standard would be more accessible and
familiar to employers in the construction industry than the ANSI
standard. Therefore, requiring compliance with the OSHA standard will
promote compliance and, as a result, improve worker protection.
One commenter suggested exempting all overhead and gantry cranes
from the scope of subpart CC because they are
[[Page 48073]]
rarely used in construction. (ID-0178.1.) While OSHA understands they
are rarely used in construction, these cranes are at least occasionally
used in construction. Were the Agency to delete this section entirely,
these cranes (overhead and gantry cranes used in construction) would
not be explicitly covered by any OSHA standard.
The same commenter reasoned that, because overhead cranes are
primarily used in general industry and Sec. 1910.179 does not require
operator certification, an overhead crane operator who performs
construction work only occasionally would need to be certified for the
occasional construction-related pick, but not for any other part of the
job. As explained above, the rule distinguishes between permanently
installed overhead and gantry cranes, which are primarily used in
general industry, and those that are not permanently installed, which
are primarily used in construction work.
The Committee determined that applying the general industry
standard (Sec. 1910.179) to overhead and gantry cranes that are
permanently installed in a facility and used for construction would
reduce compliance burdens without jeopardizing employee protection.
However, the use of overhead and gantry cranes that are not permanently
installed in a facility, which are more frequently used for
construction, presents concerns about employee safety that are
particular to the construction environment. For these overhead and
gantry cranes, the Committee applied the safety requirements in Sec.
1910.179, which apply whether the crane is used in general industry or
construction, along with portions of subpart CC to address the specific
concerns about cranes used in construction. OSHA agrees.
The commenter recognized the Committee's concern when he stated
that, unlike operators of rented or subcontracted mobile cranes,
employers that deal with overhead cranes are very aware of the
qualifications of their operators. (ID-0178.1.) OSHA determines that
non-permanently installed overhead and gantry cranes used in
construction present the same concerns as rented or subcontracted
mobile cranes.
Finally, the commenter suggests that Sec. 1926.1438 requires
operator certification for certain classes of lifting equipment--pile
drivers, derricks, and service trucks with hoisting devices--for which
no certification programs currently exist. These three types of lifting
equipment are not covered by Sec. 1926.1438: Dedicated pile drivers
are covered by Sec. 1926.1439, which requires qualification or
certification; operators of cranes used with a pile-driving attachment
must be qualified or certified under Sec. 1926.1427, and derricks are
covered by Sec. 1926.1436, which specifically states that Sec.
1926.1427, Operator qualification and certification, does not apply.
See the discussion above of Sec. 1926.1400 regarding service trucks
with hoisting devices. As noted in the explanation of Sec. 1926.1427,
OSHA has modified its operator certification requirements from the
proposed rule to address certification of operators of equipment for
which no certification program currently exists.
Another commenter sought clarification on whether Sec. 1926.1438
applies to permanently installed overhead and gantry cranes located in
facilities that may also involve construction related activities. (ID-
0162.1.) As explained above, this section applies to permanently
installed overhead and gantry cranes that are used in construction.
Section 1926.1438(a) clearly states that the requirements of Sec.
1910.179, except for Sec. 1910.179(b)(1), apply to these cranes; in
these instances, the requirements of subpart CC would not apply.
Section 1926.1438 does not apply to permanently installed overhead and
gantry cranes that are merely located in a facility that may also be
involved in construction activities. The crane itself must be used in
construction activities to trigger Sec. 1926.1438.
Except as explained above, the Agency has therefore promulgated
this provision as proposed.
Section 1926.1439 Dedicated Pile Drivers
This section covers equipment that is designed to function
exclusively as a pile driver, as defined in Sec. 1926.1401. Unlike the
other equipment covered by this subpart, dedicated pile drivers are not
designed primarily to hoist, lower, and horizontally move suspended
loads. However, the Committee decided that the scope of this standard
should cover dedicated pile drivers because their functions, and
related hazards, are similar to those of cranes. For a complete
discussion of the rationale for the coverage of dedicated pile drivers
by this standard, see the discussion in the proposed rule at Sec.
1926.1400, Scope (73 FR 59714, 59727-59728, Oct. 9, 2008).
As discussed below, most of the provisions of this subpart apply to
dedicated pile drivers; however, this section includes provisions that
address the unique characteristics of such equipment. In addition to
the requirements of this subpart, pile driving equipment continues to
be covered by Sec. 1926.603, Pile driving equipment.
One commenter expressed support for the inclusion of Sec.
1926.1439. (ID-0158.1.) OSHA received no public comment in opposition.
Paragraph (a)
This paragraph provides that the requirements of subpart CC apply
to dedicated pile drivers except as noted elsewhere in this section.
The Agency changed the words ``this standard'' to ``Subpart CC'' in the
final rule. With the exception of the clarification, this provision is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) of this section provides that the requirements of
Sec. 1926.1416(d)(3) do not apply to dedicated pile drivers. Section
1926.1416(d)(3) requires that cranes manufactured after February 28,
1992, be equipped with anti-two-blocking devices. This does not apply
to dedicated pile drivers. As explained in the discussion of Sec.
1926.1416(d)(3), anti-two-block devices are not required during pile
driving operations because the heavy repetitive forces imposed on such
devices during pile driving cause the devices to malfunction.
For discussion of alternative requirements to anti-two-blocking
devices when hoisting an employee during pile driving operations, see
Sec. 1926.1431(p)(2). No comments were received for this paragraph; it
is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)
Paragraph (c) of this section provides that the requirements of
Sec. 1926.1416(e)(4) (load weighing and similar devices) are
applicable only to dedicated pile drivers manufactured more than one
year after the effective date of this final rule. A load weighing and
rated capacity device provides the operator of a dedicated pile driver
with a reliable load weight prior to each lift to prevent equipment
overload. C-DAC found that a phase-in period was necessary because of
the technical challenges in designing this device to work consistently
and reliably on a dedicated pile driver.
OSHA solicited public comment on the availability of load-weighing
or rated capacity devices for dedicated pile drivers and the related
issue of whether a date other than one year after the effective date of
this standard would be an appropriate date for application of this
requirement. OSHA received no public comment regarding the phase-in
requirements. The Agency changed the
[[Page 48074]]
words ``this standard'' to ``Subpart CC'' in the final rule. With the
exception of the clarification, this provision is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (d)
Paragraph (d) of this section provides that for Sec. 1926.1433,
only paragraphs (d) and (e) of Sec. 1926.1433 apply to dedicated pile
drivers. Paragraphs (d) and (e) of Sec. 1926.1433, Design,
construction and testing, are applicable to all equipment covered by
this subpart, whereas the other provisions are applicable to specific
types of equipment and are not relevant to dedicated pile drivers. (See
discussion in Sec. 1926.1433 for further explanation.)
In the proposed rule this paragraph referred to Sec. Sec.
1926.1433(e) and (f); this was a clerical error. For the proposed rule,
Sec. 1926.1433 had been renumbered from what was in the C-DAC
consensus document, but paragraph (d) did not get updated accordingly.
OSHA has made this correction in the final rule. With the exception of
the corrected referencing, this provision is promulgated as proposed.
Deletion of Proposed Paragraph (e)
The Committee concluded that there was no reason to exclude
dedicated pile drivers from the requirements of Sec. 1926.1427,
Operator qualification and certification. The Committee was concerned,
however, that because of the relatively few dedicated pile drivers in
use, there would not be adequate market demand to support the
availability of certification testing specific to such equipment. For
the same reasons, the Committee was concerned about the availability of
auditors for auditing employer qualification programs for dedicated
pile driver operators. C-DAC concluded that any lack of qualification
or certification services specific to dedicated pile drivers would be
alleviated by allowing qualification or certification on similar
equipment, so proposed paragraph (e) of this section read:
Section 1926.1427 (Operator qualification and certification)
applies, except that the qualification or certification shall be for
operation of either dedicated pile drivers or equipment that is the
most similar to dedicated pile drivers.
After reviewing comments regarding Sec. 1926.1427, OSHA decided to
add language similar to proposed Sec. 1926.1439(e) to Sec. 1926.1427.
See discussion of Sec. 1926.1427(b)(2). In light of that change, OSHA
has decided that it is not necessary to include proposed Sec.
1926.1439(e) in the dedicated pile driver section of the final rule.
The concerns addressed by that paragraph, as proposed, are now dealt
with in Sec. 1926.1427(b)(2), which covers dedicated pile drivers as
well as other types of equipment covered by subpart CC.
Section 1926.1440 Requirements for Sideboom Cranes
``Sideboom crane'' is defined in Sec. 1926.1401 as ``a track-type
or wheel-type tractor having a boom mounted on the side of the tractor,
used for lifting, lowering or transporting a load suspended on the load
hook. The boom or hook can be lifted or lowered in a vertical direction
only.'' No comments were submitted on this definition; it is
promulgated as proposed. (See the discussion in the proposed rule
explaining this definition at 73 FR 59868, Oct. 9, 2008.)
This section identifies which of the other sections of the final
rule apply to this equipment and sets additional requirements. The
limited requirements for sideboom cranes, compared to the requirements
for other types of cranes, reflect the particular construction and
limited functions of sideboom cranes. Sideboom cranes are of a limited
capacity and require a relatively simple operation.
Paragraph (a)
Section 1926.1440(a) of the final rule states that the provisions
of this standard apply with the exception of Sec. Sec. 1926.1402,
Ground conditions, 1926.1415, Safety devices, 1926.1416, Operational
aids, and 1926.1427, Operator qualification and certification. As noted
in the preamble to the proposed rule, the Committee exempted sideboom
cranes from the requirements of these four sections because the
Committee determined that, in light of the limited capacity and
relative simplicity of operation of sideboom cranes, these requirements
would be unnecessary (73 FR 59868, Oct. 9, 2008).
During the SBREFA process, one Small Entity Representative (SER)
raised a question as to whether small sideboom cranes incapable of
lifting above the height of a truck bed and with a capacity of not more
than 6,000 pounds should be covered by the proposed rule. This SER
recommended that these small sideboom cranes be exempted from the scope
of subpart CC. Accordingly, OSHA asked for public comment about the
appropriateness of such an exemption (see 73 FR 59868, Oct. 9, 2008).
Two commenters responded to this issue. (ID-0205; -0213.) Both
commenters expressed their belief that such equipment should be
exempted from the final rule unless the equipment is being used outside
the parameters of the equipment's design, but neither commenter
provided any explanation as to why the final rule should exempt such
equipment. (ID-0205; -0213.) As discussed above, OSHA decided to exempt
sideboom cranes from several provisions of the final rule. Absent any
justification to provide additional relief for small-capacity sideboom
cranes, OSHA concludes that the exemptions already provided in the
final rule are appropriate, and will ensure the safety of workers who
operate these cranes.
Paragraph (b)
This paragraph addresses the hazards posed by boom free fall (that
is, ``live'' booms). As noted above in the discussion of Sec.
1926.1426 (Free fall and controlled load lowering), in general, the use
of equipment with live booms is prohibited. However, equipment
manufactured before the ANSI B30.5 series prohibited live booms may use
live booms under conditions specified in Sec. 1926.1426(a)(2). The
prohibition in Sec. 1926.1426 applies to equipment manufactured on or
after October 31, 1984. Equipment manufactured before that date may
only use live booms when none of the free fall prohibitions outlined in
Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1) are present.
OSHA received no comments on proposed Sec. 1926.1440(b).
Therefore, in the final rule, this paragraph will retain the approach
to live booms described in the proposal. Accordingly, final paragraph
(b) of this section applies an approach to live booms used with
sideboom cranes that is similar to the approach discussed above for
Sec. 1926.1426. The only difference is the cut-off date of manufacture
for sideboom cranes with live booms. As explained above in the
discussion of Sec. 1926.1426(a)(2), in light of the history of the
ANSI B30.5 prohibition against live booms, most equipment covered by
this standard manufactured after October 31, 1984, does not have live
booms. In contrast, the ANSI/ASME standards applicable to sideboom
cranes (ANSI/ASME B30.14) have never prohibited live booms. As a
result, sideboom cranes with live booms continued to be manufactured
after 1984. Consequently, under Sec. 1926.1440(b), to avoid undue
burden on employers, OSHA is designating the cut-off date of
manufacture for sideboom cranes with live booms as the effective date
of this final standard. Therefore, employers may continue to use
sideboom cranes manufactured prior to this date in which the boom is
designed to free fall, except under the conditions specified in Sec.
1926.1426(a)(1). OSHA determines
[[Page 48075]]
that these conditions will increase employee safety compared to current
practices. No comments were submitted on this paragraph; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)
As drafted by C-DAC, this paragraph would have required that
sideboom cranes meet specific requirements of ASME B30.14-1996 (``Side
Boom Tractors''), as amended by ASME B30.14a-1997, B30.14b-1999, and
B30.14c-2001. After the Committee completed its work, ASME consolidated
the requirements of the 1996 standard and the amendments into ASME
B30.14-2004. Final Sec. 1926.1440(c) incorporates by reference several
sections of ASME B30.14-2004 into the same 12 subparagraphs described
in the proposed rule. While OSHA received no comments to proposed Sec.
1926.1440(c), it decided to retain these 12 subparagraphs in the final
rule because the Committee determined that these ASME requirements are
necessary and appropriate for sideboom cranes, and represent current
best practices for the industry.
The 12 subparagraphs retained in Sec. 1926.1440(c) of the final
rule refer to the following sections of ASME B30.14-2004: 14-1.1
(``Load Ratings''); 14-1.3 (``Side Boom Tractor Travel''); 14-1.5
(``Ropes and Reeving Accessories''); 14-1.7.1 (``Booms''); 14-1.7.2
(``General Requirements--Exhaust Gases''); 14-1.7.3 (``General
Requirements--Stabilizers (Wheel-Type Side Boom Tractors)''); 14-1.7.4
(``General Requirements--Welded Construction''); 14-1.7.6 (``General
requirements--Clutch and Brake Protection''); 14-2.2.2 (``Testing--
Rated Load Test''), except that it applies only to equipment that has
been altered or modified; paragraph (a) of 14-3.1.2 (``Operator
Qualifications'') except that the phrase ``when required by law'' is
omitted; paragraphs (e), (f)(1)-(f)(4), (f)(6), (f)(7), (h), and (i) of
14-3.1.3 (``Operating Practices''), and paragraphs (j), (l), and (m) of
Sec. 1926.14-3.2.3 (``Moving the Load''). Regarding the last four of
these sections, OSHA is stipulating exceptions, or requiring employers
to comply with only specified provisions. OSHA wanted to avoid any
duplication, conflicts or possible confusion, so the final rule does
not incorporate provisions of the ASME standard that deal with issues
addressed by other provisions of this standard. The incorporated
provisions consist of requirements that are specific to sideboom
cranes.
Section 1926.1441 ``Requirements for Equipment With a Rated Hoisting/
Lifting Capacity of 2,000 Pounds or Less
Section 1926.1441 establishes the requirements applicable for
equipment with a maximum-rated hoisting/lifting capacity of 2,000
pounds. The section covers equipment designed and built at the jobsite,
as well as manufactured equipment. In the proposal, the introductory
paragraph used the term ``manufacturer-rated'' that appeared in the C-
DAC Document. OSHA requested public comment on this whether to use the
term ``rated'' instead of ``manufacturer-rated'' to clarify that the
section applied to both jobsite-built and manufactured equipment. OSHA
received only two comments, and both commenters supported this revision
because it would clarify application of the section. (ID-0205.1; -
0213.1.) Therefore, OSHA made the proposed revision in the final rule.
OSHA also solicited public comment on whether the maximum rated
capacity for application of this section should be revised because of
crane-technology advancements or other considerations. Two commenters,
one from the sign-installation industry and the other from the
utilities industry, commented that OSHA should increase the maximum
rated capacity cut-off for application of this section to not more than
10,000 pounds. (ID-0162.1; -0189.1.) The sign-installation
representative commented that the operator-qualification requirements
of Sec. 1926.1441 would encourage employers to use smaller cranes at
or near their maximum rated capacity. This commenter indicated that
using 2,000-pound rated-capacity equipment in such a way is less safe
than using higher capacity equipment, which would be operated below its
rated capacity, and at a more optimum boom angle. The utilities-
industry commenter suggested coupling the 10,000 pound cut-off with a
boom length of 25 feet. A representative from the materials-delivery
industry testified during the hearing of the proposed rule that OSHA
should exempt truck-mounted articulated-boom loaders of 10,000 pounds
or less, stating that the State of California has such an exemption.
(ID-0343.)
Another commenter, from the home-building industry, believed that
OSHA should raise the capacity cut-off to 70,000 pounds and 120 feet of
boom because this industry frequently performs light load lifts such as
hoisting roofing and framing materials. (ID-0232.) OSHA notes that the
ground conditions at residential construction sites are often hazardous
to crane operation because the soil at new-home construction sites is
often disturbed. In addition, there may be voids, such as conduits and
sewers, underneath the soil around existing homes. Power lines also are
common at these sites. Furthermore, cranes used in residential
construction not only hoist loads to structures, but also hold loads in
position during installation activities, often with significant boom
extension. A representative from a major crane-rental company shared
similar concerns during the public hearing about the hazards of boom
trucks used to perform relatively light lifts in support of
residential-construction activities. (ID-0344.) This witness stated
that boom-truck cranes present greater risk of tip over than larger
cranes with wider outrigger bases and greater stability, and that an
inexperienced operator with a rented crane (i.e., bare rental) may not
have this knowledge. This witness believed that the operators of bare
rental cranes do not completely understand how much the capacity of the
equipment decreases as the boom extends further. The witness described
crane incidents in which operators of small cranes tipped equipment or
dropped bundles of roofing materials at residential-construction sites,
and provided numerous photographs of crane failures at these sites.
(ID-0345.7.)
Two commenters stated that they believe the 2,000-pound limit is
appropriate. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) Discussion at the hearing also
addressed the appropriateness of the 2,000 pound capacity limitation.
For example, a representative of a major local government testified
about the city's experiences with smaller cranes, and explained that
smaller cranes, like some knuckle-boom cranes, lift heavier loads and
extend their booms further than older cranes, allowing materials-
delivery personnel at construction sites to position and hold materials
for contractors during installation and erection activities. (ID-0342.)
The city representative stated that, when employers perform these
activities with greater capacity equipment, employers typically plan
for those operations; however, the same planning is not necessarily
done by employers when using smaller capacity equipment for the same
activities (i.e., lifting, moving, and landing materials).
After reviewing the comments and testimony received on this issue,
OSHA finds no persuasive evidence that justifies revising the capacity
cut-off for the application of the requirements Sec. 1926.1441. The
record provides no evidence that the hazards are different for
equipment in the rated capacity
[[Page 48076]]
range from 2,000 to 10,000 pounds than the hazards associated with
equipment not covered by Sec. 1926.1441. The myriad hazards addressed
by this standard, including, for example, inadequate ground conditions,
power lines, ineffective signal communications, overloading, and
inadequate operator knowledge/ability, also are applicable to equipment
in this capacity range. As noted in the discussion of Sec. 1926.1427,
some hazards may be increased because these cranes are often used in
tight spaces. Therefore, OSHA determines that the cut-off point of
2,000 pounds or less as proposed is appropriate. This conclusion is
consistent with the judgment of the Committee as described in the
proposal (73 FR 59869, Oct. 9, 2008).
Paragraph (a) of this section lists the provisions of this subpart
that apply to equipment covered by this section. OSHA did not receive
any comments on proposed paragraph (a) and is deferring to the
Committee's determination that the hazards addressed by these
provisions apply irrespective of the equipment's rated capacity. For
example, the dangers associated with making electrical contact with a
power line do not depend on the lifting capacity of the equipment, so
C-DAC determined that Sec. Sec. 1926.1407-1926.1411 on power line
safety should apply to all equipment regardless of rated capacity.
Similarly, the other provisions listed in this paragraph apply to
equipment with a rated capacity of 2,000 pounds or less to the same
extent that those sections apply to that type of equipment with a rated
capacity in excess of 2,000 pounds. To avoid confusion, OSHA is
including references in this final paragraph (a) to provisions located
and required in other paragraphs of proposed Sec. 1926.1441.
Therefore, paragraph (a) now also references Sec. Sec. 1926.1403,
1926.1406, 1926.1412(c), and 1926.1425 (except 1926.1425(c)(3)).
Paragraph (b) of this section sets forth requirements for the
assembly/disassembly of cranes covered by this section, and duplicates
requirements specified elsewhere in this subpart. In this regard,
paragraph (b)(1) requires that equipment covered by this section meet
the requirements of Sec. Sec. 1926.1403 and 1926.1406 for assembly/
disassembly, while paragraph (b)(2) consists of requirements for the
components and configuration of equipment covered by this section. OSHA
received no comments on these two paragraphs. Paragraph (b)(1) refers
to Sec. Sec. 1926.1403 and 1926.1406 of this subpart, and the preamble
discussion above provides an explanation of these sections, and OSHA's
rationale for including them in the final rule. Because Sec. Sec.
1926.1403 and 1926.1406 are included in paragraph (a), OSHA has
modified the language in paragraph (b)(1) for clarity. The requirements
set forth under paragraph (b)(2) duplicate the requirements specified
by Sec. Sec. 1926.1404(m)(1), (m)(1)(i), (m)(1)(ii), (m)(2), and (n)
of this subpart; see the discussion under Sec. 1926.1404(m) and (n) of
this preamble for an explanation of these provisions, and OSHA's
rationale for adopting them in the final rule.
Paragraph (b)(3) requires employers to comply with manufacturer
prohibitions for equipment covered by this section. The same
requirement applies to higher-capacity equipment under Sec.
1926.1404(n). OSHA received no comments on the proposed paragraph and
is including the provision in the final rule as proposed because the
Committee agreed that manufacturers' prohibitions are designed to
prevent hazards that can arise with the use of their products.
Paragraph (c) of this section specifies procedural requirements for
operating the equipment. Paragraph (c)(1) requires the employer to
comply with all manufacturer procedures applicable to equipment
operation, including equipment operation with attachments. The same
requirement applies to higher-capacity equipment under Sec.
1926.1417(a). OSHA received no comments on the proposed paragraph and
is including the provision in the final rule as proposed because the
Committee agreed that manufacturer procedures are designed to prevent
hazards that can arise with the use of their products.
The requirements in paragraph (c)(2) apply to equipment for which
manufacturer operating procedures are unavailable. Under these
conditions, paragraph (c)(2)(i) requires the employer to develop, and
ensure compliance with, the procedures necessary for the safe operation
of the equipment and its attachments.
Paragraph (c)(2)(ii) specifies that the employer must ensure that a
qualified person develops the procedures for operational controls. The
Committee concluded that, because these procedures are highly complex
and critical to operational control of the equipment, a qualified
person has the high degree of expertise necessary to ensure proper
development of the control procedures.
When the employer develops the operating procedures for this
equipment, paragraph (c)(2)(iii) requires that procedures related to
the capacity of the equipment be developed and signed by a professional
engineer familiar with the equipment. The Committee concluded that,
because the type and complexity of engineering analysis needed to
develop safe procedures related to capacity, a registered professional
engineer who is familiar with the equipment must perform this task. The
Committee also agreed that signing the procedures was necessary to
ensure that the engineer performed the task with the requisite level of
care.
No commenters responded to the provisions of proposed paragraph
(c). OSHA is adopting these provisions in the final rule as proposed
because (1) the provisions are consistent with the consensus reached by
the Committee, and (2) will ensure that, absent manufacturer
procedures, employers develop procedures that will protect workers as
effectively as operating procedures developed by the equipment
manufacturer when implemented as required.
Paragraph (c)(3) of the final rule addresses the provision of
operating information to the equipment operator. Equipment covered by
this section may not have an operator's cab; therefore, paragraph
(c)(3)(i) requires that the load chart be made available to the
operator at the control station rather than in the cab. The Committee
developed this provision to prevent cranes from being used to perform
operations beyond their rated capacities. The Committee determined that
the load chart must be readily available to crane operators since
capacity varies according to a variety of factors addressed in such
charts, including, for example, boom length, radius, boom angle, and
equipment configuration. OSHA received no comments on the proposed
paragraph and is including the provision in the final rule as proposed
based on the rationale provided by the Committee
Under paragraph (c)(3)(ii), employers must ensure that required
procedures, recommendations, warnings, instructions, and operator's
manual be readily available for use by the operator. Again, this
provision covers equipment with and without a cab. The consensus of the
Committee was that operators must have easy access to the information
in these materials to operate the equipment safely. No comments were
received on this provision and OSHA is including this provision in the
final rule as proposed.
When rated capacities are available at the control station only in
electronic form and a failure occurs that makes the rated capacities
inaccessible, paragraph
[[Page 48077]]
(c)(3)(iii) requires employers to ensure that the crane operator
immediately ceases operations or follows safe shut-down procedures
until the rated capacities become available again. The Committee agreed
that it is unsafe to continue to operate the equipment if the rated
capacities are inaccessible to the operator. No comments were received
on this provision and OSHA is adopting this requirement in the final
rule as proposed.
Paragraph (d) of this section specifies requirements for safety
devices and operational aids for the equipment. In this regard,
paragraph (d)(1) requires that employers maintain safety devices and
operational aids that are part of the original equipment in accordance
with manufacturer procedures. (Note: This requirement applies to anti
two-block devices used on equipment covered by this section
manufactured before the effective date of this final standard; see
discussion of anti two-block device under paragraph (d)(3) below.) The
Committee determined that the full range of safety devices and
operational aids required by Sec. Sec. 1926.1415 and 1926.1416 of this
subpart were not generally needed for the safe operation of this low-
capacity equipment. However, the Committee also concluded that, if the
manufacturer included such devices or aids, it is probable that the
manufacturer's design relies on them working properly for the equipment
to operate safely. Therefore, it is appropriate for the standard to
require them to be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's
procedures. No comments were received on this provision and OSHA is
retaining this paragraph in the final standard as proposed.
Under paragraph (d)(2), employers must ensure that the equipment
covered by this section and manufactured more than one year after the
effective date of this final standard be equipped either with an anti-
two block device that meets the requirements of Sec. 1926.1416(d)(3),
or be designed so that no damage or load failure occurs in the event of
a two-block situation. The provision also identifies an example of
equipment designed to prevent equipment damage load failure, i.e., when
the power unit of the machine stalls in the event of a two-block
situation. In such a case, the power unit does not have sufficient
power to cause the load to fail or to damage the equipment. Instead,
when the two-block situation occurs, the power unit stalls, which
prevents the load from falling. The purpose of this paragraph is to
prevent equipment damage or failure stemming from contact between a
component on the hoist line and the boom tip, which occurs during a
two-block situation. Such contact can lead to a damaged or severed load
line, as well as other types of equipment failure.
The Committee agreed to provide employers with discretion to choose
between two options for eliminating two-block hazards. The first option
prevents a two-block situation from occurring, while the second option
prevents equipment damage and load failure if a two-block situation
occurs. The Committee determined that, for the equipment cover by this
section, each option protects employees equally well. Regarding the
first option, the anti two-block device used must meet the requirements
for such devices specified by Sec. 1926.1416(d)(3). Paragraph (d)(3)
of Sec. 1926,1416 addresses two types of anti two-block devices: the
warning type, and the automatic-prevention type (see the discussion of
these devices above under Sec. 1926.1416(d)(3) of this preamble). The
type required depends on the type of crane and the date of manufacture.
However, Sec. 1926.1416(d)(3) requires that employers use the
automatic-prevention type on equipment manufactured more than one year
after the effective date of this final standard. Therefore, since the
requirement in Sec. 1926.1441(d)(2) only applies to equipment
manufactured more than one year after the effective date of this final
standard, and to remain consistent with Sec. 1926.1416(d)(3), the anti
two-block device used on equipment covered by this section must be the
automatic-prevention type. The Committee concluded that it would be
inappropriate to apply this requirement to equipment manufactured
before either a voluntary consensus standard or Federal requirement is
in place. Therefore, this paragraph applies to equipment manufactured
more than one year after the effective date of this final standard.
OSHA received no comments on any provision of proposed paragraph
(c). Based on the Committee's rationale for these provisions, and the
increased safety afforded to employees, OSHA is adopting these
provisions in the final rule as proposed.
Paragraph (e) of this section requires that, before operating
equipment, employers train operators on the safe operation of the type
of equipment the operator will be using. OSHA received two comments on
the proposed paragraph. The first commenter believed the 2,000 pound
cut-off was too low and, because the operators would not have to be
certified, employers will use lower-capacity cranes to perform
construction jobs that require higher-capacity equipment. (ID-0189.)
The second commenter stated that certification of the operators of low-
capacity cranes is unnecessary in the home-building industry, but
offered no rationale for this position. (ID-0232.)
OSHA notes that the problem of overloading equipment would exist
even at a higher cut-off point. The only way to eliminate this problem
would be to require operator qualification/certification pursuant to
Sec. 1926.1427 for all equipment, including equipment covered by this
section. The Committee concluded that it is appropriate to exempt
lower-capacity equipment from the operator qualification/certification
requirements of Sec. 1926.1427. Consistent with the Committee's
consensus, OSHA finds that training operators in the safe operation of
the equipment as required by this final standard reduces the likelihood
of accidents and injuries by minimizing operator error; therefore, the
operator certification/qualification procedures required for higher-
capacity equipment under Sec. 1926.1427 are not necessary for this
lower-capacity equipment.
Under paragraph (f) of this section, employers must ensure that
signal persons are trained in the proper use of signals applicable to
the use of equipment covered by this section. Although the equipment
covered by this section has a low capacity, in some circumstances its
safe operation depends on signals given by a signal person.
Accordingly, this paragraph ensures that communication between the
crane operator and the signal person is clear and effective. However,
the Committee concluded that the comprehensive signal-person
qualification procedures required for higher-capacity equipment under
Sec. 1926.1428, Signal person qualifications, are not needed for this
equipment. OSHA received no comments on proposed paragraph (f) and is
including the provision in the final rule as proposed based on the
rationale provided by the Committee.
Proposed paragraph (g) of this section required that equipment
covered by this section comply with Sec. 1926.1425, Keeping clear of
the load, except for Sec. 1926.1425(c)(3); Sec. 1926.1425(c)(3)
specifies that materials be rigged by a qualified rigger. The Committee
determined that, in light of the limited capacity of this equipment, it
was unnecessary to require a qualified rigger. OSHA received no
comments on the proposed provision and is deferring to the Committee's
determination. As noted in the discussion of paragraph (a) above, the
requirement for the employer
[[Page 48078]]
to comply with Sec. 1926.1425 (except for Sec. 1926.1425(c)(3)) has
been added to the provisions listed in paragraph (a). Therefore, OSHA
is removing and reserving paragraph (g) in this final rule because the
requirements proposed in paragraph (g) are now required in final
paragraph (a).
According to paragraph (h) of this section, employers must ensure
that equipment covered by this section is inspected pursuant to the
manufacturer's procedures. The Committee concluded that these
inspections are sufficient to detect conditions that could lead to
equipment failure because manufacturers typically recommend procedures
designed to prevent hazards that can arise during equipment operation.
The Committee concluded that the comprehensive inspection procedures
required for higher-capacity equipment under Sec. 1926.1412 are not
needed for lighter, less complicated, equipment. OSHA received no
comments on the proposed paragraph and is adopting this paragraph in
the final rule as proposed based on the rationale provided by the
Committee.
Paragraph (j) of this section prohibits using equipment covered by
this section to hoist personnel. OSHA received no comments on the
proposed paragraph and is including it in the final rule as proposed
because the Committee determined that the low capacity and light
construction of this equipment makes it unsuited for lifting personnel
safely.
Under paragraph (k) of this section, employers must ensure that a
qualified engineer designs the equipment. The Committee noted that some
employers may design and construct this type of equipment themselves,
rather than using equipment built by a manufacturer. The Committee
developed this provision to ensure that, in such cases, the design of
such equipment is sufficient to protect employees exposed to it. OSHA
received no comments on the proposed paragraph and is retaining it in
the final standard as proposed based on the Committee's rationale.
Section 1926.1442 Severability
The Agency is including a standard severability clause to express
the Agency's intent that if any court of competent jurisdiction renders
any provision in subpart CC unenforceable, the remaining provisions of
the subpart would remain in effect.
V. Procedural Determinations
A. Legal Authority
The purpose of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C.
651 et seq. (``the Act''), is ``to assure so far as possible every
working man and woman in the Nation safe and healthful working
conditions and to preserve our human resources.'' 29 U.S.C. 651(b). To
achieve this goal, Congress authorized the Secretary of Labor to
promulgate and enforce occupational safety and health standards. See 29
U.S.C. 654, 655(b), and 658. A safety or health standard ``requires
conditions, or the adoption or use of one or more practices, means,
methods, operations, or processes, reasonably necessary or appropriate
to provide safe or healthful employment and places of employment.'' 29
U.S.C. 652(8).
A safety standard is reasonably necessary or appropriate within the
meaning of 29 U.S.C. 652(8) if it substantially reduces or eliminates a
significant risk of material harm in the workplace; is economically and
technologically feasible; uses the most cost effective protective
measures; is consistent with or is a justified departure from prior
Agency action; is supported by substantial evidence; and is better able
to effectuate the Act's purposes than any relevant national consensus
standard. See UAW v. OSHA, 37 F.3d 665, 668 (DC Cir. 1994)(``LOTO'').
In addition, safety standards must be highly protective. See id. at
669.
A standard is technologically feasible if the protective measures
it requires already exist, can be brought into existence with available
technology, or can be created with technology that can reasonably be
expected to be developed. See, e.g., American Iron & Steel Inst., Inc.
v. OSHA, 939 F.2d 975, 980 (DC Cir. 1991) (per curiam) (``AISI''). A
standard is economically feasible if industry can absorb or pass on the
costs of compliance without threatening its long-term profitability or
competitive structure. See, e.g., AISI, 939 F.2d at 980. A standard is
cost effective if the protective measures it requires are the least
costly of the available alternatives that achieve the same level of
protection. See LOTO, 37 F.3d at 668.
Section 6(b)(7) authorizes OSHA to include among a standard's
requirements labeling, monitoring, medical testing, and other
information gathering and transmittal provisions. 29 U.S.C. 655(b)(7).
Finally, the OSH Act requires that, when promulgating a rule that
differs substantially from a national consensus standard, OSHA must
explain why the promulgated rule is a better method for effectuating
the purpose of the Act. 29 U.S.C. 655(b)(8). Deviations from relevant
consensus standards are explained elsewhere in this preamble.
B. Executive Summary of the Final Economic Analysis; Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis
1. Introduction and Summary
For the final Cranes and Derricks standard, the Agency is
presenting this Executive Summary of the Final Economic Analysis (FEA)
in this preamble; while the full FEA will be available in the docket.
The complete Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is also presented
here.
The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) requires
OSHA to demonstrate the technological and economic feasibility of its
rules. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), as amended in 1996, require Federal agencies to analyze the
costs, benefits, and other consequences and impacts, including small
business impacts, of their rules.
The final cranes standard is an economically significant action
under E.O. 12866 and a major rule under the Congressional Review Act
(SBREFA). In addition, as required by the RFA, the Agency has assessed
the potential impacts of this final rule on small entities and has
prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. This rule is not a
significant Federal intergovernmental mandate, and the Agency has no
obligations to conduct analyses of this rule under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995; however the rule has costs of over $100
million per year on the private sector, and is thus subject to the
requirement under UMRA for review of private-sector costs. These
requirements are met in this section.
The purpose of the Final Economic Analysis is to identify the
establishments and industries affected by the final standard; evaluate
the standard's costs, benefits, and economic impacts; assess the
technological and economic feasibility of the final standard for
affected industries; and evaluate the appropriateness of regulatory and
non-regulatory alternatives to the rule. The FEA has been developed
according to the requirements of E.O. 12866 and the OSH Act. In
addition, in accordance with the RFA as amended by the SBREFA, this
analysis identifies and estimates the impacts of the proposal on small
businesses, using the Small Business Administration's (SBA's) industry-
[[Page 48079]]
specific definitions of small businesses. In addition, OSHA assessed
the impacts of the rule on very small businesses; i.e., those with
fewer than 20 employees.
The FEA differs in several respects from the preliminary economic
analysis (PEA). Several affected general industry sectors have been
added to the original analysis, based on comment during the
rulemaking--for example, electric utilities, telecommunications, sign
manufacturers, natural gas pipelines, and shipyards--an estimated
22,000 potentially affected establishments in all. Costs have been
revised for employer duties for assembly/disassembly and ground
conditions, power line work, and crane operator certification, as well
as inspections (due to an error in the PEA). New costs have been
estimated for meeting ground conditions' provisions ($2.3 million
annually). Estimated costs for assembly/disassembly have been decreased
in this final analysis, from about $33 million annually in the PEA to
about $16 million, primarily due to an increase in current compliance
(baseline) and estimated costs also fell for inspections (from $21
million annually to $16.5 million). Estimated costs for several
provisions have been increased from the PEA: for work near power lines
(from $30 million annually to $68 million) and for crane operator
certification (from $37 million annually to about $51 million,
primarily due to an increase in the unit cost, many more operators
potentially needing certification in the affected general industry
sectors, but decreased by the higher current baseline). Overall,
estimated costs increased from the $83 million annually in the PEA to
about $154 million. The final benefits analysis is based on four years'
of IMIS fatality reports, rather than BLS's Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries as in the preliminary analysis, as it was not
possible to use the CFOI data to estimate the number of fatalities that
were occurring due to crane construction activity by employers in
general industry sectors. The Agency estimates that compliance with the
final standard will prevent 22 fatalities and 175 non-fatal injuries
per year, compared to 53 fatalities estimated to be avoided in the PEA.
The Agency also estimates that compliance will result in
considerable cost saving by preventing many more accidents that do not
result in injury. The Agency has estimated that annual savings from
avoiding project delay, damage to cranes and structures, and lost
productivity is at least $7 million annually just from one type of
crane accident--tipovers. The Agency has not attempted to quantify all
of the costs avoided by all crane accidents prevented by the final
standard, but concludes these cost savings are also substantial. In
addition, the Agency has noted that a significant portion of these
benefits will be passed back immediately to employers in the form of
$51 million annual savings in liability insurance costs for the
affected industries.
OMB requires agencies to monetize benefits where possible. The
Agency is revising its estimate of the VSL presented in the PEA, which
was based on an EPA estimate from the early 1990s. The VSL is estimated
to be about $7 million in terms of 2000 dollars (Viscusi and Aldy,
2003). At the same time the willingness-to-pay to avoid serious injury
was estimated to be about $50,000. The Agency is adjusting the values
based on the change in the GDP implicit price deflator from 2000 to
2010 of about 25 percent (Bureau of Economic Analysis, ``National
Economic Accounts,'' Table 1.1.9 at http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb). The VSL is then $8.7 million and the monetized value of
avoiding a serious, non-fatal injury is $62,500. When fatalities and
injuries are monetized, the total monetized benefits of the standard
from preventing crane accidents is $202.3 million annually from those
sources.
The Agency estimates that the total cost of the final standard is
about $154.1 million annually. Based on comment in the record, the
Agency increased unit costs for ground conditions and ``controlling
entity'' duties for some sectors, crane operator certification, and
power line compliance provisions. The record showed that relatively
more crane operators are already certified, and the Agency reduced
costs by that factor. The total estimated costs increased due to the
inclusion of some general industry sectors which perform construction
activities, as well as increases in unit costs. The net benefit of the
standard is $55.2 million annually (total benefits of $ 209.3 million
less costs of $154.1 million annually).
The economic impact on affected employers, in terms of costs versus
revenues, ranged from 0.01 percent to 0.2 percent, for an average-size
employer. When annual costs are compared to profits, impacts range from
0.1 percent to 4 percent, for the average employer. Impacts were
highest for employers who owned and rented cranes. The final standard
is technologically feasible for employers as it does not contain any
requirements that are not capable of being done. The Agency also
concludes that the final standard is economically feasible, as the
highest impacts are on employers who own and rent cranes and even that
impact is no more than 4 percent. Cost and impacts of that magnitude
are far less than the typical yearly swings in revenues and profits for
the construction industry. Economic impacts on small business are
presented below in the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
Based on comment in the record, some employees may bear the cost of
crane operator certification (that is, pay for their own
certification). The Agency attributes all costs of crane operator
certification to employers in the analysis, though. There may also be
language and literacy barriers for operator certification that some
current operators may not be able to surmount. Table B-1 summarizes the
benefits and costs of this final standard.
Table B-1--Annual Benefits, Costs, and Net Benefits, 2010 Dollars
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Costs*:
Crane Assembly/Disassembly........ $16.3 million.
Power Line Safety................. $68.2 million.
Crane Inspections................. $16.5 million.
Ground Conditions................. $ 2.3 million.
Operator Qualification and $50.7 million.
Certification.
---------------------------------
Total Annual Costs:........... $154.1 million.
Annual Benefits:
Number of Injuries Prevented...... 175.
Number of Fatalities Prevented.... 22.
Property Damage from Tipovers $7 million.
Prevented.
---------------------------------
[[Page 48080]]
Total Monetized Benefits...... $209.3 million.
Annual Net Benefits (Benefits minus $55.2 million.
Costs).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: OSHA Office of Regulatory Analysis.
* Costs with 7% discount rate. Total costs with 3% discount rate: $150.4
million annually.
2. Need for the Rule and Market Failure
Occupational safety problems, such as safety problems associated
with cranes and derricks, routinely involve the following
characteristics that lead to market failures:
(1) A variety of situations in which one party (employers, fellow
employees) take actions that impose risks of death and injuries on
other parties (employees);
(2) The risk in question may not be well understood by any party,
or also subject to asymmetric information (the employer will typically
know more about the risks than employees);
(3) The costs of the risks are routinely transferred to other
parties who typically lack the information necessary for a precise
estimate of the costs of the transfer, or are not permitted to price
transfers appropriately (insurers are routinely forced to use premium
systems that do not capture all possible knowledge about risk).
These characteristics mean that markets will not adequately capture the
risk involved, and thus regulations are needed. (See Chapter 1 of the
FEA for more detail.)
3. Industry Profile/Affected Industries
The final standard would affect employers and employees across most
construction industry sectors as well as some in some general industry
sectors where cranes and derricks are used as part of the performance
of work duties. These industries include firms involved in renting
cranes for use in construction projects such as: Multi-family housing;
industrial buildings and warehouses; other nonresidential buildings;
highway and street construction; and water, sewer, power, and
communication line construction. As in the preliminary economic
analysis (PEA), the Agency has grouped affected establishments, by
industry, into the following categories for analyzing the final
standard:
Crane Rental with Operators,
Crane Rental without Operators,
Own and Rent Cranes with Operators,
Own but Do Not Rent, and
Crane Lessees in the Construction Industry (referred to
simply as ``Crane Lessees'' throughout).
The affected firms and establishments, including information on number
of employees, revenues, and profits, are presented below in Table B-2.
In some sectors the number of cranes has changed from the PEA because
the analysis has been updated with revenue data from the 2006 County
Business Patterns (CPB) and Statistics of U.S. Businesses (SUSB), and
in those sectors the number of cranes was estimated from revenues.
The PEA accompanying the proposed standard presented an industry
profile describing crane use in all sectors of the traditional
construction industries, the current NAICS 233-236 (the older SICs 16,
17, and 18) and the crane rental industry sector in general industry,
NAICS 53214. There were no comments objecting to the inclusion of these
sectors in the economic analysis. However, there was comment from some
general industry sectors following publication of the proposal. They
noted that the PEA had focused exclusively on the construction industry
and had not captured costs or benefits for general industry employers
who own equipment covered by the standard and engage in construction
activity in addition their primary work in the various general industry
sectors.
Table B-2--Industrial Profile of Affected Firms and Establishments for the Proposed Standard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected Average per estab.
--------------------------------------- Profit rate -------------------------
NAIC Industry (percent) Revenues Profits
Firms Estabs Employees $1,000 $1,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental with Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238990................................. All Other Specialty Trade Cont... 1,244 1,304 16,244 4.56 $1,918 $88
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental without Operators (Bare Rentals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
532412................................. Const./Min./For. Machine & Equip. 2,137 3,702 48,481 6.42 3,427 220
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own and Rent Cranes with Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115................................. New Single-Family Housing Const.. 178 178 261 4.67 220 10
236118................................. Residential Remodelers........... 25 25 45 4.67 443 21
236210................................. Industrial Building Construction. 9 12 1,067 4.67 12,213 571
236220................................. Commercial and Institutional 23 31 757 4.67 4,157 194
Building.
237110................................. Water and Sewer Line and Related 52 69 1,432 5.22 4,107 214
Struct.
237120................................. Oil and Gas Pipeline and Related 20 26 1,457 5.22 5,510 288
Struct.
237130................................. Power and Communication Line and 34 34 666 5.22 2,880 150
Rel.
237310................................. Highway, Street, and Bridge 80 107 6,456 5.22 11,783 615
Construction.
237990................................. Other Heavy and Civil Engineering 76 101 5,857 5.22 10,201 533
Const.
[[Page 48081]]
238110................................. Poured Concrete Foundation and 261 261 4,328 4.42 2,273 101
Struct.
238120................................. Structural Steel and Precast 200 266 7,389 4.42 3,439 152
Concrete.
238130................................. Framing Contractors.............. 26 26 120 4.42 153 7
238150................................. Glass and Glazing Contractors.... 42 42 328 4.42 616 27
238170................................. Siding Contractors............... 5 5 18 4.42 496 22
238190................................. Other Foundation, Structure, and 49 65 1,145 4.42 1,509 67
Building.
238210................................. Electrical Contractors........... 15 15 176 4.32 1,303 56
238220................................. Plumbing, Heating, and Air- 2 3 196 3.86 5,835 225
Conditioning.
238290................................. Other Building Equipment 113 151 4,076 4.42 3,474 154
Contractors.
238320................................. Painting and Wall Covering 21 21 159 4.42 916 41
Contractors.
238910................................. Site Preparation Contractors..... 400 400 4,706 4.56 1,668 76
---------------------------------------
Subtotal...................... 1,630 1,838 40,639
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own but Do Not Rent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115................................. New Single family housing 3,097 3,097 13,621 4.67 1,520 71
construction.
236116................................. New Multifamily housing 217 217 2,219 4.67 5,477 256
construction.
236117................................. New housing operative builders... 1,699 1,699 12,015 4.67 6,021 281
236118................................. Residential Remodelers........... 985 985 3,201 4.67 646 30
236210................................. Industrial building construction. 276 325 9,359 4.67 5,931 277
236220................................. Commercial and Institutional 4,141 4,141 71,536 4.67 7,177 335
Bldg. Const.
237110................................. Water and Sewer Line Const....... 1,028 1,371 20,306 5.22 3,239 169
237120................................. Oil and gas pipeline construction 128 171 9,276 5.22 9,189 480
237130................................. Power and communication line 213 285 12,600 5.22 5,581 291
const.
237210................................. Land subdivision................. 0 0 0 11.04 2,878 318
237310................................. Highway, street and bridge const. 88 118 4,308 5.22 8,279 432
237990................................. Other heavy and civil eng........ 273 273 7,564 5.22 3,965 207
238110................................. Poured Concrete foundation and 267 267 3,070 4.42 1,682 74
struct.
238120................................. Structural steel and precast 334 334 7,250 4.42 2,712 120
concrete.
238130................................. Framing Contractors.............. 1,395 1,395 11,834 4.42 936 41
238140................................. Masonry Contractors.............. 137 137 1,304 4.42 876 39
238150................................. Glass & Glazing Contractors...... 54 54 504 4.42 1,470 65
238160................................. Roofing Contractors.............. 197 197 2,262 4.42 1,390 61
238170................................. Siding Contractors............... 53 53 215 4.42 580 26
238190................................. Other foundation, structure, 25 25 158 4.42 1,013 45
building, ext.
238210................................. Electrical Contractors........... 78 78 771 4.32 1,321 57
238220................................. Plumbing, Heating and Air- 98 98 974 3.86 1,473 57
conditioning Cont.
238290................................. Other building equipment cont.... 49 65 1,237 4.42 2,959 131
238310................................. Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 4.42 1,751 77
contractors.
238320................................. Painting and wall covering 41 41 234 4.42 530 23
contractors.
238330................................. Flooring Contractors............. 0 0 0 4.42 811 36
238340................................. Tile and Terrazzo contractors.... 0 0 0 4.42 698 31
238350................................. Finish Carpentry contractors..... 0 0 0 4.42 678 30
238390................................. Other building finishing 0 0 0 4.42 1,091 48
contractors.
238910................................. Site Preparation................. 389 389 2,825 4.56 1,416 65
221110................................. Electric Power Generation........ 524 2,101 117,236 4.44 43,042 1,911
221120................................. Electric Power Transmission, 1,232 7,393 376,434 4.44 37,443 1,662
Control, and Distribution.
221210................................. Natural Gas Distribution......... 526 2,458 78,813 2.98 30,459 907
321213................................. Engineered Wood Member (except 132 162 8,499 3.87 19,027 737
Truss) Manufacturing.
321214................................. Truss Manufacturing.............. 902 1,085 51,270 3.87 5,972 231
336611................................. Ship Building and Repairing...... 575 635 87,352 6.09 23,071 1,406
339950................................. Sign Manufacturing............... 6,291 6,415 89,360 5.83 1,761 103
[[Page 48082]]
423310................................. Lumber, Plywood, Millwork, and 6,450 8,715 153,761 2.89 14,905 430
Wood Panel Merchant Wholesalers.
423330................................. Roofing, Siding, and Insulation 1,142 2,762 40,643 2.89 8,985 259
Material Merchant Wholesalers.
423390................................. Other Construction Material 2,363 3,155 36,914 2.89 4,859 140
Merchant Wholesalers.
423730................................. Warm Air Heating and Air-Cond. 2,533 5,193 55,606 3.08 5,413 167
Equip. and Supplies.
444110................................. Home Centers..................... 2,553 6,749 573,183 7.70 21,816 1,679
454312................................. Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Bottled 2,307 5,567 43,583 4.22 1,698 72
Gas) Dealers.
482110................................. Railroads........................ NA NA NA NA NA NA
486210................................. Pipeline Transportation of 127 1,363 22,248 13.24 15,037 1,990
Natural Gas.
517110................................. Wired Telecommunications Carriers 2,517 27,159 634,540 7.10 7,294 518
---------------------------------------
Subtotal...................... 45,436 96,725 2,568,084
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Lessees in the Construction Industry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115................................. New Single family housing 31,054 31,054 136,601 4.67 3,040 142
construction.
236116................................. New Multifamily housing 2,173 2,173 22,192 4.67 10,954 512
construction.
236117................................. New housing operative builders... 16,989 16,989 120,146 4.67 12,041 563
236118................................. Residential Remodelers........... 9,848 9,848 32,021 4.67 6,456 302
236210................................. Industrial building construction. 3,264 3,264 93,931 4.67 5,931 277
236220................................. Commercial and Institutional 41,438 41,438 715,896 4.67 7,177 335
Bldg. Construction.
237110................................. Water and Sewer Line Const....... 13,774 13,774 204,085 5.22 3,239 169
237120................................. Oil and gas pipeline construction 1,301 1,734 94,176 5.22 9,189 480
237130................................. Power and communication line 2,147 2,862 126,753 5.22 11,163 583
const.
237210................................. Land subdivision................. 0 0 0 11.04 0 0
237310................................. Highway, street and bridge const. 890 1,186 43,471 5.22 82,791 4,323
237990................................. Other heavy and civil eng........ 2,781 2,781 77,036 5.22 7,931 414
238110................................. Poured Concrete foundation and 1,348 1,348 15,498 4.42 33,636 1,487
struct.
238120................................. Structural steel and precast 3,608 3,608 78,266 4.42 2,712 120
concrete.
238130................................. Framing Contractors.............. 13,974 13,974 118,502 4.42 1,249 55
238140................................. Masonry Contractors.............. 1,372 1,372 13,035 4.42 17,527 775
238150................................. Glass & Glazing Contractors...... 547 547 5,080 4.42 14,698 650
238160................................. Roofing Contractors.............. 1,966 1,966 22,620 4.42 13,903 615
238170................................. Siding Contractors............... 527 527 2,152 4.42 11,596 513
238190................................. Other foundation, structure, 258 258 1,599 4.42 20,266 896
building, ext.
238210................................. Electrical Contractors........... 776 776 7,712 4.32 132,128 5,714
238220................................. Plumbing, Heating and Air- 981 981 9,744 3.86 147,307 5,685
conditioning Cont.
238290................................. Other building equipment cont.... 4,997 6,663 126,559 4.42 2,959 131
238310................................. Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
contractors.
238320................................. Painting and wall covering 415 415 2,346 4.42 52,995 2,343
contractors.
238330................................. Flooring Contractors............. 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
238340................................. Tile and Terrazzo contractors.... 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
238350................................. Finish Carpentry contractors..... 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
238390................................. Other building finishing 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
contractors.
238910................................. Site Preparation................. 3,927 3,927 28,543 4.56 14,164 647
---------------------------------------
Subtotal...................... 160,352 163,463 2,097,963
---------------------------------------
Total......................... 210,800 267,032 4,771,411
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: U.S. Census Bureau data; Country Business Patterns, 2006; Statistics of U.S. Businesses 2006; Internal Revenue Service, Source Book, profit
rates over 2000-2006.
[[Page 48083]]
These employers either routinely have a few tasks that can be
considered construction activity or infrequently engage in construction
projects with cranes at their own facilities. (``Cranes'' will be used
throughout this section to refer to all covered equipment by the final
standard: Cranes, derricks, pile driving equipment, and so forth.)
Comment in the record indicates that the industry sectors in the table
below have some construction activity involving cranes within the scope
of the final standard, and the Agency has made a determination that
their construction activity with cranes does, in fact, fall under the
final standard. Table B-3 below identifies the sectors in general
industry that were identified during the rulemaking, and the Agency
concludes will be affected by the final standard.
Table B-3--General Industry Sectors That Perform Construction Work Involving Cranes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS Industry Exhibits that identify affected general industry sector
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
221110........................... Electric Power ID-0155.1; -0201.1; -0203.1; -0215.1; -0328.1; -0342; -
Generation. 0344; -0367.1; -0369.1; -0408.1
221120........................... Electric Power
Transmission,
Control, and
Distribution.
221210........................... Natural Gas ID-0163.1; -0234; -0238.1; -0344
Distribution.
321213........................... Engineered Wood ID-0218.1
Member Mfg.
321214........................... Truss Mfg........... ID-0218.1
336611........................... Ship Building and ID-0195.1
Repairing.
339950........................... Sign Manufacturing.. ID-0189.1; -0344; -0386.1; -0386.2
423310........................... Lumber, Plywood,
Millwork, and Wood
Panel Merchant.
423330........................... Roofing, Siding, and ID-0145.1; -0147.1; -0184.1; -0206.1; -0208; -0218.1; -
Insulation Material 0232.1; -0233.1; -0299.1; -0341; -0343; -0372.1; -
Merchant W. 0380.1; -0380.2; -0381.1; -0384.1
423390........................... Other Construction
Material Merchant
Wholesalers.
423730........................... Warm Air Heating and ID-0165.1; -0235.1
Air-Cond. Equip.
and Supplies.
454312........................... Liquefied Petroleum ID-0198.1
Gas (Bottled Gas)
Dealers.
482110........................... Railroads........... ID-0170.1; -0176.1; -0291; -0342
486210........................... Pipeline ID-0163.1; -0328.1; -0344
Transportation of
Natural Gas.
517110........................... Wired ID-0155.1; -0234; -0328.1; -0344
Telecommunications
Carriers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Office of Regulatory Analysis.
The Agency concludes that general industry's permanently installed
overhead and gantry cranes should be covered under general industry
standards rather than the final construction crane standard, even if
they perform incidental construction work (see discussion of Sec.
1926.1400, Scope). However, all other general industry cranes, whether
mobile or permanently installed, are covered under the final standard
to the extent that they perform construction work.
Several general industry sectors that commented in the rulemaking
will not be affected by the final standard because their only
interaction with construction consists of making deliveries of
materials to the ground at construction sites. Several commenters noted
that their industry only made deliveries to the ground. (ID-0236; -
0299.1.) The Agency has made clear in the Scope section above that the
delivery process from truck to ground is not considered to be a
construction activity covered by its construction standards. For that
reason, brick manufacturers, pre-cast concrete products manufacturers,
and all other distributors of similar supplies are not affected by the
standard because they only deliver materials from truck bed to ground.
However, the Agency views deliveries into or onto structures
differently--as construction activity within the purview of the
standard. Therefore, industries that deliver materials into or onto
structures with articulating cranes are included in the industry
profile. The final standard exempts such deliveries for articulating
cranes with automatic overload protection devices (AOPDs). If all such
articulating cranes had these devices, then affected industries
(building supply, lumber yards, HVAC distributors, for example) would
be exempt. The Agency had comment in the record that newer articulating
cranes for building material supply are equipped with AOPDs, but the
Agency concludes that there are still older models of articulating
cranes making building supply deliveries, and that these affected
employers would be covered by the standard--chiefly by the requirement
for operator certification.
The electric utility industry made several comments to the record.
(ID-0144; -0155.1; -0163.1; -0200; -0203.1; -0213; -0215; -0226; -
0345.17; -0408.1.) This industry is affected by the standard both
because they have digger derricks and other cranes that perform
construction work from time to time, and because utilities must provide
voltage information and participate in meetings with contractors to
determine power line safety. Although digger derricks are exempted from
the final standard for all work on utility poles, several commenters
made clear that they are routinely used for lifting in other work
settings (ID-0328.1; -0344). For construction crane activities by
electric utilities, the main impact of the final standard is to require
that operators be certified, as all linemen currently received
extensive training in crane safety practices and procedures otherwise
(ID-0155.1; -0344; -0345.17). The Agency also learned through comment
that the telecommunications industry uses digger derricks and truck-
mounted cranes, and this industry is included in the standard's
industry profile as well.
The Federal Railroad Agency has jurisdiction over most of the work
done by railroads. The Agency has concluded
[[Page 48084]]
that railroads will not be affected by the final standard.
All of the affected general industry sectors have been added to the
industry profile in the category of employers who ``Own but do not
Rent.'' With respect to the industries not included in the PEA, the
Agency has taken a conservative approach to not underestimate costs,
and therefore economic impacts, on these sectors. The traditional
construction industry sectors have remained unchanged. The data for all
sectors has been updated with information from the 2007 Economic
Census, 2006 County Business Patterns, and 2006 Statistics for U.S.
Businesses for number of firms, establishments, and revenues. Table B-2
presents information about the affected industry sectors: the number of
affected establishments, employees, industry profit rates, and average
revenues and profits for affected establishments.
Estimating the number of establishments and cranes covered by the
standard in general industry
To estimate the number of establishments and cranes in general
industry sectors affected by the final cranes standard, the Agency
relied on: comment in the record; 2006 CPB and SUSB, and occupational
data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Occupational and Employment
Statistics, May, 2008 Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates,
extracted from 4-digit NAICS industry-specific estimates (Nov. 4, 2009
from http://bls.gov/oes/oes_dl.htm). The Agency's purpose in
estimating the number of cranes in the affected general industry
sectors is to estimate the costs employers will bear and demonstrate
that the standard is economically feasible. For some industries below,
the Agency's estimates are certainly high--overestimates, but the
ultimate purpose here is not to predict or forecast cost estimates, but
to show that even if more cranes are affected and more costs result
from the final standard, the standard is still economically feasible.
In addition, since economic impacts are measured as the costs for
affected employers, the total number of affected cranes in a sector
does not alter the measure of impact on an affected employer. Although
a higher total number of cranes in a sector obviously changes the
estimated total cost of the entire standard. For example, if an average
employer in the industry sector has 10 employees and the Agency
estimates one crane and one crane operator, it does not affect how
economic impact is measured whether there is one crane in the industry
or 50. The impact of costs as a fraction of revenues and profits are,
on average, the same for each affected employer. As a result, though
the Agency will try to estimate the number of affected employers, the
exact number is not critical to the economic feasibility finding that
is essential for the rule. In addition, although all of the sectors
below engage in crane construction activities, some likely may contract
such work out and would then only be affected by the final standard
indirectly.
Estimating the number of cranes and crane operators in affected general
industry sectors
Electric Power Generation (NAICS 221110) and Electric
Power Transmission Control, and Distribution (NAICS 221120). The Agency
is basing its estimate of affected cranes and crane operators on the
industry profile and cost analysis for subpart V, Table 5.1. (ID-
0389.2.) Table 5.1 shows that the two industries had about 114,500
employees working on power lines affected by subpart V in about 7,600
crews for Electric Power Generation and about 12,600 crews in the
Transmission, Control, and Distribution sector. Together, in total, the
Agency estimated that the industry was using about 20,200 powered
vehicles, one for each crew. OSHA concludes that each sector has one
piece of equipment, such as a digger derrick, bucket truck, or truck-
mounted crane that each crew works with (in crew sizes of 3 or 6).
Further, based on several comments in the record that digger derricks
perform crane-related work in substations and other locations (ID-
0155.1; -0201.1; -0328.1; -0344), the Agency concludes that each digger
derrick would need a certified operator to work as the industry
customarily has. Other comment in the record suggests that journeymen
are often hired as if each is completely trained in all aspects of work
(ID-0155.1; -0344); hence the industry has asserted that to maintain
this arrangement all linemen would have to receive crane operator
certification, which would be prohibitively expensive (ID-0203.1; -
0367.1). However, another comment in the record indicated that for each
crew, individuals have specific assignments--that not all journeymen
are given responsibility for operating lifting devices, whether that be
a bucket truck or aerial lift, a crane, or a digger derrick. (ID-0344.)
Comment in the record indicates that, roughly, equipment is equally
divided between equipment that is covered by the standard (digger
derricks and boom trucks) and bucket trucks, which are not. (ID-0344.)
The record also indicates that journeymen are extensively trained in
apprenticeship programs in the use of their powered equipment, and that
the primary cost of meeting the duties of the final standard is
certifying crane operators. (ID-0155.1; -0344.) The Agency can also
estimate based on comment in the record that there are far more digger
derricks than boom trucks, in a ratio of about 85:15, based on reports
of 16 of Edison Electric's members who provided information in the
record and identified their types of equipment. The PEA in subpart V
was based on the 2002 Economic Census. The 2007 Census shows that
employment in NAICS 221110 has fallen to 78 percent of the 2002 level
and employment in NAICS 221120 has fallen to 90 percent of the 2002
figure. However, there was no information in the record that showed the
number of linemen or pieces of equipment had declined; so the Agency is
basing its estimate of the number of employees who would be certified
to use the equipment covered under the final standard as presented in
subpart V's PEA Table 5.1. Neither of the affected industry sectors has
objected to certifying operators of their truck-mounted cranes; yet if
it were necessary that every lineman perform every function, that would
surely also necessitate certifying every journeyman as well. The Agency
concludes that it is not necessary to certify every journeyman as a
crane operator for the industry to continue to efficiently use their
equipment and manpower. If the industries are still operating as many
as 20,200 powered vehicles, and about one-half are digger derricks and
truck-mounted cranes, then, at the very bare minimum, to have an
operator in each piece of equipment potentially covered by the final
standard would require certifying 10,100 as crane operators. However,
having the bare minimum, the Agency recognizes, would not afford the
industries the same flexibility and efficiency as it now has nor is
every employee available to work every day of the year. However, the
Agency believes that certifying 30,000 journeymen as crane operators
would afford a sufficient number that each piece of covered equipment
(digger derricks and truck-mounted cranes) would in almost all
situations have a journeyman certified as a crane operator available to
perform work addressed by the final standard in a crew. Work that is
construction work and covered by the final standard, and not subpart V,
is not an every day occurrence for the two industry sectors. Indeed,
the Agency believes that this estimate is likely higher than the most
efficient solution that these two
[[Page 48085]]
industries will devise, but, for purposes of showing that the final
standard is economically feasible even with this many journeymen
certified as crane operators, the Agency believes it is sufficient.
Accordingly, the Agency estimates that NAICS 221110 Electric Power
Generation will expend resources to certify about 10,000 journeymen as
crane operators, and NAICS 221120 Electric Power Transmission, Control,
and Distribution about 20,000.
Two natural gas sectors are potentially affected by the
final standard: NAICS 221210 Natural Gas Distribution and 486210
Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas. Both industries were reported
to be impacted by the final standard. (ID-0155.1; -0328.1; -0344.)
NAICS 237120 Oil and Gas Pipeline Construction performs much of the
construction of new gas pipelines, the Agency concludes. However, the
two natural gas sectors likely also perform some pipeline work
themselves--or at least some employers in the industries do. Sideboom
cranes are commonly used in pipeline construction, but are exempt from
the requirement for crane operator certification. The Agency concludes
that the major significant cost for these industries is certifying
operators for their other, mostly truck-mounted cranes. Power line
safety issues occur most often below ground, and the Agency concludes
that the industry already addresses these issues, based on comments
(ID-0155.1; -0344). The 2006 CPB and SUSB shows that Natural Gas
Distribution sector has 2,458 establishments and 78,813 employees;
while Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas has 1,363 establishments
with 22,248 employees. According to BLS' 2008 Occupational Employment
survey, Natural Gas Distribution has 2,390 employees who are electric
line installers, 950 who are operating engineers and other construction
equipment operators, 1,180 heavy truck drivers and tractor trailer
drivers, and no crane operators. For the Pipeline Transportation of
Natural Gas, the employment figures are 50, 130, zero, and also no
crane operators, respectively, for the same employment categories. The
Agency concludes that the Natural Gas Distribution industry is
performing significant pipeline work, mainly with excavation equipment,
and each company on average has over 30 employees. The Agency concludes
that the average employer in this industry may be using one crane that
is not a sideboom crane and needs to certify the operator for new
construction work that would be covered by the standard. The Agency
also concludes that the Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas has
considerably less construction activity that would involve cranes
covered by the final standard and that the average establishment or
employer only has about 10 employees. The Agency estimates that as few
as 50 employers in this industry sector are using equipment in
construction activity that would necessitate certifying crane
operators.
The Structural Building Components Association (SBCA)
commented in the record that many of their members use ``boom crane
trucks to deliver and/or set their products at the jobsite.'' (ID-
0218.1.) Their members manufacture ``roof and floor trusses, wall
panels, I-joists, engineered wood beams, plywood and oriented strand
board * * *. In most instances the components are simply unloaded at
the jobsite, using either a custom roll-off trailer, a forklift, or a
boom truck crane, and left for the builder to install. It is not
uncommon for a component manufacturer who utilizes a boom truck to
deliver both in markets that require hoisting and setting of components
(thus engaging in construction activity) and those that require
delivery of the components and other building materials on the ground
(not a construction activity).'' (ID-0208.1.) SBCA viewed their crane
operations as low risk and asked for an exemption to eliminate training
burden. Under the final standard, delivery of materials onto or into
the structure, such as setting components, is a construction activity
covered under the final standard. SBCA did not mention the use of
articulating cranes, which with a lifting movement limiting device,
would in fact exempt their equipment from the standard, and thus OSHA
concludes that these affected industries are only employing boom
trucks. The Agency, based on SBCA's comment, concludes that the primary
affected industries are NAICS 321213 Engineered Wood Member (except
Truss) Manufacturing and NAICS 321214 Truss Manufacturing. Engineered
Wood Member Manufacturing has 162 establishments and 51,270 employees
(2006 CPB and SUSB). Truss Manufacturing has 1,085 establishments and
51,270 employees. According to the 2008 Occupational Employment Survey,
the four-digit NACIS 32120 Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Products
industry has 120 crane operators, 2,240 drivers of heavy trucks and
tractor trailers, and 420 drivers of delivery trucks (total employment
of 98,000). The Agency concludes that typical employers in these two
sectors, with about 50 employees, likely employ one to two boom trucks
for delivery. Truss manufacturers are much more likely to use boom
trucks for delivery and placement of components--and therefore fall
under the scope of the standard--than manufacturers of engineered wood
members, the Agency concludes, because the small equipment typically
used by the latter employers would not be capable of lifting heavy
members for placement (ID-0208.1). In addition, the relatively few
engineered wood member manufacturers produce specialty items and do not
simply serve more local or regional markets as do truss manufacturers.
The Agency concludes that employers in this latter industry are much
more likely to transport their products longer distances and deliver to
the ground. These products are also more typically used only in larger
residential and commercial applications, where an on-site crane would
lift and position them for installation. As SBCA noted in its comment,
most deliveries are made to the ground. The Agency concludes that, on
average, employers in the Engineered Wood Member industry employ one
truck-mounted crane and employers in the Wood Truss manufacturing
industry also employ one, on average. According to comments by SBCA,
employers are likely already meeting all of the other safety
requirements in the final standard save for crane operator
certification. (ID-0208.1.)
A comment by a major shipyard alerted the Agency to the
potential impact of the final construction cranes standard on the
Shipbuilding and Repair Industry NACIS 336611. (ID-0195.1.) When
shipyard cranes perform construction activities, they will be covered
by the final standard; although the final standard exempts permanently
installed overhead and gantry cranes in general industry. According to
the 2008 Occupational Employment Survey, there are 550 crane operators
in the shipyard and boatbuilding industries (the four-digit NAICS
33660). Northrup-Grumann in its comment reported that it alone employs
600 cranes throughout its shipyards around the country. (ID-0195.1.)
Northrup-Grumann's 40,000 current employees represent about one-half of
the employment in the shipbuilding and ship repair industry, and the
Agency estimates that: There are about 1,200 cranes in use in shipyards
and about one-half would be potentially covered by the standard if
construction activities are performed with them, since many large
cranes in shipyards are permanently installed. The 1,200 figure is
surely not an underestimate as
[[Page 48086]]
Northrup-Grumann is the largest shipbuilder in the country and likely
the most intense user of cranes for its larger projects. Since
construction activities in shipyards are episodic or irregular, the
Agency estimates that if shipyard employers provide certification for
crane operators for one-half of the number of non-permanent cranes
(with 300 certified operators) that would be sufficient to perform
their own construction activities without hiring outside construction
contractors for their needs.
The final standard potentially affects the general
industry sector NAICS 339950 Sign Manufacturing. In its comment to the
record, the International Sign Association reported that it had 2,600
members, most of whom are small businesses. (ID-0247; -0344.) Not all
sign manufacturers have cranes or provide installation services, nor
does the industry build or erect billboards, which is an industry
properly represented among the traditional construction industries. The
average employer has about 10 employees, according to the 2006 CPB and
SUSB data. Although many manufacturers do not use cranes or install
signs, those that do were said to have one or two cranes (ID-0344). A
sign manufacturer who participated in the public hearings described his
business: Revenues of less than $10 million annually, with 70
employees, nine of whom were in the installation department. (ID-0344.)
Gelberg sign has two crane trucks for installation, and one bucket
truck for servicing. Sign manufacturers reported that for large
projects, employers typically hired crane companies. Based on the
comment in the record, the Agency has estimated the number of cranes
and operators in the sign manufacturing sector in the table below. The
Agency has assumed that the sign making industry has one trained crane
operator for each crane it uses for installation.
Estimation of Number of Cranes in NAICS 339950 Sign Mfg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estabs Avg. Total
Size class (No. of employees) Number of with Employees number of Cranes per cranes for
estabs cranes employees estab. size class
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
''1-4............................. 3,308 ........... 6,171 2 0 0
''5-9............................. 1,229 ........... 8,603 7 0 0
''10-19........................... 854 400 11,586 14 1 400
20-49............................. 646 646 19,246 30 1 646
50-99............................. 229 229 16,053 70 2 458
100-249........................... 124 124 18,540 150 5 577
250-500........................... 24 24 7,618 317 10 246
500-999........................... 0 ........... 0 ........... 0 0
1000+............................. 1 1 1,543 1,543 51 51
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................... 6,415 ........... 89,360 ........... ........... 2,378
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: ORA; 2006 County Business Patterns, SUSB.
Retail and commercial building supply associations and
employers provided comment to the record in regard to how the standard
would affect their businesses. (ID-0184; -0326.1; -0380.1.) The Agency
concludes that commercial and retail building supply dealers are
represented in the industries in the table below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS Name
------------------------------------------------------------------------
423310.................................... Lumber, Plywood, Millwork,
and Wood Panel Merchant
Wholesalers.
423330.................................... Roofing, Siding, and
Insulation Material
Merchant Wholesalers.
423390.................................... Other Construction Material
Merchant Wholesalers.
444110.................................... Home Centers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The building supply dealers provided extensive and detailed comment
to the record--both written comment as well as testimony at the public
hearings. The key issue for these industries was that their deliveries
to construction sites were typically not construction work and about
one-half of all deliveries are to the ground. (ID-0341: -0343.) For
deliveries onto or into structures, such as drywall into buildings and
roofing materials up to roofs, they use articulating cranes which have
controls to prevent tipover, called lifting moment limiting devices
(LMLD). The Specialty Building Material Distributors and Safety
Coalition (SBMDSC) in testimony described truck-mounted cranes used to
deliver drywall, for example, and ``knuckle'' cranes used to deliver
roofing materials. The Agency has concluded that these are both
versions of articulating cranes. Both SBMDSC and the National Lumber
and Building Material Dealers Association repeated several times in
written comment and public testimony that their articulating cranes had
LMLDs. (ID-0184; -0326.1; -0341; -0344; -0380.1.) Since the truck-
mounted cranes in use are articulating cranes with LMLDs, they are
exempt from the rule and these industries will not incur any costs of
compliance. Although the industries did not report any older truck-
mounted cranes used for deliveries without LMLDs, if these do exist,
the employer would have the option to use them for deliveries to the
ground (and be unaffected by the final standard since this is not a
``construction activity'') or to deliver materials into or onto
structures by complying with the rule, which would essentially be to
ensure that their operators are certified, as well as following the
final standard's specific safety precautions. In addition, operator
certification is required only within four years after the standard is
effective, and any older equipment may be replaced in the interim if
still extant.
The Heating and Air Conditioning Equipment Distributors
reported that their deliveries to buildings would be affected by the
final standard because they often must hoist equipment to the first or
second floor of buildings, which would qualify as construction work.
(ID-0235.1.) Deliveries are also made to the ground, and some employers
do hire crane trucks for some deliveries. The Heating, Air
Conditioning, and Refrigeration Distributors International (HARDI)
reported that their 450 members who are wholesale distributors in the
industry have, on average, 11 branch companies each. According the 2006
CPB and SUSB, there are 5,193 establishments with 55,606 employees, or
about 10 to 11 employees per
[[Page 48087]]
employer. The Agency estimates that the typical establishment in the
industry operates one truck-mounted crane with a single, trained
operator who must become a certified crane operator under the final
standard to deliver HVAC equipment onto structures.
Direct-selling propane dealers use cranes to deliver and
install LP, or propane, tanks, mostly in rural areas. Installing a new
tank would constitute a construction activity, and crane use for that
activity would fall under the final crane standard. The affected
industry is identified as NAICS 434312 Liquefied Petroleum Gas Dealers.
According to the 2006 CPB and SUSB there are 5,567 establishments in
the direct selling sector with 43,583 employees. Clearly, the industry
is predominantly made up of small businesses, with the average
establishment having about eight employees, and this is attested to by
the industry's comment (ID-0198.1). The National Propane Gas
Association noted that delivering tanks is ``one of the most common
activities'' performed by propane retail marketers and that ``to
install these tanks, it often requires the need of a truck-mounted
crane to lift and/or place the empty ASME tank onto its support or
foundation.'' (ID-0198.1.) The Agency estimates that each of the retail
establishments has, on average, a truck-mounted crane that would be
engaged occasionally in construction activity covered under the rule.
Locomotive cranes are listed as one of the types of cranes
covered by the final standard, and several railroads participated in
the rulemaking. But the Agency has concluded that the Federal Railroad
Authority has primary authority over crane activity performed by
railroads. The Agency has concluded that no railroad employers will be
impacted by the final rule.
Telecommunications employers were identified by several
commenters as an industry that would be affected by final standard.
(ID-0155.1; -0234; -0326.1; -0344.) The telecommunications industry is
identified as NAICS 517110 Wired Telecommunications Carriers. According
to the Economic Census the telecommunications industry has about 2,500
firms, 27,000 establishments and 634,000 employees. There are 89,000
employees in the industry who are ``telecommunications line installers
and repairers''--as opposed to the electric power industry's journeymen
who are ``electric power installers and repairers'' (2008 Occupational
Employment Survey, or OES). OES reports only 50 power line installers
are employed in the industry. The telecommunications industry was
described in comment as engaged in work similar to that of the electric
power industry--using digger derricks and radial boom trucks to install
or replace utility poles or in laying underground cable. The Agency
concludes that telecommunications workers are not primarily engaged in
constructing and replacing structural members, but in running or
maintaining communications lines on poles or underground, and therefore
are far less intensely engaged in activities that require digger
derricks or cranes. In addition, the industry likely also employs
construction contractors for its construction work. There is nothing in
the record to suggest that digger derricks in the telecommunications
industry are used for activities other than utility pole work. For
example, they would not be used to hoist transformers or other
moderately heavy equipment onto utility poles, or at substations or
other facilities, because telecommunications equipment does not consist
of such hardware. Digger derricks therefore will largely be exempt from
the final standard in the telecommunications industry because they do
not perform construction work in which they hoist loads in other
construction activities. The Agency estimates that the industry employs
about 1 truck-mounted crane per firm (for a total of about 3,000), on
average, that will be covered by the final standard.
The self-employed owner-operators of cranes doing construction work
would not be required under the standard to be certified crane
operators as they do not have employees and are themselves not
employees. The Agency estimates that about 5 percent of cranes are
owned and operated by the self-employed, based on BLS data (ID-0025).
Table B-2 summarizes the industries affected, and the number of
cranes they use. As can be seen from this table, adding the general
industry sectors in the manner outlined above results in approximately
35,000 additional cranes and crane operators. Table B-4 presents
information about ``small entity'' establishments, as defined by SBA.
Table B-5 presents information about establishments with fewer than 20
employees.
Table B-4--Industrial Profile of SBA Defined Small Entities for the Proposed Standard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected Avg. Avg.
SBA size standard --------------------------------------- Profit rate revenues profits per
NAIC Industry (less than) % per estab. estab.
Firms Estabs Employees ($1,000) ($1,000)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental with Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238990.................. All Other Specialty $13.0 mil.............. 1,231 1,286 13,473 4.56 $1,550 $71
Trade Cont.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental without Operators (Bare Rentals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
532412.................. Const./Min./For. $6.5 mil............... 1,782 3,018 19,423 6.42 482 31
Machine & Equip.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own and Rent Cranes with Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115.................. New Single-Family $31.0 mil.............. 178 178 261 4.67 220 10
Housing Const.
236118.................. Residential Remodelers. $31.0 mil.............. 25 25 45 4.67 443 21
236210.................. Industrial Building $31.0 mil.............. 9 12 1,067 4.67 12,213 571
Construction.
236220.................. Commercial and $31.0 mil.............. 23 31 757 4.67 4,157 194
Institutional Building.
[[Page 48088]]
237110.................. Water and Sewer Line $31.0 mil.............. 52 69 1,432 5.22 4,107 214
and Related Struct.
237120.................. Oil and Gas Pipeline $31.0 mil.............. 20 26 1,457 5.22 5,510 288
and Related Struct.
237130.................. Power and Communication $31.0 mil.............. 34 34 666 5.22 2,880 150
Line and Rel.
237310.................. Highway, Street, and $31.0 mil.............. 80 107 6,456 5.22 11,783 615
Bridge Construction.
237990.................. Other Heavy and Civil $31.0 mil.............. 76 101 5,857 5.22 10,201 533
Engineering Const.
238110.................. Poured Concrete $13.0 mil.............. 261 261 4,328 4.42 2,273 101
Foundation and Struct.
238120.................. Structural Steel and $13.0 mil.............. 200 266 7,389 4.42 3,439 152
Precast Concrete.
238130.................. Framing Contractors.... $13.0 mil.............. 26 26 120 4.42 153 7
238150.................. Glass and Glazing $13.0 mil.............. 42 42 328 4.42 616 27
Contractors.
238170.................. Siding Contractors..... $13.0 mil.............. 5 5 18 4.42 496 22
238190.................. Other Foundation, $13.0 mil.............. 49 65 1,145 4.42 1,509 67
Structure, and
Building.
238210.................. Electrical Contractors. $13.0 mil.............. 15 15 176 4.32 1,303 56
238220.................. Plumbing, Heating, and $13.0 mil.............. 2 3 196 3.86 5,835 225
Air-Conditioning.
238290.................. Other Building $13.0 mil.............. 113 151 4,076 4.42 3,474 154
Equipment Contractors.
238320.................. Painting and Wall $13.0 mil.............. 21 21 159 4.42 916 41
Covering Contract.
238910.................. Site Preparation $13.0 mil.............. 400 400 4,706 4.56 1,668 76
Contractors.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............... ....................... 1,630 1,838 40,639
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own but Do Not Rent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115.................. New Single family $31.0 mil.............. 2,905 2,905 11,578 4.67 1,000 47
housing construction.
236116.................. New Multifamily housing $31.0 mil.............. 213 213 1,886 4.67 3,400 159
construction.
236117.................. New housing operative $31.0 mil.............. 1,263 1,263 10,212 4.67 5,104 239
builders.
236118.................. Residential Remodelers. $31.0 mil.............. 825 825 2,721 4.67 543 25
236210.................. Industrial building $31.0 mil.............. 223 262 7,955 4.67 2,570 120
construction.
236220.................. Commercial and $31.0 mil.............. 3,614 3,614 60,806 4.67 3,661 171
Institutional Bldg.
Const.
237110.................. Water and Sewer Line $31.0 mil.............. 917 1,223 17,260 5.22 2,324 121
Const.
237120.................. Oil and gas pipeline $31.0 mil.............. 98 131 7,885 5.22 3,743 195
construction.
237130.................. Power and communication $31.0 mil.............. 219 291 10,710 5.22 4,656 243
line const.
237210.................. Land subdivision....... $6.0 mil............... 0 0 0 11.04 0 0
237310.................. Highway, street and $31.0 mil.............. 69 93 3,662 5.22 3,225 168
bridge const.
237990.................. Other heavy and civil $31.0 mil.............. 511 511 6,429 5.22 1,500 78
eng.
238110.................. Poured Concrete $13.0 mil.............. 108 108 2,609 4.42 1,000 44
foundation and struct.
238120.................. Structural steel and $13.0 mil.............. 394 394 6,162 4.42 1,425 63
precast concrete.
238130.................. Framing Contractors.... $13.0 mil.............. 1,060 1,060 10,059 4.42 798 35
238140.................. Masonry Contractors.... $13.0 mil.............. 128 128 1,108 4.42 675 30
238150.................. Glass & Glazing $13.0 mil.............. 48 48 428 4.42 900 40
Contractors.
238160.................. Roofing Contractors.... $13.0 mil.............. 230 230 1,923 4.42 801 35
[[Page 48089]]
238170.................. Siding Contractors..... $13.0 mil.............. 33 33 183 4.42 600 27
238190.................. Other foundation, $13.0 mil.............. 7 7 134 4.42 900 40
structure, building,
ext.
238210.................. Electrical Contractors. $13.0 mil.............. 60 60 655 4.32 1,100 48
238220.................. Plumbing, Heating and $13.0 mil.............. 86 86 828 3.86 1,100 42
Air-conditioning Cont.
238290.................. Other building $13.0 mil.............. 33 44 1,051 4.42 1,664 74
equipment cont.
238310.................. Drywall and insulation $13.0 mil.............. 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
contractors.
238320.................. Painting and wall $13.0 mil.............. 37 37 199 4.42 419 19
covering contractors.
238330.................. Flooring Contractors... $13.0 mil.............. 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
238340.................. Tile and Terrazzo $13.0 mil.............. 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
contractors.
238350.................. Finish Carpentry $13.0 mil.............. 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
contractors.
238390.................. Other building $13.0 mil.............. 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
finishing contractors.
238910.................. Site Preparation....... $13.0 mil.............. 262 262 2,401 4.56 962 44
221110.................. Electric Power 4M mwh................. 293 301 99,651 4.44 7,313 325
Generation.
221120.................. Electric Power 4M mwh................. 337 358 319,969 4.44 6,882 306
Transmission, Control,
and Distribution.
221210.................. Natural Gas 500.................... 442 591 66,991 2.98 28,428 847
Distribution.
321213.................. Engineered Wood Member 500.................... 121 127 7,224 3.87 4,720 183
(except Truss)
Manufacturing.
321214.................. Truss Manufacturing.... 500.................... 871 914 43,580 3.87 4,706 182
336611.................. Ship Building and 1000................... 575 635 74,249 6.09 10,204 622
Repairing.
339950.................. Sign Manufacturing..... 500.................... 6,261 6,339 75,956 5.83 1,532 89
423310.................. Lumber, Plywood, 100.................... 5,971 6,326 130,697 2.89 7,084 204
Millwork, and Wood
Panel Merchant
Wholesalers.
423330.................. Roofing, Siding, and 100.................... 1,025 1,173 34,547 2.89 7,159 207
Insulation Material
Merchant Wholesalers.
423390.................. Other Construction 100.................... 2,181 2,296 31,377 2.89 3,260 94
Material Merchant
Wholesalers.
423730.................. Warm Air Heating and 100.................... 2,364 2,958 47,265 3.08 3,790 117
Air-Cond. Equip. and
Supplies.
444110.................. Home Centers........... $7.0 mil............... 2,409 2,575 487,206 7.70 2,335 180
454312.................. Liquefied Petroleum Gas 50..................... 2,044 2,317 37,046 4.22 2,415 102
(Bottled Gas) Dealers.
482110.................. Railroads.............. NA..................... NA NA NA NA NA NA
486210.................. Pipeline Transportation $7.0 mil............... 65 66 18,911 13.24 8,345 1,105
of Natural Gas.
517110.................. Wired 1500................... 2,517 27,159 539,359 7.10 7,294 518
Telecommunications
Carriers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............... ....................... 32,430 59,267 2,182,872
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Lessees in the Construction Industry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115.................. New Single family $31.0 mil.............. 31,038 31,038 134,788 4.67 1,480 69
housing construction.
236116.................. New Multifamily housing $31.0 mil.............. 2,086 2,086 13,738 4.67 3,085 144
construction.
[[Page 48090]]
236117.................. New housing operative $31.0 mil.............. 16,562 16,562 53,224 4.67 2,860 134
builders.
236118.................. Residential Remodelers. $31.0 mil.............. 9,846 9,846 29,319 4.67 644 30
236210.................. Industrial building $31.0 mil.............. 3,000 3,000 21,431 4.67 2,493 117
construction.
236220.................. Commercial and $31.0 mil.............. 40,530 40,530 393,560 4.67 4,024 188
Institutional Bldg.
Construction.
237110.................. Water and Sewer Line $31.0 mil.............. 13,715 13,715 162,842 5.22 2,863 149
Const.
237120.................. Oil and gas pipeline $31.0 mil.............. 1,667 1,667 34,584 5.22 4,118 215
construction.
237130.................. Power and communication $31.0 mil.............. 2,811 2,811 48,229 5.22 2,289 120
line const.
237210.................. Land subdivision....... $6.0 mil............... 0 0 0 11.04 0 0
237310.................. Highway, street and $31.0 mil.............. 1,114 1,114 14,473 5.22 3,606 188
bridge const.
237990.................. Other heavy and civil $31.0 mil.............. 2,760 2,760 67,210 5.22 2,919 152
eng.
238110.................. Poured Concrete $13.0 mil.............. 13,273 13,273 10,782 4.42 1,189 53
foundation and struct.
238120.................. Structural steel and $13.0 mil.............. 3,487 3,487 57,764 4.42 1,927 85
precast concrete.
238130.................. Framing Contractors.... $13.0 mil.............. 13,779 13,779 60,116 4.42 559 25
238140.................. Masonry Contractors.... $13.0 mil.............. 1,368 1,368 10,174 4.42 814 36
238150.................. Glass & Glazing $13.0 mil.............. 542 542 4,397 4.42 1,319 58
Contractors.
238160.................. Roofing Contractors.... $13.0 mil.............. 1,945 1,945 18,573 4.42 1,125 50
238170.................. Siding Contractors..... $13.0 mil.............. 526 526 1,455 4.42 529 23
238190.................. Other foundation, $13.0 mil.............. 256 256 881 4.42 628 28
structure, building,
ext.
238210.................. Electrical Contractors. $13.0 mil.............. 765 765 4,674 4.32 874 38
238220.................. Plumbing, Heating and $13.0 mil.............. 970 970 6,803 3.86 1,049 40
Air-conditioning Cont.
238290.................. Other building $13.0 mil.............. 644 644 6,996 4.42 2,068 91
equipment cont.
238310.................. Drywall and insulation $13.0 mil.............. 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
contractors.
238320.................. Painting and wall $13.0 mil.............. 414 414 2,103 4.42 513 23
covering contractors.
238330.................. Flooring Contractors... $13.0 mil.............. 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
238340.................. Tile and Terrazzo $13.0 mil.............. 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
contractors.
238350.................. Finish Carpentry $13.0 mil.............. 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
contractors.
238390.................. Other building $13.0 mil.............. 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
finishing contractors.
238910.................. Site Preparation....... $13.0 mil.............. 3,889 3,889 19,650 4.56 1,101 50
Subtotal............... ....................... 166,985 166,985 1,177,769
Total............... ....................... 204,058 232,394 3,434,175
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: U.S. Census Bureau data.
Country Business Patters, 2006; Statistics of U.S. Businesses 2006.
Internal Revenue Service, Source Book, profit rates over 2000-2006.
Statistics of U.S. Business (SUSB).
Table B-5--Industrial Profile of Very Small Entities (Less than 20 Employees) by Major Category
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avgerage
-------------------------
NAIC Industry Firms Estabs Employees Profit rate Revenues Profits per
% per estab. estab.
($1,000) ($1,000)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental with Operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238990........... All Other 1,065 1,065 4,824 4.10% $614 $25
Specialty
Trade Cont.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48091]]
Crane Rental without Operators (Bare Rentals)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
532412........... Const./Min./ 1,782 3,018 19,423 6.42 129 8
For. Machine &
Equip.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own and Rent Cranes with Operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115........... New Single- 178 178 261 4.67 220 10
Family Housing
Const.
236118........... Residential 25 25 45 4.67 443 21
Remodelers.
236210........... Industrial 9 12 1,067 4.67 12,213 571
Building
Construction.
236220........... Commercial and 23 31 757 4.67 4,157 194
Institutional
Building.
237110........... Water and Sewer 52 69 1,432 5.22 4,107 214
Line and
Related Struct.
237120........... Oil and Gas 20 26 1,457 5.22 5,510 288
Pipeline and
Related Struct.
237130........... Power and 34 34 666 5.22 2,880 150
Communication
Line and Rel.
237310........... Highway, 80 107 6,456 5.22 11,783 615
Street, and
Bridge
Construction.
237990........... Other Heavy and 76 101 5,857 5.22 10,201 533
Civil
Engineering
Const.
238110........... Poured Concrete 261 261 4,328 4.42 2,273 101
Foundation and
Struct.
(All other sectors in this
category have no very small
affected firms)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal....... 758 844 22,326
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own Cranes But Do Not Rent Them
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115........... New Single 2,763 2,763 12,155 4.67 823 38
family housing
construction.
236116........... New Multifamily 197 197 2,010 4.67 1,350 63
housing
construction.
236117........... New housing 1,206 1,206 8,528 4.67 1,854 87
operative
builders.
236118........... Residential 808 808 2,627 4.67 443 21
Remodelers.
236210........... Industrial 209 209 6,015 4.67 1,247 58
building
construction.
236220........... Commercial and 2,943 2,943 50,843 4.67 1,526 71
Institutional
Bldg.
Construction.
237110........... Water and Sewer 900 900 13,335 5.22 702 37
Line Const.
237120........... Oil and gas 63 63 3,416 5.22 708 37
pipeline
construction.
237130........... Power and 207 207 9,177 5.22 655 34
communication
line const.
237210........... Land 0 0 0 11.04 0 0
subdivision.
237310........... Highway, street 66 66 2,423 5.22 976 51
and bridge
const.
237990........... Other heavy and 378 378 10,483 5.22 589 31
civil eng.
238110........... Poured Concrete 46 46 531 4.42 494 22
foundation and
struct.
238120........... Structural 90 90 1,954 4.42 659 29
steel and
precast
concrete.
238130........... Framing 981 981 8,322 4.42 374 17
Contractors.
238140........... Masonry 115 115 1,093 4.42 343 15
Contractors.
238150........... Glass & Glazing 44 44 405 4.42 619 27
Contractors.
238160........... Roofing 207 207 2,378 4.42 447 20
Contractors.
238170........... Siding 31 31 127 4.42 408 18
Contractors.
238190........... Other 10 10 62 4.42 394 17
foundation,
structure,
building, ext.
238210........... Electrical 54 54 541 4.32 444 19
Contractors.
238220........... Plumbing, 77 77 768 3.86 509 20
Heating and
Air-
conditioning
Contractors.
238290........... Other building 30 30 570 4.42 714 32
equipment cont.
238310........... Drywall and 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
insulation
contractors.
238320........... Painting and 37 37 208 4.42 265 12
wall covering
contractors.
238330........... Flooring 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
Contractors.
238340........... Tile and 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
Terrazzo
contractors.
238350........... Finish 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
Carpentry
contractors.
238390........... Other building 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
finishing
contractors.
238910........... Site 271 271 1,970 4.56 497 23
Preparation.
221110........... Electric Power 293 301 1,288 4.44 7,513 334
Generation.
221120........... Electric Power 337 358 2,272 4.44 7,311 325
Transmission,
Control, and
Distribution.
221210........... Natural Gas 360 368 1,736 2.98 9,483 283
Distribution.
321213........... Engineered Wood 82 82 534 3.87 1,674 65
Member (except
Truss)
Manufacturing.
[[Page 48092]]
321214........... Truss 408 408 3,438 3.87 1,130 44
Manufacturing.
336611........... Ship Building 370 371 2,041 6.09 950 58
and Repairing.
339950........... Sign 5,312 5,316 25,236 5.83 1,303 76
Manufacturing.
423310........... Lumber, 4,774 4,844 24,410 2.89 3,970 115
Plywood,
Millwork, and
Wood Panel
Merchant
Wholesalers.
423330........... Roofing, 831 857 4,764 2.89 4,461 129
Siding, and
Insulation
Material
Merchant
Wholesalers.
423390........... Other 1,886 1,907 9,298 2.89 2,199 63
Construction
Material
Merchant
Wholesalers.
423730........... Warm Air 1,929 2,017 11,007 3.08 2,537 78
Heating and
Air-Cond.
Equip. and
Supplies.
444110........... Home Centers... 1,879 1,904 12,389 7.70 1,344 103
454312........... Liquefied 1,881 2,001 11,711 4.22 1,333 56
Petroleum Gas
(Bottled Gas)
Dealers.
482110........... Railroads...... NA NA NA NA NA NA
486210........... Pipeline 65 66 238 13.24 8,473 1,122
Transportation
of Natural Gas.
517110........... Wired 1,828 1,882 9,022 7.10 1,431 102
Telecommunicat
ions Carriers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal....... 33,969 11,734 139,941
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Lessees in the Construction Industry
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115........... New Single 29,962 29,962 95,670 4.67 1,192 56
family housing
construction.
236116........... New Multifamily 1,904 1,904 7,946 4.67 1,986 93
housing
construction.
236117........... New housing 15,927 15,927 50,782 4.67 2,063 96
operative
builders.
236118........... Residential 9,606 9,606 25,611 4.67 527 25
Remodelers.
236210........... Industrial 2,669 2,669 13,978 4.67 1,120 52
building
construction.
236220........... Commercial and 33,784 33,784 179,125 4.67 1,649 77
Institutional
Bldg.
Construction.
237110........... Water and Sewer 11,306 11,306 59,055 5.22 841 44
Line Const.
237120........... Oil and gas 1,083 1,083 4,293 5.22 666 35
pipeline
construction.
237130........... Power and 2,149 2,149 8,580 5.22 630 33
communication
line const.
237210........... Land 0 0 0 11.04 0 0
subdivision.
237310........... Highway, street 862 862 4,675 5.22 993 52
and bridge
const.
237990........... Other heavy and 2,295 2,295 10,166 5.22 1,261 66
civil engg.
238110........... Poured Concrete 11,886 11,886 52,606 4.42 677 30
foundation and
struct.
238120........... Structural 2,679 2,679 14,995 4.42 945 42
steel and
precast
concrete.
238130........... Framing 13,043 13,043 48,914 4.42 345 15
Contractors.
238140........... Masonry 1,243 1,243 4,720 4.42 376 17
Contractors.
238150........... Glass & Glazing 485 485 2,457 4.42 758 34
Contractors.
238160........... Roofing 1,722 1,722 7,015 4.42 637 28
Contractors.
238170........... Siding 506 506 1,627 4.42 359 16
Contractors.
238190........... Other 237 237 909 4.42 290 13
foundation,
structure,
building, ext.
238210........... Electrical 691 691 2,953 4.32 434 19
Contractors.
238220........... Plumbing, 872 872 3,855 3.86 551 21
Heating and
Air-
conditioning
Contractors.
238290........... Other building 524 524 2,726 4.42 868 38
equipment cont.
238310........... Drywall and 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
insulation
contractors.
238320........... Painting and 392 392 1,267 4.42 326 14
wall covering
contractors.
238330........... Flooring 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
Contractors.
238340........... Tile and 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
Terrazzo
contractors.
238350........... Finish 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
Carpentry
contractors.
238390........... Other building 0 0 0 4.42 0 0
finishing
contractors.
238910........... Site 3,579 3,579 13,406 4.56 561 26
Preparation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal....... 149,403 149,403 617,328
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.......... 186,977 166,064 803,843
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: ORA.
U.S. Census Bureau data.
Country Business Patterns, 2006; Statistics of U.S. Businesses 2006.
Internal Revenue Service, Source Book, profit rates over 2000-2006.
[[Page 48093]]
4. Benefits
The Agency received several comments in the record on the benefits
analysis in the Preliminary Economic Analysis (PEA). For example, the
commercial building supply industry noted that their industry had not
been included in the economic analysis, nor, consequently, included in
the Agency's characterization of risks and benefits. The industry
provided 2008 accident data (5 injuries related to work with cranes) to
the rulemaking record in their comments. (ID-0184; -0342; -0345.17; -
0384.1.) Stephen Yohay, representing Edison Electric Institute noted
that there was no explanation of the benefit that would result for the
electric utility industry or electric industry employees, and therefore
no evaluation of whether the benefit was reasonably related to the cost
of compliance. (ID-0203; -0335; -0342; -0345; -0372; -0380; -0381; -
0408.) The Agency was also made aware of the potential overlap of costs
and benefits of industries affected by both the construction cranes'
standard and the Agency's previously proposed standard Electric Power
Generation, Transmission, and Distribution; Electrical Protective
Equipment (subpart V), which essentially resulted in double counting of
risk reduction, or benefits, in the electric utility industry as well
as the construction industries working for the electric utility
industry in the cranes proposed standard. This oversight has been
corrected.
The proposed standard's benefits analysis rested upon BLS' Census
of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) data for total annual fatalities
in the construction industry, an estimate that eight percent of (CFOI)
construction fatalities were crane related, and an analysis of a small
sample of fatality reports from OSHA's IMIS data indicating that 58
percent of construction crane-related fatalities could be prevented by
the proposed cranes standard. The application of the construction crane
standard to general industry sectors and the necessity of disentangling
the affect of subpart V required a different approach. The Agency
instead is relying on an analysis of four years of IMIS fatality
reports across all industries to estimate the risk reduction, or
benefits, attributed to the final cranes standard. This method has been
used by the Agency to evaluate risk reduction in virtually all of its
safety standards. The Agency collected 506 fatality reports from IMIS
across all industries for the years 2004-2007. Of these, over 200 were
found to be construction related, including some in general industry
sectors. One hundred and twenty-six of these (with 132 fatalities) were
accidents that the Agency concluded were potentially impacted by the
final standard, and the Agency estimates that 88 of these will be
prevented by the final standard, or about 22 per year. The Agency also
estimated that the final standard would prevent 175 injuries annually.
The table below describes the industry sectors with IMIS accident
fatalities that the Agency concludes are impacted (i.e., potentially
avoided) by the final standard.
Table B-6--Avoidable Fatalities in the Construction Industry, 2004-2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIC Industry name Fatalities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1521....................... Single-family housing 4
construction.
1541....................... Industrial buildings and 5
warehouses.
1542....................... Nonresidential 4
construction, nec.
1611....................... Highway and street 11
construction.
1622....................... Bridge, tunnel & elevated 11
highway.
1623....................... Water, sewer, and utility 13
lines.
1629....................... Heavy construction, nec.... 7
1721....................... Painting and paper hanging. 1
1731....................... Electrical work............ 3
1742....................... Plastering, drywall, and 1
insulation.
1751....................... Carpentry work............. 3
1761....................... Roofing, siding, and sheet 3
metal work.
1771....................... Concrete work.............. 12
1781....................... Water well drilling........ 2
1791....................... Structural steel erection.. 14
1794....................... Excavation work............ 2
1795....................... Wrecking and demolition 1
work.
1796....................... Installing building 3
equipment, nec.
1799....................... Special trade contractors, 15
nec.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Agency provides a full explanation of its method of evaluating
risk reduction in the FEA in the docket, along with an Appendix (Excel
spreadsheet) of the IMIS records examined. The Agency evaluated reports
from the effect of crane regulations in California as well as the
Canadian province of Ontario. The Agency concluded that results from
these two regulatory efforts are consistent with OSHA's conclusion that
the final standard reduces risk of construction crane accidents and
injures; however, the Agency determined that review of IMIS records
would provide a better method to quantify benefits.
This same analysis also showed that there is a serious risk of
fatalities in General Industry construction work. Table 7 shows the
fatalities in construction related work in the General Industry sectors
that have been added to the economic analysis.
Table B-7--Fatalities That Occurred Outside Traditional Construction Industries That Could Be Avoided by the Final Standard, 2004-07
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of fatalities SIC Industry name
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................ 3441 Fabricated metal products.
1............................................ 4789 Transportation services.
[[Page 48094]]
1............................................ 4911 Electric services.
1............................................ 4931 Elec services and more.
1............................................ 5031 Lumber, plywood, wholesale.
2............................................ 5211 Lumber and other bldg. materials dealers.
6............................................ 7353 Heavy construction equipment rental and leasing.
1............................................ 7389 Business services, nec.
1............................................ 8731 Commercial physical and biological research.
1............................................ 9223 Correctional institutions.
1............................................ 9999 Non-classifiable establishments.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: ORA; IMIS.
Analyzing IMIS Crane Fatality Reports
OSHA typically measures the risk reduction, or benefit, of its
safety standards by examining accident reports. Accidents that occur
because of a failure to comply with an existing standard are not
counted as a benefit, or risk reduction, that is attributed to the
effect of the new standard. In addition, the Agency does not try to
estimate, or factor in, compliance with the new standard in estimating
costs and benefits. It estimates costs as if all employers fully
comply, and estimates benefits as if employer efforts prevent all types
of accidents, or risks, the standard addresses. The chief purpose of
the analysis is to demonstrate feasibility while providing a measure of
the size of the rule, its possible impact on industries and the
economy, and the ability to weigh and compare its costs and benefits.
The analysis is not trying to predict with precision exactly the
outcomes under the rule, which depend on employer compliance, changes
in technology and the way employers react to the new standard, and many
other factors.
The Agency is taking a somewhat different approach to estimating
the risk reduction under the crane standard. OSHA's current
construction crane standards were adopted in 1972 under the OSH Act's
sec. 6(a), permitting the Agency to adopt existing standards and
current consensus standards without informal rulemaking. Thus, for
example, former Sec. 1926.550(b)(2) referred to the ANSI B30.5-1968
standard (that is, from the year 1968) for requirements for design,
inspection, testing, and maintenance of crawler, locomotive, and truck
cranes. The current standards were widely believed to be out of date
and ineffective; hence, the creation of the Negotiated Rulemaking
Committee (C-DAC) from affected industries and labor representatives to
address weaknesses.
For example, the former construction crane standard had in former
Sec. 1926.550(a)(15)(i) a prohibition from working within 10 feet of
any energized overhead power line. Yet power line contact causes more
crane-related employee deaths than any other source, and the negotiated
rulemaking committee produced provisions that are meant to reduce those
fatalities. Technically, however, one could argue that it is a failure
to comply with the current standard that results in electrocutions. If
the crane, boom, wire, or load were not getting closer than 10 feet to
power lines, there would be no electrocutions. The final standard
increases the prohibited distance to 20 feet, but also includes a
number of other precautions. California recently increased the
prohibited distance to 20 feet, and reported that electrocutions due to
cranes have fallen from five over a two and one-half year period prior
to the regulation to just one in the same period of time afterward. The
reduction in the California fatalities also can be attributed to a
requirement for operator certification; this final OSHA standard also
includes this requirement.
The Agency concludes that its final standard will result in fewer
fatalities and injuries due to a number of the provisions in the final
standard, even though there are some existing construction crane
provisions that address the same risk. This is attributed to more
specific precautions in particular sections of the rule as well as the
requirement for certifying crane operators, which potentially affects
safety in all aspects of crane operations.
Another example where the final standard will be more protective
than current standards is in assembly/disassembly operations. Assembly/
disassembly operations are, along with power line contact, a leading
cause of fatalities in crane work. Technically, one could argue that
these fatalities could always be avoided by compliance with the current
crane standard--to follow manufacturers' specifications--which is a
general, passive, and non-specific duty. The final standard has lengthy
provisions in the final standard to prevent these types of accidents.
OSHA believes that these types of accidents will be prevented by
compliance with the provisions of this final standard for assembly and
disassembly of equipment. Section 1926.1403 requires that equipment be
assembled in compliance with manufacturer procedures or with
alternative employer procedures designed to prevent the equipment from
collapsing. In addition, under Sec. 1926.1404, assembly must be
conducted under the supervision of a person who understands the hazards
associated with an improperly assembled crane and is well-qualified to
understand and comply with the proper assembly procedures. Section
1926.1404(f) would prohibit employees from being under the boom when
pins are removed. In situations where site constraints require an
employee to be under the boom when pins are removed, the employer must
implement other procedures, such as ensuring that the boom sections are
adequately supported, to prevent the sections from falling onto the
employee. This specific work practice alone will prevent virtually all
fatalities associated with assembly/disassembly of lattice boom cranes.
Section 1926.1404(q) contains several provisions designed to ensure
that outriggers are deployed properly before lifting a load. In
addition, the operator qualification and certification requirement of
proposed Sec. 1926.1427, which is intended to ensure that operators
understand and follow the safety requirements for the equipment they
are operating, would help prevent this type of accident.
For informational purposes, as required by E.O. 12866 (also
following the guidance of OMB's Circular A-4), OSHA monetizes the
safety benefits of standards. OSHA assigns a value of statistical life
(VSL) to fatalities prevented by the final standard of $8.7
[[Page 48095]]
million per VSL. This estimate is based on the median value found by
Viscusi and Aldy in their 2003 review ($7 million in 2000 dollars),
adjusted by the GDP implicit price deflator 2000 to 2010). The total
monetized value of preventing 22 fatalities annually is about $191.4
million. For accidents, OSHA uses a willingness-to-pay methodology to
monetize the value of injuries avoided, of $50,000 in 2000 dollars;
which, when adjusted by the GDP deflator is about $62,500 in 2010
dollars. Thus, the monetized annual value of an estimated 175 injuries
avoided by the standard annually is about $10.9 million. The total
annual monetized value of avoided injuries and fatalities is about
$202.3 million.
Costs of Crane Accidents
Several commenters noted that crane accidents represented a
substantial cost to employers in the crane industry. (ID-0341; -0342; -
0343; -0344.) In the PEA the Agency did not estimate cost savings from
avoiding crane accidents, but only estimated monetized benefits for
avoiding fatalities (the value of a statistical life, or VSL) or
injuries (a value based on willingness to pay). These cost savings do
not represent other losses associated with accidents, such as
production time lost to provide medical services to injured employees,
damage to cranes, damage to the work site or beyond, damage to the load
materials or rigging, lost time in cleaning up and repairing damage to
the worksite, lost production time while the crane is removed,
repaired, or replaced with a substitute. More obviously they do not
account for costs of crane accidents where no fatality or injury was
recorded. There are many more crane accidents that do not involve any
injury than those represented in the IMIS reports, and the Agency
concludes that the final standard will avoid these just as effectively
as the accidents where injuries occur.
For example, there were ten tipover accidents with fatalities in
OSHA's IMIS records for 2008, and data collected in the State of
California over a three year period showed that there were 35 (mobile)
crane tipovers for the single tipover accident fatality (Op cit. Yow,
Philip, ``Crane Accidents 1997-1999 * * *.''). Since California has
about ten percent of the U.S. population and economy, this suggests
that there are on the order of 350 crane tipover accidents over a three
year period, or about 120 per year. Tipovers typically require crane
repair, lost production time for all employees at the site, and
schedule delays. Since there are firms that specialize in repairing
cranes damaged in accidents, the Agency believes that they are in fact
frequent. If the cost of these kinds of accidents are only, on average,
$100,000 each, the total annual cost savings from avoiding two-thirds
(the fraction of current crane fatalities prevented by the final
standard) of them would be about $7 million per year. That represents a
cost saving of avoiding accidents from just one cause. Although
tipovers and crane or boom collapses are likely the most expensive type
of crane accident, they represent only about 10 percent of the types of
fatal accidents.
Tower crane collapses in urban areas, while infrequent, are very
costly, as the crane is typically lost, considerable damage done to the
worksites and structures beyond, and days if not weeks of lost
production. The Agency believes that this cost is significant, but has
no information in the record with which to estimate this source of cost
savings.
Similarly, there are costs associated with all crane accidents,
whether or not there is an employee injury. The Agency does not have
information in the record upon which to estimate the overall number of
crane accidents, or the particular costs of the different types of
accidents, such as dropping a load, contact with power lines, and so
forth. But the Agency believes that the potential economic benefits
from reducing these with compliance with the final standard is likely
very substantial.
Insurance Savings
An expert from the insurance industry reported that his company
offers a 10 percent reduction in general liability premiums if all an
employer's operators are certified. (ID-0343; -0345.34; -0347.) Several
commenters confirmed that fact and also said that this saving alone
more than paid for the cost of certifying operators. (ID-0343.) There
was no information in the record about the cost of general liability
insurance to employers with cranes, and so the Agency cannot compute
any cost saving based on their cost or prices. However, this possible
saving clearly shows that it is not simply OSHA that sees savings
associated with operator certification, and that employers can
reasonably expect some immediate savings associated with operator
certification (projected to cost about $51 million annually).
Net Benefits
The monetized benefits and other benefits of the final standard are
estimated by the Agency to be $209.3 million annually ($202.3 million
from fatalities and injuries avoided, plus $7 million in avoided
tipover accident costs). The Agency has not quantified the cost savings
from many accidents which do not involve injury that will be prevented
by the final standard.
5. Technological Feasibility
In accordance with the OSH Act, OSHA is required to demonstrate
that occupational safety and health standards promulgated by the Agency
are technologically feasible. Accordingly, OSHA reviewed the
requirements that would be imposed by the final regulation, and
assessed their technological feasibility. As a result of this review,
OSHA has determined that compliance with the requirements of the final
standard is technologically feasible for all affected industries. The
standard would require employers to perform crane inspections, utilize
qualified or certified crane operators, address ground conditions,
maintain safe distances from power lines using the encroachment
prevention precautions, and to fulfill other obligations under the
standard. Compliance with all of these requirements can be achieved
with readily and widely available technologies. Some businesses in the
affected industries already implement the requirements of the standard
to varying degrees (some states have requirements), as noted during the
SBREFA Panel. OSHA believes that there are no technological constraints
in complying with any of the proposed requirements, and received no
comments that suggested that these standards were technologically
infeasible.
6. Costs
The Agency received comment on some unit cost estimates of specific
provisions in the PEA: Operator certification, the number of crane jobs
involving work near power lines, electric utilities providing voltage
information, de-energizing power lines, locking out automatic line re-
energizing devices, providing line wraps for power lines, and
conducting power line meetings. Based on that comment, the Agency has
revised the original cost analysis ($123 million annually), and
corrected errors noted below. The Agency estimates that the final
construction cranes standard will cost employers $154.1 million
annually.
The Agency did not receive comment on its estimate of the number of
cranes and crane jobs per year; nor on the time and cost of provisions
on assembly/disassembly (except for ground conditions), and
inspections. The Agency also did not receive any
[[Page 48096]]
comment on its estimates of ``baseline'' compliance, or the fraction of
affected employers who are already performing or providing protections
required in the final standard. For example, the Agency had estimated
that, as a baseline, 30 percent of affected crane operators are already
certified. However, the Agency did receive considerable comment and new
information in several areas: the number of operators already
certified; the number of cranes, crane jobs, and certified crane
operators from individual employers or industries; the extent of
current compliance (baseline) with providing safe ground conditions and
assembly/disassembly operations; frequency of crane inspections; and
the frequency of work close to high-voltage power lines. Based on the
new information in the record, the Agency has revised several of its
baseline figures, discussed below.
The Agency also received considerable new information about general
industry sectors that would be affected by the final standard. The
Agency has incorporated that information into its estimates of costs
for those sectors. The Agency has also updated its information about
wages, establishments, and revenues from the 2006 Statistics for U.S.
Business (SUSB) and County Business Patterns. As the number of cranes
in the PEA was, for some sectors, based on an estimate of revenues, the
number of cranes for some sectors has changed from the PEA based on
newer revenue data.
Employers have four years from the publication date of the final
rule to comply with the requirements for operator certification. The
Agency could assess that cost across the next four years and discount
those values back to the present to add to the other annual costs of
the standard. However, assessing benefits for only part of the final
standard for several years is problematic. The Agency has concluded
that the clearest picture of cost, benefits, and impacts will be given
as if all costs and benefits of the final standard occur in the first
year. This removes the problems of parsing risk reduction from separate
provisions of the final standard for several years, in addition to
assessing when employers might comply with certification and the
resulting effects on discounting. Presenting full benefits and costs
side by side also provides the easiest view of the long-run effects of
the final standard.
The Agency presents and discusses comment on the PEA, new
information in the record, and revisions to cost estimates in the
following sections: operator certification, power lines, assembly/
disassembly (A/D), inspections, and ground conditions. Unit costs are
explained below and presented in Table B-8. Wage rates in the PEA were
based on 2003 BLS data. The Agency has increased these base wage rates
by 19 percent for the FEA, based on more recent BLS data. Summarized
costs by provision are presented in Table B-9.
Cost of Operator Certification
For the FEA, the Agency has increased the estimated cost of test
preparation (a course) for a third party operator exam from $500 in the
PEA to $1,500, plus, as before, $250 for the exam itself and 18 hours
of wages ($31.37/hour, total of $564). When the total initial cost
($2,064) is annualized over 5 years, the annualized amount is about
$500. In addition, based on comment in the record the Agency has
increased the baseline of current compliance in the traditional
construction industries from 30 percent to 60 percent, and assumed that
no crane operators in the affected general industry sectors have been
certified (ID-0341; -0342; -0343; -0344). The Agency also reduced the
turnover rate of crane operators from 23 percent to 5 percent, thus
reducing the number of new entrants each year who would require
certification. The annualized cost of crane operator certification is
estimated to be about $59 million per year.
The PEA had estimated that a two-day preparation and testing would
cost employers $750 for each employee taking the operators
certification test ($500 for the prep course, and $250 for the written
and practical exam). In addition, employers would have to pay the wages
of a crane operator ($31.37 per hour with benefits) for 16 hours of his
time, plus an additional 2 hours, on average, for travel. The total
cost was estimated to be $1,314 per employee taking the crane
certification exam. The Agency annualized that one-time figure over 10
years, for an annual per operator costs of $187.
The Agency erred in the PEA in annualizing the cost of the training
and testing over 10 years instead of five, since the certification is
only good for five years. Although, re-certification does not typically
entail the prep course and time, and future costs of certification are
therefore probably considerably much lower, the Agency concludes that
for purposes of weighing the costs and impact of the final standard,
that it will rely on the initial costs annualized over five years.
However, because the Agency accounted for turnover of operators and
estimated costs for new operators as a result of retirement for the
industry, a simple five year annualization would overestimate costs. As
a result, the Agency introduced a factor to the formula to assure that
no costs were taken for recertification of retired operators. (See full
formulas in the FEA.)
Operator certification was the primary focus of comments on costs.
Many commenters stated that in regard to the means of crane operator
certification Option (1), or third-party testing, was the only viable
alternative. (See, e.g., ID-0151; -0342.) The Agency agrees that this
will be the primary means of certification and notes there are several
testing organizations now available, with more reportedly in the
process of being accredited. (ID-0341; -0343.)
Michael Eggenberger of Bay Ltd provided several comments on the
unit cost of operator certification. (ID-0254.) Mr. Eggenberger
provided photocopies of invoices that showed Bay Ltd paying for NCCCO
written and practical exams, over two days, for $1,375 each. The
invoice does not make clear whether the two days included prep
training, but handwritten on each invoice is the additional information
that the invoice costs did not include prep training at $500, plus five
days' wages for each employee. The Agency concludes that Bay Ltd
provided a course of prep training and testing that lasted five days.
If Mr. Eggenberger's employees were paid the average wage (including
benefits) of $31.36 per hour that OSHA is relying on, based on BLS
data, then the total cost per employee would be $3,129 (about $1,250 in
wages, $1,375 for prep and the exam, and $500 in prep training.)
Edison Electric Institute, representing the electric utility
industry, submitted cost data for certification ``utilizing $1,750 as
the base cost for a training course and the actual exam. EEI has
estimated that it would cost approximately $1,500 for an employee
training course, and $250 for the certification program.'' (ID-0345.17;
-0370.1.) EEI did not provide any detail about its figures.
Comment received from James Nevel of the National Utility Training
& Safety Education Association (NUTSEA) said that ``typical training
programs that we have seen run $1200 to $1400 for classroom training
and then an additional $450+ or so for the certification testing.''
(ID-0155.1.) NUTSEA's membership of 250 ``provides safety and training
services to most of the electric cooperatives in the United States.''
California enacted a requirement for crane operator certification
which took
[[Page 48097]]
effect in June 2005. That State's operator certification requirement
did not apply to digger derricks and mobile--usually truck-mounted--
cranes with a capacity below 15,000 pounds. The State estimated that
there were 5,000 mobile cranes and 700 tower cranes affected and that
about 10,000 operators would require certification (``Economic Impact
Statement,'' Attachment 1 for Crane Operator Qualifications/
Certification, Economic and Fiscal Impact Statement, STD, 399).
California estimated that there were almost 2,000 businesses that
owned, operated, or leased cranes affected by the State's regulation.
Further, the State's impact report estimated that the cost of
certification would include a physical examination ($320), a substance
abuse test ($120), and cost of a written and practical exam from a
NCCCO testing agent ($550), or a total of $990 per operator.
The Agency received several estimates of the cost of operator
certification as part of the Small Business Advocacy Review Panel
(SBAR). John Anderson reported that he estimated certification costs at
$2,900 per employee, including five days for training, exam, and wages
(OSHA-S030A-2006-0064-0019), with the average cost of an exam $382 and
with training or prep courses $1,260 on average, and wages $1,255. Mr.
Anderson also cited a general contractor's cost of exams and prep class
of $1,375. Art Daniels of AR Daniels Construction estimated the cost of
certifying one operator to be $6,141.59, but did not provide any detail
of how the estimate was determined. Mr. Daniel also commented that the
Agency's wage estimate was too low, but his estimate included wages for
overtime which accounted for much of the difference. (OSHA-S030A-2006-
0064-0019.) Mr. Daniel also stated that no costs were included for re-
testing or loss of production. However, the Agency did include costs
for re-testing (when an operator initially fails the test) and the
value of lost production is accounted for in operator's wages. Several
participants in the SBAR panel also noted that they have no turnover
among their crane operators.
Current OSHA standards require operators of construction cranes to
ensure that operators are trained. The Agency does not agree that the
final standard requires a five-day training and prep course for
employees to take and pass the crane operator's certification. Five-day
courses are designed not just to prepare potential operators for
certification, but to train newcomers. For example, Bob Behlman of
Behlman Builders in describing the training that he sends his crane
operator to, notes that the five-day course by a national consulting
firm that specializes in mobile crane training and inspection services
is ``designed for both newcomers to the crane operators field [and] to
those who have years of experience.'' (ID-0373.1.) Mr. Behlman notes
that the current five-day course that he provides for his crane
operators as of this time still does not include a written and
practical test, such as NCCCO or the International Union of Operating
Engineers (IUOE) offers. As Mr. Brent of NCCCO said at the public
hearing, ``a lot of those costs * * * are not associated with
certification at all. They're associated with the training process.''
(ID-0343.)
Many testing companies provide testing along with a preparation in
either two-day or five-day courses, but virtually all commenters on the
record note that few certified operators take the preparation course
when re-certifying is done, and that re-certification is much less
costly. The preparation course is designed not to train operators on
cranes, but to help them negotiate the written test. Again, as noted
above, the Agency was not including in its estimates of the cost of
operator certification any training related to obtaining knowledge
about, or operating, a crane, which is already a duty of operators of
cranes in construction. Operators have been taking certification exams
without benefit of special preparatory courses for many years in cities
and states (such as Connecticut and New York City) that perform their
own testing of crane operators for licensing or certification. As was
pointed out in testimony, part of the resistance to third-party
certification may be that current crane operators may lack the
requisite training or skills. (ID-0343.)
It was not incumbent upon the Agency to include purchased,
preparatory training from third party providers as a cost of the
standard. The final standard requires no such purchased training. The
Agency concludes that while many employers and crane operators will
avail themselves of the test preparation, not all will do so, and this
was recognized in comment. (ID-0343.) In terms of estimating the costs
of the final standard, it is reasonable that employees and independent
crane operators, who have already been sufficiently trained in crane
operation and may have many years' experience, certainly need no more
than a short preparation to successfully pass the crane operator
certification tests. Thus, the Agency has included as part of the cost
of the standard, $1,500 as the price of a two-day prep course for
taking the operator's written and hands-on exams.
The Agency did not include costs of operator certification for
users of sideboom cranes found in pipeline construction (NAICS 237120
Oil and Gas Pipeline Construction) and derricks, found in water tank
construction (NAICS Water and Sewer Line Construction). Both types of
cranes are exempted from requirements for operator certification in the
final standard.
The Agency increased the number of current crane operators in
construction who already are certified. NCCCO reported that since 1996
they had provided exams for 65,000 operators who had taken over 365,000
exams. (Operators frequently choose to be certified on several
different types of cranes. (ID-0343.)) NCCCO reported that crane
certification was primarily sought for construction cranes. The IUOE
reported that they have provided 12,000 written and 8,000 practical, or
hands-on, exams. (ID-0341.) Sixteen states now have a requirement for
operator certification or licensing. (See, e.g., -0347.1.) Four states
have their own State licensing programs. In addition, the nation's
largest cities also have their own licensing or certification
requirements. One commenter noted that in Ohio, which has no
requirement for crane operator certification, hiring certified
construction crane operators had become the norm for the industry. (ID-
0341.) Insurance representatives and other commenters at the public
hearings noted that many employers were getting their crane operators
certified as the cost was recouped from premium reductions. (ID-0341; -
0343; -0344.) Accordingly, the Agency has increased its estimate of the
number of construction crane operators who already are certified to 60
percent of current operators.
The Agency is confident that the estimated costs of operator
certification are not underestimated. The Agency concludes that at
least 5 percent of construction cranes are owner-operated. (ID-0025; -
0341.) Since these self-employed individuals or family-owned businesses
have no employees, they will not--for purposes of following the
standard--have to be certified. In some areas, it is the custom for
crane operators to pay for their own certification. (ID-0343.) However,
a new provision in the final standard requires employers to pay for
certification in any event. NCCCO's Mr. Brent testified that: ``There
are some candidates who are paying outright. Some employers have
instituted a vesting program where some
[[Page 48098]]
fees are due to be repaid if the employee leaves in a certain period.''
(ID-0343.) In addition, in situations where crane operators are union
members, who may be hired out of union hiring halls, it is likely that
training and certification will be performed through the union rather
than an employer. The IUOE pays for their members' crane training and
certifications costs out of union dues (ID-0341); so while employers,
and ultimately owners of new construction projects, may pay for the
cost of union operators' certification via somewhat higher wages, there
is no immediate cost to employers or general contractors for operator
certification. In addition, many certification prep courses and exams
are offered on weekends, and there will not be any lost time of
production in such cases. (ID-0343.)
Several small employer representatives on the Small Business
Advocacy Review Panel remarked that they had no turnover of crane
operators. (OSHA-S030A-2006-0664-0019.) Similarly, employers and
associations who provided public testimony at the standard's public
hearings also noted little or no turnover among operators. Accordingly,
the Agency concludes that although there may be transfer between
employers, crane operators are a select and highly paid group who are
unlikely to exit their field. Employers who lease cranes with
operators, which is the predominant mode of crane jobs, or who hire
from union hiring halls would experience no turnover of crane operators
at all.
Power Lines
The Agency has revised its estimates in the PEA of the ``unit''
costs of power line work for: assembly/disassembly; crane operations
closer than 20 feet to a power line (Sec. 1926.1408); and crane
operations within the Table A distances (within 10 feet in most
instances) (Sec. 1926.1410). Comment in the record indicated that
crane operators routinely assess sites for potential power line risks.
(ID-0341; -0344.) Thus the Agency concludes that the current baseline
of compliance with assessing power line risks is 100 percent and this
provision does not impose new costs on affected employers. The Agency
did not estimate costs for work near power lines within Table A
distances for the electric utility industries, power line construction,
and electric contractors, as these employers work near power lines
under subpart V.
The Agency has revised estimates of unit costs for some operations
near power lines. There were two primary sources for the revision of
some unit costs of power line work: the written submission by Edison
Electric Institute (EEI) reporting cost information from 16 members and
the testimony and written comment from EEI itself. (ID-0343; -0345.17.)
Based on the EEI member's information, the Agency concludes that the
cost of providing voltage information is about $200 per occurrence;
that the cost of locking out automatic line re-energizing devices is
about $320; and that it takes electric ``utility owner/operator'' or
engineers a total of six hours ($360) for travel and for participation
in planning meetings, review of procedures, and identification of a
person to implement procedures. These figures represent approximately
the median or average of estimates provided by EEI members, although
each member did not provide information about each operation. In
addition, the Agency had estimated the cost of using an insulating link
when working very close to power lines as $427 per use. Comment in the
record showed that the average cost of these devices is lower than the
Agency's estimate in the PEA of $15,000, that their working lifetime is
20 years rather than 10, and that they may require recertification each
year. (ID-0085; -0085.1; -0085.2.) Accordingly the Agency has revised
its estimated cost per use to $210 (based on the information and model
in ID-0085, but with a 7 percent discount rate). Although the final
standard may not require the use of NRTL-approved insulating links
until up to three years after the standard takes effect, the Agency is
including costs for this provision as if employers will replace their
inventory by purchasing and beginning use of NRTL-approved insulating
links in the first year that these links are available.
The Agency has also revised the costs of planning meetings. In the
PEA the Agency concluded that four individuals would participate in
such a meeting. That model fits with operations of a traditional
lattice-boom crane. However, most cranes jobs today are of short
duration by truck-mounted cranes, and the Agency estimates that only
three individuals will typically be involved in a planning meeting.
Operations Closer Than Table A Distance
The Agency received comment about work close to power lines that
has significantly increased its estimates of costs. (ID-0342; -
0345.17.) Unit costs for the time required of electric utilities or
professional engineers has been revised to $360 per episode; costs of
de-activating or locking automatic line reclosure devices has been
increased from about $30 to $320, and the cost of supplying voltage
information is $200.
The Agency had estimated that cranes were performing operations
closer than 10 feet, or the Table A distance, in about 5 percent of all
crane jobs that were not assembled near power lines (which was 75
percent of the total estimated 859,000 cranes jobs per year). In
testimony, EEI's David Highland, also from Allegheny Power, referred to
the frequency of close-to-power-line work as OSHA's estimate of
``50,000 episodes'' per year. The 50,000 figure was also noted in EEI's
written testimony. (ID-0345.17.) However, OSHA's estimate of the actual
number (5 percent of 75 percent of 859,000) was approximately 32,000.
Mr. Highland also said, ``We thought it would double,'' in speaking of
the number of times construction employers would operate cranes closer
than the Table A distances.
The former OSHA standard at former Sec. 1926.550(a)(15) permitted
work near power lines no closer than 10 feet except where they are de-
energized and grounded or when they have ``insulating barriers.'' If
power lines are not de-energized or do not have insulating barriers,
all parts of the crane, line and load, must maintain a 10-foot
clearance, with a designated person to observe clearance in situations
where the crane operator would have difficulty ensuring clearance by
visual means; and insulating links may be used as well (former Sec.
1926.550(a)(15(iv)). In oral testimony and written comment, EEI noted
that electric utilities provide line covers now for construction crane
operations, with practices varying from region to region. All electric
utilities make use of line hoses for protection. (ID-0342.) Mr.
Highland reported that his company gave ``free line hose up to a
certain length. * * * After 20 feet, they [crane users] start paying
about 10 bucks apiece.'' (ID-0342.) Earlier in testimony, EEI said,
``Currently, many electric utilities also place line hoses on power
lines when so requested by non-utility crane contractors who need to
work within 10 feet of a power line. Usually the utility owner/operator
receives a call from a contractor prior to this work. More often than
not, however, the utility discovered that work is being performed close
to a power line when it is observed by happenstance, for many
contractors simply do not call.'' (ID-0342.) Although the electric
utility industry predicted that the number of these episodes involving
construction cranes would double or increase exponentially, and thereby
force them to incur greater costs under the standard, the Agency
disagrees. The final standard imposes
[[Page 48099]]
significant new procedures and costs beyond what current standards
require. Generally, one expects crane users in the affected industries
to take further steps to avoid working closer than the Table A
distances to power lines, rather than more.
The Agency included in its cost estimates for work closer than
Table A distances the following:
A planning meeting (2 hours for three individuals costing
about $132);
Time and costs for the utility owner/operator or engineer
for all of their duties (6 hours or $360), i.e., planning, voltage
information, determining a minimum clearance distance, reviewing
procedures, and identification of an individual to implement
procedures;
Request that electric utilities de-activate the automatic
re-energizing devices, which the Agency assumes will cost crane
employers $320, on average, to be paid to electric utilities;
Use a dedicated spotter at all times (average of 4 hours,
$64.06);
Use of an insulating link ($210); and
Provision of barricades and grounding of equipment ($4.04
and $8.08).
The crane user must also secure voltage information from the electric
utility, but the Agency assumes that since the utility's owner/operator
or an engineer is present, this information is at hand; therefore, for
work within Table A distances, there is no separate, additional cost.
Since line hoses or barriers are already required, and terms are
currently arranged between the crane employer and the utility, there is
no new cost for line covers under the final standard. The Agency
concludes that the crane employer faces, at a minimum, about $800 in
new costs under the final standard to work within 10 feet or the Table
A distance of a power line. If the employer must also fully compensate
the electric utility for the utility owner's or engineer's time, the
total cost is estimated at $1,100.
The final standard seems to shift the duty and expense of line
covers wholly onto electric utilities, with crane contractors reported
as compensating electric utilities to some degree currently. (ID-0342.)
However, the limited comment on this issue in the record does not
permit an estimate of any effect.
All other provisions of the final standard's Sec. 1926.1410 are
already being performed in current construction crane jobs close to
power lines, the Agency concludes.
Assembly/Disassembly Near Power Lines
Under the proposed standard, before beginning crane assembly/
disassembly, the crane operator or employer must determine if any parts
of the crane or equipment may get closer than 20 feet to a power line
during A/D. If so, either the employer must have the line de-energized
(Option (1)); stay farther than 20 feet from the power line (Option
(2)); or follow the procedures in Option (3): determine the line
voltage and minimum clearance distance; prevent encroachment by having
a planning meeting and use either a dedicated spotter, proximity alarm,
a ``range control warning device,'' or an elevated warning line. The
Agency believes that by far the most common method will be to provide a
dedicated spotter during A/D. There was considerable comment in the
record that de-energizing lines was rare, difficult for regulatory
reasons, and expensive. (ID-0342.)
The Agency has estimated costs as if A/D operations near power
lines follow Option (3) and that crane employers or owners use a
spotter to ensure that cranes stay far enough away. In the PEA, the
Agency estimated that this happened in 25 percent of crane jobs. There
was no comment on that estimate in the rulemaking, and the Agency
concludes that A/D near power lines occurs about 200,000 times per
year.
The Agency has estimated A/D costs near power lines as follows:
Crane operators and employers already assess distance to
power lines; so the Agency takes this as a baseline and concludes there
are no new costs due to this provision in the final standard;
To determine voltage and the minimum clearance distance,
the Agency estimates that A/D will be close enough to the power line to
contact the utility about 25 percent of the time, costing about $50
(one-fourth of $200), on average, for each A/D episode. Most crane
operations will be near typical residential power lines of less than 50
kV, with a minimum clearance distance from Table A of 10 feet.
Hold a planning meeting which for the typical crane
operation will consist of the crane operator, spotter, and any on-site
employer or contractor (for a lattice-boom crane that truly performs A/
D operations, many more individuals are involved in the planning
meeting as required in Sec. 1926.1407(b)(1);
Employ a spotter to ensure that the minimum clearance
distance is maintained, and provide training for the spotter, if needed
(2 hours plus 15 minutes training).
The Agency estimates that the total costs of providing protective
procedures during A/D near power lines for a typical crane job will
cost less than $100. Table B-9, Cost by Provision, shows that the total
costs of these operations for all affected employers is estimated to be
about $16 million annually.
Crane Operations Within 20 Feet of Power Lines (Sec. 1926.1408)
Under the proposed standard, before beginning crane or derrick
operations, employers must either: (1) Define a work zone with
demarcated boundaries by using flags or a device such as a range-
limiting device or range-control warning device that prohibits the
operator from operating the crane past those boundaries, or (2) define
the work zone as the area 360 degrees around the crane based on the
crane's maximum working radius (see proposed Sec. 1926.1408(a)(1)).
The Agency estimates that, in most cases, the least-cost option would
be to mark the zone with flags. Based on the defined work zone, the
employer must determine whether the crane, load, or load line, if
operated to its maximum working radius, could get closer than 20 feet
to a power line.
If the 20-foot determination is positive, then the employer would
be required to follow one of three options. If any part of the crane,
load, or load line could not come within more than 20 feet of a power
line at the crane's maximum radius, the employer would not be required
to take any further action. If the crane operations could take the
crane closer than 20 feet, the employer must either: (1) De-energize
and visibly ground the power line, (2) maintain the 20-foot clearance
by employing a spotter or other warning device, after having a planning
meeting, or (3) determine the line voltage and minimum clearance
distance and maintain that distance between all crane parts and the
power line by employing a spotter or other warning device, after having
a planning meeting.
If the employer follows Option (2) or (3), the employer must then
maintain the appropriate distance by implementing several encroachment-
prevention procedures to ensure that the crane does not contact the
energized power lines, including: Having a planning meeting with the
operator and other workers who will be in the area of the crane, and
using either a proximity alarm, operational aids/limiting devices, a
dedicated spotter, or an elevated warning line. The Agency estimates
that a designated spotter would be used to ensure that the
[[Page 48100]]
appropriate distance is maintained between the crane and power line.
In the SBAR panel process, many small entity representatives
commented on this provision. The majority believed that, most of the
time, a dedicated spotter would be used. For some, work near electric
lines was rare; for others, it occurred several times each year. In the
PEA, the Agency estimates that work potentially within 20 feet of a
power line, occurred on 22.5 percent of all crane jobs. The Agency has
simplified this estimate for the final analysis, and estimates that, as
for A/D operations near power lines, operations within 20 feet of power
lines occur about 200,000 times per year.
Costs for working within 20 feet of power lines thus consists of:
Identifying and demarcating a work zone and determining
the maximum swing radius of the crane (0.5 hours)
Ensure that the crane does not come within 20 feet of the
power line by using a dedicated spotter (2 hours), or
Determine the line voltage and maintain the minimum Table
A clearance distance by using a dedicated spotter (2 hours).
Seek voltage information.
The Agency estimates that, for operations near power lines, crane
employers will do so about half the time ($100, or one-half of $200),
on average, for each occurrence.
The Agency estimates the average cost for protective measures in
the final standard for cranes to work within 20 feet of a power line is
about $160.
Crane Inspections
The Agency received little comment on its estimates of costs of
inspections. Inspections were frequently mentioned by commenters as
necessary and already being performed. However, the industry consensus
standard requires frequent (daily to monthly) inspections and periodic
inspections (monthly to annual ones). The final standard requires daily
visual inspections, and monthly and annual inspections that must be
documented. In addition, the final standard adds more specific checks
on more equipment that the consensus standards. Thus, the Agency is
keeping its estimate that monthly and annual inspections will take 15
minutes longer than is typically done today. Due to an error in the
spreadsheet calculations, in the PEA estimates of the monthly
inspections were too high--based on an additional 30 minutes per month
rather than 15 minutes. When this error was corrected the annual
additional cost for inspections fell from about $21 million per year in
the PEA to $16 million annually. The final standard has a new provision
requiring written notification when an operational aid is broken or a
repair is necessary (Sec. 1926.1417(j)(1)). The Agency has estimated
that condition will occur to 30 percent of (122,091) cranes annually
and require 0.17 hours (10 minutes) of a crane operator's time (wage
$35.62). This cost of written notification (about $257,000 annually, or
$2 per crane, on average) has been added to the inspection costs in the
tables. The Agency has also included in the inspection costs the
estimated the cost of providing affected employees notice at the
beginning of each shift that a crane function or part is broken (Sec.
1926.1417(j)(2)). The Agency estimates that such notice will take an
average of 3 minutes for, on average, 20 days by the crane operator.
Ground Conditions and Assembly/Disassembly
In the PEA the Agency estimated that for each crane job an
assembly/disassembly (A/D) supervisor--likely the crane operator in
many instances--would assess ground conditions and power line risks.
Many commenters reported that these functions were routinely already
performed, and the Agency has adopted that practice as its baseline.
(ID-0341; -0343.) More pointedly, most crane jobs today are performed
by truck-mounted cranes. Several commenters noted in both written
comment and oral testimony that these cranes have no assembly or
disassembly. While there is a lengthy description in the A/D provision
in the final standard, with pictures, of steps and procedures for
lattice-boom cranes, these cranes perform relatively few crane jobs. A
large lattice-boom crane may be assembled for a job lasting several
months--one crane job--while a truck-mounted hydraulic crane may
perform three or four jobs in a day. While truck-mounted cranes have
safety hazards when extending stabilizers or outriggers, these are not
the same hazards associated with lattice-boom cranes--or tower cranes
which have their own specific provisions for erection and climbing at
Sec. 1926.1435, Tower Cranes. There are also relatively few tower
cranes, which also perform a single ``crane job'' that may last many
months.
No commenter denied that current crane operators assess conditions
prior to setting up and operating a crane. In addition to comment in
the record, several organizations provided training materials that
indicated an assessment of conditions was standard operating procedures
for crane work. (ID-0345.14; -0345.17; -0380.) The Agency eliminated
these assessment costs in the final standard, but still included A/D
costs related to work near power lines.
There was considerable comment about ground conditions. The final
standard places responsibility for providing sufficient ground
conditions on the ``controlling entity.'' Small builders and general
contractors objected to this provision. There were several parts to
most of the criticisms. First, many builders and contractors now rely
on the crane company or the crane operator to assess conditions for
safe crane operations, for example, when hiring a crane company to set
roof trusses. (ID-0341; -0343.) In addition, many builders or
contractors who hire cranes for particular construction jobs have no
expertise in ground conditions (ID-0341), which the Agency acknowledged
in the proposal's preamble. In response to these comments, the Agency
accounted for the new burden which controlling entities will have under
the final standard.
These costs fall primarily on the lessees of cranes or of cranes
with operators, not employers affected by the crane standard who own
their own cranes. The Agency concludes that, for estimating the costs
of the ground conditions provision, builders of large commercial,
residential, and industrial buildings and contractors do not face a new
cost since they are, in general, at the building site. However, small
builders and developers, or their supervisors or representative, may
not be at one of their sites. (ID-0341.) The Agency estimates that the
ground conditions duty will require two hours of employer time to be
present at the site to meet their obligations. However, the standard
does not require that controlling entities be physically present, and
the Agency concludes that in most cases their attendance at the site
will not be necessary because, in most situations, the ground
conditions will be dry and reasonably level, and the cranes will be
lifting materials such as roof trusses and pre-fabricated wall
sections--i.e., low-risk ground conditions. Any information that the
controlling entity has about underground risks can be communicated by
telephone. The Agency concludes that small builders in three industries
will, at most, be affected by the ground condition provision at 10
percent of their projects involving crane operations. The Agency
concludes that the typical crane job--setting roof trusses--and the
fact that these loads are generally not close to the capacity of the
truck-mounted cranes that perform the task, means that concern about
ground conditions will
[[Page 48101]]
not arise often. The three affected industries are: NAICS 236115 New
Single Family Housing Construction; NAICS 236117 New Housing Operative
Builders; and NAICS 236118 Residential Remodelers.
The Agency has estimated the costs of complying with the
controlling entities' duties in regard to ground conditions for SBA-
size small entities in the three affected industries. The criterion for
``small entity'' for these industries by SBA is revenue of less than
$31 million. This is roughly comparable to construction of about 100
single family homes, and the Agency concludes that all small builders
are certainly captured within this category. Accordingly, the Agency
calculated the costs of expending two hours of time by employers for 10
percent of all crane jobs within the industry sectors by small
employers. The costs for the affected sectors are presented in Table B-
9. Table B-10 presents average annual costs per establishment across
the affected sectors. Table B-11 provides the Agency's estimate of the
number of cranes and crane jobs.
Language and Literacy
There was also comment in the record about the difficulty some
current crane operators may have in achieving crane operator
certification due to a language barrier or weak literacy skills, and
thus the FEA also describes possible impacts on current and future
crane operators. Two testing organizations reported in the public
hearings that they neither offer crane operator testing in languages
other than English nor had any plans to do so. (ID-0341: -0343.)
Testing in other languages would not merely require translating
existing written and practical test materials, but developing and
evaluating tests as if they were completely original. There was comment
in the record that some current crane operators would not be able to
read and therefore successfully pass a test in English. (ID-0100.1; -
0243.1; -0387.) The Agency is not presenting any quantitative estimate
of the impact of the final standard on individuals with language or
literacy issues. The final standard has a new provision requiring that
certification exams ``must be administered in a language understood by
the operator candidate'' which may alleviate any burden imposed on non-
English speaking crane operators.
Table B-8--Unit Cost Estimates for the Cranes and Derricks Proposed Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employee type
Section Requirement Incremental time/cost (wage)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assembly/Disassembly Near Assess power line .................................. Current practice.
Power Lines...................... hazards.
If w/in 20', $200.............................. 25% of episodes =
determine voltage. $50 on avg. per
episode.
Planning meeting.... 20 mins........................... Spotter ($18.35);
operator or A/D
director ($35.62);
rigger ($21.12).
Spotter............. 1 hour............................ Spotter/ee
($18.35).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Power Line Safety--Operations Demarcate work zone. 30 mins/instance.................. Employee ($18.35).
within 20 feet.
Planning Meeting.... 20 minutes........................ AD director or
operator ($35.62);
Rigger ($21.12)
Employee ($18.35).
Voltage information. $200.............................. 50% of time = $100
avg.
A dedicated spotter 2 hours per incident.............. Employee ($18.35),
is needed. 15 minutes (each)................. AD director/
Spotter training.... operator ($35.62).
Employee ($18.35).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Power Line Safety--Operations Min. clearance 6 hours, including travel......... Professional
(Closer Than Table A). determination; engineer (PE)
voltage ($72.22) or line
information; owner/operator.
planning meeting,
review procedures,
identification of
implementer.
Planning meeting, 2 hours........................... Rigger ($21.12);
review procedures, spotter ($18.35);
identify A/D director or
implementer. crane operator
($35.62).
Dedicated spotter... 4 hours........................... Employee ($18.35).
Barricades/work zone 15 minutes........................ Employee ($18.35).
Equipment grounding. 30 minutes........................ PE ($72.22).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Insulating Link..... $210 per use.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Written procedures.. Developed during planning meeting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barricades.......... 15 minutes........................ Employee ($18.36).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit access........ Discussed during instruction/training.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-conductive Current practice.
rigging.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Line covers......... $400-800.......................... Current practice.
Deactivate automatic $320.............................. Crane employer.
Reclosure devices.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48102]]
Crane Inspections................ Monthly inspection.. 15 minutes per crane in addition Competent person
to current time spent (includes 2 ($22.88).
minutes per crane for
recordkeeping).
Annual inspection... 15 minutes per crane in addition Qualified person
to current time spent (includes 2 ($41.25).
minutes per crane for
recordkeeping).
Repair inspections.. 15 minutes per crane (includes 2 Qualified person
minutes per crane for ($41.25).
recordkeeping).
Written notification 30% of cranes annually; 0.17 hrs;. Crane Operator
of inoperable ($35.62).
operational aid or
repair needed.
Notify affected 30% of cranes annually, notify on Crane Operator
employees each avg. for 20 days, 3 minutes each ($35.62).
shift of a broken day.
crane part or
operational aid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operator Training for Certify operators... Wages for operator's training time (16 hours) for a 2-
Certification/Qualification. day prep course with exams, plus 2 additional hours
for travel time. Thus, the total operator's pre-course
and exam time is 18 hours. Cost for a 2-day course
estimated to be $1,500. Total cost $2,054. Annualized
and adjusted for 5 percent turnover. Base line: 60% of
construction operators certified; 0% of crane
operators in affected gen. indus sectors.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Office of Regulatory Analysis; BLS 2010 Wages and Earnings.
Table B-9--Annualized Compliance Cost by Sector and Major Provision
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Number of Crane Operator Total
NAIC Industry affected affected Ground assembly/ Power line Crane qualification annualized
firms estabs conds disassembly safety inspections certification cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental with Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238990................. All Other Specialty 1,244 1,304 ........... ........... ........... $823,510 $1,689,387 $2,512,898
Trade Cont.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental without Operators (Bare Rentals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
532412................. Const./Min./For. 2,137 3,702 ........... ........... ........... 6,644,845 3,407,886 10,052,732
Machine & Equip.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own and Rent Cranes with Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115................. New Single-Family 178 178 0 6,321 26,332 13,337 26,331 72,322
Housing Const.
236118................. Residential 25 25 0 1,786 7,442 3,798 7,441 20,467
Remodelers.
236210................. Industrial Building 9 12 0 23,633 98,449 50,242 98,441 270,766
Construction.
236220................. Commercial and 23 31 0 20,783 86,575 44,183 86,568 238,109
Institutional
Building.
237110................. Water and Sewer Line 52 69 0 45,692 190,340 97,138 190,326 523,496
and Related Struct.
237120................. Oil and Gas Pipeline 20 26 0 23,103 96,241 49,116 96,233 264,693
and Related Struct.
237130................. Power and 34 34 0 15,788 65,769 33,565 65,765 180,887
Communication Line
and Rel.
237310................. Highway, Street, and 80 107 0 0 0 432,238 846,896 1,279,134
Bridge Construction.
237990................. Other Heavy and Civil 76 101 0 166,149 692,126 353,220 692,074 1,903,569
Engineering Const.
238110................. Poured Concrete 261 261 0 95,662 398,499 203,371 398,470 1,096,002
Foundation and
Struct.
238120................. Structural Steel and 200 266 0 147,527 614,552 313,631 614,507 1,690,217
Precast Concrete.
238130................. Framing Contractors.. 26 26 0 643 2,680 1,368 2,680 7,372
238150................. Glass and Glazing 42 42 0 4,174 17,387 8,873 17,386 47,819
Contractors.
238170................. Siding Contractors... 5 5 0 400 1,667 851 1,666 4,584
238190................. Other Foundation, 49 65 0 15,817 65,888 33,625 65,883 181,212
Structure, and
Building.
[[Page 48103]]
238210................. Electrical 15 15 0 0 0 6,700 13,128 19,828
Contractors.
238220................. Plumbing, Heating, 2 3 0 2,823 11,760 6,001 11,759 32,343
and Air-Conditioning.
238290................. Other Building 113 151 0 84,587 352,364 179,826 352,338 969,116
Equipment
Contractors.
238320................. Painting and Wall 21 21 0 3,103 12,926 6,597 12,925 35,552
Covering Contract.
238910................. Site Preparation 400 400 0 107,618 448,301 228,787 448,268 1,232,974
Contractors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............. 1,630 1,838 0 765,611 3,189,297 2,066,467 4,049,086 10,070,461
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own but Do Not Rent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115................. New Single family 3,097 3,097 0 242,637 832,026 424,617 831,965 2,331,245
housing construction.
236116................. New Multifamily 217 217 0 17,027 58,388 29,798 58,384 163,597
housing construction.
236117................. New housing operative 1,699 1,699 0 133,123 456,493 232,967 456,459 1,279,042
builders.
236118................. Residential 985 985 0 77,148 264,548 135,010 264,528 741,233
Remodelers.
236210................. Industrial building 276 325 0 25,482 87,381 44,594 87,374 244,832
construction.
236220................. Commercial and 4,141 4,141 0 324,459 1,112,602 567,806 1,112,520 3,117,387
Institutional Bldg.
Const.
237110................. Water and Sewer Line 1,028 1,371 0 107,390 368,252 187,934 231,198 894,775
Const.
237120................. Oil and gas pipeline 128 171 0 13,384 45,894 23,421 9,178 91,877
construction.
237130................. Power and 213 285 0 0 0 39,013 76,439 115,452
communication line
const.
237210................. Land subdivision..... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
237310................. Highway, street and 88 118 0 9,209 31,580 16,117 31,578 88,484
bridge const.
237990................. Other heavy and civil 273 273 0 21,392 73,355 37,436 73,349 205,532
eng.
238110................. Poured Concrete 267 267 0 20,914 71,716 36,599 71,710 200,940
foundation and
struct.
238120................. Structural steel and 334 334 0 26,187 89,799 45,828 89,793 251,607
precast concrete.
238130................. Framing Contractors.. 1,395 1,395 0 109,345 374,956 191,355 374,928 1,050,585
238140................. Masonry Contractors.. 137 137 0 10,747 36,852 18,807 36,849 103,255
238150................. Glass & Glazing 54 54 0 4,253 14,582 7,442 14,581 40,858
Contractors.
238160................. Roofing Contractors.. 197 197 0 15,405 52,826 26,959 52,822 148,013
238170................. Siding Contractors... 53 53 0 4,129 14,158 7,225 14,157 39,668
238190................. Other foundation, 25 25 0 1,997 6,849 3,495 6,849 19,191
structure, building,
ext.
238210................. Electrical 78 78 0 0 0 10,633 20,834 31,468
Contractors.
238220................. Plumbing, Heating and 98 98 0 7,690 26,371 13,458 26,369 73,889
Air-conditioning
Cont.
238290................. Other building 49 65 0 5,103 17,498 8,930 17,496 49,027
equipment cont.
238310................. Drywall and 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
insulation
contractors.
238320................. Painting and wall 41 41 0 3,248 11,139 5,685 11,138 31,211
covering contractors.
238330................. Flooring Contractors. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
238340................. Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238350................. Finish Carpentry 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238390................. Other building 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
finishing
contractors.
238910................. Site Preparation..... 389 389 0 30,454 104,430 53,295 104,422 292,601
221110................. Electric Power 524 2,101 0 0 2,304,000 363,390 4,063,374 6,730,763
Generation.
221120................. Electric Power 1,232 7,393 0 0 9,216,000 777,517 8,694,086 18,687,603
Transmission,
Control, Dist.
221210................. Natural Gas 526 2,458 0 192,605 660,462 337,061 1,256,324 2,446,452
Distribution.
321213................. Engineered Wood 132 162 0 12,694 43,529 22,215 82,801 161,239
Member (exc Truss)
Mfg.
321214................. Truss Manufacturing.. 902 1,085 0 85,019 291,538 148,784 554,561 1,079,902
336611................. Ship Building and 575 635 0 21,549 73,892 37,710 281,114 414,265
Repairing.
339950................. Sign Manufacturing... 6,291 6,415 0 186,336 638,966 326,091 1,215,434 2,366,828
423310................. Lumbr, Plywd, 6,450 8,715 0 0 0 0 0 0
Millwork, Wd Pnl
Mrchnt Whle.
423330................. Roofing, Siding, and 1,142 2,762 0 0 0 0 0 0
Insul Material Merch
Whle.
423390................. Other Construction 2,363 3,155 0 0 0 0 0 0
Material Merchant
Whle.
423730................. Warm Air Heating and 2,533 5,193 0 813,831 2,790,707 1,424,213 5,308,453 10,337,204
Air-Cond. Equip. &
Suppl.
444110................. Home Centers......... 2,553 6,749 0 0 0 0 0 0
[[Page 48104]]
454312................. Liquefied Petroleum 2,307 5,567 0 436,222 1,495,847 763,392 2,845,384 5,540,845
Gas (Bottled Gas)
Dealers.
482110................. Railroads............ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0
486210................. Pipeline 127 1,363 0 106,803 366,237 186,906 696,651 1,356,596
Transportation of
Natural Gas.
517110................. Wired 2,517 27,159 0 0 0 411,384 1,533,349 1,944,733
Telecommunications
Carriers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............. 45,436 96,725 0 3,065,783 22,032,873 6,967,089 30,606,452 62,672,198
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Lessees in the Construction Industry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115................. New Single family 31,054 31,054 1,276,695 2,433,344 8,344,177 ........... 2,085,890 14,140,107
housing construction.
236116................. New Multifamily 2,173 2,173 0 170,273 583,883 ........... 145,960 900,116
housing construction.
236117................. New housing operative 16,989 16,989 681,229 1,331,232 4,564,926 ........... 1,141,147 7,718,535
builders.
236118................. Residential 9,848 9,848 404,986 771,674 2,646,147 ........... 661,488 4,484,296
Remodelers.
236210................. Industrial building 3,264 3,264 0 255,762 877,033 ........... 219,242 1,352,038
construction.
236220................. Commercial and 41,438 41,438 0 3,247,019 11,134,347 ........... 2,783,381 17,164,747
Institutional Bldg.
Construction.
237110................. Water and Sewer Line 13,774 13,774 0 1,079,310 3,701,059 ........... 925,197 5,705,566
Const.
237120................. Oil and gas pipeline 1,301 1,734 0 135,874 465,924 ........... 116,472 718,270
construction.
237130................. Power and 2,147 2,862 0 0 0 ........... 192,240 192,240
communication line
const.
237210................. Land subdivision..... 0 0 0 0 0 ........... 0 0
237310................. Highway, street and 890 1,186 0 92,933 318,677 ........... 79,663 491,273
bridge const.
237990................. Other heavy and civil 2,781 2,781 0 217,876 747,117 ........... 186,766 1,151,759
eng.
238110................. Poured Concrete 1,348 1,348 0 105,592 362,085 ........... 90,515 558,192
foundation and
struct.
238120................. Structural steel and 3,608 3,608 0 282,717 969,466 ........... 242,349 1,494,532
precast concrete.
238130................. Framing Contractors.. 13,974 13,974 0 1,094,981 3,754,799 ........... 938,630 5,788,411
238140................. Masonry Contractors.. 1,372 1,372 0 107,469 368,521 ........... 92,123 568,113
238150................. Glass & Glazing 547 547 0 42,854 146,951 ........... 36,735 226,541
Contractors.
238160................. Roofing Contractors.. 1,966 1,966 0 154,053 528,262 ........... 132,056 814,371
238170................. Siding Contractors... 527 527 0 41,307 141,645 ........... 35,409 218,360
238190................. Other foundation, 258 258 0 20,228 69,365 ........... 17,340 106,933
structure, building,
ext.
238210................. Electrical 776 776 0 0 0 ........... 52,096 52,096
Contractors.
238220................. Plumbing, Heating and 981 981 0 76,906 263,720 ........... 65,925 406,552
Air-conditioning
Cont.
238290................. Other building 4,997 6,663 0 522,103 1,790,341 ........... 447,552 2,759,996
equipment cont.
238310................. Drywall and 0 0 0 0 0 ........... 0 0
insulation
contractors.
238320................. Painting and wall 415 415 0 32,501 111,448 ........... 27,860 171,809
covering contractors.
238330................. Flooring Contractors. 0 0 0 0 0 ........... 0 0
238340................. Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 0 0 0 ........... 0 0
contractors.
238350................. Finish Carpentry 0 0 0 0 0 ........... 0 0
contractors.
238390................. Other building 0 0 0 0 0 ........... 0 0
finishing
contractors.
238910................. Site Preparation..... 3,927 3,927 0 307,675 1,055,046 ........... 263,742 1,626,463
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............. 160,352 163,463 2,362,911 12,523,682 42,944,942 ........... 10,979,778 68,811,312
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............. 210,800 267,032 2,362,911 16,355,077 68,167,112 16,501,911 50,732,589 154,119,600
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: ORA.
Table B-10--Annualized Compliance Costs Per Establishments by Sector
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Number of Annualized
NAIC Industry affected affected compliance Cost per
firms estabs. cost estab.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental With Operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238990...................... All Other Specialty Trade 1,244 1,304 $2,512,898 $1,927
Cont.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48105]]
Crane Rental Without Operators (Bare Rentals)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
532412...................... Const./Min./For. Machine & 2,137 3,702 10,052,732 2,934
Equip.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own and Rent Cranes With Operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115...................... New Single-Family Housing 178 178 72,322 406
Const.
236118...................... Residential Remodelers.... 25 25 20,467 819
236210...................... Industrial Building 9 12 270,766 22,564
Construction.
236220...................... Commercial and 23 31 238,109 7,681
Institutional Building.
237110...................... Water and Sewer Line and 52 69 523,496 7,587
Related Struct.
237120...................... Oil and Gas Pipeline and 20 26 264,693 10,180
Related Struct.
237130...................... Power and Communication 34 34 180,887 5,320
Line and Rel.
237310...................... Highway, Street, and 80 107 1,279,134 11,955
Bridge Construction.
237990...................... Other Heavy and Civil 76 101 1,903,569 18,847
Engineering Const.
238110...................... Poured Concrete Foundation 261 261 1,096,002 4,199
and Struct.
238120...................... Structural Steel and 200 266 1,690,217 6,354
Precast Concrete.
238130...................... Framing Contractors....... 26 26 7,372 284
238150...................... Glass and Glazing 42 42 47,819 1,139
Contractors.
238170...................... Siding Contractors........ 5 5 4,584 917
238190...................... Other Foundation, 49 65 181,212 2,788
Structure, and Building.
238210...................... Electrical Contractors.... 15 15 19,828 1,322
238220...................... Plumbing, Heating, and Air- 2 3 32,343 10,781
Conditioning.
238290...................... Other Building Equipment 113 151 969,116 6,418
Contractors.
238320...................... Painting and Wall Covering 21 21 35,552 1,693
Contract.
238910...................... Site Preparation 400 400 1,232,974 3,082
Contractors.
-------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................. 1,630 1,838 10,070,461 ............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own but Do Not Rent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115...................... New Single family housing 3,097 3,097 2,331,245 753
construction.
236116...................... New Multifamily housing 217 217 163,597 753
construction.
236117...................... New housing operative 1,699 1,699 1,279,042 753
builders.
236118...................... Residential Remodelers.... 985 985 741,233 753
236210...................... Industrial building 276 325 244,832 753
construction.
236220...................... Commercial and 4,141 4,141 3,117,387 753
Institutional Bldg. Const.
237110...................... Water and Sewer Line Const 1,028 1,371 894,775 653
237120...................... Oil and gas pipeline 128 171 91,877 538
construction.
237130...................... Power and communication 213 285 115,452 406
line const.
237210...................... Land subdivision.......... 0 0 0 0
237310...................... Highway, street and bridge 88 118 88,484 753
const.
237990...................... Other heavy and civil eng. 273 273 205,532 753
238110...................... Poured Concrete foundation 267 267 200,940 753
and struct.
238120...................... Structural steel and 334 334 251,607 753
precast concrete.
238130...................... Framing Contractors....... 1,395 1,395 1,050,585 753
238140...................... Masonry Contractors....... 137 137 103,255 753
238150...................... Glass & Glazing 54 54 40,858 753
Contractors.
238160...................... Roofing Contractors....... 197 197 148,013 753
238170...................... Siding Contractors........ 53 53 39,668 753
238190...................... Other foundation, 25 25 19,191 753
structure, building, ext.
238210...................... Electrical Contractors.... 78 78 31,468 406
238220...................... Plumbing, Heating and Air- 98 98 73,889 753
conditioning Cont.
238290...................... Other building equipment 49 65 49,027 753
cont.
238310...................... Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238320...................... Painting and wall covering 41 41 31,211 753
contractors.
238330...................... Flooring Contractors...... 0 0 0 0
238340...................... Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238350...................... Finish Carpentry 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238390...................... Other building finishing 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238910...................... Site Preparation.......... 389 389 292,601 753
221110...................... Electric Power Generation. 524 2,101 6,730,763 3,204
221120...................... Electric Power 1,232 7,393 18,687,603 2,528
Transmission, Control,
Dist.
221210...................... Natural Gas Distribution.. 526 2,458 2,446,452 995
321213...................... Engineered Wood Member 132 162 161,239 995
(exc Truss) Mfg.
321214...................... Truss Manufacturing....... 902 1,085 1,079,902 995
336611...................... Ship Building and 575 635 414,265 652
Repairing.
339950...................... Sign Manufacturing........ 6,291 6,415 2,366,828 369
423310...................... Lumbr, Plywd, Millwork, Wd 6,450 8,715 0 0
Pnl Mrchnt Whle.
423330...................... Roofing, Siding, and Insul 1,142 2,762 0 0
Material Merch Whle.
423390...................... Other Construction 2,363 3,155 0 0
Material Merchant Whle.
[[Page 48106]]
423730...................... Warm Air Heating and Air- 2,533 5,193 10,337,204 1,991
Cond. Equip. & Suppl.
444110...................... Home Centers.............. 2,553 6,749 0 0
454312...................... Liquefied Petroleum Gas 2,307 5,567 5,540,845 995
(Bottled Gas) Dealers.
482110...................... Railroads................. NA NA NA NA
486210...................... Pipeline Transportation of 127 1,363 1,356,596 995
Natural Gas.
517110...................... Wired Telecommunications 2,517 27,159 1,944,733 72
Carriers.
-------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................. 45,436 96,725 62,672,198 ............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Lessees in the Construction Industry
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115...................... New Single family housing 31,054 31,054 14,140,107 455
construction.
236116...................... New Multifamily housing 2,173 2,173 900,116 414
construction.
236117...................... New housing operative 16,989 16,989 7,718,535 454
builders.
236118...................... Residential Remodelers.... 9,848 9,848 4,484,296 455
236210...................... Industrial building 3,264 3,264 1,352,038 414
construction.
236220...................... Commercial and 41,438 41,438 17,164,747 414
Institutional Bldg.
Construction.
237110...................... Water and Sewer Line Const 13,774 13,774 5,705,566 414
237120...................... Oil and gas pipeline 1,301 1,734 718,270 552
construction.
237130...................... Power and communication 2,147 2,862 192,240 90
line const.
237210...................... Land subdivision.......... 0 0 0 NA
237310...................... Highway, street and bridge 890 1,186 491,273 552
const.
237990...................... Other heavy and civil eng. 2,781 2,781 1,151,759 414
238110...................... Poured Concrete foundation 1,348 1,348 558,192 414
and struct.
238120...................... Structural steel and 3,608 3,608 1,494,532 414
precast concrete.
238130...................... Framing Contractors....... 13,974 13,974 5,788,411 414
238140...................... Masonry Contractors....... 1,372 1,372 568,113 414
238150...................... Glass & Glazing 547 547 226,541 414
Contractors.
238160...................... Roofing Contractors....... 1,966 1,966 814,371 414
238170...................... Siding Contractors........ 527 527 218,360 414
238190...................... Other foundation, 258 258 106,933 414
structure, building, ext.
238210...................... Electrical Contractors.... 776 776 52,096 67
238220...................... Plumbing, Heating and Air- 981 981 406,552 414
conditioning Cont.
238290...................... Other building equipment 4,997 6,663 2,759,996 552
cont.
238310...................... Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 NA
contractors.
238320...................... Painting and wall covering 415 415 171,809 414
contractors.
238330...................... Flooring Contractors...... 0 0 0 NA
238340...................... Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 0 NA
contractors.
238350...................... Finish Carpentry 0 0 0 NA
contractors.
238390...................... Other building finishing 0 0 0 NA
contractors.
238910...................... Site Preparation.......... 3,927 3,927 1,626,463 414
-------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................. 160,352 163,463 68,811,312 ............
-------------------------------------------------------
Total..................... 210,800 267,032 154,119,600 ............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: ORA.
Table B-11--Estimates of Cranes, Crane Jobs, and Affected Crane Operators for All Establishments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Number of
NAIC Industry affected affected Total Crane jobs Affected
firms estabs. cranes operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental With Operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238990................. All Other Specialty 1,244 1,304 6,288 ........... 6,288
Trade Cont.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental Without Operators (Bare Rentals)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
532412................. Const./Min./For. 2,137 3,702 50,735 ........... 12,684
Machine & Equip.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own and Rent Cranes With Operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115................. New Single-Family 178 178 98 490 98
Housing Const.
236118................. Residential Remodelers 25 25 28 138 28
236210................. Industrial Building 9 12 366 1,832 366
Construction.
236220................. Commercial and 23 31 322 1,611 322
Institutional
Building.
237110................. Water and Sewer Line 52 69 708 3,542 708
and Related Struct.
237120................. Oil and Gas Pipeline 20 26 358 1,791 358
and Related Struct.
237130................. Power and 34 34 245 1,224 245
Communication Line
and Rel.
[[Page 48107]]
237310................. Highway, Street, and 80 107 3,152 15,760 3,152
Bridge Construction.
237990................. Other Heavy and Civil 76 101 2,576 12,879 2,576
Engineering Const.
238110................. Poured Concrete 261 261 1,483 7,415 1,483
Foundation and Struct.
238120................. Structural Steel and 200 266 2,287 11,436 2,287
Precast Concrete.
238130................. Framing Contractors... 26 26 10 50 10
238150................. Glass and Glazing 42 42 65 324 65
Contractors.
238170................. Siding Contractors.... 5 5 6 31 6
238190................. Other Foundation, 49 65 245 1,226 245
Structure, and
Building.
238210................. Electrical Contractors 15 15 49 244 49
238220................. Plumbing, Heating, and 2 3 44 219 44
Air-Conditioning.
238290................. Other Building 113 151 1,311 6,557 1,311
Equipment Contractors.
238320................. Painting and Wall 21 21 48 241 48
Covering Contract.
238910................. Site Preparation 400 400 1,668 8,342 1,668
Contractors.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.............. 1,630 1,838 15,070 75,352 15,070
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own But Do Not Rent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115................. New Single family 3,097 3,097 3,097 15,483 3,097
housing construction.
236116................. New Multifamily 217 217 217 1,087 217
housing construction.
236117................. New housing operative 1,699 1,699 1,699 8,495 1,699
builders.
236118................. Residential Remodelers 985 985 985 4,923 985
236210................. Industrial building 276 325 325 1,626 325
construction.
236220................. Commercial and 4,141 4,141 4,141 20,704 4,141
Institutional Bldg.
Const.
237110................. Water and Sewer Line 1,028 1,371 1,371 6,853 1,371
Const.
237120................. Oil and gas pipeline 128 171 171 854 171
construction.
237130................. Power and 213 285 285 1,423 285
communication line
const.
237210................. Land subdivision...... 0 0 0 0 0
237310................. Highway, street and 88 118 118 588 118
bridge const.
237990................. Other heavy and civil 273 273 273 1,365 273
eng.
238110................. Poured Concrete 267 267 267 1,335 267
foundation and struct.
238120................. Structural steel and 334 334 334 1,671 334
precast concrete.
238130................. Framing Contractors... 1,395 1,395 1,395 6,977 1,395
238140................. Masonry Contractors... 137 137 137 686 137
238150................. Glass & Glazing 54 54 54 271 54
Contractors.
238160................. Roofing Contractors... 197 197 197 983 197
238170................. Siding Contractors.... 53 53 53 263 53
238190................. Other foundation, 25 25 25 127 25
structure, building,
ext.
238210................. Electrical Contractors 78 78 78 388 78
238220................. Plumbing, Heating and 98 98 98 491 98
Air-Conditioning Cont.
238290................. Other building 49 65 65 326 65
equipment cont.
238310................. Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238320................. Painting and wall 41 41 41 207 41
covering contractors.
238330................. Flooring Contractors.. 0 0 0 0 0
238340................. Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238350................. Finish Carpentry 0 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238390................. Other building 0 0 0 0 0
finishing contractors.
238910................. Site Preparation...... 389 389 389 1,943 389
221110................. Electric Power 524 2,101 2,650 13,250 7,950
Generation.
221120................. Electric Power 1,232 7,393 5,670 28,350 17,010
Transmission,
Control, and
Distribution.
221210................. Natural Gas 526 2,458 2,458 12,290 2,458
Distribution.
321213................. Engineered Wood Member 132 162 162 810 162
(except Truss)
Manufacturing.
321214................. Truss Manufacturing... 902 1,085 1,085 5,425 1,085
336611................. Ship Building and 575 635 275 1,375 550
Repairing.
339950................. Sign Manufacturing.... 6,291 6,415 2,378 11,890 2,378
423310................. Lumber, Plywood, 6,450 8,715 0 0 0
Millwork, and Wood
Panel Merchant
Wholesalers+B42.
423330................. Roofing, Siding, and 1,142 2,762 0 0 0
Insulation Material
Merchant Wholesalers.
423390................. Other Construction 2,363 3,155 0 0 0
Material Merchant
Wholesalers.
423730................. Warm Air Heating and 2,533 5,193 10,386 51,930 10,386
Air-Cond. Equip. and
Supplies.
444110................. Home Centers.......... 2,553 6,749 0 0 0
454312................. Liquefied Petroleum 2,307 5,567 5,567 27,835 5,567
Gas (Bottled Gas)
Dealers.
482110................. Railroads............. NA NA NA NA NA
486210................. Pipeline 127 1,363 1,363 6,815 1,363
Transportation of
Natural Gas.
517110................. Wired 2,517 27,159 3,000 15,000 3,000
Telecommunications
Carriers.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.............. 45,436 96,725 50,807 254,036 67,722
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48108]]
Crane Lessees in the Construction Industry
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115................. New Single family 31,054 31,054 ........... 155,270 7,764
housing construction.
236116................. New Multifamily 2,173 2,173 ........... 10,865 543
housing construction.
236117................. New housing operative 16,989 16,989 ........... 84,945 4,247
builders.
236118................. Residential Remodelers 9,848 9,848 ........... 49,240 2,462
236210................. Industrial building 3,264 3,264 ........... 16,320 816
construction.
236220................. Commercial and 41,438 41,438 ........... 207,190 10,360
Institutional Bldg.
Construction.
237110................. Water and Sewer Line 13,774 13,774 ........... 68,870 3,444
Const.
237120................. Oil and gas pipeline 1,301 1,734 ........... 8,670 434
construction.
237130................. Power and 2,147 2,862 ........... 14,310 716
communication line
const.
237210................. Land subdivision...... 0 0 ........... 0 0
237310................. Highway, street and 890 1,186 ........... 5,930 297
bridge const.
237990................. Other heavy and civil 2,781 2,781 ........... 13,903 695
eng.
238110................. Poured Concrete 1,348 1,348 ........... 6,738 337
foundation and struct.
238120................. Structural steel and 3,608 3,608 ........... 18,040 902
precast concrete.
238130................. Framing Contractors... 13,974 13,974 ........... 69,870 3,494
238140................. Masonry Contractors... 1,372 1,372 ........... 6,858 343
238150................. Glass & Glazing 547 547 ........... 2,735 137
Contractors.
238160................. Roofing Contractors... 1,966 1,966 ........... 9,830 492
238170................. Siding Contractors.... 527 527 ........... 2,636 132
238190................. Other foundation, 258 258 ........... 1,291 65
structure, building,
ext.
238210................. Electrical Contractors 776 776 ........... 3,878 194
238220................. Plumbing, Heating and 981 981 ........... 4,907 245
Air-Conditioning Cont.
238290................. Other building 4,997 6,663 ........... 33,315 1,666
equipment cont.
238310................. Drywall and insulation 0 0 ........... 0 0
contractors.
238320................. Painting and wall 415 415 ........... 2,074 104
covering contractors.
238330................. Flooring Contractors.. 0 0 ........... 0 0
238340................. Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 ........... 0 0
contractors.
238350................. Finish Carpentry 0 0 ........... 0 0
contractors.
238390................. Other building 0 0 ........... 0 0
finishing contractors.
238910................. Site Preparation...... 3,927 3,927 ........... 19,633 982
----------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.............. 160,352 163,463 ........... 817,315 40,866
----------------------------------------------------------------
Total.............. 210,800 267,032 122,901 1,146,703 142,630
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: ORA.
U.S. Census Bureau data.
7. Economic Feasibility and Impacts
This section presents OSHA's analysis of the potential economic
impacts of the final standard and an assessment of its economic
feasibility. A separate analysis of the potential economic impacts on
small entities (as defined by the Small Business Administration) and on
very small entities (employers with fewer than 20 employees) is
presented in the following section as part of the Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, conducted in accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
A standard is economically feasible if it does not threaten massive
dislocation to an industry or imperil its existence. (See United
Steelworkers v. Marshall, 647 F.2d 1189 (DC Cit. 1980).) The court also
found that a standard that is financially burdensome or threatens the
survival of some companies in an industry is not sufficient to render
it infeasible. Further, the cost of compliance with an OSHA standard
must be analyzed ``in relation to the financial health and
profitability of the industry and the likely effect of such costs on
unit consumer prices.'' Id. The court also found that ``the practical
question is whether the standard threatens the competitive stability of
an industry, or whether any intra-industry or inter-industry
discrimination in the standard might wreck such stability or lead to
undue concentration.'' Id.
To assess the potential economic impacts of the final rule, OSHA
compared the anticipated costs of achieving compliance against revenues
and profits of establishments affected by the rule. This screening
analysis is presented in Table B-12. This table is considered a
screening analysis because it measures costs as a percent of pre-tax
profits and revenues, but does not predict impacts on pre-tax profits
and sales. This screening analysis is used to determine whether the
compliance costs potentially associated with the standard would lead to
significant impacts on establishments in the affected industries. The
actual impact of the standard on the profits and revenues of
establishments in a given industry will depend on the price elasticity
of demand for the services sold by establishments in that industry.
Price elasticity refers to the relationship between the price
charged for a service and the demand for that service; the more elastic
the relationship, the less able an establishment is to pass the costs
of compliance through to its customers in the form of a price increase,
and the more it will have to absorb the costs of compliance in the form
of reduced profits. In general, ``when an industry is subject to a
higher cost, it does not simply swallow it, it raises its price and
reduces its output, and in this way shifts a part of the cost to its
consumers and a part to its suppliers.'' American
[[Page 48109]]
Dental Association v. Secretary of Labor, 984 F.2d 823, 829 (7th Cir.
1993).
Table B-12--Estimates of Economic Impacts for Affected Establishments Across Industry Sectors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected Avg. Avg.
-------------------------- revenues profits per Cost per Cost as a Cost as a
NAIC Industry per estab. estab. estab. percent of percent of
Firms Estabs. ($1,000) ($1,000) revenues profits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental With Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238990........................ All Other Specialty Trade 1,244 1,304 1,918 79 1,927 0.10 2.45
Cont.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental Without Operators (Bare Rentals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
532412........................ Const./Min./For. Machine & 2,137 3,702 2,258 145 2,934 0.13 2.02
Equip.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own and Rent Cranes With Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115........................ New Single-Family Housing 178 178 220 10 406 0.18 3.95
Const.
236118........................ Residential Remodelers...... 25 25 443 21 819 0.18 3.95
236210........................ Industrial Building 9 12 12,213 571 22,564 0.18 3.95
Construction.
236220........................ Commercial and Institutional 23 31 4,157 194 7,681 0.18 3.95
Building.
237110........................ Water and Sewer Line and 52 69 4,107 214 7,587 0.18 3.54
Related Struct.
237120........................ Oil and Gas Pipeline and 20 26 5,510 288 10,180 0.18 3.54
Related Struct.
237130........................ Power and Communication Line 34 34 2,880 150 5,320 0.18 3.54
and Rel.
237310........................ Highway, Street, and Bridge 80 107 11,783 615 11,955 0.10 1.94
Construction.
237990........................ Other Heavy and Civil 76 101 10,201 533 18,847 0.18 3.54
Engineering Const.
238110........................ Poured Concrete Foundation 261 261 2,273 101 4,199 0.18 4.18
and Struct.
238120........................ Structural Steel and Precast 200 266 3,439 152 6,354 0.18 4.18
Concrete.
238130........................ Framing Contractors......... 26 26 153 7 284 0.18 4.18
238150........................ Glass and Glazing 42 42 616 27 1,139 0.18 4.18
Contractors.
238170........................ Siding Contractors.......... 5 5 496 22 917 0.18 4.18
238190........................ Other Foundation, Structure, 49 65 1,509 67 2,788 0.18 4.18
and Building.
238210........................ Electrical Contractors...... 15 15 1,303 56 1,322 0.10 2.35
238220........................ Plumbing, Heating, and Air- 2 3 5,835 225 10,781 0.18 4.79
Conditioning.
238290........................ Other Building Equipment 113 151 3,474 154 6,418 0.18 4.18
Contractors.
238320........................ Painting and Wall Covering 21 21 916 41 1,693 0.18 4.18
Contract.
238910........................ Site Preparation Contractors 400 400 1,668 76 3,082 0.18 4.05
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................... 1,630 1,838 ........... ........... ........... ............ ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own but Do Not Rent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115........................ New Single family housing 3,097 3,097 1,520 71 753 0.05 1.06
construction.
236116........................ New Multifamily housing 217 217 5,477 256 753 0.01 0.29
construction.
236117........................ New housing operative 1,699 1,699 6,021 281 753 0.01 0.27
builders.
236118........................ Residential Remodelers...... 985 985 646 30 753 0.12 2.49
236210........................ Industrial building 276 325 5,931 277 753 0.01 0.27
construction.
236220........................ Commercial and Institutional 4,141 4,141 7,177 335 753 0.01 0.22
Bldg. Const.
237110........................ Water and Sewer Line Const.. 1,028 1,371 3,239 169 653 0.02 0.39
[[Page 48110]]
237120........................ Oil and gas pipeline 128 171 9,189 480 538 0.01 0.11
construction.
237130........................ Power and communication line 213 285 5,581 291 406 0.01 0.14
const.
237210........................ Land subdivision............ 0 0 2,878 318 0 0.00 0.00
237310........................ Highway, street and bridge 88 118 8,279 432 753 0.01 0.17
const.
237990........................ Other heavy and civil eng... 273 273 3,965 207 753 0.02 0.36
238110........................ Poured Concrete foundation 267 267 1,682 74 753 0.04 1.01
and struct.
238120........................ Structural steel and precast 334 334 2,712 120 753 0.03 0.63
concrete.
238130........................ Framing Contractors......... 1,395 1,395 936 41 753 0.08 1.82
238140........................ Masonry Contractors......... 137 137 876 39 753 0.09 1.94
238150........................ Glass & Glazing Contractors. 54 54 1,470 65 753 0.05 1.16
238160........................ Roofing Contractors......... 197 197 1,390 61 753 0.05 1.22
238170........................ Siding Contractors.......... 53 53 580 26 753 0.13 2.94
238190........................ Other foundation, structure, 25 25 1,013 45 753 0.07 1.68
building, ext.
238210........................ Electrical Contractors...... 78 78 1,321 57 406 0.03 0.71
238220........................ Plumbing, Heating and Air- 98 98 1,473 57 753 0.05 1.32
conditioning Cont.
238290........................ Other building equipment 49 65 2,959 131 753 0.03 0.58
cont.
238310........................ Drywall and insulation 0 0 1,751 77 0 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238320........................ Painting and wall covering 41 41 530 23 753 0.14 3.21
contractors.
238330........................ Flooring Contractors........ 0 0 811 36 0 0.00 0.00
238340........................ Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 698 31 0 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238350........................ Finish Carpentry contractors 0 0 678 30 0 0.00 0.00
238390........................ Other building finishing 0 0 1,091 48 0 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238910........................ Site Preparation............ 389 389 1,416 65 753 0.05 1.16
221110........................ Electric Power Generation... 524 2,101 43,042 1,911 3,204 0.01 0.17
221120........................ Electric Power Transmission, 1,232 7,393 37,443 1,662 2,528 0.01 0.15
Control, Dist.
221210........................ Natural Gas Distribution.... 526 2,458 30,459 907 995 0.00 0.11
321213........................ Engineered Wood Member (exc 132 162 19,027 737 995 0.01 0.14
Truss) Mfg.
321214........................ Truss Manufacturing......... 902 1,085 5,972 231 995 0.02 0.43
336611........................ Ship Building and Repairing. 575 635 23,071 1,406 652 0.00 0.05
339950........................ Sign Manufacturing.......... 6,291 6,415 1,761 103 369 0.02 0.36
423310........................ Lumbr, Plywd, Millwork, Wd 6,450 8,715 14,905 430 0 0.00 0.00
Pnl Mrchnt Whle.
423330........................ Roofing, Siding, and Insul 1,142 2,762 8,985 259 0 0.00 0.00
Material Merch Whle.
423390........................ Other Construction Material 2,363 3,155 4,859 140 0 0.00 0.00
Merchant Whle.
423730........................ Warm Air Heating and Air- 2,533 5,193 5,413 167 1,991 0.04 1.19
Cond. Equip. & Suppl.
444110........................ Home Centers................ 2,553 6,749 21,816 1,679 0 0.00 0.00
454312........................ Liquefied Petroleum Gas 2,307 5,567 1,698 72 995 0.06 1.39
(Bottled Gas) Dealers.
482110........................ Railroads................... NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
486210........................ Pipeline Transportation of 127 1,363 15,037 1,990 995 0.01 0.05
Natural Gas.
[[Page 48111]]
517110........................ Wired Telecommunications 2,517 27,159 7,294 518 72 0.00 0.01
Carriers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................... 45,436 96,725 ........... ........... ........... ............ ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Lessees in the Construction Industry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115........................ New Single family housing 31,054 31,054 3,040 142 455 0.01 0.32
construction.
236116........................ New Multifamily housing 2,173 2,173 10,954 512 414 0.00 0.08
construction.
236117........................ New housing operative 16,989 16,989 12,041 563 454 0.00 0.08
builders.
236118........................ Residential Remodelers...... 9,848 9,848 6,456 302 455 0.01 0.15
236210........................ Industrial building 3,264 3,264 5,931 277 414 0.01 0.15
construction.
236220........................ Commercial and Institutional 41,438 41,438 7,177 335 414 0.01 0.12
Bldg. Construction.
237110........................ Water and Sewer Line Const.. 13,774 13,774 3,239 169 414 0.01 0.24
237120........................ Oil and gas pipeline 1,301 1,734 9,189 480 552 0.01 0.12
construction.
237130........................ Power and communication line 2,147 2,862 11,163 583 90 0.00 0.02
const.
237210........................ Land subdivision............ 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
237310........................ Highway, street and bridge 890 1,186 82,791 4,323 552 0.00 0.01
const.
237990........................ Other heavy and civil eng... 2,781 2,781 7,931 414 414 0.01 0.10
238110........................ Poured Concrete foundation 1,348 1,348 33,636 1,487 414 0.00 0.03
and struct.
238120........................ Structural steel and precast 3,608 3,608 2,712 120 414 0.02 0.35
concrete.
238130........................ Framing Contractors......... 13,974 13,974 1,249 55 414 0.03 0.75
238140........................ Masonry Contractors......... 1,372 1,372 17,527 775 414 0.00 0.05
238150........................ Glass & Glazing Contractors. 547 547 14,698 650 414 0.00 0.06
238160........................ Roofing Contractors......... 1,966 1,966 13,903 615 414 0.00 0.07
238170........................ Siding Contractors.......... 527 527 11,596 513 414 0.00 0.08
238190........................ Other foundation, structure, 258 258 20,266 896 414 0.00 0.05
building, ext.
238210........................ Electrical Contractors...... 776 776 132,128 5,714 67 0.00 0.00
238220........................ Plumbing, Heating and Air- 981 981 147,307 5,685 414 0.00 0.01
conditioning Cont.
238290........................ Other building equipment 4,997 6,663 2,959 131 552 0.02 0.42
cont.
238310........................ Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238320........................ Painting and wall covering 415 415 52,995 2,343 414 0.00 0.02
contractors.
238330........................ Flooring Contractors........ 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
238340........................ Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238350........................ Finish Carpentry contractors 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
238390........................ Other building finishing 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238910........................ Site Preparation............ 3,927 3,927 14,164 647 414 0.003 0.06
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................... 160,352 163,463 ........... ........... ........... 0.05 1.17
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................... 210,800 267,032 ........... ........... ........... ............ ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: U.S. Census Bureau data.
Country Business Patters, 2006; Statistics of U.S. Businesses 2006.
Internal Revenue Service, Source Book, profit rates over 2000-2006.
[[Page 48112]]
In the extreme, if demand is perfectly inelastic (i.e., the price
elasticity is 0), then the expected impact of compliance costs equal to
1 percent of revenues would be a 1 percent increase in the price of the
product or service, with no decline in demand or profit. Such a
situation would be most likely when there are few, if any, substitutes
for the product or service offered by the affected sector or if the
products or services of the affected sector account only for a small
portion of the income of its consumers. On the other hand, if demand is
perfectly elastic (i.e., the price elasticity is infinitely large),
then no increase in price is possible, and before-tax profits would be
reduced by an amount equal to the costs of compliance (minus any cost
savings resulting from compliance, such as improved worker health and
reduced insurance costs). Under this scenario, if the costs of
compliance represent a large percentage of the sector's profits, some
establishments might be forced to close. This scenario is highly
unlikely to occur, however, because it can only arise when there are
other goods and services that are, in the eye of the consumer, perfect
substitutes for the goods and services the affected establishments
produce or provide.
A common intermediate case would be a price elasticity of one. In
this situation, if the costs of compliance amount to 1 percent of
revenues, then production would decline by 1 percent and prices would
rise by 1 percent. The sector would be expected to remain in business
and maintain a comparable profit rate as before implementation of the
standard, but would produce 1 percent less of its services. Consumers
would effectively absorb the costs through a combination of increased
prices and reduced consumption; this, as the court described in ADA v.
Secretary of Labor, is the more typical case.
Table B-12 presents estimates for the number of affected
establishments, average establishment revenues and profits, and average
establishment costs for each affected industry sector. Economic impacts
in the table (the two right-most columns) are represented by two
ratios: Of average establishment costs to revenues, and of costs to
profits.
The average (unweighted) cost of the final standard per
establishment is about $560 annually. As is evident from the data and
estimates in Table B-12, average establishment costs of compliance for
the final standard are not large in relation to the corresponding
average establishment revenues and profits in each of the industry
sectors. The estimated per establishment cost of compliance represents
less than 0.2 percent (or 0.002) of average establishment revenues for
all affected sectors. In most sectors it is lower. The average cost as
a percentage of revenues across all sectors is 0.05 percent (0.0005).
The impact of the final standard measured by the ratio of costs to
profits varies across the affected sectors. Among the sectors in the
Crane Lessees sector, which includes about 163,000 of the 267,000
affected establishments; in this sector, employers, on average, are
expected to have costs that represent about 1 percent of profits.
Within the sector of employers Own but Do Not Rent, affected
establishments in 14 of the 46 sectors have average costs as a percent
of profits of 1 percent or higher (from 1 to 3 percent); this impact of
costs as a percentage of profits is relatively low.
In the two sectors that are most intensively involved in crane use,
Crane Rental with Operators (employers primarily in the crane rental
business) and Crane Rental without Operators (bare rentals), estimated
costs are about 2 percent of profits. In the Own and Rent Cranes with
Operators sectors, costs as a percentage of profits are estimated at
about 4 percent. Because these employers both own and use cranes, as
well as rent them, the cost model estimates significantly higher
average establishment costs for them--even in relation to the sectors
involved primarily in crane rentals. In addition, as noted above for
the Own but Do Not Rent sector, most employers in these sectors are
quite small, with only a few employees, and a relatively small fraction
of employers in the sectors that own cranes. Consequently, average
establishment revenues and profits may be lower for the average
establishment than for establishments that own cranes. If so, the cost
as a percentage of profits overestimates that impact for affected
establishments.
The Agency concludes that the final standard is economically
feasible for the affected industries. As described above, a standard is
economically feasible if there is a reasonable likelihood that the
estimated costs of compliance ``will not threaten the existence or
competitive structure of an industry, even if it does portend disaster
for some marginal firms.'' United Steelworkers of America v. Marshall,
647 F.2d 1189, 1272 (DC Cir. 1980). The potential impacts on employer
costs associated with achieving compliance with the final standard fall
well within the bounds of economic feasibility in each industry sector.
Costs of 0.2 percent of revenues and 4 percent of profits will not
threaten the existence of the construction industry, affected general
industry sectors, or the use of cranes in affected industry sectors.
OSHA does not expect compliance with the requirements of the final
standard to threaten the viability of employers or the competitive
structure of any of the affected industry sectors. When viewed in the
larger context of the construction sector, an increase in costs of
$148.2 million a year is effectively negligible, and will have no
noticeable effect on the demand for construction services. Even when
viewed as an increase in the costs of using cranes, an increase in the
cost of rentals services of 0.2 percent will not cause the construction
industry to forego the use of cranes and, thus, put crane leasing firms
out of business.
For several reasons, the Agency believes that the impact of
compliance costs will be less than estimates in Table B-12. For the
affected construction sectors, the economic impact of the final
standard is most likely to consist of a very small increase in prices
for construction projects involving work with cranes (0.2 percent or
less, depending on the sector). Crane rental companies, all of which
must incur the costs of compliance unless they are already in
compliance, should be able to pass through costs to lessees. The
additional costs of crane safety measures are extremely small in
relation to the value of construction, and there are no economic
substitutes, or alternatives, to the use of cranes in construction. It
is unlikely that a price increase of this magnitude would significantly
alter the services demanded by the public or any other affected
customers or intermediaries. If the compliance costs of the final
standard are substantially recouped with an increase in rental prices,
there would be little effect on profits. Impacts on all affected
general industry sectors are slight, and far below any test of economic
feasibility.
Given the small incremental increases in prices potentially
resulting from compliance with the final standard, and the lack of
readily available substitutes for the products and services provided by
the covered construction and general industry sectors, demand is
expected to be sufficiently inelastic in each affected industry to
enable entities to substantially offset compliance costs through minor
price increases without experiencing any significant reduction in
revenues or profits.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended in 1996, requires the
preparation of a Final Regulatory
[[Page 48113]]
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) for specified proposed rules (5 U.S.C. 601-
612). Under the provisions of the law, each such analysis must contain:
(1) A description of the impact of the rule on small entities;
(2) A succinct statement of the need for, and objectives of, the
rule;
(3) A summary of the significant issues raised by the public
comments in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, a
summary of the assessment of the agency of such issues, and a statement
of any changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments;
(4) A description of and an estimate of the number of small
entities to which the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such
estimate is available; and
(5) A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and
other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the
classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and
the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report
or record.
1. Impact of the Final Rule on Small Entities
OSHA has analyzed the potential impact of the final standard on
small entities. The total annual cost of compliance with the final for
small entities is estimated to be $101 million, as shown by industry in
Table B-13. The costs per establishment in the table are identical in
several sectors because the cost model assumed that, on average, the
number of cranes, operators, and crane jobs were the same for each
affected establishment. In the crane-rental sectors, the Agency had
rental income data for each sector and estimated the number of cranes
owned per establishment for each sector. Different sizes of firms with
different numbers of cranes in the rental sectors resulted in per
establishment (average) costs varying by industry NAICS.
Table B-13--Annualized Compliance Costs for SBA Defined Small Entities by Major Category
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized
Industry Firms Estabs. compliance Cost per
costs estab.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental With Operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238990...................... All Other Specialty Trade 1,231 1,286 $1,991,485 $1,618
Cont.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental Without Operators (Bare Rentals)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
532412...................... Const./Min./For. Machine & 1,782 3,018 309,609 103
Equip.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own and Rent Cranes With Operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115...................... New Single-Family Housing 178 178 72,322 406
Const.
236118...................... Residential Remodelers.... 25 25 20,467 819
236210...................... Industrial Building 9 12 270,766 22,564
Construction.
236220...................... Commercial and 23 31 238,109 7,681
Institutional Building.
237110...................... Water and Sewer Line and 52 69 523,496 7,587
Related Struct.
237120...................... Oil and Gas Pipeline and 20 26 264,693 10,180
Related Struct.
237130...................... Power and Communication 34 34 180,887 5,320
Line and Rel.
237310...................... Highway, Street, and 80 107 1,279,134 11,955
Bridge Construction.
237990...................... Other Heavy and Civil 76 101 1,903,569 18,847
Engineering Const.
238110...................... Poured Concrete Foundation 261 261 1,096,002 4,199
and Struct.
238120...................... Structural Steel and 200 266 1,690,217 6,354
Precast Concrete.
238130...................... Framing Contractors....... 26 26 7,372 284
238150...................... Glass and Glazing 42 42 47,819 1,139
Contractors.
238170...................... Siding Contractors........ 5 5 4,584 917
238190...................... Other Foundation, 49 65 181,212 2,788
Structure, and Building.
238210...................... Electrical Contractors.... 15 15 19,828 1,322
238220...................... Plumbing, Heating, and Air- 2 3 32,343 10,781
Conditioning.
238290...................... Other Building Equipment 113 151 969,116 6,418
Contractors.
238320...................... Painting and Wall Covering 21 21 35,552 1,693
Contract.
238910...................... Site Preparation 400 400 1,232,974 3,082
Contractors.
-------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................. 1,630 1,838 10,070,461 ............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own but Do Not Rent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115...................... New Single family housing 2,905 2,905 2,151,333 741
construction.
236116...................... New Multifamily housing 213 213 157,700 741
construction.
236117...................... New housing operative 1,263 1,263 935,573 741
builders.
236118...................... Residential Remodelers.... 825 825 610,894 741
236210...................... Industrial building 223 262 194,098 741
construction.
236220...................... Commercial and 3,614 3,614 2,676,568 741
Institutional Bldg. Const.
237110...................... Water and Sewer Line Const 917 1,223 905,470 741
237120...................... Oil and gas pipeline 98 131 96,790 741
construction.
237130...................... Power and communication 219 291 114,664 393
line const.
237210...................... Land subdivision.......... 0 0 0 0
237310...................... Highway, street and bridge 69 93 68,575 741
const.
237990...................... Other heavy and civil eng. 511 511 378,643 741
238110...................... Poured Concrete foundation 108 108 79,805 741
and struct.
238120...................... Structural steel and 394 394 291,554 741
precast concrete.
238130...................... Framing Contractors....... 1,060 1,060 785,316 741
[[Page 48114]]
238140...................... Masonry Contractors....... 128 128 94,975 741
238150...................... Glass & Glazing 48 48 35,872 741
Contractors.
238160...................... Roofing Contractors....... 230 230 170,275 741
238170...................... Siding Contractors........ 33 33 24,105 741
238190...................... Other foundation, 7 7 5,273 741
structure, building, ext.
238210...................... Electrical Contractors.... 60 60 23,612 393
238220...................... Plumbing, Heating and Air- 86 86 63,721 741
conditioning Cont.
238290...................... Other building equipment 33 44 32,355 741
cont.
238310...................... Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238320...................... Painting and wall covering 37 37 27,267 741
contractors.
238330...................... Flooring Contractors...... 0 0 0 0
238340...................... Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238350...................... Finish Carpentry 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238390...................... Other building finishing 0 0 0 0
contractors.
238910...................... Site Preparation.......... 262 262 194,105 741
221110...................... Electric Power Generation. 293 301 73,588 244
221120...................... Electric Power 337 358 112,369 314
Transmission, Control,
and Distribution.
221210...................... Natural Gas Distribution.. 442 591 255,619 433
321213...................... Engineered Wood Member 121 127 59,770 471
(except Truss)
Manufacturing.
321214...................... Truss Manufacturing....... 871 914 744,121 814
336611...................... Ship Building and 575 635 410,878 647
Repairing.
339950...................... Sign Manufacturing........ 6,261 6,339 245,747 39
423310...................... Lumber, Plywood, Millwork, 5,971 6,326 0 0
and Wood Panel Merchant
Wholesalers.
423330...................... Roofing, Siding, and 1,025 1,173 0 0
Insulation Material
Merchant Wholesalers.
423390...................... Other Construction 2,181 2,296 0 0
Material Merchant
Wholesalers.
423730...................... Warm Air Heating and Air- 2,364 2,958 4,851,281 1,640
Cond. Equip. and Supplies.
444110...................... Home Centers.............. 2,409 2,575 0 0
454312...................... Liquefied Petroleum Gas 2,044 2,317 2,460,790 1,062
(Bottled Gas) Dealers.
482110...................... Railroads................. NA NA NA NA
486210...................... Pipeline Transportation of 65 66 14,333 217
Natural Gas.
517110...................... Wired Telecommunications 2,517 27,159 1,907,788 70
Carriers.
-------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................. 32,430 59,267 21,254,828 ............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Lessees in the Construction Industry
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115...................... New Single family housing 31,038 31,038 14,133,479 455
construction.
236116...................... New Multifamily housing 2,086 2,086 864,078 414
construction.
236117...................... New housing operative 16,562 16,562 7,541,453 455
builders.
236118...................... Residential Remodelers.... 9,846 9,846 4,483,343 455
236210...................... Industrial building 3,000 3,000 1,242,682 414
construction.
236220...................... Commercial and 40,530 40,530 16,788,629 414
Institutional Bldg.
Construction.
237110...................... Water and Sewer Line Const 13,715 13,715 5,681,126 414
237120...................... Oil and gas pipeline 1,667 1,667 690,517 414
construction.
237130...................... Power and communication 2,811 2,811 188,781 67
line const.
237210...................... Land subdivision.......... 0 0 0 NA
237310...................... Highway, street and bridge 1,114 1,114 461,532 414
const.
237990...................... Other heavy and civil eng. 2,760 2,760 1,143,060 414
238110...................... Poured Concrete foundation 13,273 13,273 5,498,038 414
and struct.
238120...................... Structural steel and 3,487 3,487 1,444,410 414
precast concrete.
238130...................... Framing Contractors....... 13,779 13,779 5,707,637 414
238140...................... Masonry Contractors....... 1,368 1,368 566,539 414
238150...................... Glass & Glazing 542 542 224,387 414
Contractors.
238160...................... Roofing Contractors....... 1,945 1,945 805,589 414
238170...................... Siding Contractors........ 526 526 217,821 414
238190...................... Other foundation, 256 256 106,104 414
structure, building, ext.
238210...................... Electrical Contractors.... 765 765 51,356 67
238220...................... Plumbing, Heating and Air- 970 970 401,941 414
conditioning Cont.
238290...................... Other building equipment 644 644 266,845 414
cont.
238310...................... Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 NA
contractors.
238320...................... Painting and wall covering 414 414 171,627 414
contractors.
238330...................... Flooring Contractors...... 0 0 0 NA
238340...................... Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 0 NA
contractors.
238350...................... Finish Carpentry 0 0 0 NA
contractors.
238390...................... Other building finishing 0 0 0 NA
contractors.
238910...................... Site Preparation.......... 3,889 3,889 1,610,805 414
-------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................. 166,985 166,985 70,291,778
-------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48115]]
Total..................... 204,058 232,394 103,918,161
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: ORA.
U.S. Census Bureau data.
Country Business Patters, 2006; Statistics of U.S. Businesses 2006.
Statistics of U.S. Business (SUSB).
To assess the potential economic impact of the proposal on small
entities, OSHA calculated the ratios of compliance costs to profits and
to revenues. These impacts are presented for each affected industry in
Table B-14. OSHA expects that, among small entities potentially
affected by the proposal, the average increase in prices necessary to
completely offset the compliance costs is 0.06 percent. The average
price increase necessary to completely offset compliance costs would
not exceed 0.18 percent among small entities in any industry. Only to
the extent that such price increases are not possible would there be
any effect on the average profits of small entities. Even in the
unlikely event that no costs could be passed through, the compliance
costs could be completely absorbed through an average reduction in
profits of 1.2 percent. In most affected industries, the compliance
costs, without any pass-through, could be completely absorbed through
an average reduction in profits of less than 1 percent; the reduction
would be no more than 5.0 percent in any of the affected industries.
To further ensure that potential impacts on small entities were
fully analyzed and considered, OSHA also separately examined the
potential impacts of the final standard on very small entities, defined
as employers with fewer than 20 employees. To assess the potential
economic impact of the final standard on very small entities, OSHA
calculated the ratios of compliance costs to profits and to revenues.
These ratios are presented for each affected industry in Table B-15.
OSHA expects that among very small entities potentially affected by the
final standard, the average increase in prices necessary to completely
offset the compliance costs would be 0.08 percent (less than 1
percent). Only to the extent that such price increases are not
possible, would there be any effect on the average profits of very
small entities. Even in the unlikely event that no costs could be
passed through, the compliance costs could be completely absorbed
through an average reduction in profits of 1.68 percent among affected
very small entities.
Table B-14--Economic Impacts for SBA Defined Small Entities by Major Categories
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avg.
Avg. rev's profits per Cost per Cost as a Cost as a
0 Industry Firms Estabs. per estab. estab. estab. percent of percent of
($1,000) ($1,000) revenues profits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental with Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238990........................ All Other Specialty Trade 1,231 1,286 1,550 71 1,618 0.10 2.29
Cont.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental without Operators (Bare Rentals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
532412........................ Const./Min./For. Machine & 1,782 3,018 482 31 103 0.13 2.02
Equip.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own and Rent Cranes with Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115........................ New Single-Family Housing 178 178 220 10 406 0.18 3.95
Const.
236118........................ Residential Remodelers....... 25 25 443 21 819 0.18 3.95
236210........................ Industrial Building 9 12 12,213 571 22,564 0.18 3.95
Construction.
236220........................ Commercial and Institutional 23 31 4,157 194 7,681 0.18 3.95
Building.
237110........................ Water and Sewer Line and 52 69 4,107 214 7,587 0.18 3.54
Related Struct.
237120........................ Oil and Gas Pipeline and 20 26 5,510 288 10,180 0.18 3.54
Related Struct.
237130........................ Power and Communication Line 34 34 2,880 150 5,320 0.18 3.54
and Rel.
237310........................ Highway, Street, and Bridge 80 107 11,783 615 11,955 0.10 1.94
Construction.
237990........................ Other Heavy and Civil 76 101 10,201 533 18,847 0.18 3.54
Engineering Const.
238110........................ Poured Concrete Foundation 261 261 2,273 101 4,199 0.18 4.18
and Struct.
238120........................ Structural Steel and Precast 200 266 3,439 152 6,354 0.18 4.18
Concrete.
238130........................ Framing Contractors.......... 26 26 153 7 284 0.18 4.18
[[Page 48116]]
238150........................ Glass and Glazing Contractors 42 42 616 27 1,139 0.18 4.18
238170........................ Siding Contractors........... 5 5 496 22 917 0.18 4.18
238190........................ Other Foundation, Structure, 49 65 1,509 67 2,788 0.18 4.18
and Building.
238210........................ Electrical Contractors....... 15 15 1,303 56 1,322 0.10 2.35
238220........................ Plumbing, Heating, and Air- 2 3 5,835 225 10,781 0.18 4.79
Conditioning.
238290........................ Other Building Equipment 113 151 3,474 154 6,418 0.18 4.18
Contractors.
238320........................ Painting and Wall Covering 21 21 916 41 1,693 0.18 4.18
Contract.
238910........................ Site Preparation Contractors. 400 400 1,668 76 3,082 0.18 4.05
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................... 1,630 1,838 ........... ........... ........... ........... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own but Do Not Rent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115........................ New Single family housing 2,905 2,905 1,000 47 741 0.07 1.58
construction.
236116........................ New Multifamily housing 213 213 3,400 159 741 0.02 0.47
construction.
236117........................ New housing operative 1,263 1,263 5,104 239 741 0.01 0.31
builders.
236118........................ Residential Remodelers....... 825 825 543 25 741 0.14 2.92
236210........................ Industrial building 223 262 2,570 120 741 0.03 0.62
construction.
236220........................ Commercial and Institutional 3,614 3,614 3,661 171 741 0.02 0.43
Bldg. Const.
237110........................ Water and Sewer Line Const... 917 1,223 2,324 121 741 0.03 0.61
237120........................ Oil and gas pipeline 98 131 3,743 195 741 0.02 0.38
construction.
237130........................ Power and communication line 219 291 4,656 243 393 0.01 0.16
const.
237210........................ Land subdivision............. 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
237310........................ Highway, street and bridge 69 93 3,225 168 741 0.02 0.44
const.
237990........................ Other heavy and civil eng.... 511 511 1,500 78 741 0.05 0.95
238110........................ Poured Concrete foundation 108 108 1,000 44 741 0.07 1.67
and struct.
238120........................ Structural steel and precast 394 394 1,425 63 741 0.05 1.18
concrete.
238130........................ Framing Contractors.......... 1,060 1,060 798 35 741 0.09 2.10
238140........................ Masonry Contractors.......... 128 128 675 30 741 0.11 2.48
238150........................ Glass & Glazing Contractors.. 48 48 900 40 741 0.08 1.86
238160........................ Roofing Contractors.......... 230 230 801 35 741 0.09 2.09
238170........................ Siding Contractors........... 33 33 600 27 741 0.12 2.79
238190........................ Other foundation, structure, 7 7 900 40 741 0.08 1.86
building, ext.
238210........................ Electrical Contractors....... 60 60 1,100 48 393 0.04 0.83
238220........................ Plumbing, Heating and Air- 86 86 1,100 42 741 0.07 1.74
conditioning Cont.
238290........................ Other building equipment cont 33 44 1,664 74 741 0.04 1.01
238310........................ Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238320........................ Painting and wall covering 37 37 419 19 741 0.18 4.00
contractors.
238330........................ Flooring Contractors......... 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
238340........................ Tile and Terrazzo contractors 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
238350........................ Finish Carpentry contractors. 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
238390........................ Other building finishing 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238910........................ Site Preparation............. 262 262 962 44 741 0.08 1.69
[[Page 48117]]
221110........................ Electric Power Generation.... 293 301 7,313 325 244 0.00 0.08
221120........................ Electric Power Trans, 337 358 6,882 306 314 0.00 0.10
Control, Dist.
221210........................ Natural Gas Distribution..... 442 591 28,428 847 433 0.00 0.05
321213........................ Engineered Wd Member (exct 121 127 4,720 183 471 0.01 0.26
Truss) Mfg.
321214........................ Truss Manufacturing.......... 871 914 4,706 182 814 0.02 0.45
336611........................ Ship Building and Repairing.. 575 635 10,204 622 647 0.01 0.10
339950........................ Sign Manufacturing........... 6,261 6,339 1,532 89 39 0.00 0.04
423310........................ Lumber, Plywd, Millwork, Wood 5,971 6,326 7,084 204 0 0.00 0.00
Panel Whle.
423330........................ Roofing, Siding, and 1,025 1,173 7,159 207 0 0.00 0.00
Insulation Merch Whle.
423390........................ Other Construction Material 2,181 2,296 3,260 94 0 0.00 0.00
Merch Whle.
423730........................ Warm Air Heating and A-C 2,364 2,958 3,790 117 1,640 0.04 1.41
Equip & Supplies.
444110........................ Home Centers................. 2,409 2,575 2,335 180 0 0.00 0.00
454312........................ Liquefied Petroleum Gas 2,044 2,317 2,415 102 1,062 0.04 1.04
(Bottled Gas) Dlrs.
482110........................ Railroads.................... NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
486210........................ Pipeline Transportation of 65 66 8,345 1,105 217 0.00 0.02
Natural Gas.
517110........................ Wired Telecommunications 2,517 27,159 7,294 518 70 0.00 0.01
Carriers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................... 32,430 59,267 ........... ........... ........... ........... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Lessees in the Construction Industry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115........................ New Single family housing 31,038 31,038 1,480 69 455 0.03 0.32
construction.
236116........................ New Multifamily housing 2,086 2,086 3,085 144 414 0.01 0.08
construction.
236117........................ New housing operative 16,562 16,562 2,860 134 455 0.02 0.08
builders.
236118........................ Residential Remodelers....... 9,846 9,846 644 30 455 0.07 0.15
236210........................ Industrial building 3,000 3,000 2,493 117 414 0.02 0.15
construction.
236220........................ Commercial and Institutional 40,530 40,530 4,024 188 414 0.01 0.12
Bldg. Construction.
237110........................ Water and Sewer Line Const... 13,715 13,715 2,863 149 414 0.01 0.24
237120........................ Oil and gas pipeline 1,667 1,667 4,118 215 414 0.01 0.09
construction.
237130........................ Power and communication line 2,811 2,811 2,289 120 67 0.00 0.01
const.
237210........................ Land subdivision............. 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
237310........................ Highway, street and bridge 1,114 1,114 3,606 188 414 0.01 0.01
const.
237990........................ Other heavy and civil eng.... 2,760 2,760 2,919 152 414 0.01 0.10
238110........................ Poured Concrete foundation 13,273 13,273 1,189 53 414 0.03 0.03
and struct.
238120........................ Structural steel and precast 3,487 3,487 1,927 85 414 0.02 0.35
concrete.
238130........................ Framing Contractors.......... 13,779 13,779 559 25 414 0.07 0.75
238140........................ Masonry Contractors.......... 1,368 1,368 814 36 414 0.05 0.05
238150........................ Glass & Glazing Contractors.. 542 542 1,319 58 414 0.03 0.06
238160........................ Roofing Contractors.......... 1,945 1,945 1,125 50 414 0.04 0.07
238170........................ Siding Contractors........... 526 526 529 23 414 0.08 0.08
238190........................ Other foundation, structure, 256 256 628 28 414 0.07 0.05
building, ext.
238210........................ Electrical Contractors....... 765 765 874 38 67 0.01 0.00
238220........................ Plumbing, Heating and Air- 970 970 1,049 40 414 0.04 0.01
conditioning Cont.
[[Page 48118]]
238290........................ Other building equipment cont 644 644 2,068 91 414 0.02 0.32
238310........................ Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238320........................ Painting and wall covering 414 414 513 23 414 0.08 0.02
contractors.
238330........................ Flooring Contractors......... 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
238340........................ Tile and Terrazzo contractors 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
238350........................ Finish Carpentry contractors. 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
238390........................ Other building finishing 0 0 0 0 NA 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238910........................ Site Preparation............. 3,889 3,889 1,101 50 414 0.04 0.06
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................... 166,985 166,985 ........... ........... ........... ........... ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total........................ 204,058 232,394 ........... ........... ........... ........... ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simple Average of impacts: 0.06 1.25
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: ORA.
U.S. Census Bureau data.
Country Business Patters, 2006; Statistics of U.S. Businesses 2006.
Internal Revenue Service, Source Book, profit rates over 2000-2006.
Statistics of U.S. Business (SUSB).
Table B-15--Economic Impacts for Very Small Entities (Less Than 20 Employees) by Major Category
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost as Cost as
Profit Revenues Profits Cost a a
Industry Firms Estabs. Employees rate per estab. per per percent percent
(percent) ($1,000) estab. estab. of of
($1,000) revenues profits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental With Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238990....................... All Other Specialty Trade 1,065 1,065 4,824 4.10 $614 $25 $614 0.10 2.44
Cont.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Rental Without Operators (Bare Rentals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
532412....................... Const./Min./For. Machine & 1,782 3,018 19,423 6.42 129 8 103 0.08 1.23
Equip.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own and Rent Cranes With Operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115....................... New Single-Family Housing 178 178 261 4.67 220 10 407 0.18 4.19
Const.
236118....................... Residential Remodelers...... 25 25 45 4.67 443 21 819 0.18 4.19
236210....................... Industrial Building 9 12 1,067 4.67 12,213 571 22,564 0.18 4.19
Construction.
236220....................... Commercial and Institutional 23 31 757 4.67 4,157 194 7,681 0.18 4.19
Building.
237110....................... Water and Sewer Line and 52 69 1,432 5.22 4,107 214 7,587 0.18 3.97
Related Struct.
237120....................... Oil and Gas Pipeline and 20 26 1,457 5.22 5,510 288 10,180 0.18 3.97
Related Struct.
237130....................... Power and Communication Line 34 34 666 5.22 2,880 150 5,320 0.18 3.97
and Rel.
237310....................... Highway, Street, and Bridge 80 107 6,456 5.22 11,783 615 21,770 0.18 3.97
Construction.
237990....................... Other Heavy and Civil 76 101 5,857 5.22 10,201 533 18,847 0.18 3.97
Engineering Const.
238110....................... Poured Concrete Foundation 261 261 4,328 4.42 2,273 101 4,199 0.18 4.18
and Struct.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................... ........ 758 844 22,326 .......... ........ ....... ........ .......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48119]]
Own Cranes but Do Not Rent Them
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115....................... New Single family housing 2,763 2,763 12,155 4.67 823 38 628 0.08 1.63
construction.
236116....................... New Multifamily housing 197 197 2,010 4.67 1,350 63 628 0.05 1.00
construction.
236117....................... New housing operative 1,206 1,206 8,528 4.67 1,854 87 628 0.03 0.73
builders.
236118....................... Residential Remodelers...... 808 808 2,627 4.67 443 21 628 0.14 3.03
236210....................... Industrial building 209 209 6,015 4.67 1,247 58 628 0.05 1.08
construction.
236220....................... Commercial and Institutional 2,943 2,943 50,843 4.67 1,526 71 628 0.04 0.88
Bldg. Construc.
237110....................... Water and Sewer Line Const.. 900 900 13,335 5.22 702 37 628 0.09 1.71
237120....................... Oil and gas pipeline 63 63 3,416 5.22 708 37 628 0.09 1.70
construction.
237130....................... Power and communication line 207 207 9,177 5.22 655 34 281 0.04 0.82
const.
237210....................... Land subdivision............ 0 0 0 11.04 0 0 0 NA NA
237310....................... Highway, street and bridge 66 66 2,423 5.22 976 51 628 0.06 1.23
const.
237990....................... Other heavy and civil eng... 378 378 10,483 5.22 589 31 628 0.11 2.04
238110....................... Poured Concrete foundation 46 46 531 4.42 494 22 628 0.13 2.87
and struct.
238120....................... Structural steel and precast 90 90 1,954 4.42 659 29 628 0.10 2.16
concrete.
238130....................... Framing Contractors......... 981 981 8,322 4.42 374 17 628 0.17 3.80
238140....................... Masonry Contractors......... 115 115 1,093 4.42 343 15 628 0.18 4.14
238150....................... Glass & Glazing Contractors. 44 44 405 4.42 619 27 628 0.10 2.29
238160....................... Roofing Contractors......... 207 207 2,378 4.42 447 20 628 0.14 3.18
238170....................... Siding Contractors.......... 31 31 127 4.42 408 18 628 0.15 3.48
238190....................... Other foundation, structure, 10 10 62 4.42 394 17 628 0.16 3.60
building, ext.
238210....................... Electrical Contractors...... 54 54 541 4.32 444 19 281 0.06 1.47
238220....................... Plumbing, Heating and Air- 77 77 768 3.86 509 20 628 0.12 3.20
conditioning Contractors.
238290....................... Other building equipment 30 30 570 4.42 714 32 628 0.09 1.99
cont.
238310....................... Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 4.42 0 0 0 NA NA
contractors.
238320....................... Painting and wall covering 37 37 208 4.42 265 12 628 0.24 5.36
contractors.
238330....................... Flooring Contractors........ 0 0 0 4.42 0 0 0 NA NA
238340....................... Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 0 4.42 0 0 0 NA NA
contractors.
238350....................... Finish Carpentry contractors 0 0 0 4.42 0 0 0 NA NA
238390....................... Other building finishing 0 0 0 4.42 0 0 0 NA NA
contractors.
238910....................... Site Preparation............ 271 271 1,970 4.56 497 23 628 0.13 2.77
221110....................... Electric Power Generation... 293 301 1,288 4.44 7,513 334 234 0.00 0.07
221120....................... Electric Power Trans, 337 358 2,272 4.44 7,311 325 303 0.00 0.09
Control, and Dist.
221210....................... Natural Gas Distribution.... 360 368 1,736 2.98 9,483 283 128 0.00 0.05
321213....................... Engineered Wood Member 82 82 534 3.87 1,674 65 108 0.01 0.17
(except Truss) Mfg.
321214....................... Truss Manufacturing......... 408 408 3,438 3.87 1,130 44 156 0.01 0.36
336611....................... Ship Building and Repairing. 370 371 2,041 6.09 950 58 24 0.00 0.04
339950....................... Sign Manufacturing.......... 5,312 5,316 25,236 5.83 1,303 76 66 0.01 0.09
423310....................... Lumber, Plywd, Millwork, & 4,774 4,844 24,410 2.89 3,970 115 0 0.00 0.00
Panel Merch Whl.
[[Page 48120]]
423330....................... Roofing, Siding, and Insul 831 857 4,764 2.89 4,461 129 0 0.00 0.00
Merchant Wholes.
423390....................... Other Construction Material 1,886 1,907 9,298 2.89 2,199 63 0 0.00 0.00
Merch Whleslrs.
423730....................... Warm Air Heating and A-C 1,929 2,017 11,007 3.08 2,537 78 888 0.03 1.14
Equip. & Supplies.
444110....................... Home Centers................ 1,879 1,904 12,389 7.70 1,344 103 0 0.00 0.00
454312....................... Liquefied Petroleum Gas 1,881 2,001 11,711 4.22 1,333 56 651 0.05 1.16
(Bottled Gas) Dlrs.
482110....................... Railroads................... NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
486210....................... Pipeline Transportation of 65 66 238 13.24 8,473 1,122 192 0.00 0.02
Natural Gas.
517110....................... Wired Telecommunications 1,828 1,882 9,022 7.10 1,431 102 12 0.00 0.01
Carriers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................... 33,969 11,734 139,941 ......... .......... ........ ....... ........ .......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Lessees in the Construction Industry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
236115....................... New Single family housing 29,962 29,962 95,670 4.67 1,192 56 455 0.04 0.82
construction.
236116....................... New Multifamily housing 1,904 1,904 7,946 4.67 1,986 93 414 0.02 0.45
construction.
236117....................... New housing operative 15,927 15,927 50,782 4.67 2,063 96 455 0.02 0.47
builders.
236118....................... Residential Remodelers...... 9,606 9,606 25,611 4.67 527 25 455 0.09 1.85
236210....................... Industrial building 2,669 2,669 13,978 4.67 1,120 52 414 0.04 0.79
construction.
236220....................... Commercial and Institutional 33,784 33,784 179,125 4.67 1,649 77 414 0.03 0.54
Bldg. Construction.
237110....................... Water and Sewer Line Const.. 11,306 11,306 59,055 5.22 841 44 414 0.05 0.94
237120....................... Oil and gas pipeline 1,083 1,083 4,293 5.22 666 35 414 0.06 1.19
construction.
237130....................... Power and communication line 2,149 2,149 8,580 5.22 630 33 67 0.01 0.20
const.
237210....................... Land subdivision............ 0 0 0 11.04 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
237310....................... Highway, street and bridge 862 862 4,675 5.22 993 52 414 0.04 0.80
const.
237990....................... Other heavy and civil engg.. 2,295 2,295 10,166 5.22 1,261 66 414 0.03 0.63
238110....................... Poured Concrete foundation 11,886 11,886 52,606 4.42 677 30 414 0.06 1.38
and struct.
238120....................... Structural steel and precast 2,679 2,679 14,995 4.42 945 42 414 0.04 0.99
concrete.
238130....................... Framing Contractors......... 13,043 13,043 48,914 4.42 345 15 414 0.12 2.72
238140....................... Masonry Contractors......... 1,243 1,243 4,720 4.42 376 17 414 0.11 2.49
238150....................... Glass & Glazing Contractors. 485 485 2,457 4.42 758 34 414 0.05 1.24
238160....................... Roofing Contractors......... 1,722 1,722 7,015 4.42 637 28 414 0.07 1.47
238170....................... Siding Contractors.......... 506 506 1,627 4.42 359 16 414 0.12 2.61
238190....................... Other foundation, structure, 237 237 909 4.42 290 13 414 0.14 3.24
building, ext.
238210....................... Electrical Contractors...... 691 691 2,953 4.32 434 19 67 0.02 0.36
238220....................... Plumbing, Heating and Air- 872 872 3,855 3.86 551 21 414 0.08 1.95
conditioning Contractors.
238290....................... Other building equipment 524 524 2,726 4.42 868 38 414 0.05 1.08
cont.
238310....................... Drywall and insulation 0 0 0 4.42 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238320....................... Painting and wall covering 392 392 1,267 4.42 326 14 414 0.13 2.87
contractors.
238330....................... Flooring Contractors........ 0 0 0 4.42 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
238340....................... Tile and Terrazzo 0 0 0 4.42 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
contractors.
[[Page 48121]]
238350....................... Finish Carpentry contractors 0 0 0 4.42 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
238390....................... Other building finishing 0 0 0 4.42 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
contractors.
238910....................... Site Preparation............ 3,579 3,579 13,406 4.56 561 26 414 0.07 1.62
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................... 149,403 149,403 617,328 ......... .......... ........ ....... ........ .......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................... 186,977 166,064 803,843 ......... .......... ........ ....... 0.08 1.69
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: ORA.
U.S. Census Bureau data.
Country Business Patterns, 2006; Statistics of U.S. Businesses 2006.
Internal Revenue Service, Source Book, profit rates over 2000-2006.
2. A Succinct Statement of the Need for, and Objectives of, the Rule
The primary objective of the proposed standard is to provide an
increased degree of occupational safety for employees performing
construction work involving cranes/derricks. As stated above, an
estimated 157 injuries and 21 fatalities would be prevented annually
through compliance with this standard. Another objective of the
rulemaking is to provide employers and employees updated and more
complete safety standards for construction work involving cranes/
derricks.
The legal basis for the rule is the Occupational Safety and Health
(OSH) Act of 1970. The OSH Act authorizes and obligates the Secretary
of Labor to promulgate mandatory occupational safety and health
standards as necessary ``to assure so far as possible every working man
and woman in the Nation safe and healthful working conditions and to
preserve our human resources.'' 29 U.S.C. 651(b).
3. Summary of the Significant Issues Raised by the Public Comments in
Response to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, a Summary of
the Assessment of the Agency of Such Issues, and a Statement of Any
Changes Made in the Proposed Rule as a Result of Such Comments
On August 18, 2006, OSHA convened a Small Business Advocacy Review
Panel (the Panel) for this rulemaking in accordance with the provisions
of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub.
L. 104-121), as codified at 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. The Panel consisted of
representatives of OSHA, the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs in the Office of Management and Budget, and of the Office of
Advocacy within the U.S. Small Business Administration. The Panel
received oral and written comments on a draft proposal and a draft
economic analysis from small entities (businesses) that would
potentially be affected by the rule. The Panel, in turn, prepared a
written report which was delivered to the Assistant Secretary for
Occupational Safety and Health (which can be found in the docket for
this rulemaking). The report summarized the comments received from the
small entities, and included recommendations from the Panel to OSHA
regarding the proposal and the associated analysis of compliance costs.
OSHA sought comment on a variety of issues of particular interest to
small businesses as a result of the recommendations of the SBREFA
Panel. Table B-16 below summarizes the responses to these Panel
recommendations.
Table B-16--Response to SBREFA Panel Recommendations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SBREFA panel recommendation OSHA response
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Panel recommends that OSHA provide OSHA has developed a full
full documentation for how it preliminary economic analysis
estimated the number of affected small (PEA) for the proposal which
entities and all other calculations explains all assumptions used
and estimates provided in the PIRFA. in estimating the costs and
benefits of the proposed
standard. The Final Economic
Analysis (FEA) also explains
the changes made to the
analysis as a result of
comments on the proposed rule,
and OSHA's responses to these
comments.
The Panel recommends that OSHA OSHA included homebuilding
reexamine its estimate of crane use in industries in the ``Own but Do
home building, the coverage of crane Not Rent ``and ``Crane
trucks used for loading and unloading, Lessees'' industrial profile
and the estimates of the number of categories.
jobs per crane. Changes in these OSHA has also made a number of
estimates should be incorporated into additions to the industrial
the estimates of costs and economic profile to cover firms in
impacts. general industry that
sometimes use cranes for
construction work, and has
added costs for these sectors.
The Panel recommends that OSHA review OSHA sought comments on the
its estimates for the direct costs of estimates and methodology. As
operator certification and seek a result of these comments,
comment on these cost estimates. OSHA has increased its
estimate of the unit costs of
certification.
[[Page 48122]]
The Panel recommends that OSHA OSHA sought public comment on
carefully examine certain types of all aspects (including
impact that could result from an economic impacts, wages,
operator certification requirement, number of operators, demand,
including reports of substantial etc.) of the operator
increases in the wages of operators; certification requirements,
the possibility of increased market specifically as it pertains to
power for firms renting out cranes; the State of California.
and loss of jobs for existing OSHA has included 2 hours of
operators due to language, literacy, travel time per operator into
or knowledge problems; and seek the unit costs for operator
comment on these types of impacts. The certification.
Panel also recommends studying the OSHA also increased the unit
impacts of the implementation of costs of operator
operator certification in CA. certification as a result of
comments. However, based on
comments, OSHA also reduced
the OSHA percentage of crane
operators still needing
certification.
The Agency reviewed data on
wage rates for operators in
California immediately before
and after operator
certification was required
(Employment Development
Department, Labor Market
Information Division, State of
California, 2007). The data
did not show much change in
operators' wages.
OSHA also evaluated the changes
in crane related fatality
rates in California and found
these had significantly
declined after the California
certification requirements
were put into place.
The Panel recommends that OSHA OSHA sought comment on the
reexamine its estimates for the amount methodology used to calculate
of time required to assess ground all of the costs in the PEA,
conditions, the number of persons which includes the costs for
involved in the assessment, and the assessing ground conditions.
amount of coordination involved; As a result of these comments,
clarify the extent to which such OSHA has added costs for
assessments are currently being examination of ground
conducted and what OSHA estimates as conditions. This addition of
new costs for this rule represent; and costs does not change OSHA's
seek comments on OSHA's cost estimates. conclusion that this standard
is economically feasible.
The Panel recommends that OSHA The Agency describes the
carefully review the documentation documentation requirements,
requirements of the standard, along with cost estimates, in
including documentation that employers the section of this preamble
may consider it prudent to maintain; entitled ``OMB Review Under
estimate the costs of such the Paperwork Reduction Act of
requirements; seek ways of minimizing 1995.''
these costs consistent with the goals
of the OSH Act; and solicit comment on
these costs and ways of minimizing
these costs.
The Panel recommends that OSHA examine As explained in the discussion
whether the inspection requirements of of Sec. 1926.1412,
the proposed rule require procedures Inspections, OSHA's former
not normally conducted currently, such standard at former Sec.
as lowering and fully extending the 1926.550 required inspections
boom before the crane can be used, and each time the equipment is
removing non-hinged inspection plates used, as well as thorough
during the shift inspection, estimate annual inspections. In
the costs of any such requirements, addition, national consensus
and seek comment on these issues. standards that are
incorporated by reference
include additional inspection
requirements. This final
standard would list the
inspection requirements in one
place rather than rely on
incorporated consensus
standards. This final standard
does not impose significant
new requirements for
inspections. OSHA received
comments on the issue of
lowering and fully extending
the boom before the crane can
be used. However, OSHA
concludes that the comments
were based on a general
misunderstanding of the
requirements. Section
1926.1413(a) explicitly says
that booming down is not
required for shift (and
therefore monthly)
inspections.
Similarly, OSHA stated in the
proposed preamble (73 FR
59770, Oct. 9, 2008) that it
does not believe inspection of
any of those items would
require removal of non-hinged
inspection plates. In the
discussion of proposed Sec.
1926.1412, OSHA requested
public comment on this point.
OSHA finalized Sec.
1926.1412 as proposed because
comments did not confirm that
non-hinged plates needed to be
removed to meet the
requirements of a shift
inspection.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider Previous subpart N, at former
the costs of meeting the requirements Sec. 1926.550(a)(2),
for original load charts and full required load charts; this is
manuals, and solicit comments on such not a new cost. Subpart N did
costs. not require manuals. OSHA
concludes that most crane
owners and operators have and
maintain crane manuals, which
contain the load charts and
other critical technical
information about crane
operations and maintenance.
The Agency determined that the
cost of obtaining a copy of a
manual should be modest and
solicited comment on how many
owners or operators do not
have full manuals for their
cranes or derricks. Few
commenters saw this as a major
problem.
The Panel recommends that OSHA provide The Agency placed additional
full documentation for its analysis of materials in the rulemaking
the benefits the proposed rule are docket to aid in the
expected to produce and assure that reproduction of the benefits
the benefits analysis is reproducible analysis. The Agency also
by others. developed a full benefits
analysis (sec. 4 of the FEA)
which includes the methodology
and data sources for the
calculations.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider In the discussion of proposed
and solicit public comment on whether Sec. 1926.1400(c)(8), OSHA
the scope language should be clarified requested public comment on
to explicitly state whether forklifts this issue.
that are modified to perform tasks
similar to equipment (cranes and
derricks) modified in that manner
would be covered.
[[Page 48123]]
The Panel recommends that there be a OSHA explained in the
full explanation in the preamble of discussion of proposed Sec.
how responsibility for ensuring 1926.1402(e) how the various
adequate ground conditions is shared employers, including the
between the controlling entity, and controlling entity, the
the employer of the individual employer whose employees
supervising assembly/disassembly and/ operate the equipment, and the
or the operator. employer of the A/D director
share responsibility for
ensuring adequate ground
conditions. OSHA did not
receive any significant
comments on this issue and,
therefore, considers this
matter resolved.
The Panel recommends that OSHA restate OSHA addressed this
the applicable corrective action recommendation in the
provisions (which are set forth in the discussion of proposed Sec.
shift inspection) in the monthly 1926.1412(e) and requested
inspection section. public comment on the issue.
Based on these comments, OSHA
concludes that the
requirements were clear as
proposed, and repeating the
provisions will create
confusion. Therefore, OSHA did
not restate the corrective
actions in Sec.
1926.1412(e).
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit OSHA addressed this
public comment on whether, and under recommendation in the
what circumstances, booming down discussion of proposed Sec.
should be specifically excluded as a 1926.1412(d) and requested
part of the shift inspection, and public comment on the issues
whether the removal of non-hinged raised in the recommendation.
inspection plates should be required
during the shift inspection.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit OSHA solicited comments on this
public comment on whether to include issue, but the Agency did not
an exception for transportation receive any significant
systems in proposed Sec. comments supporting an
1926.1412(a), which requires an exception for transportation
inspection of equipment that has had systems. Based on the analysis
modifications or additions that affect of comments received about
its safe operation, and, if so, what Sec. 1926.1412(a), OSHA
the appropriate terminology for such concludes that the inspections
an exception would be. of modifications as required
by the final rule are
sufficient to ensure that safe
equipment is used. Therefore,
OSHA did include the
recommended exclusion in the
final rule.
The Panel recommends that OSHA explain In the explanation of Sec.
in the preamble that the shift 1926.1412(d)(1) of the
inspection does not need to be proposed rule, OSHA explained
completed prior to each shift but may that the shift inspection may
be completed during the shift. be completed during the shift.
OSHA finalized Sec.
1926.1412(d)(1) as proposed
because the comments did not
demonstrate how it was safer
to deviate from the rule as
proposed.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit OSHA requested public comment
public comment about whether it is on this issue and revised the
necessary to clarify the requirement regulatory text of Sec.
of proposed Sec. 1926.1412(d)(1)(xi) 1926.1412(d)(1)(xi) to provide
that the equipment be inspected for more clarity, in response to
``level position.'' the comments the Agency
received.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit There is no requirement to
comment on whether proposed Sec. check the pressure ``at each
1926.1412(f)(2)(xii)(D) should be and every line.'' The
changed to require that pressure be provision simply states that
inspected ``at the end of the line,'' relief valves should be
as distinguished from ``at each and checked for failure to reach
every line,'' and if so, what the best correct pressure. If this can
terminology would be to meet this be done at one point for the
purpose. (An SER indicated that entire system, then that would
proposed Sec. satisfy the requirement.
1926.1412(f)(2)(xiv)(D) should be
modified to ``checking pressure
setting,'' in part to avoid having to
check the pressure at ``each and every
line'' as opposed to ``at the end of
the line.'')
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit Section 1926.1412(f)(2)(xx) of
public comment on whether proposed the final rule does not
Sec. 1926.1412(f)(2)(xx) should be require the corrective action
deleted because an SER believes that to which the SER refers. If an
it is not always appropriate to retain inspection under Sec.
originally-equipped steps and ladders, 1926.1412(f) reveals a
such as in instances where they are deficiency, a qualified person
replaced with ``attaching dollies.'' must determine whether that
deficiency is a safety hazard
requiring immediate
correction. If the inspection
reveals that original
equipment, such as stairs and
ladders, have been replaced
with something equally safe,
there would be no safety
hazard and no requirement for
corrective action.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit In the discussion of proposed
public comment on the extent of Sec. 1926.1412(f)(7), OSHA
documentation of monthly and annual/ requested public comment on
comprehensive inspections the rule this issue. OSHA finalized
should require. Sec. 1926.1412(f)(7) as
proposed because the comments
did not demonstrate a need to
modify the extent of required
documentation.
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit In the discussion of proposed
public comment on whether the Sec. 1926.1412(e), OSHA
provision for monthly inspections requested public comment on
should, like the provision for annual this issue. In response to
inspections, specify who must keep the these comments, OSHA has
documentation associated with monthly explained in the final
inspections. preamble that the employer who
performs the inspection must
maintain documentation. If
another employer wants to rely
on this inspection, but cannot
ensure completion and
documentation of the
inspection, then that employer
must conduct a monthly
inspection.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
ways to account for the possibility recommendation in the
that there may sometimes be an discussion of proposed Sec.
extended delay in obtaining the part 1926.1416(d), and requested
number for an operational aid for public comment on the issue.
older equipment and solicit public The Agency did not receive any
comment on the extent to which this is significant comments.
a problem.
The Panel recommends that the provision Except for a minor change to
on fall protection (proposed Sec. Sec. 1926.1423(h), which was
1926.1423) be finalized as written and made for clarity purposes,
that OSHA explain in the preamble how OSHA has finalized Sec.
and why the Committee arrived at this 1926.1423 as proposed. OSHA
provision. explained the Committee's
rationale in the proposed
preamble discussion of Sec.
1926.1423.
[[Page 48124]]
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed these
the potential advantages of and recommendations in the
solicit public comment on adding discussion of proposed Sec.
provisions to proposed Sec. 1926.1427, and requested
1926.1427 that would allow an operator public comment on the issues
to be certified on a particular model raised by the Panel. Based on
of crane; allow tests to be these comments, OSHA is not
administered by an accredited permitting certification on a
educational institution; and allow particular crane model because
employers to use manuals that have the body of knowledge and
been re-written to accommodate the skills required to be
literacy level and English proficiency qualified/certified on a
of operators. particular model of crane is
not less than that needed to
be qualified/certified for
that model's type and
capacity. OSHA is not allowing
an institution accredited by
the Department of Education
(DOE) to certify crane
operators solely on the basis
of DOE accreditation; such
institutions would, like other
operator-certification
entities used to fulfill
Option (1), be accredited by a
``nationally recognized''
accrediting body. Finally,
OSHA is permitting employers
to re-write manuals to
accommodate the literacy level
and English proficiency of
operators.
The Panel recommends that OSHA clarify In the discussion of proposed
in the preamble how the proposed rule Sec. 1926.1427(h), OSHA
addresses an SER's concern that his proposed to allow the oral
crane operator would not be able to administration of tests if two
pass a written qualification/ prerequisites are met. None of
certification exam because the the comments explained why the
operator has difficulty in taking rule as proposed was not
written exams. effective for evaluating the
knowledge of the candidate.
The Panel recommends soliciting public OSHA received public comments
comment on whether the phrase on this issue. In the final
``equipment capacity and type'' in preamble discussion of Sec.
proposed Sec. 1926.1427(b)(1)(ii)(B) 1926.1427(b)(1)(ii)(B), OSHA
needs clarification, suggestions on explains that the Agency added
how to accomplish this, and whether a definition of ``type'' in
the categories represented in Figures response to public comment.
1 through 10 contained in ANSI B30.5- The Agency also references
2000 (i.e., commercial truck-mounted ANSI crane categories to
crane--telescoping boom; commercial illustrate the meaning of
truck-mounted crane--non-telescoping ``type'' in this standard.
boom; crawler crane; crawler crane--
telescoping boom; locomotive crane;
wheel-mounted crane (multiple control
station); wheel-mounted crane--
telescoping boom (multiple control
station); wheel-mounted crane (single
control station); wheel-mounted crane--
telescoping boom (single control
station)) should be used.
The Panel recommends that OSHA ask for OSHA addressed this
public comment on whether the rule recommendation in the
needs to state more clearly that Sec. discussion of proposed Sec.
1926.1427(j)(1)(i) requires more 1926.1430(c), and explained
limited training for operators of that Sec. 1926.1427(j)(1)'s
smaller capacity equipment used in requirement for operator
less complex operations as compared training in ``the information
with operators of higher capacity, necessary for safe operation
more complex equipment used in more of the specific type of
complex situations. equipment the individual will
operate'' addressed the SERs'
concern. However, the Agency
sought public comment on this
issue. OSHA finalized Sec.
1926.1427(j)(1) as proposed
because the comments failed to
explain how the hazards
related to the operation of
smaller equipment differed
from larger equipment. OSHA
then concluded that the
comments also were not
persuasive as to why operators
of smaller capacity equipment
should be allowed limited
training.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
and ask for public comment on whether recommendation in the
a more limited training program would discussion of proposed Sec.
be appropriate for operations based on 1926.1430(c) requested public
the capacity and type of equipment and comment on the issue. The
nature of operations. comments failed to explain how
the hazards related to smaller
equipment were any different
from larger equipment. OSHA
then concluded that the
comments also were not
persuasive as to why operators
of smaller capacity equipment
should be allowed limited
training.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
and ask for public comment as to recommendation in the
whether the supervisor responsible for discussion of proposed Sec.
oversight for an operator in the pre- 1926.1430(c). and requested
qualification period (Sec. public comment on the issue.
1926.1427(f)) should have additional In the proposed preamble, OSHA
training beyond that required in the C- stated that, where a
DAC document at Sec. supervisor is not a certified
1926.1427(f)(2)(iii)(B). operator, ``he/she must be
certified on the written
portion of the test and be
familiar with the proper use
of the equipment's controls;
the supervisor is not required
to have passed a practical
operating test.'' OSHA
finalized this requirement
without substantive change in
Sec. 1926.1427(f)(3)(ii) as
proposed because none of the
comments demonstrated a need
to require additional training
for this qualified individual.
The Panel recommends OSHA solicit In the discussion of proposed
comment on whether there are qualified Sec. 1926.1437(n)(2), OSHA
persons in the field with the requested public comment on
necessary expertise to assess how the this issue. Based on these
rated capacity for land cranes and comments, OSHA has concluded
derricks used on barges and other that there are qualified
flotation devices needs to be modified persons with dual expertise,
as required by proposed Sec. and that the requirement in
1926.1437(n)(2). Sec. 1926.1437(n)(2) is
necessary for safety when
equipment is engaged in duty
cycle work.
The Panel also recommends that OSHA
solicit comment on whether it is
necessary, from a safety standpoint,
to apply this provision to cranes used
only for duty cycle work, and if so,
why that is the case, and how ``duty
cycle work'' should be defined.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider In the discussion of proposed
and ask for comment on whether it Sec. 1926.1440(a), OSHA
would be appropriate to exempt from requested public comment on
the rule small sideboom cranes this issue. These comments did
incapable of lifting above the height not provide any specific
of a truck bed and with a capacity of reason for exempting these
not more than 6,000 pounds. small sideboom cranes and,
therefore, OSHA has not
provided a small capacity
sideboom crane exemption from
this standard.
[[Page 48125]]
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit The length and
public comment on how the proposed comprehensiveness of the
rule could be simplified (without standard is an issue for this
creating ambiguities) and made easier rulemaking. In the proposed
to understand. (Several SERs believed preamble Introduction, OSHA
that the C-DAC document was so long requested public comment on
and complex that small businesses this issue; however, the
would have difficulty understanding it Agency did not receive any
and complying with it.) comments objecting to the
length or clarity of the
overall rule or offer any
suggestions as to how it could
be simplified.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA will consider developing
outlining the inspection requirements such an aid as a separate
in spreadsheet form in an Appendix or guidance document.
developing some other means to help
employers understand what inspections
are needed and when they must be done.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider Some SERs requested
whether use of the words ``determine'' clarification as to when
and ``demonstrate'' would mandate that documentation was required,
the employer keep records of such believing that the document
determinations and if records would be implicitly requires
required to make such demonstrations. documentation when it states
that the employer must
``determine'' or
``demonstrate'' certain
actions or conditions. OSHA
notes that it cannot cite an
employer for failing to have
documentation not explicitly
required by a standard. See
also the discussion under
proposed Sec. 1926.1402(e).
The Panel recommends soliciting public In the discussion of proposed
comment on whether the word ``days'' Sec. 1926.1416(d), OSHA
as used in Sec. Sec. 1926.1416(d) requested public comment on
and 1926.1416(e) should be clarified this issue. As a clarification
to mean calendar days or business days. in response to the comments
received, OSHA determines that
the term ``days'' refers to
calendar days.
The Panel recommends that OSHA OSHA proposed a scope section,
carefully discuss what is included and Sec. 1926.1400, and
excluded from the scope of this discussed in detail the types
standard. of machinery proposed to be
included and excluded under
this standard. OSHA received
public comments on this
proposed scope, analyzed the
comments, and provided more
discussion of the scope
section in the final preamble.
The Panel recommends that OSHA gather OSHA obtained and evaluated a
data and analyze the effects of study by the Construction
already existing certification Safety Association of Ontario
requirements. showing that Ontario's
certification requirement led
to a substantial decrease in
crane-related fatalities
there. OSHA also examined both
economic data of crane
operator wage rates before and
after the certification
requirements, and fatality
rates before and after the
certification requirements.
This data shows that costs
disruptions were minimal, and
that crane fatalities were
significantly reduced as a
result of the California
certification standard.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider In the discussion of proposed
excluding and soliciting comment on Sec. 1926.1400(c), OSHA
whether equipment used solely to requested public comment on
deliver materials to a construction this issue. Based on the
site by placing/stacking the materials analysis of the comments
on the ground should be explicitly received, OSHA recognized an
excluded from the proposed standard's exclusion for delivery
scope. materials that should exclude
most true deliveries, while
avoiding creating a loophole
to the standard that would
allow materials-delivery firms
to engage in extensive
construction activities
The Panel recommends that OSHA should The information and opinions
consider the information and range of submitted by the SERs are part
opinions that were presented by the of the record for this
SERs on the issue of operator rulemaking, and OSHA
qualification/certification when considered them along with the
analyzing the public comments on this other public comments on the
issue. proposed rule.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
and solicit public comment on recommendation in the
expanding the levels of certification discussion of proposed Sec.
so as to allow an operator to be 1926.1427, and requested
certified on a specific brand's model public comment on the issue.
of crane. Based on these comments, OSHA
is not permitting
certification on a particular
crane model because the body
of knowledge and skills
required to be qualified/
certified on a particular
model of crane is not less
than that needed to be
qualified/certified for that
model's type and capacity.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
and solicit public comment on recommendation in the
expanding the levels of operator discussion of proposed Sec.
qualification/certification to allow 1926.1427(j)(1), and requested
an operator to be certified for a public comment on this issue.
specific, limited type of Though several commenters were
circumstance. Such a circumstance in favor of this option, they
would be defined by a set of did not explain how these
parameters that, taken together, would lifts could objectively be
describe an operation characterized by distinguished from lifts
simplicity and relatively low risk. generally. Several other
The Agency should consider and solicit commenters indicated that the
comment on whether such parameters types of hazards present and
could be identified in a way that the knowledge needed to
would result in a clear, easily address those hazards,
understood provision that could be remained the same, regardless
effectively enforced. of the capacity of the crane
involved or the ``routine''
nature of the lift (see
discussion of Sec.
1926.1427(a)). Based on these
comments, the Agency has not
promulgated such a provision.
The Panel recommends that OSHA consider OSHA addressed this
and solicit public comment on allowing recommendation in the
the written and practical tests discussion of proposed Sec.
described in Option (1) to be 1926.1427(b)(3), and requested
administered by an accredited public comment on the issue.
educational institution. Several comments were
submitted in favor of allowing
this option; however, they did
not establish that Department
of Education (DOE)
accreditation would guarantee
the same efficacy in
certification as accreditation
as a personnel certification
entity.
The hearing testimony of Dr.
Roy Swift explained the
difference in the types of
accreditation and the reasons
why DOE accreditation would
not adequately address
operator certification issues.
Therefore, OSHA has finalized
this provision as it was
proposed.
[[Page 48126]]
The Panel recommends that OSHA solicit In the discussion of proposed
public comment on making it clear Sec. 1926.1427(h)(1), OSHA
that: (1) An employer is permitted to requested public comment on
equip its cranes with manuals re- this issue. Based on the
written in a way that would allow an analysis of the comments
operator with a low literacy level to received, OSHA concludes that
understand the material (such as these manuals may not be re-
substituting some text with pictures written as recommended because
and illustrations), and (2) making it it could cause information
clear that, when the cranes are important for safety to be
equipped with such re-written manuals omitted.
and materials, the ``manuals'' and
``materials'' referred to in these
literacy provisions would be the re-
written manuals.
The Panel recommends that OSHA explain OSHA will issue a Small
in a Small Business Compliance Guide Business Compliance Guide
that the certification/qualification after the final rule is
test does not need to be administered issued, and will explain these
in English but can be administered in points in the Guide.
a language that the candidate can
read; and that while the employee
would also need to have a sufficient
level of literacy to read and
understand the relevant information in
the equipment manual, that requirement
would be satisfied if the material is
written in a language that the
employee can read and understand.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to these issues brought up by the SBREFA panel, SBA's
office of Advocacy provided a set of recommendations for OSHA to
consider. (ID-0147.) These recommendations and OSHA's responses to them
are summarized as follows:
1. ``OSHA should consider eliminating the requirement for third-
party certification of crane operators--at least for some small cranes
or routine lifts.'' OSHA carefully examined this requirement. As noted
in the benefits sections, broadly speaking, such a requirement resulted
in major reductions in crane fatalities in both Ontario and California.
Further, as discussed in the preamble sections, there is no easy way,
beyond that already allowed, to eliminate third-party certification.
2. ``OSHA should exempt equipment used solely to deliver materials
to a construction site by placing or staking the materials on the
ground.'' OSHA has clearly exempted such activities from the scope of
the final standard.
3. ``OSHA should clarify the meaning of `construction'.'' As noted
above, OSHA has added material designed to aid in this distinction.
However, the definition of construction is not an issue in this
rulemaking, but is instead an issue for all construction rules.
4. ``OSHA should further limit the `controlling entity' provisions
in the proposed rule.'' Advocacy was concerned that small businesses
may not be onsite, or may not have suitable expertise to meet the
requirements for controlling entities. However, the fact remains that
only the controlling entity can do what this section of the standard
requires: (1) Transfer any information they know of to the crane
operator; and (2) authorize action that will change ground conditions
to assure they are suitable for crane operations. The controlling
entity could, of course, authorize the crane operator to alter site
conditions as they wished to assure adequate safety--but it is the
controlling entity and not the crane operator that inevitably has
responsibility for site conditions.
5. ``OSHA should not mandate that employers follow manufacturers'
recommendations.'' Advocacy's concern here was that manufacturers may
unduly limit crane operations out of liability concerns. However, only
the manufacturers know the limitations of the cranes they produce. As a
result, OSHA has retained these provisions. If Advocacy had provided
examples of clearly unnecessary provisions in manuals, their argument
might have been more convincing. In the absence of even a single
example, there seems no reason to reject this provision or provide
costs for it.
6. ``OSHA should consider and document any `significant
alternatives' to the proposed rule.'' Advocacy was concerned that some
possible alternatives were not fully analyzed ``because OSHA had
committed to publishing the draft rule developed by C-DAC as the
proposed rule, [and did not give] full consideration [to] significant
alternatives that would specifically reduce the burden on small
businesses have not been documented in the proposed rule.'' OSHA
believes that reliance on the work of C-DAC was and remains,
appropriate. The two largest sources of costs in the rule are operator
certification and rules covering operations close to power lines. The
experience of Ontario and California shows that operator certification
can make a major difference to crane fatalities. Additional work done
for this final rule shows that construction crane fatalities also occur
in general industry sectors where construction work is performed. As a
result, and as more fully discussed in the scope and operator
certification sections of this preamble, OSHA continues to believe that
operator certification for cranes doing construction work is necessary
to prevent crane-related deaths and injury. OSHA also believes that the
power line rules developed through the expertise of C-DAC remain
necessary to address the largest single source of crane-related
construction fatalities--fatalities due to power line contact.
4. A Description of and an Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to
Which the Rule Will Apply
OSHA completed an analysis of the economic impacts associated with
this final rule, including an analysis of the type and number of small
entities to which the rule would apply, as described above. To
determine the number of small entities potentially affected by this
rulemaking, OSHA used the definitions of small entities developed by
the Small Business Administration (SBA) for each industry.
For the construction industry generally, SBA defines small
businesses using revenue-based criteria. For most of the affected
construction industries, including those industries that are mostly
comprised of general contractors, firms with annual revenues of less
than $31 million are classified as small businesses. For specialty
contractors, such as structural-steel erection contractors, firms with
annual revenues of less than $13 million are considered to be small
businesses. Based on the definitions of small entities developed by SBA
for each industry, the final rule is estimated to potentially affect a
total of 204,000 small entities, as shown in Tables B-13 and B-14.
Included in this number are an estimated 187,000
[[Page 48127]]
entities with fewer than 20 employees (Table B-15).
5. A Description of the Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other
Compliance Requirements of the Rule, Including an Estimate of the
Classes of Small Entities Which Will Be Subject to the Requirement and
the Type of Professional Skills Necessary for Preparation of the Report
or Record
The final rule addresses the work practices used, as well as other
requirements, for performing construction work involving cranes/
derricks. Employers are required to keep specified records associated
with inspections and operator certification/qualification.
Other compliance requirements in the standard include the assembly
and disassembly requirements, encroachment-prevention precautions when
working near power lines, and ground condition and power line
assessments.
The preamble to the standard provides a comprehensive description
of the standard's requirements. The final economic analysis located in
the preamble provides a description of the types of business entities
subject to these requirements, and the types of professional skills
necessary to comply with the requirements.
Regulatory Alternatives
The Agency considered alternatives to the many provisions in the
proposed standard, and these are presented and discussed in the Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis below, as well as throughout the
Preamble. Crane operator certification was one of the main issues in
the rulemaking, and the Agency concludes that provisions for
certification offer the most prominent way to consider both a more
stringent standard (requiring certification of inspectors, riggers, and
signal persons in addition to crane operators) as well as less
stringent option of dropping the requirement of crane operator
certification altogether.
The Agency has estimated the additional annualized costs for crane
operator certification to be about $51 million annually--about one-
third of the estimated total costs of the final standard. Dropping this
requirement would reduce costs and impacts by that amount, roughly.
Without a Federal regulatory requirement, the level of operator
certification would be uncertain. A substantial percentage of operators
have already been certified. The Agency is convinced that certification
significantly improves the safe practices of crane operators, and that
increased protection has been the experience in several venues where
certification has been required. Liability insurers have reduced the
premium rates on employers who use certified operators. Some states and
cities also currently require crane operators to be certified. It is
likely that crane services in construction work would be divided into
two separate worlds without a Federal regulatory requirement: One with
certified operators, perhaps slightly more expensive but safer, and one
where operators are not certified but employers still have a
requirement to adequately train them. As it is difficult to predict
what the relative size of the market would be, it is not possible to
predict or estimate what the effect would be in terms of future crane
safety. The Agency did have substantial evidence in the record that
operator certification, although costly, sharply reduces crane
accidents, and did not adopt this alternative of dropping the operator
certification requirement.
Several commenters in the rulemaking recommended that riggers,
crane inspectors, and signal persons also be certified. The final
standard requires riggers who perform tasks such as assembly/
disassembly be qualified, as defined in the construction standards'
definitions. The annualized cost of certifying a crane operator is
about $400 (spread over 5 years, 7 percent discount rate). The Agency
estimates that certifying a rigger would cost much less, about $100 per
year; a signal person, on average, $50 per year; and inspectors as much
as a crane operator. The Agency estimates that there needs to be, at
most, on average, one certified rigger per crane; one signal person for
every 3 cranes; and about 1,000 certified inspectors to conduct annual
inspections of all the estimated 123,000 construction cranes. The
Agency estimates that certification will annually cost about $100 for a
rigger, $50 for a signal person, and $400 for an inspector (as much as
a for a crane operator). The Agency estimates the total annual cost of
certifying will be $14.5 million ($12.3 million for riggers, $2 million
for signal persons, and $0.4 million for inspectors). The cost of crane
inspection is likely to increase since many employers will no longer be
able to have an employee perform an inspection, but the Agency is not
estimating that increased cost.
Riggers are injured and killed more frequently than workers in any
other occupation during construction crane activities. They are injured
when cranes tip over or booms fall, by falling loads, by electrical
shock from power line contact, and through falls. The Negotiated
Rulemaking Committee focused on the safety of the crane itself
(capacity or loading limits, for example), crane movement or
operations, assembly/disassembly, and power line risk rather than risks
faced by riggers and signal persons who work with them. The Agency
concludes that more training and certification for riggers could
provide greater safety for them, but information in IMIS did not permit
a separate analysis of the role of riggers in crane safety. No
commenter who advocated certification for riggers provided more than a
qualitative assertion that increased crane safety would result. There
was similarly no information in the record that inspection failures had
resulted in accidents, save for one accident in New York City that
resulted from an inadequate repair to a tower crane part. The Agency
did not have enough information in the record to recommend or support
this alternative of requiring certification for riggers, signal
persons, or inspectors.
C. OMB Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The final Cranes and Derricks Standard contains collection of
information requirements (paperwork) that are subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). In accordance with the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA-95) (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)), the proposed regulation solicited comments on the
information collection included in the proposal. The Department also
submitted an information collection request (ICR), titled ``Cranes and
Derricks in Construction (29 CFR part 1926 subpart CC),'' to OMB for
review in accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) on the date the proposed
regulation was published. On January 8, 2009, OMB informed the
Department of Labor to use OMB control number 1218-0261 in future
submissions involving this rulemaking. OMB also commented, ``This OMB
action is not an approval to conduct or sponsor an information
collection under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.''
OSHA received no public comments that addressed specifically the
paperwork burden analysis of the information collections. A number of
comments, described earlier in this preamble, contained information
relevant to the costs and burden hours attendant to the non-paperwork
provisions of the proposal, which OSHA considered when it developed the
revised burden analysis for the ICR associated with this final rule.
[[Page 48128]]
Prior to publishing this final rulemaking, the Department of Labor
submitted the Cranes and Derricks ICR to OMB for OMB approval. OSHA
will publish a separate notice in the Federal Register that will
announce the results of that review and include any applicable OMB
control number. That notice also will include a summary of the
information collection requirements and burdens imposed by the new
standard. A copy of the ICR is available as an exhibit at http://www.regulations.gov. The Department of Labor notes that a Federal
agency cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it
is approved by OMB under the PRA, and displays a currently valid OMB
control number. Also, notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
employer shall be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a
collection of information if the collection of information does not
display a currently valid OMB control number.
The final Cranes and Derricks standard imposes new information-
collection requirements for purposes of PRA-95. These provisions are
necessary to protect the health and safety of employees who work with
equipment at construction worksites. The paperwork requirements impose
on employers a duty to produce and maintain records when they implement
controls and take other measures to protect workers from hazards
related to cranes and derricks used in construction. For example, each
construction business that has workers who operate or are in the
vicinity of cranes and derricks must have, as applicable, the following
documents on file and available at the job site: Equipment ratings,
employee training records, written authorizations from qualified
individuals, and qualification program audits. During an inspection,
OSHA must have access to these records to determine compliance under
conditions specified by the final standard. An employer's failure to
generate and disclose the information required by this standard will
have a substantial affect on the Agency's effort to control and reduce
injuries and fatalities related to the use of cranes and derricks in
construction.
D. Federalism
The Agency reviewed this final rule according to the most recent
Executive Order (``E.O.'') on Federalism (E.O. 13132, 64 FR 43225, Aug.
10, 1994). This E.O. requires that Federal agencies, to the extent
possible, refrain from limiting State or local policy options, consult
with States before taking actions that restrict State or local policy
options, and take such actions only when clear constitutional authority
exists, and the problem is national in scope. The E.O. allows Federal
agencies to preempt State and local law only with the expressed consent
of Congress. In such cases, Federal agencies must limit preemption of
State and local law to the extent possible.
Under section 18 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
(``OSH Act''; 29 U.S.C. 667), Congress expressly provides that States
may adopt, with Federal approval, a plan for the development and
enforcement of occupational safety and health standards; States that
obtain Federal approval for such a plan are referred to as ``State-Plan
States.'' (29 U.S.C. 667.) Occupational safety and health standards
developed by State-Plan States must be at least as effective in
providing safe and healthful employment and places of employment as the
Federal standards. Subject to these requirements, State-Plan States are
free to develop and enforce under State law their own requirements for
occupational safety and health standards.
OSHA has authority under E.O. 13132 to promulgate the final rule in
29 CFR part 1926 because the employee exposures related to cranes and
derricks used in construction addressed by the requirements of the
final standard are national in scope. The Agency concludes that the
requirements in this final rule will provide employers in every State
with critical information to use when protecting their employees from
the hazards presented when working with cranes and derricks.
A number of commenters were concerned with the preemptive effect of
the final rule in jurisdictions not covered by an approved State plan.
Representatives of New York City urged OSHA to make clear that the new
standard will not preempt the City's ordinances governing the erection,
dismantling, and operation of cranes, including crane operator
licensing requirements, that protect the public in general. (ID-0342; -
0404.1.) \142\ The Allied Building Metal Industries Association, on the
other hand, stated that preemption of local crane laws is not only
preferable, but is mandated by the OSH Act. (ID-0344.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\142\ The City of Chicago Department of Buildings submitted a
late comment expressing the same concerns as those of New York City.
(ID-0348.1.) The concerns expressed by Chicago are mainly the same
as those of New York, and are addressed in the discussion of the New
York laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OSH Act does not contain an express preemption provision.\143\
However, in accordance with ordinary conflict preemption principles,
preemption may be implied where the State law conflicts with Federal
law or is an impediment to full accomplishment of the Federal purpose.
Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Ass'n, 505 U.S. 88, 100
(1992). The determination whether, under Gade, a State or local law is
impliedly preempted by a Federal occupational safety or health standard
involves a detailed examination of the specific provisions and purposes
of the law. The Secretary previously examined New York City's crane
ordinances and concluded that they were not preempted by the prior
crane standard. OSHA has placed the Secretary's amicus brief in Steel
Institute of New York v. The City of New York, No. 09-CV-6539 (CM)
(JCF) on the record. (ID-0419.1.) This brief presents the agency's
interpretation of the preemptive effect of the prior rule on New York
City's crane ordinances. For the same reasons set forth in the amicus
brief--which are summarized below--New York City's crane ordinances are
not preempted by this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\143\ The proposed rule incorrectly stated that sec. 18 of the
Act expressly provides OSHA with authority to preempt State
occupational safety and health standards to the extent that the
Agency promulgates a permanent Federal standard (73 FR 59913, Oct.
9, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Steel Institute case, the Secretary concluded that the OSH
Act does not preempt municipal building codes like New York City's
crane ordinances, which are designed to protect the public and
neighboring structures from the hazards of cranes and do not conflict
with OSHA standards. In Gade, a plurality read the provisions of sec.
18 of the Act to preempt supplementary State laws that are not part of
an approved State plan. 505 U.S. at 100-108. However, sec. 18 refers to
states, not localities, and does not evince a clear intention to
preempt local building codes. The Gade decision did not address local
building codes, and the plurality's rationale for concluding that State
laws may be preempted does not apply with equal measure to municipal
building codes. The plurality relied chiefly on the availability of
sec. 18's State plan mechanism for states that wish to supplement
Federal requirements, and Congress's intent to encourage states to
assume full responsibility for safety and health through the State plan
process. (ID-0419.1.) Cities and localities, however, have no authority
under the Act to submit a State plan. Only a State
[[Page 48129]]
itself may submit a plan and that plan must apply throughout the State.
(ID-0419.1.) There was no majority consensus in Gade as to the
preemptive effect of an OSHA standard on supplementary laws not
addressed by sec. 18.
A variety of factors support the view that building codes are not
the type of laws Congress intended to preempt in enacting sec. 18.
There is legislative history supporting this conclusion. Representative
Steiger, a primary sponsor of the Act, indicated that the Act would not
be preemptive in the event of an overlap between an OSHA standard and a
local building code. (ID-0419.1.) The Secretary has interpreted the Act
as not preempting laws such as building codes and OSHA rulemaking has
long proceeded on the assumption that local building codes exist in
parallel to OSHA regulations and are not preempted by them. For
example, in the preamble to the final rule on Exit Routes, Emergency
Action Plans, and Fire Prevention Plans, OSHA commended the
effectiveness of building codes while declining to recognize compliance
with building codes as compliance with the OSHA standard (67 FR 67950,
67954, Nov. 7, 2002). Strong policy considerations bolster this
understanding. Work practices and conditions pose a variety of serious
hazards to the public, and local jurisdictions have enacted a network
of industrial codes, such as building and electrical codes, that touch
on issues for which there are OSHA standards. If New York City's crane
ordinances are preempted because of their incidental impact on worker
safety, building and electrical codes, and many other types of local
regulation will also be in jeopardy. The text and history of the Act
give no indication that Congress intended such a sweeping preemptive
effect. (ID-0419.1.)
A separate reason for concluding that New York City's crane laws
are not preempted is that they are laws of general applicability. The
Gade plurality stated that laws of general applicability, such as
traffic or fire safety laws, that regulate the conduct of workers and
nonworkers as members of the general public would not be preempted
regardless of their substantial effect on worker safety. 505 U.S. at
107.
The New York City crane ordinances are not designed to protect
workers as a class; they regulate crane operations only to the extent
they pose a hazard to the public. The effect of the ordinances is to
protect a group far larger than employees on a construction site.
Cranes operate in some of the most densely populated areas of the city.
(ID-0404.1; -0342.) This density makes it generally impossible to
locate a crane or derrick so that it will not operate over or adjacent
to crowded streets, sidewalks and occupied buildings. Id. For the same
reason, mobile cranes, which can have booms hundreds of feet in length,
must park on and operate from, the street. Id. On any given day, more
than 300 cranes, including 30-40 tower cranes, operate in New York
City.\144\ Id. A recent study concluded that a tower crane operating in
NYC poses a risk to 12 to 15 surrounding buildings, several streets,
and 1,000-1,500 people. Id. A crane accident on March 15, 2008 killed a
woman in a brownstone one block away, destroyed eighteen buildings and
damaged many more within a several-block radius, and forced hundreds of
people from their homes. Id. Twelve members of the public were injured
in crane accidents between 2006 and 2008. Id. Although compliance with
the City's ordinances will unquestionably protect workers, such
protection is incidental to protection of all persons in the vicinity
regardless of their status as employees or non-employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\144\ This means that tower cranes pose a risk to upwards of
60,000 people on any given day (40 x 1,500 = 60,000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The City's crane laws are analogous to fire and safety laws in that
they comprehensively address a public hazard by imposing obligations on
a wide variety of persons without regard to the existence of an
employment relationship. Many of these duties are imposed on
manufacturers, owners, engineers, designated representatives and others
who need not be employers or employees. By contrast, this final rule,
like the prior crane rule, applies only to construction work as defined
in OSHA regulations, which relates to the performance of physical trade
labor on site and does not generally include engineers, who are the
subject of several of the City's ordinances.
Comparison of the City's crane ordinances to fire safety laws--a
category of laws expressly recognized in Gade as being ``generally
applicable''--further bolsters the argument that the City's laws are
not preempted. 505 U.S. at 107. Fire safety laws impose requirements
that directly and substantially regulate workplace conduct to protect
the public and property from fire. (ID-0419.1.) For example, both the
International Fire Code, on which many local codes are based, and the
New York City Fire Code, contain provisions applicable to specific
workplaces, such as Aviation Facilities and Operations, and
Semiconductor Fabrication Facilities, and specific work operations,
such as Combustible Dust-Producing Operations and Welding and Other Hot
Work. Id. The New York and International Fire Codes also contain
requirements applicable during the construction of buildings, including
requirements for daily disposal of waste and limitations on the use of
portable oxygen containers and internal-combustion-powered equipment at
the construction site. Id. Like the City's crane safety laws, these
work-related fire safety laws include training, certification and
recordkeeping requirements. Id. The fact that New York City's crane
ordinances similarly regulate workplace conduct is therefore fully
consistent with the City ordinances being laws of general
applicability.
Although the interpretation outlined above was developed based on
consideration of the specific provisions of New York City's crane
ordinances, the preemption principles set forth are generally
applicable. The agency does not believe that this final rule preempts
any non-conflicting local or municipal building code designed to
protect the public from the hazards of cranes.
E. State-Plan States
When Federal OSHA promulgates a new standard or more stringent
amendment to an existing standard, the 27 States and U.S. Territories
with their own OSHA-approved occupational safety and health plans
(``State-Plan States'') must amend their standards to reflect the new
standard or amendment, or show OSHA why such action is unnecessary,
e.g., because an existing State standard covering this area is ``at
least as effective'' as the new Federal standard or amendment. 29 CFR
1953.5(a). The State standard must be at least as effective as the
final Federal rule, must be applicable to both the private and public
(State and local government employees) sectors, and must be completed
within six months of the promulgation date of the final Federal rule.
When OSHA promulgates a new standard or amendment that does not impose
additional or more stringent requirements than an existing standard,
State-Plan States are not required to amend their standards, although
the Agency may encourage them to do so. The 27 States and U.S.
Territories with OSHA-approved occupational safety and health plans
are: Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky,
Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina,
Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont,
[[Page 48130]]
Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming; Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey,
New York, and the Virgin Islands have OSHA-approved State Plans that
apply to State and local government employees only.
This final rule results in more stringent requirements for the work
it covers. Therefore, States and Territories with approved State Plans
must adopt comparable amendments to their standards within six months
of the promulgation date of this rule unless they demonstrate that such
amendments are not necessary because their existing standards are at
least as effective in protecting workers as this final rule.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
OSHA reviewed this final rule according to the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (``UMRA''; 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) and Executive
Order 12875 (58 FR 58093, Oct. 28, 1993). As discussed above in section
V.B of this preamble (``Summary of the Final Economic Analysis, and
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis''), the Agency estimates that
compliance with this rule will require private-sector employers to
expend about $154.1 million each year. However, while this rule
establishes a Federal mandate in the private sector, the Agency's
standards do not apply to State, local, or Tribal governments except in
States that have elected voluntarily to adopt a State Plan approved by
the Agency. Consequently, this final rule does not meet the definition
of a ``Federal intergovernmental mandate'' (see sec. 421(5) of the UMRA
(2 U.S.C. 658(5))). However, the rule imposes costs of over $100
million per year on the private sector, and is thus subject to the
requirement under UMRA for review of private sector costs. That
requirement is met in section V.B. of the preamble.
G. Applicability of Existing Consensus Standards
Some of the types of equipment subject to this final standard are
addressed by current national consensus standards in the ASME B30
series, including: ASME B30.5-2004, ``Mobile and Locomotive Cranes'';
ASME B30.6-2003, ``Derricks''; ASME B30.8-2004, ``Floating Cranes and
Floating Derricks''; ASME B30.3-2004, ``Construction Tower Cranes'';
ASME B30.14-2004, ``Side Boom Tractors''; and ASME B30.2-2001,
``Overhead and Gantry Cranes.'' In addition, ASME B30.7-2005, ``Base-
Mounted Drum Hoists,'' addresses a type of equipment that is often a
component of derricks, and ASME B30.23-2005, ``Personnel Lifting
Systems,'' addresses issues that are covered by Sec. 1926.1431,
Hoisting personnel.
The Committee consulted these ASME standards (or the most current
versions available at the time) and other resources in developing its
proposal. In most instances, the ASME standards that the Committee
consulted were entered into the docket, including: ASME B30.5-2000
(OSHA-S030-2006-0663-0334); ASME B30.5a-2002 Addenda (OSHA-S030-2006-
0663-0335); ASME B30.6-2003 (OSHA-S030-2006-0663-0337); ASME B30.17-
2003 (OSHA-S030-2006-0663-0338); ASME B30.3-1996 (OSHA-S030-2006-0663-
0353); and ASME B30.23-1998 (OSHA-S030-2006-0663-0354). When newer
versions of the ASME standards were issued after the Committee finished
its work, OSHA examined the updated standards to determine if the
provisions of the updated standards deviated in a significant way from
provisions on which the Committee relied. OSHA entered the updated
standards into the record of this rulemaking. For the most part, OSHA
did not find significant deviations between the updated versions and
the versions reviewed by the Committee. In the few instances in which
deviations occurred, OSHA identified those deviations and asked for
public comment on any issues raised.
As discussed in detail in the Summary and Explanation of the
standard, a number of provisions in this final rule contain concepts
that are similar to the concepts underlying the various ASME standards.
However, the Committee determined that, in most instances, the wording
of the provisions in these ASME standards needed revision to improve
the enforceability, clarity, and ease of use.
For some issues, the ASME standards do not address issues covered
by this final rule, or the Committee determined that a different
approach was necessary. For example, in the provisions on inspections
(Sec. Sec. 1926.1412 and 1926.1413), the Committee concluded that
shift, monthly, and annual inspection intervals are most appropriate,
in contrast to the ASME approach, which uses ``frequent'' and
``periodic'' intervals. In the provisions addressing assembly/
disassembly (Sec. Sec. 1926.1403 through 1926.1406) and the
encroachment-prevention provisions for power lines (Sec. Sec.
1926.1407 through 1926.1411), the Committee adopted approaches with no
comparable counterparts in the ASME standards.
In some instances, the Committee determined that it was appropriate
to incorporate ASME standards by reference, in whole or in part. For
example, in Sec. 1926.1433 (Design, construction and testing), the
rule incorporates by reference ANSI B30.5-1968, safety code for
``Crawler, Locomotive, and Truck Cranes,'' PCSA Std. No. 2 (1968), for
crawler, truck and locomotive cranes manufactured prior to the
effective date of this final rule, and incorporates portions of ASME
B30.5a-2004, ``Mobile and Locomotive Cranes,'' for mobile cranes
(including crawler and truck cranes) and locomotive cranes manufactured
on or after the effective date of this final rule.
List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1926
Construction industry, Incorporation by reference, Occupational
safety and health, Safety.
VI. Authority and Signature
David Michaels, PhD, MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20210, directed the preparation
of this notice. The Agency is issuing this final rule under the
following authorities: Sections 4, 6(b), 8(c), and 8(g) of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657);
Section 3704 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40
U.S.C. 3701 et seq.); Section 4 of the Administrative Procedure Act (5
U.S.C. 553); Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2007 (72 FR 31159, Jun.
5, 2007); and 29 CFR part 1911.
Signed at Washington, DC, on July 16, 2010.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
VII. Amendments to Standards
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble of this final rule, the Agency
is amending 29 CFR part 1926 to read as follows:
PART 1926--[AMENDED]
Subpart A--General
0
1. The authority citation for subpart A of 29 CFR part 1926 is retained
as follows:
Authority: Sec. 3704, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards
Act (40 U.S.C. 333); secs. 4, 6, and 8, Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); Secretary of Labor's
Order No. 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48 FR
35736), 6-96 (62 FR 111), or 5-2007 (72 FR 31160) as applicable; and
29 CFR part 1911.
0
2. Section 1926.6 is added to read as follows:
[[Page 48131]]
Sec. 1926.6 Incorporation by reference.
(a) The standards of agencies of the U.S. Government, and
organizations which are not agencies of the U.S. Government which are
incorporated by reference in this part, have the same force and effect
as other standards in this part. Only the mandatory provisions (i.e.,
provisions containing the word ``shall'' or other mandatory language)
of standards incorporated by reference are adopted as standards under
the Occupational Safety and Health Act. The locations where these
standards may be examined are as follows:
(1) Offices of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
U.S. Department of Labor, Frances Perkins Building, Washington, DC
20210.
(2) The Regional and Field Offices of the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, which are listed in the U.S. Government Manual.
(b) The materials listed in paragraphs (g) through (ff) of this
section are incorporated by reference in the corresponding sections
noted as they exist on the date of the approval, and a notice of any
change in these materials will be published in the Federal Register.
These incorporations by reference were approved by the Director of the
Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(c) Copies of standards listed in this section and issued by
private standards organizations are available for purchase from the
issuing organizations at the addresses or through the other contact
information listed below for these private standards organizations. In
addition, these standards are available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of these standards at NARA, telephone: 202-741-6030, or go
to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html. Also, the standards are available for
inspection at any Regional Office of the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), or at the OSHA Docket Office, U.S. Department of
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N-2625, Washington, DC 20210;
telephone: 202-693-2350 (TTY number: 877-889-5627).
(d) [Reserved.]
(e) [Reserved.]
(f) [Reserved.]
(g) The following material is available for purchase from the
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), 1330
Kemper Meadow Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45240; telephone: 513-742-6163;
fax: 513-742-3355; e-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.acgih.org:
(1) Threshold Limit Values of Airborne Contaminants for 1970, 1970,
IBR approved for Sec. 1926.55(a) and Appendix A of Sec. 1926.55.
(h) The following material is available for purchase from the
American National Standards Institute (ANSI), 25 West 43rd Street,
Fourth Floor, New York, NY 10036; telephone: 212-642-4900; fax: 212-
302-1286; e-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.ansi.org/.
(1) ANSI A10.3-1970, Safety Requirements for Explosive-Actuated
Fastening Tools, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.302(e).
(2) ANSI A10.4-1963, Safety Requirements for Workmen's Hoists, IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.552(c).
(3) ANSI A10.5-1969, Safety Requirements for Material Hoists, IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.552(b).
(4) ANSI A11.1-1965 (R1970), Practice for Industrial Lighting, IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.56(b).
(5) ANSI A17.1-1965, Elevators, Dumbwaiters, Escalators, and Moving
Walks, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.552(d).
(6) ANSI A17.1a-1967, Elevators, Dumbwaiters, Escalators, and
Moving Walks Supplement, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.552(d).
(7) ANSI A17.1b-1968, Elevators, Dumbwaiters, Escalators, and
Moving Walks Supplement, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.552(d).
(8) ANSI A17.1c-1969, Elevators, Dumbwaiters, Escalators, and
Moving Walks Supplement, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.552(d).
(9) ANSI A17.1d-1970, Elevators, Dumbwaiters, Escalators, and
Moving Walks Supplement, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.552(d).
(10) ANSI A17.2-1960, Practice for the Inspection of Elevators
(Inspector's Manual), IBR approved for Sec. 1926.552(d).
(11) ANSI A17.2a-1965, Practice for the Inspection of Elevators
(Inspector's Manual) Supplement, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.552(d).
(12) ANSI A17.2b-1967, Practice for the Inspection of Elevators
(Inspector's Manual) Supplement, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.552(d).
(13) ANSI A92.2-1969, Vehicle Mounted Elevating and Rotating Work
Platforms, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 1926.453(a) and 1926.453(b).
(14) ANSI B7.1-1970, Safety Code for the Use, Care, and Protection
of Abrasive Wheels, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 1926.57(g),
1926.303(b), 1926.303(c), and 1926.303(d).
(15) ANSI B20.1-1957, Safety Code for Conveyors, Cableways, and
Related Equipment, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.555(a).
(16) ANSI B56.1-1969, Safety Standards for Powered Industrial
Trucks, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.602(c).
(17) ANSI J6.1-1950 (R1971), Rubber Insulating Line Hose, IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.951(a).
(18) ANSI J6.2-1950 (R1971), Rubber Insulating Hoods, IBR approved
for Sec. 1926.951(a).
(19) ANSI J6.4-1971, Rubber Insulating Blankets, IBR approved for
Sec. 1926.951(a).
(20) ANSI J6.5-1971, Rubber Insulating Sleeves, IBR approved for
Sec. 1926.951(a).
(21) ANSI J6.6-1971, Rubber Insulating Gloves, IBR approved for
Sec. 1926.951(a).
(22) ANSI J6.7-1935 (R1971), Rubber Matting for Use Around Electric
Apparatus, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.951(a).
(23) ANSI O1.1-1961, Safety Code for Woodworking Machinery, IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.304(f).
(24) ANSI Z35.1-1968, Specifications for Accident Prevention Signs,
IBR approved for Sec. 1926.200(i).
(25) ANSI Z35.2-1968, Specifications for Accident Prevention Tags,
IBR approved for Sec. 1926.200(i).
(26) ANSI Z49.1-1967, Safety in Welding and Cutting, IBR approved
for Sec. 1926.350(j).
(27) ANSI Z87.1-1968, Practice for Occupational and Educational Eye
and Face Protection, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.102(a).
(28) ANSI Z89.1-1969, Safety Requirements for Industrial Head
Protection, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.100(b).
(29) ANSI Z89.2-1971, Industrial Protective Helmets for Electrical
Workers, Class B, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 1926.100(c) and
1926.951(a).
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) The following material is available for purchase from the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), ASTM International,
100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA, 19428-2959;
telephone: 610-832-9585; fax: 610-832-9555; e-mail: [email protected];
Web site: http://www.astm.org/:
(1) ASTM A370-1968, Methods and Definitions for Mechanical Testing
and Steel Products, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1001(f).
(2) ASTM B117-1964, 50 Hour Test, IBR approved for Sec.
1926.959(a).
(3) ASTM D56-1969, Standard Method of Test for Flash Point by the
Tag Closed Tester, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.155(i).
(4) ASTM D93-1969, Standard Method of Test for Flash Point by the
[[Page 48132]]
Pensky Martens Closed Tester, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.155(i).
(5) ASTM D323-1958 (R1968), Standard Method of Test for Vapor
Pressure of Petroleum Products (Reid Method), IBR approved for Sec.
1926.155(m).
(k) The following material is available for purchase from the
American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE), 2950
Niles Road, St. Joseph, MI 49085; telephone: 269-429-0300; fax: 269-
429-3852; e-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.asabe.org/:
(1) ASAE R313.1-1971, Soil Cone Penetrometer, reaffirmed 1975, IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.1002(e).
(l) The following material is available for purchase from the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Three Park Avenue, New
York, NY 10016; telephone: 1-800-843-2763; fax: 973-882-1717; e-mail:
[email protected]; Web site: http://www.asme.org/:
(1) ASME B30.2-2005, Overhead and Gantry Cranes (Top Running
Bridge, Single or Multiple Girder, Top Running Trolley Hoist), issued
Dec. 30, 2005 (``ASME B30.2-2005''), IBR approved for Sec.
1926.1438(b).
(2) ASME B30.5-2004, Mobile and Locomotive Cranes, issued Sept. 27,
2004 (``ASME B30.5-2004''), IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 1926.1414(b);
1926.1414(e); 1926.1433(b).
(3) ASME B30.7-2001, Base-Mounted Drum Hoists, issued Jan. 21, 2002
(``ASME B30.7-2001''), IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1436(e).
(4) ASME B30.14-2004, Side Boom Tractors, issued Sept. 20, 2004
(``ASME B30.14-2004''), IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1440(c).
(5) ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, 1968, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 1926.152(i), 1926.306(a), and 1926.603(a).
(6) ASME Power Boilers, Section I, 1968, IBR approved for Sec.
1926.603(a).
(m) The following material is available for purchase from the
American Welding Society (AWS), 550 N.W. LeJeune Road, Miami, Florida
33126; telephone: 1-800-443-9353; Web site: http://www.aws.org/:
(1) AWS D1.1/D1.1M:2002, Structural Welding Code--Steel, 18th ed.,
ANSI approved Aug. 31, 2001 (``AWS D1.1/D1.1M:2002''), IBR approved for
Sec. 1926.1436(c).
(2) ANSI/AWS D14.3-94, Specification for Welding Earthmoving and
Construction Equipment, ANSI approved Jun. 11, 1993 (``ANSI/AWS D14.3-
94''), IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1436(c).
(n) The following material is available for purchase from the
British Standards Institution (BSI), 389 Chiswick High Road, London, W4
4AL, United Kingdom; telephone: +44 20 8996 9001; fax: +44 20 8996
7001; e-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.bsigroup.com/:
(1) BS EN 13000:2004, Cranes--Mobile Cranes, published Jan. 4, 2006
(``BS EN 13000:2004''), IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1433(c).
(2) BS EN 14439:2006, Cranes--Safety--Tower Cranes, published Jan.
31, 2007 (``BS EN 14439:2006''), IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1433(c).
(o) The following material is available for purchase from the
Bureau of Reclamation, United States Department of the Interior, 1849 C
Street, NW., Washington DC 20240; telephone: 202-208-4501; Web site:
http://www.usbr.gov/:
(1) Safety and Health Regulations for Construction, Part II, Sept.
1971, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1000(f).
(p) The following material is available for purchase from the
California Department of Industrial Relations, 455 Golden Gate Avenue,
San Francisco CA 94102; telephone: (415) 703-5070; e-mail:
[email protected]; Web site: http://www.dir.ca.gov/:
(1) Construction Safety Orders, IBR approved for Sec.
1926.1000(f).
(q) [Reserved.]
(r) [Reserved.]
(s) [Reserved.]
(t) [Reserved.]
(u) The following material is available for purchase from the
Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590;
telephone: 202-366-4000; Web site: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/:
(1) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Millennium Edition,
Dec. 2000, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 1926.200(g), 1926.201(a), and
1926.202.
(v) The following material is available for purchase from the
General Services Administration (GSA), 1800 F Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20405; telephone: (202) 501-0800; Web site: http://www.gsa.gov/:
(1) QQ-P-416, Federal Specification Plating Cadmium
(Electrodeposited), IBR approved for Sec. 1926.104(e).
(w) The following material is available for purchase from the
Institute of Makers of Explosives (IME), 1120 19th Street, NW., Suite
310, Washington, DC 20036; telephone: 202-429-9280; fax: 202-429-9280;
e-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.ime.org/:
(1) IME Pub. No. 2, American Table of Distances for Storage of
Explosives, Jun. 5, 1964, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.914(a).
(2) IME Pub. No. 20, Radio Frequency Energy--A Potential Hazard in
the Use of Electric Blasting Caps, Mar. 1968, IBR approved for Sec.
1926.900(k).
(x) The following material is available for purchase from the
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 1, ch. de la
Voie-Creuse, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland;
telephone: +41 22 749 01 11; fax: +41 22 733 34 30; Web site: http://www.iso.org/:
(1) ISO 11660-1:2008(E), Cranes--Access, guards and restraints--
Part 1: General, 2d ed., Feb. 15, 2008 (``ISO 11660-1:2008(E)''), IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.1423(c).
(2) ISO 11660-2:1994(E), Cranes--Access, guards and restraints--
Part 2: Mobile cranes, 1994 (``ISO 11660-2:1994(E)''), IBR approved for
Sec. 1926.1423(c).
(3) ISO 11660-3:2008(E), Cranes--Access, guards and restraints--
Part 3: Tower cranes, 2d ed., Feb. 15, 2008 (``ISO 11660-3:2008(E)''),
IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1423(c).
(y) The following material is available for purchase from the
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), 1 Batterymarch Park,
Quincy, MA 02169; telephone: 617-770-3000; fax: 617-770-0700; Web site:
http://www.nfpa.org/:
(1) NFPA 10A-1970, Maintenance and Use of Portable Fire
Extinguishers, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.150(c).
(2) NFPA 13-1969, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler
Systems, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.152(d).
(3) NFPA 30-1969, The Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code, IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.152(c).
(4) NFPA 80-1970, Standard for Fire Doors and Windows, Class E or F
Openings, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.152(b).
(5) NFPA 251-1969, Standard Methods of Fire Test of Building
Construction and Material, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 1926.152(b) and
1926.155(f).
(6) NFPA 385-1966, Standard for Tank Vehicles for Flammable and
Combustible Liquids, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.152(g).
(z) [Reserved.]
(aa) The following material is available for purchase from the
Power Crane and Shovel Association (PCSA), 6737 W. Washington Street,
Suite 2400, Milwaukee, WI 53214; telephone: 1-800-369-2310; fax: 414-
272-1170; Web site: http://www.aem.org/CBC/ProdSpec/PCSA/:
(1) PCSA Std. No. 1, Mobile Crane and Excavator Standards, 1968,
IBR approved for Sec. 1926.602(b).
(2) PCSA Std. No. 2, Mobile Hydraulic Crane Standards, 1968 (``PCSA
Std. No. 2 (1968)''), IBR approved for
[[Page 48133]]
Sec. Sec. 1926.602(b), 1926.1433(a), and 1926.1501(a).
(3) PCSA Std. No. 3, Mobile Hydraulic Excavator Standards, 1969,
IBR approved for Sec. 1926.602(b).
(bb) [Reserved.]
(cc) [Reserved.]
(dd) The following material is available for purchase from the
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), 400 Commonwealth Drive,
Warrendale, PA 15096; telephone: 1-877-606-7323; fax: 724-776-0790; Web
site: http://www.sae.org/:
(1) SAE 1970 Handbook, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.602(b).
(2) SAE 1971 Handbook, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1001(h).
(3) SAE J166-1971, Trucks and Wagons, IBR approved for Sec.
1926.602(a).
(4) SAE J168-1970, Protective Enclosures--Test Procedures and
Performance Requirements, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1002(a).
(5) SAE J185 (reaf. May 2003), Access Systems for Off-Road
Machines, reaffirmed May 2003 (``SAE J185 (May 1993)''), IBR approved
for Sec. 1926.1423(c).
(6) SAE J236-1971, Self-Propelled Graders, IBR approved for Sec.
1926.602(a).
(7) SAE J237-1971, Front End Loaders and Dozers, IBR approved for
Sec. 126.602(a).
(8) SAE J319b-1971, Self-Propelled Scrapers, IBR approved for Sec.
1926.602(a).
(9) SAE J320a-1971, Minimum Performance Criteria for Roll-Over
Protective Structure for Rubber-Tired, Self-Propelled Scrapers, IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.1001(h).
(10) SAE J321a-1970, Fenders for Pneumatic-Tired Earthmoving
Haulage Equipment, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.602(a).
(11) SAE J333a-1970, Operator Protection for Agricultural and Light
Industrial Tractors, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.602(a).
(11) SAE J386-1969, Seat Belts for Construction Equipment, IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.602(a).
(12) SAE J394-1971, Minimum Performance Criteria for Roll-Over
Protective Structure for Rubber-Tired Front End Loaders and Robber-
Tired Dozers, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1001(h).
(13) SAE J395-1971, Minimum Performance Criteria for Roll-Over
Protective Structure for Crawler Tractors and Crawler-Type Loaders, IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.1001(h).
(14) SAE J396-1971, Minimum Performance Criteria for Roll-Over
Protective Structure for Motor Graders, IBR approved for Sec.
1926.1001(h).
(15) SAE J397-1969, Critical Zone Characteristics and Dimensions
for Operators of Construction and Industrial Machinery, IBR approved
for Sec. 1926.1001(f).
(16) SAE J743a-1964, Tractor Mounted Side Boom, 1964 (``SAE J743a-
1964''), IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1501(a).
(17) SAE J959-1966, Lifting Crane Wire-Rope Strength Factors, 1966
(``SAE J959-1966''), IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1501(a).
(18) SAE J987 (rev. Jun. 2003), Lattice Boom Cranes--Method of
Test, revised Jun. 2003 (``SAE J987 (Jun. 2003)''), IBR approved for
Sec. 1926.1433(c).
(19) SAE J1063 (rev. Nov. 1993), Cantilevered Boom Crane
Structures--Method of Test, revised Nov. 1993 (``SAE J1063 (Nov.
1993)''), IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1433(c).
(ee) The following material is available for purchase from the
United States Army Corps of Engineers, 441 G Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20314; telephone: 202-761-0011; e-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.usace.army.mil/:
(1) EM-385-1-1, General Safety Requirements, Mar. 1967, IBR
approved for Sec. 1926.1000(f).
(ff) The following material is available for purchase from
standards resellers such as the Document Center Inc., 111 Industrial
Road, Suite 9, Belmont, CA 94002; telephone: 650-591-7600; fax: 650-
591-7617; e-mail: center.com">info@document-center.com; Web site: http://www.document-center.com/:
(1) ANSI B15.1-1953 (R1958), Safety Code for Mechanical Power-
Transmission Apparatus, revised 1958, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
1926.300(b)(2) and 1926.1501(a).
(2) ANSI B30.2.0-1967, Safety Code for Overhead and Gantry Cranes,
approved May 4, 1967, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1501(d).
(3) ANSI B30.5-1968, Crawler, Locomotive, and Truck Cranes,
approved Dec. 16, 1968, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 1926.1433(a),
1926.1501(a), and 1926.1501(b).
(4) ANSI B30.6-1969, Safety Code for Derricks, approved Dec. 18,
1967, IBR approved for Sec. 1926.1501(e).
Subpart C--General Safety and Health Provisions
0
3. The authority citation for subpart C of 29 CFR part 1926 is retained
as follows:
Authority: Sec. 3704, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards
Act (40 U.S.C. 333); secs. 4, 6, and 8, Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); Secretary of Labor's
Order No. 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48 FR
35736), 6-96 (62 FR 111), or 5-2007 (72 FR 31160) as applicable; and
29 CFR part 1911.
Sec. 1926.31 [Reserved.]
0
4. Section 1926.31 is removed and reserved.
Subpart L--Scaffolds
0
5. The authority citation for subpart L of 29 CFR part 1926 is revised
to read as follows:
Authority: Section 107, Contract Work Hours and Safety
Standards Act (Construction Safety Act)(40 U.S.C. 333); Secs. 4, 6,
8, Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657); Secretary of Labor's Order Nos. 1-90 (55 FR 9033) and 5-2007
(72 FR 31159); and 29 CFR part 1911.
0
6. Section 1926.450 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1926.450 Scope, application, and definitions applicable to this
subpart.
(a) Scope and application. This subpart applies to all scaffolds
used in workplaces covered by this part. It does not apply to crane or
derrick suspended personnel platforms. The criteria for aerial lifts
are set out exclusively in Sec. 1926.453.
* * * * *
Subpart M--Fall Protection
0
7. The authority citation for subpart M of 29 CFR part 1926 is revised
to read as follows:
Authority: Section 3704 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety
Standards Act (Construction Safety Act) (40 U.S.C. 3701); Sections
4, 6 and 8 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29
U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); Secretary of Labor's Order Nos. 1-90 (55 FR
9033), 6-96 (62 FR 111), 3-2000 (65 FR 50017), and 5-2007 (72 FR
31159); and 29 CFR part 1911.
0
8. Section 1926.500 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2)(ii), adding
paragraph (a)(3)(v), and revising paragraph (a)(4), to read as follows:
Sec. 1926.500 Scope, application, and definitions applicable to this
subpart.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) Requirements relating to fall protection for employees working
on cranes and derricks are provided in subpart CC of this part.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(v) Criteria for steps, handholds, ladders, and grabrails/
guardrails/railings required by subpart CC are provided in subpart CC.
Sections 1926.502(a), (c) through (e), and (i) apply to activities
covered under subpart CC unless otherwise stated in subpart CC. No
other paragraphs of Sec. 1926.502 apply to subpart CC.
* * * * *
[[Page 48134]]
(4) Section 1926.503 sets forth requirements for training in the
installation and use of fall protection systems, except in relation to
steel erection activities and the use of equipment covered by subpart
CC.
Subpart DD--Cranes and Derricks Used in Demolition and Underground
Construction
0
9. New subpart DD, consisting of Sec. 1926.1500 is added to read as
follows:
Subpart DD--Cranes and Derricks Used in Demolition and Underground
Construction
Authority: Section 3704 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety
Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3701); Sections 4, 6, and 8 of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657); Secretary of Labor's Order Nos. 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41
FR 25059), or 9-83 (49 FR 35736), and 5-2007 (72 FR 31159).
Sec. 1926.1500 Scope.
This subpart applies only to employers engaged in demolition work
covered by Sec. 1926.856 and Sec. 1926.858, and underground
construction work covered by Sec. 1926.800. This subpart applies in
lieu of Sec. 1926 subpart CC.
Subpart N--Cranes, Derricks, Hoists, Elevators, and Conveyors
0
10. The authority citation for subpart N of 29 CFR part 1926 is revised
to read as follows:
Authority: Section 3704 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety
Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3701); Sections 4, 6, and 8 of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657); Secretary of Labor's Order Nos. 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41
FR 25059), or 9-83 (49 FR 35736), and 5-2007 (72 FR 31159).
0
11. The heading to subpart N of 29 CFR part 1926 is revised to read as
follows:
Subpart N--Helicopters, Hoists, Elevators, and Conveyors
* * * * *
Sec. 1926.550 [Redesignated as Sec. 1926.1501]
0
12. Section 1926.550 is redesignated as Sec. 1926.1501 in subpart DD.
Sec. 1926.550 [Reserved]
0
13. Section 1926.550 is reserved.
0
14. Section 1926.553 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1926.553 Base-mounted drum hoists.
* * * * *
(c) This section does not apply to base-mounted drum hoists used in
conjunction with derricks. Base-mounted drum hoists used in conjunction
with derricks must conform to Sec. 1926.1436(e).
Subpart O--Motorized Vehicles, Mechanical Equipment, and Marine
Operations
0
15. The authority citation for subpart O of 29 CFR part 1926 is revised
to read as follows:
Authority: Section 107, Construction Work Hours and Safety
Standards Act (Construction Safety Act) (40 U.S.C. 333); Secs. 4, 6,
8, Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657); Secretary of Labor's Order No. 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR
25059), 9-83 (48 FR 35736), 1-90 (55 FR 9033), 6-96 (62 FR 111), or
5-2007 (72 FR 31159), as applicable. Section 1926.602 also issued
under 29 CFR part 1911.
0
16. Section 1926.600 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(6) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1926.600 Equipment.
(a) General Requirements. * * *
(6) All equipment covered by this subpart shall comply with the
following requirements when working or being moved in the vicinity of
power lines or energized transmitters, except where electrical
distribution and transmission lines have been deenergized and visibly
grounded at point of work or where insulating barriers, not a part of
or an attachment to the equipment or machinery, have been erected to
prevent physical contact with the lines:
(i) For lines rated 50 kV or below, minimum clearance between the
lines and any part of the crane or load shall be 10 feet;
(ii) For lines rated over 50 kV, minimum clearance between the
lines and any part of the crane or load shall be 10 feet plus 0.4 inch
for each 1 kV over 50 kV, or twice the length of the line insulator,
but never less than 10 feet;
(iii) In transit with no load and boom lowered, the equipment
clearance shall be a minimum of 4 feet for voltages less than 50 kV,
and 10 feet for voltages over 50 kV, up to and including 345 kV, and 16
feet for voltages up to and including 750 kV;
(iv) A person shall be designated to observe clearance of the
equipment and give timely warning for all operations where it is
difficult for the operator to maintain the desired clearance by visual
means;
(v) Cage-type boom guards, insulating links, or proximity warning
devices may be used on cranes, but the use of such devices shall not
alter the requirements of any other regulation of this part even if
such device is required by law or regulation;
(vi) Any overhead wire shall be considered to be an energized line
unless and until the person owning such line or the electrical utility
authorities indicate that it is not an energized line and it has been
visibly grounded;
(vii) Prior to work near transmitter towers where an electrical
charge can be induced in the equipment or materials being handled, the
transmitter shall be de-energized or tests shall be made to determine
if electrical charge is induced on the crane. The following precautions
shall be taken when necessary to dissipate induced voltages:
(A) The equipment shall be provided with an electrical ground
directly to the upper rotating structure supporting the boom; and
(B) Ground jumper cables shall be attached to materials being
handled by boom equipment when electrical charge is induced while
working near energized transmitters. Crews shall be provided with
nonconductive poles having large alligator clips or other similar
protection to attach the ground cable to the load.
(C) Combustible and flammable materials shall be removed from the
immediate area prior to operations.
Subpart R--Steel Erection
0
17. The authority citation for subpart R of 29 CFR part 1926 is revised
to read as follows:
Authority: Section 3704 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety
Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3701); Sections 4, 6, and 8 of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657); Secretary of Labor's Order Nos. 3-2000 (65 FR 50017), 5-2002
(67 FR 65008), and 5-2007 (72 FR 31159); and 29 CFR part 1911.
0
18. Section 1926.753 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (c)(4)
to read as follows:
Sec. 1926.753 Hoisting and rigging.
(a) All the provisions of subpart CC apply to hoisting and rigging
with the exception of Sec. 1926.1431(a).
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) Cranes or derricks may be used to hoist employees on a
personnel platform when work under this subpart is being conducted,
provided that all provisions of Sec. 1926.1431 (except for Sec.
1926.1431(a)) are met.
* * * * *
[[Page 48135]]
Subpart S--Underground Construction, Caissons, Cofferdams, and
Compressed Air
0
19. The authority citation for subpart S of 29 CFR part 1926 is revised
to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 107, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards
Act (40 U.S.C. 333); secs. 4, 6, and 8 of the Occupational Safety
and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); Secretary of
Labor's Orders 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48 FR
35736), 1-90 (55 FR 9033), 6-96 (62 FR 111), or 5-2007 (72 FR 31159)
as applicable.
0
20. Section 1926.800 is amended by revising paragraph (t) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1926.800 Underground construction.
* * * * *
(t) Hoisting unique to underground construction. Employers must
comply with Sec. 1926.1501(g) of Sec. 1926 subpart DD. Except as
modified by this paragraph (t), the following provisions of subpart N
of this part apply: Requirements for material hoists are found in
Sec. Sec. 1926.552(a) and (b) of this part. Requirements for personnel
hoists are found in the personnel hoists requirements of Sec. Sec.
1926.552(a) and (c) of this part and in the elevator requirement of
Sec. Sec. 1926.552(a) and (d) of this part.
* * * * *
Subpart T--Demolition
0
21. The authority citation for subpart S of 29 CFR part 1926 is revised
to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 107, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards
Act (40 U.S.C. 333); secs. 4, 6, and 8 of the Occupational Safety
and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); Secretary of
Labor's Orders 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48 FR
35736), 1-90 (55 FR 9033), 6-96 (62 FR 111), or 5-2007 (72 FR 31159)
as applicable.
0
22. Section 1926.856 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1926.856 Removal of walls, floors, and material with equipment.
* * * * *
(c) Mechanical equipment used shall meet the requirements specified
in subparts N and O and Sec. 1926.1501 of Sec. 1926 subpart DD.
0
23. Section 1926.858 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1926.858 Removal of walls, floors, and material with equipment.
* * * * *
(b) Cranes, derricks, and other hoisting equipment used shall meet
the requirements specified in Sec. 1926.1501 of Sec. 1926 subpart DD.
Subpart V--Power Transmission and Distribution
0
24. The authority citation for subpart V of part 1926 is revised to
read as follows:
Authority: Section 3704 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety
Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3701); Secs. 4, 6, and 8 of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657); Secretary of Labor's Order Nos. 12-71 (36 FR 8754); 8-76 (41
FR 25059); 9-83 (48 FR 35736, 1-90 (55 FR 9033), and 5-2007 (72 FR
31159). Section 1926.951 also issued under 29 CFR part 1911.
0
25. Section 1926.952 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1926.952 Mechanical equipment.
* * * * *
(c) Cranes and other lifting equipment.
(1) All equipment shall comply with subparts CC and O of this part,
as applicable.
(2) Digger derricks used for augering holes for poles carrying
electric lines, placing and removing poles, or for handling associated
materials to be installed or removed from the poles must comply with 29
CFR 1910.269.
(3) With the exception of equipment certified for work on the
proper voltage, mechanical equipment shall not be operated closer to
any energized line or equipment than the clearances set forth in Sec.
1926.950(c) unless, in addition to the requirements in Sec. 1926.1410:
(i) The mechanical equipment is insulated, or
(ii) The mechanical equipment is considered as energized.
Note to paragraph (c)(3): In accordance with 29 CFR
1926.1400(g), compliance with 29 CFR 1910.269(p) will be deemed
compliance with Sec. Sec. 1926.1407 through 1926.1411, including
Sec. 1926.1410.
Subpart X--Stairways and Ladders
0
26. The authority citation for subpart X of 29 CFR part 1926 is amended
by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Authority: Section 107, Contract Work Hours and Safety
Standards Act (Construction Safety Act](40 U.S.C. 333); Secs. 4, 6,
8, Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657); Secretary of Labor's Order Nos. 1-90 (55 FR 9033), 5-2007 (72
FR 31159); and 29 CFR part 1911.
0
27. Section 1926.1050 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1926.1050 Scope, application, and definitions applicable to this
subpart.
(a) Scope and application. This subpart applies to all stairways
and ladders used in construction, alteration, repair (including
painting and decorating), and demolition workplaces covered under 29
CFR part 1926, and also sets forth, in specified circumstances, when
ladders and stairways are required to be provided. Additional
requirements for ladders used on or with scaffolds are contained in
subpart L--Scaffolds. This subpart does not apply to integral
components of equipment covered by subpart CC. Subpart CC exclusively
sets forth the circumstances when ladders and stairways must be
provided on equipment covered by subpart CC.
* * * * *
Appendix A to Part 1926--Designations for General Industry Standards
Incorporated into Body of Construction Standards
0
28. Appendix A to part 1926 is amended by removing the row containing
``1926.550(a)(19)'' and ``1910.184(c)(9)'' from the table ``1926
DESIGNATIONS FOR APPLICABLE 1910 STANDARDS.''
Subparts AA and BB--[Reserved]
0
29. Subparts AA and BB are reserved and subpart CC is added to read as
follows:
Subpart CC--Cranes and Derricks in Construction
Sec.
1926.1400 Scope.
1926.1401 Definitions.
1926.1402 Ground conditions.
1926.1403 Assembly/Disassembly--selection of manufacturer or
employer procedures.
1926.1404 Assembly/Disassembly--general requirements (applies to all
assembly and disassembly operations).
1926.1405 Disassembly--additional requirements for dismantling of
booms and jibs (applies to both the use of manufacturer procedures
and employer procedures).
1926.1406 Assembly/Disassembly--employer procedures--general
requirements.
1926.1407 Power line safety (up to 350 kV)--assembly and
disassembly.
1926.1408 Power line safety (up to 350 kV)--equipment operations.
1926.1409 Power line safety (over 350 kV).
1926.1410 Power line safety (all voltages)--equipment operations
closer than the Table A zone.
1926.1411 Power line safety--while traveling.
1926.1412 Inspections.
1926.1413 Wire rope--inspection.
1926.1414 Wire rope--selection and installation criteria.
1926.1415 Safety devices.
1926.1416 Operational aids.
1926.1417 Operation.
1926.1418 Authority to stop operation.
1926.1419 Signals--general requirements.
[[Page 48136]]
1926.1420 Signals--radio, telephone or other electronic transmission
of signals.
1926.1421 Signals--voice signals--additional requirements.
1926.1422 Signals--hand signal chart.
1926.1423 Fall protection.
1926.1424 Work area control.
1926.1425 Keeping clear of the load.
1926.1426 Free fall and controlled load lowering.
1926.1427 Operator qualification and certification.
1926.1428 Signal person qualifications.
1926.1429 Qualifications of maintenance & repair employees.
1926.1430 Training.
1926.1431 Hoisting personnel.
1926.1432 Multiple-crane/derrick lifts--supplemental requirements.
1926.1433 Design, construction and testing.
1926.1434 Equipment modifications.
1926.1435 Tower cranes.
1926.1436 Derricks.
1926.1437 Floating cranes/derricks and land cranes/derricks on
barges.
1926.1438 Overhead & gantry cranes.
1926.1439 Dedicated pile drivers.
1926.1440 Sideboom cranes.
1926.1441 Equipment with a rated hoisting/lifting capacity of 2,000
pounds or less.
1926.1442 Severability.
Appendix A to Subpart CC of part 1926--Standard Hand Signals
Appendix B to Subpart CC of part 1926--Assembly/Disassembly--Sample
Procedures for Minimizing the Risk of Unintended Dangerous Boom
Movement
Appendix C to Subpart CC of part 1926--Operator Certification--
Written Examination--Technical Knowledge Criteria
Subpart CC--Cranes and Derricks in Construction
Authority: Section 3704 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety
Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3701); sections 4, 6, and 8 of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657); Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2007 (72 FR 31159); and 29
CFR part 1911.
Sec. 1926.1400 Scope.
(a) This standard applies to power-operated equipment, when used in
construction, that can hoist, lower and horizontally move a suspended
load. Such equipment includes, but is not limited to: Articulating
cranes (such as knuckle-boom cranes); crawler cranes; floating cranes;
cranes on barges; locomotive cranes; mobile cranes (such as wheel-
mounted, rough-terrain, all-terrain, commercial truck-mounted, and boom
truck cranes); multi-purpose machines when configured to hoist and
lower (by means of a winch or hook) and horizontally move a suspended
load; industrial cranes (such as carry-deck cranes); dedicated pile
drivers; service/mechanic trucks with a hoisting device; a crane on a
monorail; tower cranes (such as a fixed jib, i.e., ``hammerhead
boom''), luffing boom and self-erecting); pedestal cranes; portal
cranes; overhead and gantry cranes; straddle cranes; sideboom cranes;
derricks; and variations of such equipment. However, items listed in
paragraph (c) of this section are excluded from the scope of this
standard.
(b) Attachments. This standard applies to equipment included in
paragraph (a) of this section when used with attachments. Such
attachments, whether crane-attached or suspended include, but are not
limited to: Hooks, magnets, grapples, clamshell buckets, orange peel
buckets, concrete buckets, drag lines, personnel platforms, augers or
drills and pile driving equipment.
(c) Exclusions. This subpart does not cover:
(1) Machinery included in paragraph (a) of this section while it
has been converted or adapted for a non-hoisting/lifting use. Such
conversions/adaptations include, but are not limited to, power shovels,
excavators and concrete pumps.
(2) Power shovels, excavators, wheel loaders, backhoes, loader
backhoes, track loaders. This machinery is also excluded when used with
chains, slings or other rigging to lift suspended loads.
(3) Automotive wreckers and tow trucks when used to clear wrecks
and haul vehicles.
(4) Digger derricks when used for augering holes for poles carrying
electric and telecommunication lines, placing and removing the poles,
and for handling associated materials to be installed on or removed
from the poles. Digger derricks used in work subject to 29 CFR part
1926, subpart V, must comply with 29 CFR 1910.269. Digger derricks used
in construction work for telecommunication service (as defined at 29
CFR 1910.268(s)(40)) must comply with 29 CFR 1910.268.
(5) Machinery originally designed as vehicle-mounted aerial devices
(for lifting personnel) and self-propelled elevating work platforms.
(6) Telescopic/hydraulic gantry systems.
(7) Stacker cranes.
(8) Powered industrial trucks (forklifts), except when configured
to hoist and lower (by means of a winch or hook) and horizontally move
a suspended load.
(9) Mechanic's truck with a hoisting device when used in activities
related to equipment maintenance and repair.
(10) Machinery that hoists by using a come-a-long or chainfall.
(11) Dedicated drilling rigs.
(12) Gin poles when used for the erection of communication towers.
(13) Tree trimming and tree removal work.
(14) Anchor handling or dredge-related operations with a vessel or
barge using an affixed A-frame.
(15) Roustabouts.
(16) Helicopter cranes.
(17) Material Delivery
(i) Articulating/knuckle-boom truck cranes that deliver material to
a construction site when used to transfer materials from the truck
crane to the ground, without arranging the materials in a particular
sequence for hoisting.
(ii) Articulating/knuckle-boom truck cranes that deliver material
to a construction site when the crane is used to transfer building
supply sheet goods or building supply packaged materials from the truck
crane onto a structure, using a fork/cradle at the end of the boom, but
only when the truck crane is equipped with a properly functioning
automatic overload prevention device. Such sheet goods or packaged
materials include, but are not limited to: Sheets of sheet rock, sheets
of plywood, bags of cement, sheets or packages of roofing shingles, and
rolls of roofing felt.
(iii) This exclusion does not apply when:
(A) The articulating/knuckle-boom crane is used to hold, support or
stabilize the material to facilitate a construction activity, such as
holding material in place while it is attached to the structure;
(B) The material being handled by the articulating/knuckle-boom
crane is a prefabricated component. Such prefabricated components
include, but are not limited to: Precast concrete members or panels,
roof trusses (wooden, cold-formed metal, steel, or other material),
prefabricated building sections such as, but not limited to: Floor
panels, wall panels, roof panels, roof structures, or similar items;
(C) The material being handled by the crane is a structural steel
member (for example, steel joists, beams, columns, steel decking
(bundled or unbundled) or a component of a systems-engineered metal
building (as defined in 29 CFR 1926 subpart R).
(D) The activity is not specifically excluded under Sec.
1400(c)(17)(i) and (ii).
(d) All sections of this subpart CC apply to the equipment covered
by this standard unless specified otherwise.
(e) The duties of controlling entities under this subpart include,
but are not limited to, the duties specified in Sec. 1926.1402(c),
Sec. 1926.1402(e) and Sec. 1926.1424(b).
(f) Where provisions of this standard direct an operator,
crewmember, or other employee to take certain actions, the employer
must establish, effectively
[[Page 48137]]
communicate to the relevant persons, and enforce, work rules to ensure
compliance with such provisions.
(g) For work covered by subpart V of this part, compliance with 29
CFR Sec. 1910.269(p) is deemed compliance with Sec. Sec. 1926.1407
through 1926.1411.
(h) Section 1926.1402 does not apply to cranes designed for use on
railroad tracks, when used on railroad tracks that are part of the
general railroad system of transportation that is regulated pursuant to
the Federal Railroad Administration under 49 CFR part 213, and that
comply with applicable Federal Railroad Administration requirements.
See Sec. 1926.1402(f).
Sec. 1926.1401 Definitions.
A/D director (Assembly/Disassembly director) means an individual
who meets this subpart's requirements for an A/D director, irrespective
of the person's formal job title or whether the person is non-
management or management personnel.
Articulating crane means a crane whose boom consists of a series of
folding, pin connected structural members, typically manipulated to
extend or retract by power from hydraulic cylinders.
Assembly/Disassembly means the assembly and/or disassembly of
equipment covered under this standard. With regard to tower cranes,
``erecting and climbing'' replaces the term ``assembly,'' and
``dismantling'' replaces the term ``disassembly.'' Regardless of
whether the crane is initially erected to its full height or is climbed
in stages, the process of increasing the height of the crane is an
erection process.
Assist crane means a crane used to assist in assembling or
disassembling a crane.
Attachments means any device that expands the range of tasks that
can be done by the equipment. Examples include, but are not limited to:
An auger, drill, magnet, pile-driver, and boom-attached personnel
platform.
Audible signal means a signal made by a distinct sound or series of
sounds. Examples include, but are not limited to, sounds made by a
bell, horn, or whistle.
Blocking (also referred to as ``cribbing'') is wood or other
material used to support equipment or a component and distribute loads
to the ground. It is typically used to support lattice boom sections
during assembly/disassembly and under outrigger and stabilizer floats.
Boatswain's chair means a single-point adjustable suspension
scaffold consisting of a seat or sling (which may be incorporated into
a full body harness) designed to support one employee in a sitting
position.
Bogie means ``travel bogie,'' which is defined below.
Boom (equipment other than tower crane) means an inclined spar,
strut, or other long structural member which supports the upper
hoisting tackle on a crane or derrick. Typically, the length and
vertical angle of the boom can be varied to achieve increased height or
height and reach when lifting loads. Booms can usually be grouped into
general categories of hydraulically extendible, cantilevered type,
latticed section, cable supported type or articulating type.
Boom (tower cranes): On tower cranes, if the ``boom'' (i.e.,
principal horizontal structure) is fixed, it is referred to as a jib;
if it is moveable up and down, it is referred to as a boom.
Boom angle indicator means a device which measures the angle of the
boom relative to horizontal.
Boom hoist limiting device includes boom hoist disengaging device,
boom hoist shut-off, boom hoist disconnect, boom hoist hydraulic
relief, boom hoist kick-outs, automatic boom stop device, or derricking
limiter. This type of device disengages boom hoist power when the boom
reaches a predetermined operating angle. It also sets brakes or closes
valves to prevent the boom from lowering after power is disengaged.
Boom length indicator indicates the length of the permanent part of
the boom (such as ruled markings on the boom) or, as in some
computerized systems, the length of the boom with extensions/
attachments.
Boom stop includes boom stops, (belly straps with struts/standoff),
telescoping boom stops, attachment boom stops, and backstops. These
devices restrict the boom from moving above a certain maximum angle and
toppling over backward.
Boom suspension system means a system of pendants, running ropes,
sheaves, and other hardware which supports the boom tip and controls
the boom angle.
Builder means the builder/constructor of equipment.
Center of gravity: The center of gravity of any object is the point
in the object around which its weight is evenly distributed. If you
could put a support under that point, you could balance the object on
the support.
Certified welder means a welder who meets nationally recognized
certification requirements applicable to the task being performed.
Climbing means the process in which a tower crane is raised to a
new working height, either by adding additional tower sections to the
top of the crane (top climbing), or by a system in which the entire
crane is raised inside the structure (inside climbing).
Come-a-long means a mechanical device typically consisting of a
chain or cable attached at each end that is used to facilitate movement
of materials through leverage.
Competent person means one who is capable of identifying existing
and predictable hazards in the surroundings or working conditions which
are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees, and who has
authorization to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them.
Controlled load lowering means lowering a load by means of a
mechanical hoist drum device that allows a hoisted load to be lowered
with maximum control using the gear train or hydraulic components of
the hoist mechanism. Controlled load lowering requires the use of the
hoist drive motor, rather than the load hoist brake, to lower the load.
Controlling entity means an employer that is a prime contractor,
general contractor, construction manager or any other legal entity
which has the overall responsibility for the construction of the
project--its planning, quality and completion.
Counterweight means a weight used to supplement the weight of
equipment in providing stability for lifting loads by counterbalancing
those loads.
Crane/derrick includes all equipment covered by this subpart.
Crawler crane means equipment that has a type of base mounting
which incorporates a continuous belt of sprocket driven track.
Crossover points means locations on a wire rope which is spooled on
a drum where one layer of rope climbs up on and crosses over the
previous layer. This takes place at each flange of the drum as the rope
is spooled onto the drum, reaches the flange, and begins to wrap back
in the opposite direction.
Dedicated channel means a line of communication assigned by the
employer who controls the communication system to only one signal
person and crane/derrick or to a coordinated group of cranes/derricks/
signal person(s).
Dedicated pile-driver is a machine that is designed to function
exclusively as a pile-driver. These machines typically have the ability
to both hoist the material that will be pile-driven and to pile-drive
that material.
Dedicated spotter (power lines): To be considered a dedicated
spotter, the requirements of Sec. 1926.1428 (Signal person
qualifications) must be met and
[[Page 48138]]
his/her sole responsibility is to watch the separation between the
power line and the equipment, load line and load (including rigging and
lifting accessories), and ensure through communication with the
operator that the applicable minimum approach distance is not breached.
Directly under the load means a part or all of an employee is
directly beneath the load.
Dismantling includes partial dismantling (such as dismantling to
shorten a boom or substitute a different component).
Drum rotation indicator means a device on a crane or hoist which
indicates in which direction and at what relative speed a particular
hoist drum is turning.
Electrical contact occurs when a person, object, or equipment makes
contact or comes in close proximity with an energized conductor or
equipment that allows the passage of current.
Employer-made equipment means floating cranes/derricks designed and
built by an employer for the employer's own use.
Encroachment is where any part of the crane, load line or load
(including rigging and lifting accessories) breaches a minimum
clearance distance that this subpart requires to be maintained from a
power line.
Equipment means equipment covered by this subpart.
Equipment criteria means instructions, recommendations, limitations
and specifications.
Fall protection equipment means guardrail systems, safety net
systems, personal fall arrest systems, positioning device systems or
fall restraint systems.
Fall restraint system means a fall protection system that prevents
the user from falling any distance. The system is comprised of either a
body belt or body harness, along with an anchorage, connectors and
other necessary equipment. The other components typically include a
lanyard, and may also include a lifeline and other devices.
Fall zone means the area (including but not limited to the area
directly beneath the load) in which it is reasonably foreseeable that
partially or completely suspended materials could fall in the event of
an accident.
Flange points are points of contact between rope and drum flange
where the rope changes layers.
Floating cranes/derricks means equipment designed by the
manufacturer (or employer) for marine use by permanent attachment to a
barge, pontoons, vessel or other means of flotation.
For example means ``one example, although there are others.''
Free fall (of the load line) means that only the brake is used to
regulate the descent of the load line (the drive mechanism is not used
to drive the load down faster or retard its lowering).
Free surface effect is the uncontrolled transverse movement of
liquids in compartments which reduce a vessel's transverse stability.
Hoist means a mechanical device for lifting and lowering loads by
winding a line onto or off a drum.
Hoisting is the act of raising, lowering or otherwise moving a load
in the air with equipment covered by this standard. As used in this
standard, ``hoisting'' can be done by means other than wire rope/hoist
drum equipment.
Include/including means ``including, but not limited to.''
Insulating link/device means an insulating device listed, labeled,
or accepted by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory in accordance
with 29 CFR 1910.7.
Jib stop (also referred to as a jib backstop), is the same type of
device as a boom stop but is for a fixed or luffing jib.
Land crane/derrick is equipment not originally designed by the
manufacturer for marine use by permanent attachment to barges,
pontoons, vessels, or other means of floatation.
List means the angle of inclination about the longitudinal axis of
a barge, pontoons, vessel or other means of floatation.
Load refers to the object(s) being hoisted and/or the weight of the
object(s); both uses refer to the object(s) and the load-attaching
equipment, such as, the load block, ropes, slings, shackles, and any
other ancillary attachment.
Load moment (or rated capacity) indicator means a system which aids
the equipment operator by sensing (directly or indirectly) the
overturning moment on the equipment, i.e., load multiplied by radius.
It compares this lifting condition to the equipment's rated capacity,
and indicates to the operator the percentage of capacity at which the
equipment is working. Lights, bells, or buzzers may be incorporated as
a warning of an approaching overload condition.
Load moment (or rated capacity) limiter means a system which aids
the equipment operator by sensing (directly or indirectly) the
overturning moment on the equipment, i.e., load multiplied by radius.
It compares this lifting condition to the equipment's rated capacity,
and when the rated capacity is reached, it shuts off power to those
equipment functions which can increase the severity of loading on the
equipment, e.g., hoisting, telescoping out, or luffing out. Typically,
those functions which decrease the severity of loading on the equipment
remain operational, e.g., lowering, telescoping in, or luffing in.
Locomotive crane means a crane mounted on a base or car equipped
for travel on a railroad track.
Luffing jib limiting device is similar to a boom hoist limiting
device, except that it limits the movement of the luffing jib.
Marine hoisted personnel transfer device means a device, such as a
``transfer net,'' that is designed to protect the employees being
hoisted during a marine transfer and to facilitate rapid entry into and
exit from the device. Such devices do not include boatswain's chairs
when hoisted by equipment covered by this standard.
Marine worksite means a construction worksite located in, on or
above the water.
Mobile crane means a lifting device incorporating a cable suspended
latticed boom or hydraulic telescopic boom designed to be moved between
operating locations by transport over the road.
Moving point-to-point means the times during which an employee is
in the process of going to or from a work station.
Multi-purpose machine means a machine that is designed to be
configured in various ways, at least one of which allows it to hoist
(by means of a winch or hook) and horizontally move a suspended load.
For example, a machine that can rotate and can be configured with
removable forks/tongs (for use as a forklift) or with a winch pack, jib
(with a hook at the end) or jib used in conjunction with a winch. When
configured with the forks/tongs, it is not covered by this subpart.
When configured with a winch pack, jib (with a hook at the end) or jib
used in conjunction with a winch, it is covered by this subpart.
Nationally recognized accrediting agency is an organization that,
due to its independence and expertise, is widely recognized as
competent to accredit testing organizations. Examples of such
accrediting agencies include, but are not limited to, the National
Commission for Certifying Agencies and the American National Standards
Institute.
Nonconductive means that, because of the nature and condition of
the materials used, and the conditions of use (including environmental
conditions and condition of the material), the object in question has
the
[[Page 48139]]
property of not becoming energized (that is, it has high dielectric
properties offering a high resistance to the passage of current under
the conditions of use).
Operational aids are devices that assist the operator in the safe
operation of the crane by providing information or automatically taking
control of a crane function. These include, but are not limited to, the
devices listed in Sec. 1926.1416 (``listed operational aids'').
Operational controls means levers, switches, pedals and other
devices for controlling equipment operation.
Operator means a person who is operating the equipment.
Overhead and gantry cranes includes overhead/bridge cranes,
semigantry, cantilever gantry, wall cranes, storage bridge cranes,
launching gantry cranes, and similar equipment, irrespective of whether
it travels on tracks, wheels, or other means.
Paragraph refers to a paragraph in the same section of this subpart
that the word ``paragraph'' is used, unless otherwise specified.
Pendants includes both wire and bar types. Wire type: A fixed
length of wire rope with mechanical fittings at both ends for pinning
segments of wire rope together. Bar type: Instead of wire rope, a bar
is used. Pendants are typically used in a latticed boom crane system to
easily change the length of the boom suspension system without
completely changing the rope on the drum when the boom length is
increased or decreased.
Personal fall arrest system means a system used to arrest an
employee in a fall from a working level. It consists of an anchorage,
connectors, a body harness and may include a lanyard, deceleration
device, lifeline, or suitable combination of these.
Portal crane is a type of crane consisting of a rotating
upperstructure, hoist machinery, and boom mounted on top of a
structural gantry which may be fixed in one location or have travel
capability. The gantry legs or columns usually have portal openings in
between to allow passage of traffic beneath the gantry.
Power lines means electric transmission and distribution lines.
Procedures include, but are not limited to: Instructions, diagrams,
recommendations, warnings, specifications, protocols and limitations.
Proximity alarm is a device that provides a warning of proximity to
a power line and that has been listed, labeled, or accepted by a
Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory in accordance with 29 CFR
1910.7.
Qualified evaluator (not a third party) means a person employed by
the signal person's employer who has demonstrated that he/she is
competent in accurately assessing whether individuals meet the
Qualification Requirements in this subpart for a signal person.
Qualified evaluator (third party) means an entity that, due to its
independence and expertise, has demonstrated that it is competent in
accurately assessing whether individuals meet the Qualification
Requirements in this subpart for a signal person.
Qualified person means a person who, by possession of a recognized
degree, certificate, or professional standing, or who by extensive
knowledge, training and experience, successfully demonstrated the
ability to solve/resolve problems relating to the subject matter, the
work, or the project.
Qualified rigger is a rigger who meets the criteria for a qualified
person.
Range control limit device is a device that can be set by an
equipment operator to limit movement of the boom or jib tip to a plane
or multiple planes.
Range control warning device is a device that can be set by an
equipment operator to warn that the boom or jib tip is at a plane or
multiple planes.
Rated capacity means the maximum working load permitted by the
manufacturer under specified working conditions. Such working
conditions typically include a specific combination of factors such as
equipment configuration, radii, boom length, and other parameters of
use.
Rated capacity indicator: See load moment indicator.
Rated capacity limiter: See load moment limiter.
Repetitive pickup points refer to, when operating on a short cycle
operation, the rope being used on a single layer and being spooled
repetitively over a short portion of the drum.
Running wire rope means a wire rope that moves over sheaves or
drums.
Runway means a firm, level surface designed, prepared and
designated as a path of travel for the weight and configuration of the
crane being used to lift and travel with the crane suspended platform.
An existing surface may be used as long as it meets these criteria.
Section means a section of this subpart, unless otherwise
specified.
Sideboom crane means a track-type or wheel-type tractor having a
boom mounted on the side of the tractor, used for lifting, lowering or
transporting a load suspended on the load hook. The boom or hook can be
lifted or lowered in a vertical direction only.
Special hazard warnings means warnings of site-specific hazards
(for example, proximity of power lines).
Stability (flotation device) means the tendency of a barge,
pontoons, vessel or other means of flotation to return to an upright
position after having been inclined by an external force.
Standard Method means the protocol in Appendix A of this subpart
for hand signals.
Such as means ``such as, but not limited to.''
Superstructure: See Upperworks.
Tagline means a rope (usually fiber) attached to a lifted load for
purposes of controlling load spinning and pendular motions or used to
stabilize a bucket or magnet during material handling operations.
Tender means an individual responsible for monitoring and
communicating with a diver.
Tilt up or tilt down operation means raising/lowering a load from
the horizontal to vertical or vertical to horizontal.
Tower crane is a type of lifting structure which utilizes a
vertical mast or tower to support a working boom (jib) in an elevated
position. Loads are suspended from the working boom. While the working
boom may be of the fixed type (horizontal or angled) or have luffing
capability, it can always rotate to swing loads, either by rotating on
the top of the tower (top slewing) or by the rotation of the tower
(bottom slewing). The tower base may be fixed in one location or
ballasted and moveable between locations. Mobile cranes that are
configured with luffing jib and/or tower attachments are not considered
tower cranes under this section.
Travel bogie (tower cranes) is an assembly of two or more axles
arranged to permit vertical wheel displacement and equalize the loading
on the wheels.
Trim means angle of inclination about the transverse axis of a
barge, pontoons, vessel or other means of floatation.
Two blocking means a condition in which a component that is
uppermost on the hoist line such as the load block, hook block,
overhaul ball, or similar component, comes in contact with the boom
tip, fixed upper block or similar component. This binds the system and
continued application of power can cause failure of the hoist rope or
other component.
Unavailable procedures means procedures that are no longer
available from the manufacturer, or have never been available, from the
manufacturer.
Upperstructure: See Upperworks.
[[Page 48140]]
Upperworks means the revolving frame of equipment on which the
operating machinery (and many cases the engine) are mounted along with
the operator's cab. The counterweight is typically supported on the
rear of the upperstructure and the boom or other front end attachment
is mounted on the front.
Up to means ``up to and including.''
Wire rope means a flexible rope constructed by laying steel wires
into various patterns of multi-wired strands around a core system to
produce a helically wound rope.
Sec. 1926.1402 Ground conditions.
(a) Definitions.
(1) ``Ground conditions'' means the ability of the ground to
support the equipment (including slope, compaction, and firmness).
(2) ``Supporting materials'' means blocking, mats, cribbing, marsh
buggies (in marshes/wetlands), or similar supporting materials or
devices.
(b) The equipment must not be assembled or used unless ground
conditions are firm, drained, and graded to a sufficient extent so
that, in conjunction (if necessary) with the use of supporting
materials, the equipment manufacturer's specifications for adequate
support and degree of level of the equipment are met. The requirement
for the ground to be drained does not apply to marshes/wetlands.
(c) The controlling entity must:
(1) Ensure that ground preparations necessary to meet the
requirements in paragraph (b) of this section are provided.
(2) Inform the user of the equipment and the operator of the
location of hazards beneath the equipment set-up area (such as voids,
tanks, utilities) if those hazards are identified in documents (such as
site drawings, as-built drawings, and soil analyses) that are in the
possession of the controlling entity (whether at the site or off-site)
or the hazards are otherwise known to that controlling entity.
(d) If there is no controlling entity for the project, the
requirement in paragraph (c)(1) of this section must be met by the
employer that has authority at the site to make or arrange for ground
preparations needed to meet paragraph (b) of this section.
(e) If the A/D director or the operator determines that ground
conditions do not meet the requirements in paragraph (b) of this
section, that person's employer must have a discussion with the
controlling entity regarding the ground preparations that are needed so
that, with the use of suitable supporting materials/devices (if
necessary), the requirements in paragraph (b) of this section can be
met.
(f) This section does not apply to cranes designed for use on
railroad tracks when used on railroad tracks that are part of the
general railroad system of transportation that is regulated pursuant to
the Federal Railroad Administration under 49 CFR part 213 and that
comply with applicable Federal Railroad Administration requirements.
Sec. 1926.1403 Assembly/Disassembly--selection of manufacturer or
employer procedures.
When assembling or disassembling equipment (or attachments), the
employer must comply with all applicable manufacturer prohibitions and
must comply with either:
(a) Manufacturer procedures applicable to assembly and disassembly,
or
(b) Employer procedures for assembly and disassembly. Employer
procedures may be used only where the employer can demonstrate that the
procedures used meet the requirements in Sec. 1926.1406. Note: The
employer must follow manufacturer procedures when an employer uses
synthetic slings during assembly or disassembly rigging. (See Sec.
1926.1404(r).)
Sec. 1926.1404 Assembly/Disassembly--general requirements (applies to
all assembly and disassembly operations).
(a) Supervision--competent-qualified person.
(1) Assembly/disassembly must be directed by a person who meets the
criteria for both a competent person and a qualified person, or by a
competent person who is assisted by one or more qualified persons (``A/
D director'').
(2) Where the assembly/disassembly is being performed by only one
person, that person must meet the criteria for both a competent person
and a qualified person. For purposes of this standard, that person is
considered the A/D director.
(b) Knowledge of procedures. The A/D director must understand the
applicable assembly/disassembly procedures.
(c) Review of procedures. The A/D director must review the
applicable assembly/disassembly procedures immediately prior to the
commencement of assembly/disassembly unless the A/D director
understands the procedures and has applied them to the same type and
configuration of equipment (including accessories, if any).
(d) Crew instructions.
(1) Before commencing assembly/disassembly operations, the A/D
director must ensure that the crew members understand all of the
following:
(i) Their tasks.
(ii) The hazards associated with their tasks.
(iii) The hazardous positions/locations that they need to avoid.
(2) During assembly/disassembly operations, before a crew member
takes on a different task, or when adding new personnel during the
operations, the requirements in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through
(d)(1)(iii) of this section must be met.
(e) Protecting assembly/disassembly crew members out of operator
view.
(1) Before a crew member goes to a location that is out of view of
the operator and is either in, on, or under the equipment, or near the
equipment (or load) where the crew member could be injured by movement
of the equipment (or load), the crew member must inform the operator
that he/she is going to that location.
(2) Where the operator knows that a crew member went to a location
covered by paragraph (e)(1) of this section, the operator must not move
any part of the equipment (or load) until the operator is informed in
accordance with a pre-arranged system of communication that the crew
member is in a safe position.
(f) Working under the boom, jib or other components.
(1) When pins (or similar devices) are being removed, employees
must not be under the boom, jib, or other components, except where the
requirements of paragraph (f)(2) of this section are met.
(2) Exception. Where the employer demonstrates that site
constraints require one or more employees to be under the boom, jib, or
other components when pins (or similar devices) are being removed, the
A/D director must implement procedures that minimize the risk of
unintended dangerous movement and minimize the duration and extent of
exposure under the boom. (See Non-mandatory Appendix B of this subpart
for an example.)
(g) Capacity limits. During all phases of assembly/disassembly,
rated capacity limits for loads imposed on the equipment, equipment
components (including rigging), lifting lugs and equipment accessories,
must not be exceeded for the equipment being assembled/disassembled.
(h) Addressing specific hazards. The A/D director supervising the
assembly/disassembly operation must address the hazards associated with
the operation, which include:
[[Page 48141]]
(1) Site and ground bearing conditions. Site and ground conditions
must be adequate for safe assembly/disassembly operations and to
support the equipment during assembly/disassembly (see Sec. 1926.1402
for ground condition requirements).
(2) Blocking material. The size, amount, condition and method of
stacking the blocking must be sufficient to sustain the loads and
maintain stability.
(3) Proper location of blocking. When used to support lattice booms
or components, blocking must be appropriately placed to:
(i) Protect the structural integrity of the equipment, and
(ii) Prevent dangerous movement and collapse.
(4) Verifying assist crane loads. When using an assist crane, the
loads that will be imposed on the assist crane at each phase of
assembly/disassembly must be verified in accordance with Sec.
1926.1417(o)(3) before assembly/disassembly begins.
(5) Boom and jib pick points. The point(s) of attachment of rigging
to a boom (or boom sections or jib or jib sections) must be suitable
for preventing structural damage and facilitating safe handling of
these components.
(6) Center of gravity.
(i) The center of gravity of the load must be identified if that is
necessary for the method used for maintaining stability.
(ii) Where there is insufficient information to accurately identify
the center of gravity, measures designed to prevent unintended
dangerous movement resulting from an inaccurate identification of the
center of gravity must be used. (See Non-mandatory Appendix B of this
subpart for an example.)
(7) Stability upon pin removal. The boom sections, boom suspension
systems (such as gantry A-frames and jib struts), and components must
be rigged or supported to maintain stability upon the removal of the
pins.
(8) Snagging. Suspension ropes and pendants must not be allowed to
catch on the boom or jib connection pins or cotter pins (including
keepers and locking pins).
(9) Struck by counterweights. The potential for unintended movement
from inadequately supported counterweights and from hoisting
counterweights.
(10) Boom hoist brake failure. Each time reliance is to be placed
on the boom hoist brake to prevent boom movement during assembly/
disassembly, the brake must be tested prior to such reliance to
determine if it is sufficient to prevent boom movement. If it is not
sufficient, a boom hoist pawl, other locking device/back-up braking
device, or another method of preventing dangerous movement of the boom
(such as blocking or using an assist crane) from a boom hoist brake
failure must be used.
(11) Loss of backward stability. Backward stability before swinging
the upperworks, travel, and when attaching or removing equipment
components.
(12) Wind speed and weather. The effect of wind speed and weather
on the equipment.
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) Cantilevered boom sections. Manufacturer limitations on the
maximum amount of boom supported only by cantilevering must not be
exceeded. Where these are unavailable, a registered professional
engineer familiar with the type of equipment involved must determine in
writing this limitation, which must not be exceeded.
(k) Weight of components. The weight of each of the components must
be readily available.
(l) [Reserved.]
(m) Components and configuration.
(1) The selection of components, and configuration of the
equipment, that affect the capacity or safe operation of the equipment
must be in accordance with:
(i) Manufacturer instructions, prohibitions, limitations, and
specifications. Where these are unavailable, a registered professional
engineer familiar with the type of equipment involved must approve, in
writing, the selection and configuration of components; or
(ii) Approved modifications that meet the requirements of Sec.
1926.1434 (Equipment modifications).
(2) Post-assembly inspection. Upon completion of assembly, the
equipment must be inspected to ensure compliance with paragraph (m)(1)
of this section (see Sec. 1926.1412(c) for post-assembly inspection
requirements).
(n) [Reserved.]
(o) Shipping pins. Reusable shipping pins, straps, links, and
similar equipment must be removed. Once they are removed they must
either be stowed or otherwise stored so that they do not present a
falling object hazard.
(p) Pile driving. Equipment used for pile driving must not have a
jib attached during pile driving operations.
(q) Outriggers and Stabilizers. When the load to be handled and the
operating radius require the use of outriggers or stabilizers, or at
any time when outriggers or stabilizers are used, all of the following
requirements must be met (except as otherwise indicated):
(1) The outriggers or stabilizers must be either fully extended or,
if manufacturer procedures permit, deployed as specified in the load
chart.
(2) The outriggers must be set to remove the equipment weight from
the wheels, except for locomotive cranes (see paragraph (q)(6) of this
section for use of outriggers on locomotive cranes). This provision
does not apply to stabilizers.
(3) When outrigger floats are used, they must be attached to the
outriggers. When stabilizer floats are used, they must be attached to
the stabilizers.
(4) Each outrigger or stabilizer must be visible to the operator or
to a signal person during extension and setting.
(5) Outrigger and stabilizer blocking must:
(i) Meet the requirements in paragraphs (h)(2) and (h)(3) of this
section.
(ii) Be placed only under the outrigger or stabilizer float/pad of
the jack or, where the outrigger or stabilizer is designed without a
jack, under the outer bearing surface of the extended outrigger or
stabilizer beam.
(6) For locomotive cranes, when using outriggers or stabilizers to
handle loads, the manufacturer's procedures must be followed. When
lifting loads without using outriggers or stabilizers, the
manufacturer's procedures must be met regarding truck wedges or screws.
(r) Rigging. In addition to following the requirements in 29 CFR
1926.251 and other requirements in this and other standards applicable
to rigging, when rigging is used for assembly/disassembly, the employer
must ensure that:
(1) The rigging work is done by a qualified rigger.
(2) Synthetic slings are protected from: Abrasive, sharp or acute
edges, and configurations that could cause a reduction of the sling's
rated capacity, such as distortion or localized compression. Note:
Requirements for the protection of wire rope slings are contained in 29
CFR 1926.251(c)(9).
(3) When synthetic slings are used, the synthetic sling
manufacturer's instructions, limitations, specifications and
recommendations must be followed.
Sec. 1926.1405 Disassembly--additional requirements for dismantling
of booms and jibs (applies to both the use of manufacturer procedures
and employer procedures).
Dismantling (including dismantling for changing the length of)
booms and jibs.
(a) None of the pins in the pendants are to be removed (partly or
completely) when the pendants are in tension.
[[Page 48142]]
(b) None of the pins (top or bottom) on boom sections located
between the pendant attachment points and the crane/derrick body are to
be removed (partly or completely) when the pendants are in tension.
(c) None of the pins (top or bottom) on boom sections located
between the uppermost boom section and the crane/derrick body are to be
removed (partly or completely) when the boom is being supported by the
uppermost boom section resting on the ground (or other support).
(d) None of the top pins on boom sections located on the
cantilevered portion of the boom being removed (the portion being
removed ahead of the pendant attachment points) are to be removed
(partly or completely) until the cantilevered section to be removed is
fully supported.
Sec. 1926.1406 Assembly/Disassembly--employer procedures--general
requirements.
(a) When using employer procedures instead of manufacturer
procedures for assembly/disassembly, the employer must ensure that the
procedures:
(1) Prevent unintended dangerous movement, and prevent collapse, of
any part of the equipment.
(2) Provide adequate support and stability of all parts of the
equipment.
(3) Position employees involved in the assembly/disassembly
operation so that their exposure to unintended movement or collapse of
part or all of the equipment is minimized.
(b) Qualified person. Employer procedures must be developed by a
qualified person.
Sec. 1926.1407 Power line safety (up to 350 kV)--assembly and
disassembly.
(a) Before assembling or disassembling equipment, the employer must
determine if any part of the equipment, load line, or load (including
rigging and lifting accessories) could get, in the direction or area of
assembly/disassembly, closer than 20 feet to a power line during the
assembly/disassembly process. If so, the employer must meet the
requirements in Option (1), Option (2), or Option (3) of this section,
as follows:
(1) Option (1)--Deenergize and ground. Confirm from the utility
owner/operator that the power line has been deenergized and visibly
grounded at the worksite.
(2) Option (2)--20 foot clearance. Ensure that no part of the
equipment, load line or load (including rigging and lifting
accessories), gets closer than 20 feet to the power line by
implementing the measures specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
(3) Option (3)--Table A clearance.
(i) Determine the line's voltage and the minimum clearance distance
permitted under Table A (see Sec. 1926.1408).
(ii) Determine if any part of the equipment, load line, or load
(including rigging and lifting accessories), could get closer than the
minimum clearance distance to the power line permitted under Table A
(see Sec. 1926.1408). If so, then the employer must follow the
requirements in paragraph (b) of this section to ensure that no part of
the equipment, load line, or load (including rigging and lifting
accessories), gets closer to the line than the minimum clearance
distance.
(b) Preventing encroachment/electrocution. Where encroachment
precautions are required under Option (2), or Option (3) of this
section, all of the following requirements must be met:
(1) Conduct a planning meeting with the Assembly/Disassembly
director (A/D director), operator, assembly/disassembly crew and the
other workers who will be in the assembly/disassembly area to review
the location of the power line(s) and the steps that will be
implemented to prevent encroachment/electrocution.
(2) If tag lines are used, they must be nonconductive.
(3) At least one of the following additional measures must be in
place. The measure selected from this list must be effective in
preventing encroachment.
The additional measures are:
(i) Use a dedicated spotter who is in continuous contact with the
equipment operator. The dedicated spotter must:
(A) Be equipped with a visual aid to assist in identifying the
minimum clearance distance. Examples of a visual aid include, but are
not limited to: A clearly visible line painted on the ground; a clearly
visible line of stanchions; a set of clearly visible line-of-sight
landmarks (such as a fence post behind the dedicated spotter and a
building corner ahead of the dedicated spotter).
(B) Be positioned to effectively gauge the clearance distance.
(C) Where necessary, use equipment that enables the dedicated
spotter to communicate directly with the operator.
(D) Give timely information to the operator so that the required
clearance distance can be maintained.
(ii) A proximity alarm set to give the operator sufficient warning
to prevent encroachment.
(iii) A device that automatically warns the operator when to stop
movement, such as a range control warning device. Such a device must be
set to give the operator sufficient warning to prevent encroachment.
(iv) A device that automatically limits range of movement, set to
prevent encroachment.
(v) An elevated warning line, barricade, or line of signs, in view
of the operator, equipped with flags or similar high-visibility
markings.
(c) Assembly/disassembly below power lines prohibited. No part of a
crane/derrick, load line, or load (including rigging and lifting
accessories), whether partially or fully assembled, is allowed below a
power line unless the employer has confirmed that the utility owner/
operator has deenergized and (at the worksite) visibly grounded the
power line.
(d) Assembly/disassembly inside Table A clearance prohibited. No
part of a crane/derrick, load line, or load (including rigging and
lifting accessories), whether partially or fully assembled, is allowed
closer than the minimum approach distance under Table A (see Sec.
1926.1408) to a power line unless the employer has confirmed that the
utility owner/operator has deenergized and (at the worksite) visibly
grounded the power line.
(e) Voltage information. Where Option (3) of this section is used,
the utility owner/operator of the power lines must provide the
requested voltage information within two working days of the employer's
request.
(f) Power lines presumed energized. The employer must assume that
all power lines are energized unless the utility owner/operator
confirms that the power line has been and continues to be deenergized
and visibly grounded at the worksite.
(g) Posting of electrocution warnings. There must be at least one
electrocution hazard warning conspicuously posted in the cab so that it
is in view of the operator and (except for overhead gantry and tower
cranes) at least two on the outside of the equipment.
Sec. 1926.1408 Power line safety (up to 350 kV)--equipment
operations.
(a) Hazard assessments and precautions inside the work zone. Before
beginning equipment operations, the employer must:
(1) Identify the work zone by either:
(i) Demarcating boundaries (such as with flags, or a device such as
a range limit device or range control warning device) and prohibiting
the operator from operating the equipment past those boundaries, or
(ii) Defining the work zone as the area 360 degrees around the
equipment, up to the equipment's maximum working radius.
[[Page 48143]]
(2) Determine if any part of the equipment, load line or load
(including rigging and lifting accessories), if operated up to the
equipment's maximum working radius in the work zone, could get closer
than 20 feet to a power line. If so, the employer must meet the
requirements in Option (1), Option (2), or Option (3) of this section,
as follows:
(i) Option (1)--Deenergize and ground. Confirm from the utility
owner/operator that the power line has been deenergized and visibly
grounded at the worksite.
(ii) Option (2)--20 foot clearance. Ensure that no part of the
equipment, load line, or load (including rigging and lifting
accessories), gets closer than 20 feet to the power line by
implementing the measures specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
(iii) Option (3)--Table A clearance.
(A) Determine the line's voltage and the minimum approach distance
permitted under Table A (see Sec. 1926.1408).
(B) Determine if any part of the equipment, load line or load
(including rigging and lifting accessories), while operating up to the
equipment's maximum working radius in the work zone, could get closer
than the minimum approach distance of the power line permitted under
Table A (see Sec. 1926.1408). If so, then the employer must follow the
requirements in paragraph (b) of this section to ensure that no part of
the equipment, load line, or load (including rigging and lifting
accessories), gets closer to the line than the minimum approach
distance.
(b) Preventing encroachment/electrocution. Where encroachment
precautions are required under Option (2) or Option (3) of this
section, all of the following requirements must be met:
(1) Conduct a planning meeting with the operator and the other
workers who will be in the area of the equipment or load to review the
location of the power line(s), and the steps that will be implemented
to prevent encroachment/electrocution.
(2) If tag lines are used, they must be non-conductive.
(3) Erect and maintain an elevated warning line, barricade, or line
of signs, in view of the operator, equipped with flags or similar high-
visibility markings, at 20 feet from the power line (if using Option
(2) of this section) or at the minimum approach distance under Table A
(see Sec. 1926.1408) (if using Option (3) of this section). If the
operator is unable to see the elevated warning line, a dedicated
spotter must be used as described in Sec. 1926.1408(b)(4)(ii) in
addition to implementing one of the measures described in Sec. Sec.
1926.1408(b)(4)(i), (iii), (iv) and (v).
(4) Implement at least one of the following measures:
(i) A proximity alarm set to give the operator sufficient warning
to prevent encroachment.
(ii) A dedicated spotter who is in continuous contact with the
operator. Where this measure is selected, the dedicated spotter must:
(A) Be equipped with a visual aid to assist in identifying the
minimum clearance distance. Examples of a visual aid include, but are
not limited to: A clearly visible line painted on the ground; a clearly
visible line of stanchions; a set of clearly visible line-of-sight
landmarks (such as a fence post behind the dedicated spotter and a
building corner ahead of the dedicated spotter).
(B) Be positioned to effectively gauge the clearance distance.
(C) Where necessary, use equipment that enables the dedicated
spotter to communicate directly with the operator.
(D) Give timely information to the operator so that the required
clearance distance can be maintained.
(iii) A device that automatically warns the operator when to stop
movement, such as a range control warning device. Such a device must be
set to give the operator sufficient warning to prevent encroachment.
(iv) A device that automatically limits range of movement, set to
prevent encroachment.
(v) An insulating link/device, as defined in Sec. 1926.1401,
installed at a point between the end of the load line (or below) and
the load.
(5) The requirements of paragraph (b)(4) of this section do not
apply to work covered by subpart V of this part.
(c) Voltage information. Where Option (3) of this section is used,
the utility owner/operator of the power lines must provide the
requested voltage information within two working days of the employer's
request.
(d) Operations below power lines.
(1) No part of the equipment, load line, or load (including rigging
and lifting accessories) is allowed below a power line unless the
employer has confirmed that the utility owner/operator has deenergized
and (at the worksite) visibly grounded the power line, except where one
of the exceptions in paragraph (d)(2) of this section applies.
(2) Exceptions. Paragraph (d)(1) of this section is inapplicable
where the employer demonstrates that one of the following applies:
(i) The work is covered by subpart V of this part.
(ii) For equipment with non-extensible booms: The uppermost part of
the equipment, with the boom at true vertical, would be more than 20
feet below the plane of the power line or more than the Table A of this
section minimum clearance distance below the plane of the power line.
(iii) For equipment with articulating or extensible booms: The
uppermost part of the equipment, with the boom in the fully extended
position, at true vertical, would be more than 20 feet below the plane
of the power line or more than the Table A of this section minimum
clearance distance below the plane of the power line.
(iv) The employer demonstrates that compliance with paragraph
(d)(1) of this section is infeasible and meets the requirements of
Sec. 1926.1410.
(e) Power lines presumed energized. The employer must assume that
all power lines are energized unless the utility owner/operator
confirms that the power line has been and continues to be deenergized
and visibly grounded at the worksite.
(f) When working near transmitter/communication towers where the
equipment is close enough for an electrical charge to be induced in the
equipment or materials being handled, the transmitter must be
deenergized or the following precautions must be taken:
(1) The equipment must be provided with an electrical ground.
(2) If tag lines are used, they must be non-conductive.
(g) Training.
(1) The employer must train each operator and crew member assigned
to work with the equipment on all of the following:
(i) The procedures to be followed in the event of electrical
contact with a power line. Such training must include:
(A) Information regarding the danger of electrocution from the
operator simultaneously touching the equipment and the ground.
(B) The importance to the operator's safety of remaining inside the
cab except where there is an imminent danger of fire, explosion, or
other emergency that necessitates leaving the cab.
(C) The safest means of evacuating from equipment that may be
energized.
(D) The danger of the potentially energized zone around the
equipment (step potential).
(E) The need for crew in the area to avoid approaching or touching
the equipment and the load.
(F) Safe clearance distance from power lines.
(ii) Power lines are presumed to be energized unless the utility
owner/
[[Page 48144]]
operator confirms that the power line has been and continues to be
deenergized and visibly grounded at the worksite.
(iii) Power lines are presumed to be uninsulated unless the utility
owner/operator or a registered engineer who is a qualified person with
respect to electrical power transmission and distribution confirms that
a line is insulated.
(iv) The limitations of an insulating link/device, proximity alarm,
and range control (and similar) device, if used.
(v) The procedures to be followed to properly ground equipment and
the limitations of grounding.
(2) Employees working as dedicated spotters must be trained to
enable them to effectively perform their task, including training on
the applicable requirements of this section.
(3) Training under this section must be administered in accordance
with Sec. 1926.1430(g).
(h) Devices originally designed by the manufacturer for use as: A
safety device (see Sec. 1926.1415), operational aid, or a means to
prevent power line contact or electrocution, when used to comply with
this section, must meet the manufacturer's procedures for use and
conditions of use.
Table A--Minimum Clearance Distances
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Voltage (nominal, kV, alternating Minimum clearance distance
current) (feet)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
up to 50............................... 10
over 50 to 200......................... 15
over 200 to 350........................ 20
over 350 to 500........................ 25
over 500 to 750........................ 35
over 750 to 1,000...................... 45
over 1,000............................. (as established by the utility
owner/operator or registered
professional engineer who is a
qualified person with respect
to electrical power
transmission and
distribution).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The value that follows ``to'' is up to and includes that value.
For example, over 50 to 200 means up to and including 200kV.
Sec. 1926.1409 Power line safety (over 350 kV).
The requirements of Sec. 1926.1407 and Sec. 1926.1408 apply to
power lines over 350 kV except:
(a) For power lines at or below 1000 kV, wherever the distance ``20
feet'' is specified, the distance ``50 feet'' must be substituted; and
(b) For power lines over 1000 kV, the minimum clearance distance
must be established by the utility owner/operator or registered
professional engineer who is a qualified person with respect to
electrical power transmission and distribution.
Sec. 1926.1410 Power line safety (all voltages)--equipment operations
closer than the Table A zone.
Equipment operations in which any part of the equipment, load line,
or load (including rigging and lifting accessories) is closer than the
minimum approach distance under Table A of Sec. 1926.1408 to an
energized power line is prohibited, except where the employer
demonstrates that all of the following requirements are met:
(a) The employer determines that it is infeasible to do the work
without breaching the minimum approach distance under Table A of Sec.
1926.1408.
(b) The employer determines that, after consultation with the
utility owner/operator, it is infeasible to deenergize and ground the
power line or relocate the power line.
(c) Minimum clearance distance.
(1) The power line owner/operator or registered professional
engineer who is a qualified person with respect to electrical power
transmission and distribution determines the minimum clearance distance
that must be maintained to prevent electrical contact in light of the
on-site conditions. The factors that must be considered in making this
determination include, but are not limited to: Conditions affecting
atmospheric conductivity; time necessary to bring the equipment, load
line, and load (including rigging and lifting accessories) to a
complete stop; wind conditions; degree of sway in the power line;
lighting conditions, and other conditions affecting the ability to
prevent electrical contact.
(2) Paragraph (c)(1) of this section does not apply to work covered
by subpart V of this part; instead, for such work, the minimum
clearance distances specified in Sec. 1926.950 Table V-1 apply.
Employers engaged in subpart V work are permitted to work closer than
the distances in Sec. 1926.950 Table V-1 where both the requirements
of this section and Sec. 1926.952(c)(3)(i) or (ii) are met.
(d) A planning meeting with the employer and utility owner/operator
(or registered professional engineer who is a qualified person with
respect to electrical power transmission and distribution) is held to
determine the procedures that will be followed to prevent electrical
contact and electrocution. At a minimum these procedures must include:
(1) If the power line is equipped with a device that automatically
reenergizes the circuit in the event of a power line contact, before
the work begins, the automatic reclosing feature of the circuit
interrupting device must be made inoperative if the design of the
device permits.
(2) A dedicated spotter who is in continuous contact with the
operator. The dedicated spotter must:
(i) Be equipped with a visual aid to assist in identifying the
minimum clearance distance. Examples of a visual aid include, but are
not limited to: A line painted on the ground; a clearly visible line of
stanchions; a set of clearly visible line-of-sight landmarks (such as a
fence post behind the dedicated spotter and a building corner ahead of
the dedicated spotter).
(ii) Be positioned to effectively gauge the clearance distance.
(iii) Where necessary, use equipment that enables the dedicated
spotter to communicate directly with the operator.
(iv) Give timely information to the operator so that the required
clearance distance can be maintained.
(3) An elevated warning line, or barricade (not attached to the
crane), in view of the operator (either directly or through video
equipment), equipped with flags or similar high-visibility markings, to
prevent electrical contact. However, this provision does not apply to
work covered by subpart V of this part.
(4) Insulating link/device.
(i) An insulating link/device installed at a point between the end
of the load line (or below) and the load.
(ii) For work covered by subpart V of this part, the requirement in
paragraph
[[Page 48145]]
(d)(4)(i) of this section applies only when working inside the Sec.
1926.950 Table V-1 clearance distances.
(iii) For work covered by subpart V of this part involving
operations where use of an insulating link/device is infeasible, the
requirements of Sec. 1910.269(p)(4)(iii)(B) or (C) may be substituted
for the requirement in (d)(4)(i) of this section.
(iv) Until November 8, 2011, the following procedure may be
substituted for the requirement in paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this section:
All employees, excluding equipment operators located on the equipment,
who may come in contact with the equipment, the load line, or the load
must be insulated or guarded from the equipment, the load line, and the
load. Insulating gloves rated for the voltage involved are adequate
insulation for the purposes of this paragraph.
(v) Until November 8, 2013, the following procedure may be
substituted for the requirement in (d)(4)(i) of this section:
(A) The employer must use a link/device manufactured on or before
November 8, 2011, that meets the definition of an insulating link/
device, except that it has not been approved by a Nationally Recognized
Testing Laboratory, and that is maintained and used in accordance with
manufacturer requirements and recommendations, and is installed at a
point between the end of the load line (or below) and the load; and
(B) All employees, excluding equipment operators located on the
equipment, who may come in contact with the equipment, the load line,
or the load must be insulated or guarded from the equipment, the load
line, and the load through an additional means other than the device
described in paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) of this section. Insulating gloves
rated for the voltage involved are adequate additional means of
protection for the purposes of this paragraph.
(5) Nonconductive rigging if the rigging may be within the Table A
of Sec. 1926.1408 distance during the operation.
(6) If the equipment is equipped with a device that automatically
limits range of movement, it must be used and set to prevent any part
of the equipment, load line, or load (including rigging and lifting
accessories) from breaching the minimum approach distance established
under paragraph (c) of this section.
(7) If a tag line is used, it must be of the nonconductive type.
(8) Barricades forming a perimeter at least 10 feet away from the
equipment to prevent unauthorized personnel from entering the work
area. In areas where obstacles prevent the barricade from being at
least 10 feet away, the barricade must be as far from the equipment as
feasible.
(9) Workers other than the operator must be prohibited from
touching the load line above the insulating link/device and crane.
Operators remotely operating the equipment from the ground must use
either wireless controls that isolate the operator from the equipment
or insulating mats that insulate the operator from the ground.
(10) Only personnel essential to the operation are permitted to be
in the area of the crane and load.
(11) The equipment must be properly grounded.
(12) Insulating line hose or cover-up must be installed by the
utility owner/operator except where such devices are unavailable for
the line voltages involved.
(e) The procedures developed to comply with paragraph (d) of this
section are documented and immediately available on-site.
(f) The equipment user and utility owner/operator (or registered
professional engineer) meet with the equipment operator and the other
workers who will be in the area of the equipment or load to review the
procedures that will be implemented to prevent breaching the minimum
approach distance established in paragraph (c) of this section and
prevent electrocution.
(g) The procedures developed to comply with paragraph (d) of this
section are implemented.
(h) The utility owner/operator (or registered professional
engineer) and all employers of employees involved in the work must
identify one person who will direct the implementation of the
procedures. The person identified in accordance with this paragraph
must direct the implementation of the procedures and must have the
authority to stop work at any time to ensure safety.
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) If a problem occurs implementing the procedures being used to
comply with paragraph (d) of this section, or indicating that those
procedures are inadequate to prevent electrocution, the employer must
safely stop operations and either develop new procedures to comply with
paragraph (d) of this section or have the utility owner/operator
deenergize and visibly ground or relocate the power line before
resuming work.
(k) Devices originally designed by the manufacturer for use as a
safety device (see Sec. 1926.1415), operational aid, or a means to
prevent power line contact or electrocution, when used to comply with
this section, must comply with the manufacturer's procedures for use
and conditions of use.
(l) [Reserved.]
(m) The employer must train each operator and crew member assigned
to work with the equipment in accordance with Sec. 1926.1408(g).
Sec. 1926.1411 Power line safety--while traveling under or near power
lines with no load.
(a) This section establishes procedures and criteria that must be
met for equipment traveling under or near a power line on a
construction site with no load. Equipment traveling on a construction
site with a load is governed by Sec. Sec. 1926.1408, 1926.1409 or
1926.1410, whichever is appropriate, and Sec. 1926.1417(u).
(b) The employer must ensure that:
(1) The boom/mast and boom/mast support system are lowered
sufficiently to meet the requirements of this paragraph.
(2) The clearances specified in Table T of this section are
maintained.
(3) The effects of speed and terrain on equipment movement
(including movement of the boom/mast) are considered so that those
effects do not cause the minimum clearance distances specified in Table
T of this section to be breached.
(4) Dedicated spotter. If any part of the equipment while traveling
will get closer than 20 feet to the power line, the employer must
ensure that a dedicated spotter who is in continuous contact with the
driver/operator is used. The dedicated spotter must:
(i) Be positioned to effectively gauge the clearance distance.
(ii) Where necessary, use equipment that enables the dedicated
spotter to communicate directly with the operator.
(iii) Give timely information to the operator so that the required
clearance distance can be maintained.
(5) Additional precautions for traveling in poor visibility. When
traveling at night, or in conditions of poor visibility, in addition to
the measures specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this
section, the employer must ensure that:
(i) The power lines are illuminated or another means of identifying
the location of the lines is used.
(ii) A safe path of travel is identified and used.
[[Page 48146]]
Table T--Minimum Clearance Distances While Traveling With No Load
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Voltage (nominal, kV, alternating While traveling--minimum
current) clearance distance (feet)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
up to 0.75............................. 4
over .75 to 50......................... 6
over 50 to 345......................... 10
over 345 to 750........................ 16
Over 750 to 1,000...................... 20
Over 1,000............................. (as established by the utility
owner/operator or registered
professional engineer who is a
qualified person with respect
to electrical power
transmission and
distribution).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 1926.1412 Inspections.
(a) Modified equipment.
(1) Equipment that has had modifications or additions which affect
the safe operation of the equipment (such as modifications or additions
involving a safety device or operational aid, critical part of a
control system, power plant, braking system, load-sustaining structural
components, load hook, or in-use operating mechanism) or capacity must
be inspected by a qualified person after such modifications/additions
have been completed, prior to initial use. The inspection must meet all
of the following requirements:
(i) The inspection must assure that the modifications or additions
have been done in accordance with the approval obtained pursuant to
Sec. 1926.1434 (Equipment modifications).
(ii) The inspection must include functional testing of the
equipment.
(2) Equipment must not be used until an inspection under this
paragraph demonstrates that the requirements of paragraph (a)(1)(i) of
this section have been met.
(b) Repaired/adjusted equipment.
(1) Equipment that has had a repair or adjustment that relates to
safe operation (such as: A repair or adjustment to a safety device or
operator aid, or to a critical part of a control system, power plant,
braking system, load-sustaining structural components, load hook, or
in-use operating mechanism), must be inspected by a qualified person
after such a repair or adjustment has been completed, prior to initial
use. The inspection must meet all of the following requirements:
(i) The qualified person must determine if the repair/adjustment
meets manufacturer equipment criteria (where applicable and available).
(ii) Where manufacturer equipment criteria are unavailable or
inapplicable, the qualified person must:
(A) Determine if a registered professional engineer (RPE) is needed
to develop criteria for the repair/adjustment. If an RPE is not needed,
the employer must ensure that the criteria are developed by the
qualified person. If an RPE is needed, the employer must ensure that
they are developed by an RPE.
(B) Determine if the repair/adjustment meets the criteria developed
in accordance with paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(A) of this section.
(iii) The inspection must include functional testing of the
repaired/adjusted parts and other components that may be affected by
the repair/adjustment.
(4) Equipment must not be used until an inspection under this
paragraph demonstrates that the repair/adjustment meets the
requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section (or, where
applicable, paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section).
(c) Post-assembly.
(1) Upon completion of assembly, the equipment must be inspected by
a qualified person to assure that it is configured in accordance with
manufacturer equipment criteria.
(2) Where manufacturer equipment criteria are unavailable, a
qualified person must:
(i) Determine if a registered professional engineer (RPE) familiar
with the type of equipment involved is needed to develop criteria for
the equipment configuration. If an RPE is not needed, the employer must
ensure that the criteria are developed by the qualified person. If an
RPE is needed, the employer must ensure that they are developed by an
RPE.
(ii) Determine if the equipment meets the criteria developed in
accordance with paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section.
(3) Equipment must not be used until an inspection under this
paragraph demonstrates that the equipment is configured in accordance
with the applicable criteria.
(d) Each shift.
(1) A competent person must begin a visual inspection prior to each
shift the equipment will be used, which must be completed before or
during that shift. The inspection must consist of observation for
apparent deficiencies. Taking apart equipment components and booming
down is not required as part of this inspection unless the results of
the visual inspection or trial operation indicate that further
investigation necessitating taking apart equipment components or
booming down is needed. Determinations made in conducting the
inspection must be reassessed in light of observations made during
operation. At a minimum the inspection must include all of the
following:
(i) Control mechanisms for maladjustments interfering with proper
operation.
(ii) Control and drive mechanisms for apparent excessive wear of
components and contamination by lubricants, water or other foreign
matter.
(iii) Air, hydraulic, and other pressurized lines for deterioration
or leakage, particularly those which flex in normal operation.
(iv) Hydraulic system for proper fluid level.
(v) Hooks and latches for deformation, cracks, excessive wear, or
damage such as from chemicals or heat.
(vi) Wire rope reeving for compliance with the manufacturer's
specifications.
(vii) Wire rope, in accordance with Sec. 1926.1413(a).
(viii) Electrical apparatus for malfunctioning, signs of apparent
excessive deterioration, dirt or moisture accumulation.
(ix) Tires (when in use) for proper inflation and condition.
(x) Ground conditions around the equipment for proper support,
including ground settling under and around outriggers/stabilizers and
supporting foundations, ground water accumulation, or similar
conditions. This paragraph does not apply to the inspection of ground
conditions for railroad tracks and their underlying support when the
railroad tracks are part of the general railroad system of
transportation that is regulated pursuant to the Federal Railroad
Administration under 49 CFR part 213.
(xi) The equipment for level position within the tolerances
specified by the
[[Page 48147]]
equipment manufacturer's recommendations, both before each shift and
after each move and setup.
(xii) Operator cab windows for significant cracks, breaks, or other
deficiencies that would hamper the operator's view.
(xiii) Rails, rail stops, rail clamps and supporting surfaces when
the equipment has rail traveling. This paragraph does not apply to the
inspection of rails, rail stops, rail clamps and supporting surfaces
when the railroad tracks are part of the general railroad system of
transportation that is regulated pursuant to the Federal Railroad
Administration under 49 CFR part 213.
(xiv) Safety devices and operational aids for proper operation.
(2) If any deficiency in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (xiii) of
this section (or in additional inspection items required to be checked
for specific types of equipment in accordance with other sections of
this standard) is identified, an immediate determination must be made
by the competent person as to whether the deficiency constitutes a
safety hazard. If the deficiency is determined to constitute a safety
hazard, the equipment must be taken out of service until it has been
corrected. See Sec. 1926.1417.
(3) If any deficiency in paragraph (d)(1)(xiv) of this section
(safety devices/operational aids) is identified, the action specified
in Sec. 1926.1415 and Sec. 1926.1416 must be taken prior to using the
equipment.
(e) Monthly.
(1) Each month the equipment is in service it must be inspected in
accordance with paragraph (d) of this section (each shift).
(2) Equipment must not be used until an inspection under this
paragraph demonstrates that no corrective action under paragraphs
(d)(2) and (3) of this section is required.
(3) Documentation.
(i) The following information must be documented and maintained by
the employer that conducts the inspection:
(A) The items checked and the results of the inspection.
(B) The name and signature of the person who conducted the
inspection and the date.
(ii) This document must be retained for a minimum of three months.
(f) Annual/comprehensive.
(1) At least every 12 months the equipment must be inspected by a
qualified person in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section (each
shift) except that the corrective action set forth in paragraphs
(f)(4), (f)(5), and (f)(6) of this section must apply in place of the
corrective action required by paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3) of this
section.
(2) In addition, at least every 12 months, the equipment must be
inspected by a qualified person. Disassembly is required, as necessary,
to complete the inspection. The equipment must be inspected for all of
the following:
(i) Equipment structure (including the boom and, if equipped, the
jib):
(A) Structural members: Deformed, cracked, or significantly
corroded.
(B) Bolts, rivets and other fasteners: loose, failed or
significantly corroded.
(C) Welds for cracks.
(ii) Sheaves and drums for cracks or significant wear.
(iii) Parts such as pins, bearings, shafts, gears, rollers and
locking devices for distortion, cracks or significant wear.
(iv) Brake and clutch system parts, linings, pawls and ratchets for
excessive wear.
(v) Safety devices and operational aids for proper operation
(including significant inaccuracies).
(vi) Gasoline, diesel, electric, or other power plants for safety-
related problems (such as leaking exhaust and emergency shut-down
feature) and conditions, and proper operation.
(vii) Chains and chain drive sprockets for excessive wear of
sprockets and excessive chain stretch.
(viii) Travel steering, brakes, and locking devices, for proper
operation.
(ix) Tires for damage or excessive wear.
(x) Hydraulic, pneumatic and other pressurized hoses, fittings and
tubing, as follows:
(A) Flexible hose or its junction with the fittings for indications
of leaks.
(B) Threaded or clamped joints for leaks.
(C) Outer covering of the hose for blistering, abnormal deformation
or other signs of failure/impending failure.
(D) Outer surface of a hose, rigid tube, or fitting for indications
of excessive abrasion or scrubbing.
(xi) Hydraulic and pneumatic pumps and motors, as follows:
(A) Performance indicators: Unusual noises or vibration, low
operating speed, excessive heating of the fluid, low pressure.
(B) Loose bolts or fasteners.
(C) Shaft seals and joints between pump sections for leaks.
(xii) Hydraulic and pneumatic valves, as follows:
(A) Spools: Sticking, improper return to neutral, and leaks.
(B) Leaks.
(C) Valve housing cracks.
(D) Relief valves: Failure to reach correct pressure (if there is a
manufacturer procedure for checking pressure, it must be followed).
(xiii) Hydraulic and pneumatic cylinders, as follows:
(A) Drifting caused by fluid leaking across the piston.
(B) Rod seals and welded joints for leaks.
(C) Cylinder rods for scores, nicks, or dents.
(D) Case (barrel) for significant dents.
(E) Rod eyes and connecting joints: Loose or deformed.
(xiv) Outrigger or stabilizer pads/floats for excessive wear or
cracks.
(xv) Slider pads for excessive wear or cracks.
(xvi) Electrical components and wiring for cracked or split
insulation and loose or corroded terminations.
(xvii) Warning labels and decals originally supplied with the
equipment by the manufacturer or otherwise required under this
standard: Missing or unreadable.
(xviii) Originally equipped operator seat (or equivalent): Missing.
(xix) Operator seat: Unserviceable.
(xx) Originally equipped steps, ladders, handrails, guards:
Missing.
(xxi) Steps, ladders, handrails, guards: In unusable/unsafe
condition.
(3) This inspection must include functional testing to determine
that the equipment as configured in the inspection is functioning
properly.
(4) If any deficiency is identified, an immediate determination
must be made by the qualified person as to whether the deficiency
constitutes a safety hazard or, though not yet a safety hazard, needs
to be monitored in the monthly inspections.
(5) If the qualified person determines that a deficiency is a
safety hazard, the equipment must be taken out of service until it has
been corrected, except when temporary alternative measures are
implemented as specified in Sec. 1926.1416(d) or Sec. 1926.1435(e).
See Sec. 1926.1417.
(6) If the qualified person determines that, though not presently a
safety hazard, the deficiency needs to be monitored, the employer must
ensure that the deficiency is checked in the monthly inspections.
(7) Documentation of annual/comprehensive inspection. The following
information must be documented, maintained, and retained for a minimum
of 12 months, by the employer that conducts the inspection:
(i) The items checked and the results of the inspection.
(ii) The name and signature of the person who conducted the
inspection and the date.
(g) Severe service. Where the severity of use/conditions is such
that there is a
[[Page 48148]]
reasonable probability of damage or excessive wear (such as loading
that may have exceeded rated capacity, shock loading that may have
exceeded rated capacity, prolonged exposure to a corrosive atmosphere),
the employer must stop using the equipment and a qualified person must:
(1) Inspect the equipment for structural damage to determine if the
equipment can continue to be used safely.
(2) In light of the use/conditions determine whether any items/
conditions listed in paragraph (f) of this section need to be
inspected; if so, the qualified person must inspect those items/
conditions.
(3) If a deficiency is found, the employer must follow the
requirements in paragraphs (f)(4) through (6) of this section.
(h) Equipment not in regular use. Equipment that has been idle for
3 months or more must be inspected by a qualified person in accordance
with the requirements of paragraph (e) (Monthly) of this section before
initial use.
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) Any part of a manufacturer's procedures regarding inspections
that relate to safe operation (such as to a safety device or
operational aid, critical part of a control system, power plant,
braking system, load-sustaining structural components, load hook, or
in-use operating mechanism) that is more comprehensive or has a more
frequent schedule of inspection than the requirements of this section
must be followed.
(k) All documents produced under this section must be available,
during the applicable document retention period, to all persons who
conduct inspections under this section.
Sec. 1926.1413 Wire rope--inspection.
(a) Shift inspection.
(1) A competent person must begin a visual inspection prior to each
shift the equipment is used, which must be completed before or during
that shift. The inspection must consist of observation of wire ropes
(running and standing) that are likely to be in use during the shift
for apparent deficiencies, including those listed in paragraph (a)(2)
of this section. Untwisting (opening) of wire rope or booming down is
not required as part of this inspection.
(2) Apparent deficiencies.
(i) Category I. Apparent deficiencies in this category include the
following:
(A) Significant distortion of the wire rope structure such as
kinking, crushing, unstranding, birdcaging, signs of core failure or
steel core protrusion between the outer strands.
(B) Significant corrosion.
(C) Electric arc damage (from a source other than power lines) or
heat damage.
(D) Improperly applied end connections.
(E) Significantly corroded, cracked, bent, or worn end connections
(such as from severe service).
(ii) Category II. Apparent deficiencies in this category are:
(A) Visible broken wires, as follows:
(1) In running wire ropes: Six randomly distributed broken wires in
one rope lay or three broken wires in one strand in one rope lay, where
a rope lay is the length along the rope in which one strand makes a
complete revolution around the rope.
(2) In rotation resistant ropes: Two randomly distributed broken
wires in six rope diameters or four randomly distributed broken wires
in 30 rope diameters.
(3) In pendants or standing wire ropes: More than two broken wires
in one rope lay located in rope beyond end connections and/or more than
one broken wire in a rope lay located at an end connection.
(B) A diameter reduction of more than 5% from nominal diameter.
(iii) Category III. Apparent deficiencies in this category include
the following:
(A) In rotation resistant wire rope, core protrusion or other
distortion indicating core failure.
(B) Prior electrical contact with a power line.
(C) A broken strand.
(3) Critical review items. The competent person must give
particular attention to all of the following:
(i) Rotation resistant wire rope in use.
(ii) Wire rope being used for boom hoists and luffing hoists,
particularly at reverse bends.
(iii) Wire rope at flange points, crossover points and repetitive
pickup points on drums.
(iv) Wire rope at or near terminal ends.
(v) Wire rope in contact with saddles, equalizer sheaves or other
sheaves where rope travel is limited.
(4) Removal from service.
(i) If a deficiency in Category I (see paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this
section) is identified, an immediate determination must be made by the
competent person as to whether the deficiency constitutes a safety
hazard. If the deficiency is determined to constitute a safety hazard,
operations involving use of the wire rope in question must be
prohibited until:
(A) The wire rope is replaced (see Sec. 1926.1417), or
(B) If the deficiency is localized, the problem is corrected by
severing the wire rope in two; the undamaged portion may continue to be
used. Joining lengths of wire rope by splicing is prohibited. If a rope
is shortened under this paragraph, the employer must ensure that the
drum will still have two wraps of wire when the load and/or boom is in
its lowest position.
(ii) If a deficiency in Category II (see paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of
this section) is identified, operations involving use of the wire rope
in question must be prohibited until:
(A) The employer complies with the wire rope manufacturer's
established criterion for removal from service or a different criterion
that the wire rope manufacturer has approved in writing for that
specific wire rope (see Sec. 1926.1417),
(B) The wire rope is replaced (see Sec. 1926.1417), or
(C) If the deficiency is localized, the problem is corrected by
severing the wire rope in two; the undamaged portion may continue to be
used. Joining lengths of wire rope by splicing is prohibited. If a rope
is shortened under this paragraph, the employer must ensure that the
drum will still have two wraps of wire when the load and/or boom is in
its lowest position.
(iii) If a deficiency in Category III is identified, operations
involving use of the wire rope in question must be prohibited until:
(A) The wire rope is replaced (see Sec. 1926.1417), or
(B) If the deficiency (other than power line contact) is localized,
the problem is corrected by severing the wire rope in two; the
undamaged portion may continue to be used. Joining lengths of wire rope
by splicing is prohibited. Repair of wire rope that contacted an
energized power line is also prohibited. If a rope is shortened under
this paragraph, the employer must ensure that the drum will still have
two wraps of wire when the load and/or boom is in its lowest position.
(iv) Where a wire rope is required to be removed from service under
this section, either the equipment (as a whole) or the hoist with that
wire rope must be tagged-out, in accordance with Sec. 1926.1417(f)(1),
until the wire rope is repaired or replaced.
(b) Monthly inspection.
(1) Each month an inspection must be conducted in accordance with
paragraph (a) (shift inspection) of this section.
(2) The inspection must include any deficiencies that the qualified
person who conducts the annual inspection
[[Page 48149]]
determines under paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section must be
monitored.
(3) Wire ropes on equipment must not be used until an inspection
under this paragraph demonstrates that no corrective action under
paragraph (a)(4) of this section is required.
(4) The inspection must be documented according to Sec.
1926.1412(e)(3) (monthly inspection documentation).
(c) Annual/comprehensive.
(1) At least every 12 months, wire ropes in use on equipment must
be inspected by a qualified person in accordance with paragraph (a) of
this section (shift inspection).
(2) In addition, at least every 12 months, the wire ropes in use on
equipment must be inspected by a qualified person, as follows:
(i) The inspection must be for deficiencies of the types listed in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(ii) The inspection must be complete and thorough, covering the
surface of the entire length of the wire ropes, with particular
attention given to all of the following:
(A) Critical review items listed in paragraph (a)(3) of this
section.
(B) Those sections that are normally hidden during shift and
monthly inspections.
(C) Wire rope subject to reverse bends.
(D) Wire rope passing over sheaves.
(iii) Exception: In the event an inspection under paragraph (c)(2)
of this section is not feasible due to existing set-up and
configuration of the equipment (such as where an assist crane is
needed) or due to site conditions (such as a dense urban setting), such
inspections must be conducted as soon as it becomes feasible, but no
longer than an additional 6 months for running ropes and, for standing
ropes, at the time of disassembly.
(3) If a deficiency is identified, an immediate determination must
be made by the qualified person as to whether the deficiency
constitutes a safety hazard.
(i) If the deficiency is determined to constitute a safety hazard,
operations involving use of the wire rope in question must be
prohibited until:
(A) The wire rope is replaced (see Sec. 1926.1417), or
(B) If the deficiency is localized, the problem is corrected by
severing the wire rope in two; the undamaged portion may continue to be
used. Joining lengths of wire rope by splicing is prohibited. If a rope
is shortened under this paragraph, the employer must ensure that the
drum will still have two wraps of wire when the load and/or boom is in
its lowest position.
(ii) If the qualified person determines that, though not presently
a safety hazard, the deficiency needs to be monitored, the employer
must ensure that the deficiency is checked in the monthly inspections.
(4) The inspection must be documented according to Sec.
1926.1412(f)(7) (annual/comprehensive inspection documentation).
(d) Rope lubricants that are of the type that hinder inspection
must not be used.
(e) All documents produced under this section must be available,
during the applicable document retention period, to all persons who
conduct inspections under this section.
Sec. 1926.1414 Wire rope--selection and installation criteria.
(a) Original equipment wire rope and replacement wire rope must be
selected and installed in accordance with the requirements of this
section. Selection of replacement wire rope must be in accordance with
the recommendations of the wire rope manufacturer, the equipment
manufacturer, or a qualified person.
(b) Wire rope design criteria: Wire rope (other than rotation
resistant rope) must comply with either Option (1) or Option (2) of
this section, as follows:
(1) Option (1). Wire rope must comply with section 5-1.7.1 of ASME
B30.5-2004 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 1926.6) except that
section's paragraph (c) must not apply.
(2) Option (2). Wire rope must be designed to have, in relation to
the equipment's rated capacity, a sufficient minimum breaking force and
design factor so that compliance with the applicable inspection
provisions in Sec. 1926.1413 will be an effective means of preventing
sudden rope failure.
(c) Wire rope must be compatible with the safe functioning of the
equipment.
(d) Boom hoist reeving.
(1) Fiber core ropes must not be used for boom hoist reeving,
except for derricks.
(2) Rotation resistant ropes must be used for boom hoist reeving
only where the requirements of paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of this section are
met.
(e) Rotation resistant ropes.
(1) Definitions.
(i) Type I rotation resistant wire rope (``Type I''). Type I
rotation resistant rope is stranded rope constructed to have little or
no tendency to rotate or, if guided, transmits little or no torque. It
has at least 15 outer strands and comprises an assembly of at least
three layers of strands laid helically over a center in two operations.
The direction of lay of the outer strands is opposite to that of the
underlying layer.
(ii) Type II rotation resistant wire rope (``Type II''). Type II
rotation resistant rope is stranded rope constructed to have
significant resistance to rotation. It has at least 10 outer strands
and comprises an assembly of two or more layers of strands laid
helically over a center in two or three operations. The direction of
lay of the outer strands is opposite to that of the underlying layer.
(iii) Type III rotation resistant wire rope (``Type III''). Type
III rotation resistant rope is stranded rope constructed to have
limited resistance to rotation. It has no more than nine outer strands,
and comprises an assembly of two layers of strands laid helically over
a center in two operations. The direction of lay of the outer strands
is opposite to that of the underlying layer.
(2) Requirements.
(i) Types II and III with an operating design factor of less than 5
must not be used for duty cycle or repetitive lifts.
(ii) Rotation resistant ropes (including Types I, II and III) must
have an operating design factor of no less than 3.5.
(iii) Type I must have an operating design factor of no less than
5, except where the wire rope manufacturer and the equipment
manufacturer approves the design factor, in writing.
(iv) Types II and III must have an operating design factor of no
less than 5, except where the requirements of paragraph (e)(3) of this
section are met.
(3) When Types II and III with an operating design factor of less
than 5 are used (for non-duty cycle, non-repetitive lifts), the
following requirements must be met for each lifting operation:
(i) A qualified person must inspect the rope in accordance with
Sec. 1926.1413(a). The rope must be used only if the qualified person
determines that there are no deficiencies constituting a hazard. In
making this determination, more than one broken wire in any one rope
lay must be considered a hazard.
(ii) Operations must be conducted in such a manner and at such
speeds as to minimize dynamic effects.
(iii) Each lift made under Sec. 1926.1414(e)(3) must be recorded
in the monthly and annual inspection documents. Such prior uses must be
considered by the qualified person in determining whether to use the
rope again.
(4) Additional requirements for rotation resistant ropes for boom
hoist reeving.
(i) Rotation resistant ropes must not be used for boom hoist
reeving, except where the requirements of paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of this
section are met.
[[Page 48150]]
(ii) Rotation resistant ropes may be used as boom hoist reeving
when load hoists are used as boom hoists for attachments such as
luffing attachments or boom and mast attachment systems. Under these
conditions, all of the following requirements must be met:
(A) The drum must provide a first layer rope pitch diameter of not
less than 18 times the nominal diameter of the rope used.
(B) The requirements in Sec. 1926.1426(a) (irrespective of the
date of manufacture of the equipment), and Sec. 1926.1426(b).
(C) The requirements in ASME B30.5-2004 sections 5-1.3.2(a), (a)(2)
through (a)(4), (b) and (d) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
1926.6) except that the minimum pitch diameter for sheaves used in
multiple rope reeving is 18 times the nominal diameter of the rope used
(instead of the value of 16 specified in section 5-1.3.2(d)).
(D) All sheaves used in the boom hoist reeving system must have a
rope pitch diameter of not less than 18 times the nominal diameter of
the rope used.
(E) The operating design factor for the boom hoist reeving system
must be not less than five.
(F) The operating design factor for these ropes must be the total
minimum breaking force of all parts of rope in the system divided by
the load imposed on the rope system when supporting the static weights
of the structure and the load within the equipment's rated capacity.
(G) When provided, a power-controlled lowering system must be
capable of handling rated capacities and speeds as specified by the
manufacturer.
(f) Wire rope clips used in conjunction with wedge sockets must be
attached to the unloaded dead end of the rope only, except that the use
of devices specifically designed for dead-ending rope in a wedge socket
is permitted.
(g) Socketing must be done in the manner specified by the
manufacturer of the wire rope or fitting.
(h) Prior to cutting a wire rope, seizings must be placed on each
side of the point to be cut. The length and number of seizings must be
in accordance with the wire rope manufacturer's instructions.
Sec. 1926.1415 Safety devices.
(a) Safety devices. The following safety devices are required on
all equipment covered by this subpart, unless otherwise specified:
(1) Crane level indicator.
(i) The equipment must have a crane level indicator that is either
built into the equipment or is available on the equipment.
(ii) If a built-in crane level indicator is not working properly,
it must be tagged-out or removed. If a removable crane level indicator
is not working properly, it must be removed.
(iii) This requirement does not apply to portal cranes, derricks,
floating cranes/derricks and land cranes/derricks on barges, pontoons,
vessels or other means of flotation.
(2) Boom stops, except for derricks and hydraulic booms.
(3) Jib stops (if a jib is attached), except for derricks.
(4) Equipment with foot pedal brakes must have locks.
(5) Hydraulic outrigger jacks and hydraulic stabilizer jacks must
have an integral holding device/check valve.
(6) Equipment on rails must have rail clamps and rail stops, except
for portal cranes.
(7) Horn
(i) The equipment must have a horn that is either built into the
equipment or is on the equipment and immediately available to the
operator.
(ii) If a built-in horn is not working properly, it must be tagged-
out or removed. If a removable horn is not working properly, it must be
removed.
(b) Proper operation required. Operations must not begin unless all
of the devices listed in this section are in proper working order. If a
device stops working properly during operations, the operator must
safely stop operations. If any of the devices listed in this section
are not in proper working order, the equipment must be taken out of
service and operations must not resume until the device is again
working properly. See Sec. 1926.1417 (Operation). Alternative measures
are not permitted to be used.
Sec. 1926.1416 Operational aids.
(a) The devices listed in this section (``listed operational
aids'') are required on all equipment covered by this subpart, unless
otherwise specified.
(1) The requirements in paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2), and (e)(3) of
this section do not apply to articulating cranes.
(2) The requirements in paragraphs (d)(3), (e)(1), and (e)(4) of
this section apply only to those digger derricks manufactured after
November 8, 2011.
(b) Operations must not begin unless the listed operational aids
are in proper working order, except where an operational aid is being
repaired the employer uses the specified temporary alternative
measures. The time periods permitted for repairing defective
operational aids are specified in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this
section. More protective alternative measures specified by the crane/
derrick manufacturer, if any, must be followed.
(c) If a listed operational aid stops working properly during
operations, the operator must safely stop operations until the
temporary alternative measures are implemented or the device is again
working properly. If a replacement part is no longer available, the use
of a substitute device that performs the same type of function is
permitted and is not considered a modification under Sec. 1926.1434.
(d) Category I operational aids and alternative measures.
Operational aids listed in this paragraph that are not working properly
must be repaired no later than 7 calendar days after the deficiency
occurs. Exception: If the employer documents that it has ordered the
necessary parts within 7 calendar days of the occurrence of the
deficiency, the repair must be completed within 7 calendar days of
receipt of the parts. See Sec. 1926.1417(j) for additional
requirements.
(1) Boom hoist limiting device.
(i) For equipment manufactured after December 16, 1969, a boom
hoist limiting device is required. Temporary alternative measures (use
at least one). One or more of the following methods must be used:
(A) Use a boom angle indicator.
(B) Clearly mark the boom hoist cable (so that it can easily be
seen by the operator) at a point that will give the operator sufficient
time to stop the hoist to keep the boom within the minimum allowable
radius. In addition, install mirrors or remote video cameras and
displays if necessary for the operator to see the mark.
(C) Clearly mark the boom hoist cable (so that it can easily be
seen by a spotter) at a point that will give the spotter sufficient
time to signal the operator and have the operator stop the hoist to
keep the boom within the minimum allowable radius.
(ii) If the equipment was manufactured on or before December 16,
1969, and is not equipped with a boom hoist limiting device, at least
one of the measures in paragraphs (d)(1)(i)(A) through (C) of this
section must be used.
(2) Luffing jib limiting device. Equipment with a luffing jib must
have a luffing jib limiting device. Temporary alternative measures are
the same as in paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section, except to limit the
movement of the luffing jib rather than the boom hoist.
(3) Anti two-blocking device.
(i) Telescopic boom cranes manufactured after February 28, 1992,
must be equipped with a device which automatically prevents damage from
contact between the load block, overhaul ball, or similar component,
and the boom tip (or fixed upper block
[[Page 48151]]
or similar component). The device(s) must prevent such damage at all
points where two-blocking could occur.
Temporary alternative measures: Clearly mark the cable (so that it
can easily be seen by the operator) at a point that will give the
operator sufficient time to stop the hoist to prevent two-blocking, and
use a spotter when extending the boom.
(ii) Lattice boom cranes.
(A) Lattice boom cranes manufactured after Feb 28, 1992, must be
equipped with a device that either automatically prevents damage and
load failure from contact between the load block, overhaul ball, or
similar component, and the boom tip (or fixed upper block or similar
component), or warns the operator in time for the operator to prevent
two-blocking. The device must prevent such damage/failure or provide
adequate warning for all points where two-blocking could occur.
(B) Lattice boom cranes and derricks manufactured after November 8,
2011 must be equipped with a device which automatically prevents damage
and load failure from contact between the load block, overhaul ball, or
similar component, and the boom tip (or fixed upper block or similar
component). The device(s) must prevent such damage/failure at all
points where two-blocking could occur.
(C) Exception. The requirements in paragraphs (d)(3)(ii)(A) and (B)
of this section do not apply to such lattice boom equipment when used
for dragline, clamshell (grapple), magnet, drop ball, container
handling, concrete bucket, marine operations that do not involve
hoisting personnel, and pile driving work.
(D) Temporary alternative measures. Clearly mark the cable (so that
it can easily be seen by the operator) at a point that will give the
operator sufficient time to stop the hoist to prevent two-blocking, or
use a spotter.
(iii) Articulating cranes manufactured after December 31, 1999,
that are equipped with a load hoist must be equipped with a device that
automatically prevents damage from contact between the load block,
overhaul ball, or similar component, and the boom tip (or fixed upper
block or similar component). The device must prevent such damage at all
points where two-blocking could occur. Temporary alternative measures:
When two-blocking could only occur with movement of the load hoist,
clearly mark the cable (so that it can easily be seen by the operator)
at a point that will give the operator sufficient time to stop the
hoist to prevent two-blocking, or use a spotter. When two-blocking
could occur without movement of the load hoist, clearly mark the cable
(so that it can easily be seen by the operator) at a point that will
give the operator sufficient time to stop the hoist to prevent two-
blocking, and use a spotter when extending the boom.
(e) Category II operational aids and alternative measures.
Operational aids listed in this paragraph that are not working properly
must be repaired no later than 30 calendar days after the deficiency
occurs. Exception: If the employer documents that it has ordered the
necessary parts within 7 calendar days of the occurrence of the
deficiency, and the part is not received in time to complete the repair
in 30 calendar days, the repair must be completed within 7 calendar
days of receipt of the parts. See Sec. 1926.1417(j) for additional
requirements.
(1) Boom angle or radius indicator. The equipment must have a boom
angle or radius indicator readable from the operator's station.
Temporary alternative measures: Radii or boom angle must be determined
by measuring the radii or boom angle with a measuring device.
(2) Jib angle indicator if the equipment has a luffing jib.
Temporary alternative measures: Radii or jib angle must be determined
by ascertaining the main boom angle and then measuring the radii or jib
angle with a measuring device.
(3) Boom length indicator if the equipment has a telescopic boom,
except where the rated capacity is independent of the boom length.
Temporary alternative measures. One or more of the following methods
must be used:
(i) Mark the boom with measured marks to calculate boom length,
(ii) Calculate boom length from boom angle and radius measurements,
(iii) Measure the boom with a measuring device.
(4) Load weighing and similar devices.
(i) Equipment (other than derricks and articulating cranes)
manufactured after March 29, 2003 with a rated capacity over 6,000
pounds must have at least one of the following: load weighing device,
load moment (or rated capacity) indicator, or load moment (or rated
capacity) limiter. Temporary alternative measures: The weight of the
load must be determined from a source recognized by the industry (such
as the load's manufacturer) or by a calculation method recognized by
the industry (such as calculating a steel beam from measured dimensions
and a known per foot weight). This information must be provided to the
operator prior to the lift.
(ii) Articulating cranes manufactured after November 8, 2011 must
have at least one of the following: automatic overload prevention
device, load weighing device, load moment (or rated capacity)
indicator, or load moment (rated capacity) limiter. Temporary
alternative measures: The weight of the load must be determined from a
source recognized by the industry (such as the load's manufacturer) or
by a calculation method recognized by the industry (such as calculating
a steel beam from measured dimensions and a known per foot weight).
This information must be provided to the operator prior to the lift.
(5) The following devices are required on equipment manufactured
after November 8, 2011:
(i) Outrigger/stabilizer position (horizontal beam extension)
sensor/monitor if the equipment has outriggers or stabilizers.
Temporary alternative measures: The operator must verify that the
position of the outriggers or stabilizers is correct (in accordance
with manufacturer procedures) before beginning operations requiring
outrigger or stabilizer deployment.
(ii) Hoist drum rotation indicator if the equipment has a hoist
drum not visible from the operator's station. Temporary alternative
measures: Mark the drum to indicate the rotation of the drum. In
addition, install mirrors or remote video cameras and displays if
necessary for the operator to see the mark.
Sec. 1926.1417 Operation.
(a) The employer must comply with all manufacturer procedures
applicable to the operational functions of equipment, including its use
with attachments.
(b) Unavailable operation procedures.
(1) Where the manufacturer procedures are unavailable, the employer
must develop and ensure compliance with all procedures necessary for
the safe operation of the equipment and attachments.
(2) Procedures for the operational controls must be developed by a
qualified person.
(3) Procedures related to the capacity of the equipment must be
developed and signed by a registered professional engineer familiar
with the equipment.
(c) Accessibility of procedures.
(1) The procedures applicable to the operation of the equipment,
including rated capacities (load charts), recommended operating speeds,
special hazard warnings, instructions, and operator's manual, must be
readily available in the cab at all times for use by the operator.
[[Page 48152]]
(2) Where rated capacities are available in the cab only in
electronic form: In the event of a failure which makes the rated
capacities inaccessible, the operator must immediately cease operations
or follow safe shut-down procedures until the rated capacities (in
electronic or other form) are available.
(d) The operator must not engage in any practice or activity that
diverts his/her attention while actually engaged in operating the
equipment, such as the use of cellular phones (other than when used for
signal communications).
(e) Leaving the equipment unattended.
(1) The operator must not leave the controls while the load is
suspended, except where all of the following are met:
(i) The operator remains adjacent to the equipment and is not
engaged in any other duties.
(ii) The load is to be held suspended for a period of time
exceeding normal lifting operations.
(iii) The competent person determines that it is safe to do so and
implements measures necessary to restrain the boom hoist and
telescoping, load, swing, and outrigger or stabilizer functions.
(iv) Barricades or caution lines, and notices, are erected to
prevent all employees from entering the fall zone. No employees,
including those listed in Sec. Sec. 1926.1425(b)(1) through (3), Sec.
1926.1425(d) or Sec. 1926.1425(e), are permitted in the fall zone.
(2) The provisions in Sec. 1926.1417(e)(1) do not apply to working
gear (such as slings, spreader bars, ladders, and welding machines)
where the weight of the working gear is negligible relative to the
lifting capacity of the equipment as positioned, and the working gear
is suspended over an area other than an entrance or exit.
(f) Tag-out.
(1) Tagging out of service equipment/functions. Where the employer
has taken the equipment out of service, a tag must be placed in the cab
stating that the equipment is out of service and is not to be used.
Where the employer has taken a function(s) out of service, a tag must
be placed in a conspicuous position stating that the function is out of
service and is not to be used.
(2) Response to ``do not operate''/tag-out signs.
(i) If there is a warning (tag-out or maintenance/do not operate)
sign on the equipment or starting control, the operator must not
activate the switch or start the equipment until the sign has been
removed by a person authorized to remove it, or until the operator has
verified that:
(A) No one is servicing, working on, or otherwise in a dangerous
position on the machine.
(B) The equipment has been repaired and is working properly.
(ii) If there is a warning (tag-out or maintenance/do not operate)
sign on any other switch or control, the operator must not activate
that switch or control until the sign has been removed by a person
authorized to remove it, or until the operator has verified that the
requirements in paragraphs (f)(2)(i)(A) and (B) of this section have
been met.
(g) Before starting the engine, the operator must verify that all
controls are in the proper starting position and that all personnel are
in the clear.
(h) Storm warning. When a local storm warning has been issued, the
competent person must determine whether it is necessary to implement
manufacturer recommendations for securing the equipment.
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) If equipment adjustments or repairs are necessary:
(1) The operator must, in writing, promptly inform the person
designated by the employer to receive such information and, where there
are successive shifts, to the next operator; and
(2) The employer must notify all affected employees, at the
beginning of each shift, of the necessary adjustments or repairs and
all alternative measures.
(k) Safety devices and operational aids must not be used as a
substitute for the exercise of professional judgment by the operator.
(l) [Reserved.]
(m) If the competent person determines that there is a slack rope
condition requiring re-spooling of the rope, it must be verified
(before starting to lift) that the rope is seated on the drum and in
the sheaves as the slack is removed.
(n) The competent person must adjust the equipment and/or
operations to address the effect of wind, ice, and snow on equipment
stability and rated capacity.
(o) Compliance with rated capacity.
(1) The equipment must not be operated in excess of its rated
capacity.
(2) The operator must not be required to operate the equipment in a
manner that would violate paragraph (o)(1) of this section.
(3) Load weight. The operator must verify that the load is within
the rated capacity of the equipment by at least one of the following
methods:
(i) The weight of the load must be determined from a source
recognized by the industry (such as the load's manufacturer), or by a
calculation method recognized by the industry (such as calculating a
steel beam from measured dimensions and a known per foot weight), or by
other equally reliable means. In addition, when requested by the
operator, this information must be provided to the operator prior to
the lift; or
(ii) The operator must begin hoisting the load to determine, using
a load weighing device, load moment indicator, rated capacity
indicator, or rated capacity limiter, if it exceeds 75 percent of the
maximum rated capacity at the longest radius that will be used during
the lift operation. If it does, the operator must not proceed with the
lift until he/she verifies the weight of the load in accordance with
paragraph (o)(3)(i) of this section.
(p) The boom or other parts of the equipment must not contact any
obstruction.
(q) The equipment must not be used to drag or pull loads sideways.
(r) On wheel-mounted equipment, no loads must be lifted over the
front area, except as permitted by the manufacturer.
(s) The operator must test the brakes each time a load that is 90%
or more of the maximum line pull is handled by lifting the load a few
inches and applying the brakes. In duty cycle and repetitive lifts
where each lift is 90% or more of the maximum line pull, this
requirement applies to the first lift but not to successive lifts.
(t) Neither the load nor the boom must be lowered below the point
where less than two full wraps of rope remain on their respective
drums.
(u) Traveling with a load.
(1) Traveling with a load is prohibited if the practice is
prohibited by the manufacturer.
(2) Where traveling with a load, the employer must ensure that:
(i) A competent person supervises the operation, determines if it
is necessary to reduce rated capacity, and makes determinations
regarding load position, boom location, ground support, travel route,
overhead obstructions, and speed of movement necessary to ensure
safety.
(ii) The determinations of the competent person required in
paragraph (u)(2)(i) of this section are implemented.
(iii) For equipment with tires, tire pressure specified by the
manufacturer is maintained.
(v) Rotational speed of the equipment must be such that the load
does not swing out beyond the radius at which it can be controlled.
(w) A tag or restraint line must be used if necessary to prevent
rotation of the load that would be hazardous.
[[Page 48153]]
(x) The brakes must be adjusted in accordance with manufacturer
procedures to prevent unintended movement.
(y) The operator must obey a stop (or emergency stop) signal,
irrespective of who gives it.
(z) Swinging locomotive cranes. A locomotive crane must not be
swung into a position where railway cars on an adjacent track could
strike it, until it is determined that cars are not being moved on the
adjacent track and that proper flag protection has been established.
(aa) Counterweight/ballast.
(1) The following applies to equipment other than tower cranes:
(i) Equipment must not be operated without the counterweight or
ballast in place as specified by the manufacturer.
(ii) The maximum counterweight or ballast specified by the
manufacturer for the equipment must not be exceeded.
(2) Counterweight/ballast requirements for tower cranes are
specified in Sec. 1926.1435(b)(8).
Sec. 1926.1418 Authority to stop operation.
Whenever there is a concern as to safety, the operator must have
the authority to stop and refuse to handle loads until a qualified
person has determined that safety has been assured.
Sec. 1926.1419 Signals--general requirements.
(a) A signal person must be provided in each of the following
situations:
(1) The point of operation, meaning the load travel or the area
near or at load placement, is not in full view of the operator.
(2) When the equipment is traveling, the view in the direction of
travel is obstructed.
(3) Due to site specific safety concerns, either the operator or
the person handling the load determines that it is necessary.
(b) Types of signals. Signals to operators must be by hand, voice,
audible, or new signals.
(c) Hand signals.
(1) When using hand signals, the Standard Method must be used (see
Appendix A of this subpart). Exception: Where use of the Standard
Method for hand signals is infeasible, or where an operation or use of
an attachment is not covered in the Standard Method, non-standard hand
signals may be used in accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this
section.
(2) Non-standard hand signals. When using non-standard hand
signals, the signal person, operator, and lift director (where there is
one) must contact each other prior to the operation and agree on the
non-standard hand signals that will be used.
(d) New signals. Signals other than hand, voice, or audible signals
may be used where the employer demonstrates that:
(1) The new signals provide at least equally effective
communication as voice, audible, or Standard Method hand signals, or
(2) The new signals comply with a national consensus standard that
provides at least equally effective communication as voice, audible, or
Standard Method hand signals.
(e) Suitability. The signals used (hand, voice, audible, or new),
and means of transmitting the signals to the operator (such as direct
line of sight, video, radio, etc.), must be appropriate for the site
conditions.
(f) During operations requiring signals, the ability to transmit
signals between the operator and signal person must be maintained. If
that ability is interrupted at any time, the operator must safely stop
operations requiring signals until it is reestablished and a proper
signal is given and understood.
(g) If the operator becomes aware of a safety problem and needs to
communicate with the signal person, the operator must safely stop
operations. Operations must not resume until the operator and signal
person agree that the problem has been resolved.
(h) Only one person may give signals to a crane/derrick at a time,
except in circumstances covered by paragraph (j) of this section.
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) Anyone who becomes aware of a safety problem must alert the
operator or signal person by giving the stop or emergency stop signal.
(Note: Sec. 1926.1417(y) requires the operator to obey a stop or
emergency stop signal).
(k) All directions given to the operator by the signal person must
be given from the operator's direction perspective.
(l) [Reserved.]
(m) Communication with multiple cranes/derricks. Where a signal
person(s) is in communication with more than one crane/derrick, a
system must be used for identifying the crane/derrick each signal is
for, as follows:
(1) for each signal, prior to giving the function/direction, the
signal person must identify the crane/derrick the signal is for, or
(2) must use an equally effective method of identifying which
crane/derrick the signal is for.
Sec. 1926.1420 Signals--radio, telephone or other electronic
transmission of signals.
(a) The device(s) used to transmit signals must be tested on site
before beginning operations to ensure that the signal transmission is
effective, clear, and reliable.
(b) Signal transmission must be through a dedicated channel,
except:
(1) Multiple cranes/derricks and one or more signal persons may
share a dedicated channel for the purpose of coordinating operations.
(2) Where a crane is being operated on or adjacent to railroad
tracks, and the actions of the crane operator need to be coordinated
with the movement of other equipment or trains on the same or adjacent
tracks.
(c) The operator's reception of signals must be by a hands-free
system.
Sec. 1926.1421 Signals--voice signals--additional requirements.
(a) Prior to beginning operations, the operator, signal person and
lift director (if there is one), must contact each other and agree on
the voice signals that will be used. Once the voice signals are agreed
upon, these workers need not meet again to discuss voice signals unless
another worker is added or substituted, there is confusion about the
voice signals, or a voice signal is to be changed.
(b) Each voice signal must contain the following three elements,
given in the following order: function (such as hoist, boom, etc.),
direction; distance and/or speed; function, stop command.
(c) The operator, signal person and lift director (if there is
one), must be able to effectively communicate in the language used.
Sec. 1926.1422 Signals--hand signal chart.
Hand signal charts must be either posted on the equipment or
conspicuously posted in the vicinity of the hoisting operations.
Sec. 1926.1423 Fall protection.
(a) Application.
(1) Paragraphs (b), (c)(3), (e) and (f) of this section apply to
all equipment covered by this subpart except tower cranes.
(2) Paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), (d), (g), (j) and (k) of this
section apply to all equipment covered by this subpart.
(3) Paragraphs (c)(4) and (h) of this section apply only to tower
cranes.
(b) Boom walkways.
(1) Equipment manufactured after November 8, 2011 with lattice
booms must be equipped with walkways on the boom(s) if the vertical
profile of the boom (from cord centerline to cord centerline) is 6 or
more feet.
(2) Boom walkway criteria.
(i) The walkways must be at least 12 inches wide.
[[Page 48154]]
(ii) Guardrails, railings and other permanent fall protection
attachments along walkways are:
(A) Not required.
(B) Prohibited on booms supported by pendant ropes or bars if the
guardrails/railings/attachments could be snagged by the ropes or bars.
(C) Prohibited if of the removable type (designed to be installed
and removed each time the boom is assembled/disassembled).
(D) Where not prohibited, guardrails or railings may be of any
height up to, but not more than, 45 inches.
(c) Steps, handholds, ladders, grabrails, guardrails and railings.
(1) Section 1926.502(b) does not apply to equipment covered by this
subpart.
(2) The employer must maintain in good condition originally-
equipped steps, handholds, ladders and guardrails/railings/grabrails.
(3) Equipment manufactured after November 8, 2011 must be equipped
so as to provide safe access and egress between the ground and the
operator work station(s), including the forward and rear positions, by
the provision of devices such as steps, handholds, ladders, and
guardrails/railings/grabrails. These devices must meet the following
criteria:
(i) Steps, handholds, ladders and guardrails/railings/grabrails
must meet the criteria of SAE J185 (May 2003) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 1926.6) or ISO 11660-2:1994(E) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 1926.6) except where infeasible.
(ii) Walking/stepping surfaces, except for crawler treads, must
have slip-resistant features/properties (such as diamond plate metal,
strategically placed grip tape, expanded metal, or slip-resistant
paint).
(4) Tower cranes manufactured after November 8, 2011 must be
equipped so as to provide safe access and egress between the ground and
the cab, machinery platforms, and tower (mast), by the provision of
devices such as steps, handholds, ladders, and guardrails/railings/
grabrails. These devices must meet the following criteria:
(i) Steps, handholds, ladders, and guardrails/railings/grabrails
must meet the criteria of ISO 11660-1:2008(E) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 1926.6) and ISO 11660-3:2008(E) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 1926.6) or SAE J185 (May 2003) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 1926.6) except where infeasible.
(ii) Walking/stepping surfaces must have slip-resistant features/
properties (such as diamond plate metal, strategically placed grip
tape, expanded metal, or slip-resistant paint).
(d) Personal fall arrest and fall restraint systems. Personal fall
arrest system components must be used in personal fall arrest and fall
restraint systems and must conform to the criteria in Sec. 1926.502(d)
except that Sec. 1926.502(d)(15) does not apply to components used in
personal fall arrest and fall restraint systems. Either body belts or
body harnesses must be used in personal fall arrest and fall restraint
systems.
(e) For non-assembly/disassembly work, the employer must provide
and ensure the use of fall protection equipment for employees who are
on a walking/working surface with an unprotected side or edge more than
6 feet above a lower level as follows:
(1) When moving point-to-point:
(i) On non-lattice booms (whether horizontal or not horizontal).
(ii) On lattice booms that are not horizontal.
(iii) On horizontal lattice booms where the fall distance is 15
feet or more.
(2) While at a work station on any part of the equipment (including
the boom, of any type), except when the employee is at or near draw-
works (when the equipment is running), in the cab, or on the deck.
(f) For assembly/disassembly work, the employer must provide and
ensure the use of fall protection equipment for employees who are on a
walking/working surface with an unprotected side or edge more than 15
feet above a lower level, except when the employee is at or near draw-
works (when the equipment is running), in the cab, or on the deck.
(g) Anchorage criteria.
(1) Sections 1926.502(d)(15) and 1926.502(e)(2) apply to equipment
covered by this subpart only to the extent delineated in paragraph
(g)(2) of this section.
(2) Anchorages for personal fall arrest and positioning device
systems.
(i) Personal fall arrest systems must be anchored to any apparently
substantial part of the equipment unless a competent person, from a
visual inspection, without an engineering analysis, would conclude that
the criteria in Sec. 1926.502(d)(15) would not be met.
(ii) Positioning device systems must be anchored to any apparently
substantial part of the equipment unless a competent person, from a
visual inspection, without an engineering analysis, would conclude that
the criteria in Sec. 1926.502(e)(2) would not be met.
(iii) Attachable anchor devices (portable anchor devices that are
attached to the equipment) must meet the anchorage criteria in Sec.
1926.502(d)(15) for personal fall arrest systems and Sec.
1926.502(e)(2) for positioning device systems.
(3) Anchorages for fall restraint systems. Fall restraint systems
must be anchored to any part of the equipment that is capable of
withstanding twice the maximum load that an employee may impose on it
during reasonably anticipated conditions of use.
(h) Tower cranes.
(1) For work other than erecting, climbing, and dismantling, the
employer must provide and ensure the use of fall protection equipment
for employees who are on a walking/working surface with an unprotected
side or edge more than 6 feet above a lower level, except when the
employee is at or near draw-works (when the equipment is running), in
the cab, or on the deck.
(2) For erecting, climbing, and dismantling work, the employer must
provide and ensure the use of fall protection equipment for employees
who are on a walking/working surface with an unprotected side or edge
more than 15 feet above a lower level.
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) Anchoring to the load line. A personal fall arrest system is
permitted to be anchored to the crane/derrick's hook (or other part of
the load line) where all of the following requirements are met:
(1) A qualified person has determined that the set-up and rated
capacity of the crane/derrick (including the hook, load line and
rigging) meets or exceeds the requirements in Sec. 1926.502(d)(15).
(2) The equipment operator must be at the work site and informed
that the equipment is being used for this purpose.
(3) No load is suspended from the load line when the personal fall
arrest system is anchored to the crane/derrick's hook (or other part of
the load line).
(k) Training. The employer must train each employee who may be
exposed to fall hazards while on, or hoisted by, equipment covered by
this subpart on all of the following:
(1) the requirements in this subpart that address fall protection.
(2) the applicable requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.500 and
1926.502.
Sec. 1926.1424 Work area control.
(a) Swing radius hazards.
(1) The requirements in paragraph (a)(2) of this section apply
where there are accessible areas in which the equipment's rotating
superstructure (whether permanently or temporarily
[[Page 48155]]
mounted) poses a reasonably foreseeable risk of:
(i) Striking and injuring an employee; or
(ii) Pinching/crushing an employee against another part of the
equipment or another object.
(2) To prevent employees from entering these hazard areas, the
employer must:
(i) Train each employee assigned to work on or near the equipment
(``authorized personnel'') in how to recognize struck-by and pinch/
crush hazard areas posed by the rotating superstructure.
(ii) Erect and maintain control lines, warning lines, railings or
similar barriers to mark the boundaries of the hazard areas. Exception:
When the employer can demonstrate that it is neither feasible to erect
such barriers on the ground nor on the equipment, the hazard areas must
be clearly marked by a combination of warning signs (such as ``Danger--
Swing/Crush Zone'') and high visibility markings on the equipment that
identify the hazard areas. In addition, the employer must train each
employee to understand what these markings signify.
(3) Protecting employees in the hazard area.
(i) Before an employee goes to a location in the hazard area that
is out of view of the operator, the employee (or someone instructed by
the employee) must ensure that the operator is informed that he/she is
going to that location.
(ii) Where the operator knows that an employee went to a location
covered by paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the operator must not
rotate the superstructure until the operator is informed in accordance
with a pre-arranged system of communication that the employee is in a
safe position.
(b) Where any part of a crane/derrick is within the working radius
of another crane/derrick, the controlling entity must institute a
system to coordinate operations. If there is no controlling entity, the
employer (if there is only one employer operating the multiple pieces
of equipment), or employers, must institute such a system.
Sec. 1926.1425 Keeping clear of the load.
(a) Where available, hoisting routes that minimize the exposure of
employees to hoisted loads must be used, to the extent consistent with
public safety.
(b) While the operator is not moving a suspended load, no employee
must be within the fall zone, except for employees:
(1) Engaged in hooking, unhooking or guiding a load;
(2) Engaged in the initial attachment of the load to a component or
structure; or
(3) Operating a concrete hopper or concrete bucket.
(c) When employees are engaged in hooking, unhooking, or guiding
the load, or in the initial connection of a load to a component or
structure and are within the fall zone, all of the following criteria
must be met:
(1) The materials being hoisted must be rigged to prevent
unintentional displacement.
(2) Hooks with self-closing latches or their equivalent must be
used. Exception: ``J'' hooks are permitted to be used for setting
wooden trusses.
(3) The materials must be rigged by a qualified rigger.
(d) Receiving a load. Only employees needed to receive a load are
permitted to be within the fall zone when a load is being landed.
(e) During a tilt-up or tilt-down operation:
(1) No employee must be directly under the load.
(2) Only employees essential to the operation are permitted in the
fall zone (but not directly under the load). An employee is essential
to the operation if the employee is conducting one of the following
operations and the employer can demonstrate it is infeasible for the
employee to perform that operation from outside the fall zone: (1)
Physically guide the load; (2) closely monitor and give instructions
regarding the load's movement; or (3) either detach it from or
initially attach it to another component or structure (such as, but not
limited to, making an initial connection or installing bracing).
Note: Boom free fall is prohibited when an employee is in the
fall zone of the boom or load, and load line free fall is prohibited
when an employee is directly under the load; see Sec. 1926.1426.
Sec. 1926.1426 Free fall and controlled load lowering.
(a) Boom free fall prohibitions.
(1) The use of equipment in which the boom is designed to free fall
(live boom) is prohibited in each of the following circumstances:
(i) An employee is in the fall zone of the boom or load.
(ii) An employee is being hoisted.
(iii) The load or boom is directly over a power line, or over any
part of the area extending the Table A of Sec. 1926.1408 clearance
distance to each side of the power line; or any part of the area
extending the Table A clearance distance to each side of the power line
is within the radius of vertical travel of the boom or the load.
(iv) The load is over a shaft, except where there are no employees
in the shaft.
(v) The load is over a cofferdam, except where there are no
employees in the fall zone of the boom or the load.
(vi) Lifting operations are taking place in a refinery or tank
farm.
(2) The use of equipment in which the boom is designed to free fall
(live boom) is permitted only where none of the circumstances listed in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section are present and:
(i) The equipment was manufactured prior to October 31, 1984; or
(ii) The equipment is a floating crane/derrick or a land crane/
derrick on a vessel/flotation device.
(b) Preventing boom free fall. Where the use of equipment with a
boom that is designed to free fall (live boom) is prohibited, the boom
hoist must have a secondary mechanism or device designed to prevent the
boom from falling in the event the primary system used to hold or
regulate the boom hoist fails, as follows:
(1) Friction drums must have:
(i) A friction clutch and, in addition, a braking device, to allow
for controlled boom lowering.
(ii) A secondary braking or locking device, which is manually or
automatically engaged, to back-up the primary brake while the boom is
held (such as a secondary friction brake or a ratchet and pawl device).
(2) Hydraulic drums must have an integrally mounted holding device
or internal static brake to prevent boom hoist movement in the event of
hydraulic failure.
(3) Neither clutches nor hydraulic motors must be considered brake
or locking devices for purposes of this subpart.
(4) Hydraulic boom cylinders must have an integrally mounted
holding device.
(c) Preventing uncontrolled retraction. Hydraulic telescoping booms
must have an integrally mounted holding device to prevent the boom from
retracting in the event of hydraulic failure.
(d) Load line free fall. In each of the following circumstances,
controlled load lowering is required and free fall of the load line
hoist is prohibited:
(1) An employee is directly under the load.
(2) An employee is being hoisted.
(3) The load is directly over a power line, or over any part of the
area extending the Table A of Sec. 1926.1408 clearance distance to
each side of the power line; or any part of the area extending the
Table A of Sec. 1926.1408
[[Page 48156]]
clearance distance to each side of the power line is within the radius
of vertical travel of the load.
(4) The load is over a shaft.
(5) The load is over a cofferdam, except where there are no
employees in the fall zone of the load.
Sec. 1926.1427 Operator qualification and certification.
(a) The employer must ensure that, prior to operating any equipment
covered under subpart CC, the person is operating the equipment during
a training period in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section, or
the operator is qualified or certified to operate the equipment in
accordance with the following:
(1) When a non-military government entity issues operator licenses
for equipment covered under subpart CC, and that government licensing
program meets the requirements of paragraphs (e)(2) and (j) of this
section, the equipment operator must either be:
(i) Licensed by that government entity for operation of equipment
within that entity's jurisdiction; or
(ii) qualified in compliance with paragraph (d) of this section.
(2) Where paragraph (a)(1) of this section is not applicable, the
certification or qualification must comply with one of the options in
paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.
(3) Exceptions: Operator qualification or certification under this
section is not required for operators of derricks (see Sec.
1926.1436), sideboom cranes (see Sec. 1926.1440), or equipment with a
maximum manufacturer-rated hoisting/lifting capacity of 2,000 pounds or
less (see Sec. 1926.1441).
(4) Whenever operator qualification or certification is required
under Sec. 1926.1427, the employer must provide the qualification or
certification at no cost to operators who are employed by the employer
on November 8, 2010.
(b) Option (1): Certification by an accredited crane operator
testing organization.
(1) For a testing organization to be considered accredited to
certify operators under this subpart, it must:
(i) Be accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency
based on that agency's determination that industry recognized criteria
for written testing materials, practical examinations, test
administration, grading, facilities/equipment and personnel have been
met.
(ii) Administer written and practical tests that:
(A) Assess the operator applicant regarding, at a minimum, the
knowledge and skills listed in paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of this
section.
(B) Provide different levels of certification based on equipment
capacity and type.
(iii) Have procedures for operators to re-apply and be re-tested in
the event an operator applicant fails a test or is decertified.
(iv) Have testing procedures for re-certification designed to
ensure that the operator continues to meet the technical knowledge and
skills requirements in paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of this section.
(v) Have its accreditation reviewed by the nationally recognized
accrediting agency at least every three years.
(2) An operator will be deemed qualified to operate a particular
piece of equipment if the operator is certified under paragraph (b) of
this section for that type and capacity of equipment or for higher-
capacity equipment of that type. If no accredited testing agency offers
certification examinations for a particular type and/or capacity of
equipment, an operator will be deemed qualified to operate that
equipment if the operator has been certified for the type/capacity that
is most similar to that equipment and for which a certification
examination is available. The operator's certificate must state the
type/capacity of equipment for which the operator is certified.
(3) A certification issued under this option is portable and meets
the requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(4) A certification issued under this paragraph is valid for 5
years.
(c) Option (2): Qualification by an audited employer program. The
employer's qualification of its employee must meet the following
requirements:
(1) The written and practical tests must be either:
(i) Developed by an accredited crane operator testing organization
(see paragraph (b) of this section); or
(ii) Approved by an auditor in accordance with the following
requirements:
(A) The auditor is certified to evaluate such tests by an
accredited crane operator testing organization (see paragraph (b) of
this section).
(B) The auditor is not an employee of the employer.
(C) The approval must be based on the auditor's determination that
the written and practical tests meet nationally recognized test
development criteria and are valid and reliable in assessing the
operator applicants regarding, at a minimum, the knowledge and skills
listed in paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of this section.
(D) The audit must be conducted in accordance with nationally
recognized auditing standards.
(2) Administration of tests.
(i) The written and practical tests must be administered under
circumstances approved by the auditor as meeting nationally recognized
test administration standards.
(ii) The auditor must be certified to evaluate the administration
of the written and practical tests by an accredited crane operator
testing organization (see paragraph (b) of this section).
(iii) The auditor must not be an employee of the employer.
(iv) The audit must be conducted in accordance with nationally
recognized auditing standards.
(3) The employer program must be audited within 3 months of the
beginning of the program and at least every 3 years thereafter.
(4) The employer program must have testing procedures for re-
qualification designed to ensure that the operator continues to meet
the technical knowledge and skills requirements in paragraphs (j)(1)
and (2) of this section. The re-qualification procedures must be
audited in accordance with paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.
(5) Deficiencies. If the auditor determines that there is a
significant deficiency (``deficiency'') in the program, the employer
must ensure that:
(i) No operator is qualified until the auditor confirms that the
deficiency has been corrected.
(ii) The program is audited again within 180 days of the
confirmation that the deficiency was corrected.
(iii) The auditor files a documented report of the deficiency to
the appropriate Regional Office of the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration within 15 days of the auditor's determination that there
is a deficiency.
(iv) Records of the audits of the employer's program are maintained
by the auditor for three years and are made available by the auditor to
the Secretary of Labor or the Secretary's designated representative
upon request.
(6) A qualification under this paragraph is:
(i) Not portable. Such a qualification meets the requirements of
paragraph (a) of this section only where the operator is employed by
(and operating the equipment for) the employer that issued the
qualification.
(ii) Valid for 5 years.
(d) Option (3): Qualification by the U.S. military.
(1) For purposes of this section, an operator who is an employee of
the U.S.
[[Page 48157]]
military is considered qualified if he/she has a current operator
qualification issued by the U.S. military for operation of the
equipment. An employee of the U.S. military is a Federal employee of
the Department of Defense or Armed Forces and does not include
employees of private contractors.
(2) A qualification under this paragraph is:
(i) Not portable. Such a qualification meets the requirements of
paragraph (a) of this section only where the operator is employed by
(and operating the equipment for) the employer that issued the
qualification.
(ii) Valid for the period of time stipulated by the issuing entity.
(e) Option (4): Licensing by a government entity.
(1) For purposes of this section, a government licensing
department/office that issues operator licenses for operating equipment
covered by this standard is considered a government accredited crane
operator testing organization if the criteria in paragraph (e)(2) of
this section are met.
(2) Licensing criteria.
(i) The requirements for obtaining the license include an
assessment, by written and practical tests, of the operator applicant
regarding, at a minimum, the knowledge and skills listed in paragraphs
(j)(1) and (2) of this section.
(ii) The testing meets industry recognized criteria for written
testing materials, practical examinations, test administration,
grading, facilities/equipment and personnel.
(iii) The government authority that oversees the licensing
department/office, has determined that the requirements in paragraphs
(e)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section have been met.
(iv) The licensing department/office has testing procedures for re-
licensing designed to ensure that the operator continues to meet the
technical knowledge and skills requirements in paragraphs (j)(1) and
(2) of this section.
(3) A license issued by a government accredited crane operator
testing organization that meets the requirements of this option:
(i) Meets the operator qualification requirements of this section
for operation of equipment only within the jurisdiction of the
government entity.
(ii) Is valid for the period of time stipulated by the licensing
department/office, but no longer than 5 years.
(f) Pre-qualification/certification training period. An employee
who is not qualified or certified under this section is permitted to
operate equipment only as an operator-in-training and only where the
requirements of this paragraph are met.
(1) The employer must provide each operator-in-training with
sufficient training prior to operating the equipment to enable the
operator-in-training to operate the equipment safely under limitations
established by this section (including continuous monitoring) and any
additional limitations established by the employer.
(2) The tasks performed by the operator-in-training while operating
the equipment must be within the operator-in-training's ability.
(3) Trainer. While operating the equipment, the operator-in-
training must be continuously monitored by an individual (``operator's
trainer'') who meets all of the following requirements:
(i) The operator's trainer is an employee or agent of the operator-
in-training's employer.
(ii) The operator's trainer is either a certified operator under
this section, or has passed the written portion of a certification test
under one of the options in paragraphs (b) through (e) of this section,
and is familiar with the proper use of the equipment's controls.
(iii) While monitoring the operator-in-training, the operator's
trainer performs no tasks that detract from the trainer's ability to
monitor the operator-in-training.
(iv) For equipment other than tower cranes: The operator's trainer
and the operator-in-training must be in direct line of sight of each
other. In addition, they must communicate verbally or by hand signals.
For tower cranes: The operator's trainer and the operator-in-training
must be in direct communication with each other.
(4) Continuous monitoring. The operator-in-training must be
monitored by the operator's trainer at all times, except for short
breaks where all of the following are met:
(i) The break lasts no longer than 15 minutes and there is no more
than one break per hour.
(ii) Immediately prior to the break the operator's trainer informs
the operator-in-training of the specific tasks that the operator-in-
training is to perform and limitations to which he/she must adhere
during the operator trainer's break.
(iii) The specific tasks that the operator-in-training will perform
during the operator trainer's break are within the operator-in-
training's abilities.
(5) The operator-in-training must not operate the equipment in any
of the following circumstances unless the exception stated in paragraph
(f)(5)(v) of this section is applicable:
(i) If any part of the equipment, load line or load (including
rigging and lifting accessories), if operated up to the equipment's
maximum working radius in the work zone (see Sec. 1926.1408(a)(1)),
could get within 20 feet of a power line that is up to 350 kV, or
within 50 feet of a power line that is over 350 kV.
(ii) If the equipment is used to hoist personnel.
(iii) In multiple-equipment lifts.
(iv) If the equipment is used over a shaft, cofferdam, or in a tank
farm.
(v) In multiple-lift rigging operations, except where the
operator's trainer determines that the operator-in-training skills are
sufficient for this high-skill work.
(g) Under this section, a testing entity is permitted to provide
training as well as testing services as long as the criteria of the
applicable accrediting agency (in the option selected) for an
organization providing both services are met.
(h) Language and Literacy Requirements.
(1) Tests under this section may be administered verbally, with
answers given verbally, where the operator candidate:
(i) Passes a written demonstration of literacy relevant to the
work.
(ii) Demonstrates the ability to use the type of written
manufacturer procedures applicable to the class/type of equipment for
which the candidate is seeking certification.
(2) Tests under this section may be administered in any language
the operator candidate understands, and the operator's certificate must
note the language in which the test was given. The operator is
qualified under paragraph (b)(2) of this section to operate equipment
that is furnished with materials required by this subpart that are
written in the language of the certification. The operator may only
operate equipment furnished with such materials.
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) Certification criteria. Qualifications and certifications must
be based, at a minimum, on the following:
(1) A determination through a written test that:
(i) The individual knows the information necessary for safe
operation of the specific type of equipment the individual will
operate, including all of the following:
(A) The controls and operational/performance characteristics.
(B) Use of, and the ability to calculate (manually or with a
calculator), load/capacity information on a variety of configurations
of the equipment.
(C) Procedures for preventing and responding to power line contact.
(D) Technical knowledge similar to the subject matter criteria
listed in
[[Page 48158]]
Appendix C of this subpart applicable to the specific type of equipment
the individual will operate. Use of the Appendix C criteria meets the
requirements of this provision.
(E) Technical knowledge applicable to:
(1) The suitability of the supporting ground and surface to handle
expected loads.
(2) Site hazards.
(3) Site access.
(F) This subpart, including applicable incorporated materials.
(ii) The individual is able to read and locate relevant information
in the equipment manual and other materials containing information
referred to in paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section.
(2) A determination through a practical test that the individual
has the skills necessary for safe operation of the equipment, including
the following:
(i) Ability to recognize, from visual and auditory observation, the
items listed in Sec. 1926.1412(d) (shift inspection).
(ii) Operational and maneuvering skills.
(iii) Application of load chart information.
(iv) Application of safe shut-down and securing procedures.
(k) Phase-in.
(1) The provisions of this section are applicable November 8, 2010,
except for paragraphs (a)(2) and (f) which are applicable November 10,
2014.
(2) When Sec. 1926.1427(a)(1) is not applicable, all of the
requirements in paragraphs (k)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section apply
until November 10, 2014:
(i) The employer must ensure that operators of equipment covered by
this standard are competent to operate the equipment safely.
(ii) Where an employee assigned to operate machinery does not have
the required knowledge or ability to operate the equipment safely, the
employer must train that employee prior to operating the equipment. The
employer must ensure that each operator is evaluated to confirm that
he/she understands the information provided in the training.
Sec. 1926.1428 Signal person qualifications.
(a) The employer of the signal person must ensure that each signal
person meets the Qualification Requirements (paragraph (c) of this
section) prior to giving any signals. This requirement must be met by
using either Option (1) or Option (2) of this section.
(1) Option (1)--Third party qualified evaluator. The signal person
has documentation from a third party qualified evaluator (see Qualified
Evaluator (third party), Sec. 1926.1401 for definition) showing that
the signal person meets the Qualification Requirements (see paragraph
(c) of this section).
(2) Option (2)--Employer's qualified evaluator. The employer's
qualified (see Qualified Evaluator (not a third party), Sec. 1926.1401
for definition) evaluator assesses the individual and determines that
the individual meets the Qualification Requirements (see paragraph (c)
of this section) and provides documentation of that determination. An
assessment by an employer's qualified evaluator under this option is
not portable--other employers are not permitted to use it to meet the
requirements of this section.
(3) The employer must make the documentation for whichever option
is used available at the site while the signal person is employed by
the employer. The documentation must specify each type of signaling
(e.g. hand signals, radio signals, etc.) for which the signal person
meets the requirements of paragraph (c) of this section.
(b) If subsequent actions by the signal person indicate that the
individual does not meet the Qualification Requirements (see paragraph
(c) of this section), the employer must not allow the individual to
continue working as a signal person until re-training is provided and a
re-assessment is made in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section
that confirms that the individual meets the Qualification Requirements.
(c) Qualification Requirements. Each signal person must:
(1) Know and understand the type of signals used. If hand signals
are used, the signal person must know and understand the Standard
Method for hand signals.
(2) Be competent in the application of the type of signals used.
(3) Have a basic understanding of equipment operation and
limitations, including the crane dynamics involved in swinging and
stopping loads and boom deflection from hoisting loads.
(4) Know and understand the relevant requirements of Sec.
1926.1419 through Sec. 1926.1422 and Sec. 1926.1428.
(5) Demonstrate that he/she meets the requirements in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (4) of this section through an oral or written test, and
through a practical test.
Sec. 1926.1429 Qualifications of maintenance & repair employees.
(a) Maintenance, inspection and repair personnel are permitted to
operate the equipment only where all of the following requirements are
met:
(1) The operation is limited to those functions necessary to
perform maintenance, inspect the equipment, or verify its performance.
(2) The personnel either:
(i) Operate the equipment under the direct supervision of an
operator who meets the requirements of Sec. 1926.1427 (Operator
qualification and certification); or
(ii) Are familiar with the operation, limitations, characteristics
and hazards associated with the type of equipment.
(b) Maintenance and repair personnel must meet the definition of a
qualified person with respect to the equipment and maintenance/repair
tasks performed.
Sec. 1926.1430 Training.
The employer must provide training as follows:
(a) Overhead powerlines. The employer must train each employee
specified in Sec. 1926.1408(g) and Sec. 1926.1410(m) in the topics
listed in Sec. 1926.1408(g).
(b) Signal persons. The employer must train each employee who will
be assigned to work as a signal persons who does not meet the
requirements of Sec. 1926.1428(c) in the areas addressed in that
paragraph.
(c) Operators.
(1) Operators-in-Training for equipment where certification or
qualification is required by this subpart. The employer must train each
operator-in-training in the areas addressed in Sec. 1926.1427(j). The
employer must provide re-training if the operator-in-training does not
pass a qualification or certification test.
(2) Transitional Period. During the four-year phase-in period for
operator certification or qualification, as provided in Sec.
1926.1427(k), employers must train each operator who has not yet been
certified or qualified in the areas addressed in Sec. 1926.1427(j).
(3) Operators excepted from the requirements of Sec. 1926.1427.
The employer must train each operator excepted under Sec. 1926.1427(a)
from the requirements of Sec. 1926.1427 on the safe operation of the
equipment the operator will be using.
(4) The employer must train each operator of the equipment covered
by this subpart in the following practices:
(i) On friction equipment, whenever moving a boom off a support,
first raise the boom a short distance (sufficient to take the load of
the boom) to determine if the boom hoist brake needs to be adjusted. On
other types of equipment with a boom, the same practice is applicable,
except that typically there is no means of adjusting the brake; if the
[[Page 48159]]
brake does not hold, a repair is necessary. See Sec. 1926.1417(f) and
(j) for additional requirements.
(ii) Where available, the manufacturer's emergency procedures for
halting unintended equipment movement.
(d) Competent persons and qualified persons. The employer must
train each competent person and each qualified person regarding the
requirements of this subpart applicable to their respective roles.
(e) Crush/pinch points. The employer must train each employee who
works with the equipment to keep clear of holes, and crush/pinch points
and the hazards addressed in Sec. 1926.1424 (Work area control).
(f) Tag-out. The employer must train each operator and each
additional employee authorized to start/energize equipment or operate
equipment controls (such as maintenance and repair employees), in the
tag-out and start-up procedures in Sec. Sec. 1926.1417(f) and (g).
(g) Training administration.
(1) The employer must evaluate each employee required to be trained
under this subpart to confirm that the employee understands the
information provided in the training.
(2) The employer must provide refresher training in relevant topics
for each employee when, based on the conduct of the employee or an
evaluation of the employee's knowledge, there is an indication that
retraining is necessary.
(3) Whenever training is required under subpart CC, the employer
must provide the training at no cost to the employee.
Sec. 1926.1431 Hoisting personnel.
The requirements of this section are supplemental to the other
requirements in this subpart and apply when one or more employees are
hoisted.
(a) The use of equipment to hoist employees is prohibited except
where the employer demonstrates that the erection, use, and dismantling
of conventional means of reaching the work area, such as a personnel
hoist, ladder, stairway, aerial lift, elevating work platform, or
scaffold, would be more hazardous, or is not possible because of the
project's structural design or worksite conditions. This paragraph does
not apply to work covered by subpart R (Steel Erection) of this part.
(b) Use of personnel platform.
(1) When using equipment to hoist employees, the employees must be
in a personnel platform that meets the requirements of paragraph (e) of
this section.
(2) Exceptions: A personnel platform is not required for hoisting
employees:
(i) Into and out of drill shafts that are up to and including 8
feet in diameter (see paragraph (o) of this section for requirements
for hoisting these employees).
(ii) In pile driving operations (see paragraph (p) of this section
for requirements for hoisting these employees).
(iii) Solely for transfer to or from a marine worksite in a marine-
hoisted personnel transfer device (see paragraph (r) of this section
for requirements for hoisting these employees).
(iv) In storage-tank (steel or concrete), shaft and chimney
operations (see paragraph (s) of this section for requirements for
hoisting these employees).
(c) Equipment set-up.
(1) The equipment must be uniformly level, within one percent of
level grade, and located on footing that a qualified person has
determined to be sufficiently firm and stable.
(2) Equipment with outriggers or stabilizers must have them all
extended and locked. The amount of extension must be the same for all
outriggers and stabilizers and in accordance with manufacturer
procedures and load charts.
(d) Equipment criteria.
(1) Capacity: Use of suspended personnel platforms. The total load
(with the platform loaded, including the hook, load line and rigging)
must not exceed 50 percent of the rated capacity for the radius and
configuration of the equipment, except during proof testing.
(2) Capacity: Use of boom-attached personnel platforms. The total
weight of the loaded personnel platform must not exceed 50 percent of
the rated capacity for the radius and configuration of the equipment
(except during proof testing).
(3) Capacity: Hoisting personnel without a personnel platform. When
hoisting personnel without a personnel platform pursuant to paragraph
(b)(2) of this section, the total load (including the hook, load line,
rigging and any other equipment that imposes a load) must not exceed 50
percent of the rated capacity for the radius and configuration of the
equipment, except during proof testing.
(4) When the occupied personnel platform is in a stationary working
position, the load and boom hoist brakes, swing brakes, and operator
actuated secondary braking and locking features (such as pawls or dogs)
or automatic secondary brakes must be engaged.
(5) Devices.
(i) Equipment (except for derricks and articulating cranes) with a
variable angle boom must be equipped with all of the following:
(A) A boom angle indicator, readily visible to the operator, and
(B) A boom hoist limiting device.
(ii) Articulating cranes must be equipped with a properly
functioning automatic overload protection device.
(iii) Equipment with a luffing jib must be equipped with:
(A) A jib angle indicator, readily visible to the operator, and.
(B) A jib hoist limiting device.
(iv) Equipment with telescoping booms must be equipped with a
device to indicate the boom's extended length clearly to the operator,
or must have measuring marks on the boom.
(v) Anti two-block. A device which automatically prevents damage
and load failure from contact between the load block, overhaul ball, or
similar component, and the boom tip (or fixed upper block or similar
component) must be used. The device(s) must prevent such damage/failure
at all points where two-blocking could occur. Exception: This device is
not required when hoisting personnel in pile driving operations.
Instead, paragraph (p)(2) of this section specifies how to prevent two-
blocking during such operations.
(vi) Controlled load lowering. The load line hoist drum must have a
system, other than the load line hoist brake, which regulates the
lowering rate of speed of the hoist mechanism. This system or device
must be used when hoisting personnel.
Note: Free fall of the load line hoist is prohibited (see Sec.
1926.1426(d); the use of equipment in which the boom hoist mechanism
can free fall is also prohibited (see Sec. 1926.1426(a)(1).
(vii) Proper operation required. Personnel hoisting operations must
not begin unless the devices listed in this section are in proper
working order. If a device stops working properly during such
operations, the operator must safely stop operations. Personnel
hoisting operations must not resume until the device is again working
properly. Alternative measures are not permitted. (See Sec. 1926.1417
for tag-out and related requirements.)
(6) Direct attachment of a personnel platform to a luffing jib is
prohibited.
(e) Personnel platform criteria.
(1) A qualified person familiar with structural design must design
the personnel platform and attachment/suspension system used for
hoisting personnel.
(2) The system used to connect the personnel platform to the
equipment
[[Page 48160]]
must allow the platform to remain within 10 degrees of level,
regardless of boom angle.
(3) The suspension system must be designed to minimize tipping of
the platform due to movement of employees occupying the platform.
(4) The personnel platform itself (excluding the guardrail system
and personal fall arrest system anchorages), must be capable of
supporting, without failure, its own weight and at least five times the
maximum intended load.
(5) All welding of the personnel platform and its components must
be performed by a certified welder familiar with the weld grades, types
and material specified in the platform design.
(6) The personnel platform must be equipped with a guardrail system
which meets the requirements of subpart M of this part, and must be
enclosed at least from the toeboard to mid-rail with either solid
construction material or expanded metal having openings no greater than
\1/2\ inch (1.27 cm). Points to which personal fall arrest systems are
attached must meet the anchorage requirements in subpart M of this
part.
(7) A grab rail must be installed inside the entire perimeter of
the personnel platform except for access gates/doors.
(8) Access gates/doors. If installed, access gates/doors of all
types (including swinging, sliding, folding, or other types) must:
(i) Not swing outward. If due to the size of the personnel
platform, such as a 1-person platform, it is infeasible for the door to
swing inward and allow safe entry for the platform occupant, then the
access gate/door may swing outward.
(ii) Be equipped with a device that prevents accidental opening.
(9) Headroom must be sufficient to allow employees to stand upright
in the platform.
(10) In addition to the use of hard hats, employees must be
protected by overhead protection on the personnel platform when
employees are exposed to falling objects. The platform overhead
protection must not obscure the view of the operator or platform
occupants (such as wire mesh that has up to \1/2\ inch openings),
unless full protection is necessary.
(11) All edges exposed to employee contact must be smooth enough to
prevent injury.
(12) The weight of the platform and its rated capacity must be
conspicuously posted on the platform with a plate or other permanent
marking.
(f) Personnel platform loading.
(1) The personnel platform must not be loaded in excess of its
rated capacity.
(2) Use.
(i) Personnel platforms must be used only for employees, their
tools, and the materials necessary to do their work. Platforms must not
be used to hoist materials or tools when not hoisting personnel.
(ii) Exception: Materials and tools to be used during the lift, if
secured and distributed in accordance with paragraph (f)(3) of this
section may be in the platform for trial lifts.
(3) Materials and tools must be:
(i) Secured to prevent displacement.
(ii) Evenly distributed within the confines of the platform while
it is suspended.
(4) The number of employees occupying the personnel platform must
not exceed the maximum number the platform was designed to hold or the
number required to perform the work, whichever is less.
(g) Attachment and rigging.
(1) Hooks and other detachable devices.
(i) Hooks used in the connection between the hoist line and the
personnel platform (including hooks on overhaul ball assemblies, lower
load blocks, bridle legs, or other attachment assemblies or components)
must be:
(A) Of a type that can be closed and locked, eliminating the throat
opening.
(B) Closed and locked when attached.
(ii) Shackles used in place of hooks must be of the alloy anchor
type, with either:
(A) A bolt, nut and retaining pin, in place; or
(B) Of the screw type, with the screw pin secured from accidental
removal.
(iii) Where other detachable devices are used, they must be of the
type that can be closed and locked to the same extent as the devices
addressed in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section. Such
devices must be closed and locked when attached.
(2) Rope bridle. When a rope bridle is used to suspend the
personnel platform, each bridle leg must be connected to a master link
or shackle (see paragraph (g)(1) of this section) in a manner that
ensures that the load is evenly divided among the bridle legs.
(3) Rigging hardware (including wire rope, shackles, rings, master
links, and other rigging hardware) and hooks must be capable of
supporting, without failure, at least five times the maximum intended
load applied or transmitted to that component. Where rotation resistant
rope is used, the slings must be capable of supporting without failure
at least ten times the maximum intended load.
(4) Eyes in wire rope slings must be fabricated with thimbles.
(5) Bridles and associated rigging for suspending the personnel
platform must be used only for the platform and the necessary
employees, their tools and materials necessary to do their work. The
bridles and associated rigging must not have been used for any purpose
other than hoisting personnel.
(h) Trial lift and inspection.
(1) A trial lift with the unoccupied personnel platform loaded at
least to the anticipated liftweight must be made from ground level, or
any other location where employees will enter the platform, to each
location at which the platform is to be hoisted and positioned. Where
there is more than one location to be reached from a single set-up
position, either individual trial lifts for each location, or a single
trial lift, in which the platform is moved sequentially to each
location, must be performed; the method selected must be the same as
the method that will be used to hoist the personnel.
(2) The trial lift must be performed immediately prior to each
shift in which personnel will be hoisted. In addition, the trial lift
must be repeated prior to hoisting employees in each of the following
circumstances:
(i) The equipment is moved and set up in a new location or returned
to a previously used location.
(ii) The lift route is changed, unless the competent person
determines that the new route presents no new factors affecting safety.
(3) The competent person must determine that:
(i) Safety devices and operational aids required by this section
are activated and functioning properly. Other safety devices and
operational aids must meet the requirements of Sec. 1926.1415 and
Sec. 1926.1416.
(ii) Nothing interferes with the equipment or the personnel
platform in the course of the trial lift.
(iii) The lift will not exceed 50 percent of the equipment's rated
capacity at any time during the lift.
(iv) The load radius to be used during the lift has been accurately
determined.
(4) Immediately after the trial lift, the competent person must:
(i) Conduct a visual inspection of the equipment, base support or
ground, and personnel platform, to determine whether the trial lift has
exposed any defect or problem or produced any adverse effect.
(ii) Confirm that, upon the completion of the trial lift process,
the test weight has been removed.
(5) Immediately prior to each lift:
(i) The platform must be hoisted a few inches with the personnel
and materials/tools on board and inspected by a competent person to
ensure that it is secure and properly balanced.
[[Page 48161]]
(ii) The following conditions must be determined by a competent
person to exist before the lift of personnel proceeds:
(A) Hoist ropes must be free of deficiencies in accordance with
Sec. 1926.1413(a).
(B) Multiple part lines must not be twisted around each other.
(C) The primary attachment must be centered over the platform.
(D) If the load rope is slack, the hoisting system must be
inspected to ensure that all ropes are properly seated on drums and in
sheaves.
(6) Any condition found during the trial lift and subsequent
inspection(s) that fails to meet a requirement of this standard or
otherwise creates a safety hazard must be corrected before hoisting
personnel. (See Sec. 1926.1417 for tag-out and related requirements.)
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) Proof testing.
(1) At each jobsite, prior to hoisting employees on the personnel
platform, and after any repair or modification, the platform and
rigging must be proof tested to 125 percent of the platform's rated
capacity. The proof test may be done concurrently with the trial lift.
(2) The platform must be lowered by controlled load lowering,
braked, and held in a suspended position for a minimum of five minutes
with the test load evenly distributed on the platform.
(3) After proof testing, a competent person must inspect the
platform and rigging to determine if the test has been passed. If any
deficiencies are found that pose a safety hazard, the platform and
rigging must not be used to hoist personnel unless the deficiencies are
corrected, the test is repeated, and a competent person determines that
the test has been passed. (See Sec. 1926.1417 for tag-out and related
requirements.)
(4) Personnel hoisting must not be conducted until the competent
person determines that the platform and rigging have successfully
passed the proof test.
(k) Work practices.
(1) Hoisting of the personnel platform must be performed in a slow,
controlled, cautious manner, with no sudden movements of the equipment
or the platform.
(2) Platform occupants must:
(i) Keep all parts of the body inside the platform during raising,
lowering, and horizontal movement. This provision does not apply to an
occupant of the platform when necessary to position the platform or
while performing the duties of a signal person.
(ii) Not stand, sit on, or work from the top or intermediate rail
or toeboard, or use any other means/device to raise their working
height.
(iii) Not pull the platform out of plumb in relation to the
hoisting equipment.
(3) Before employees exit or enter a hoisted personnel platform
that is not landed, the platform must be secured to the structure where
the work is to be performed, unless the employer can demonstrate that
securing to the structure would create a greater hazard.
(4) If the platform is tied to the structure, the operator must not
move the platform until the operator receives confirmation that it is
freely suspended.
(5) Tag lines must be used when necessary to control the platform.
(6) Platforms without controls. Where the platform is not equipped
with controls, the equipment operator must remain at the equipment
controls, on site, and in view of the equipment, at all times while the
platform is occupied.
(7) Platforms with controls. Where the platform is equipped with
controls, all of the following must be met at all times while the
platform is occupied:
(i) The occupant using the controls in the platform must be a
qualified person with respect to their use, including the safe
limitations of the equipment and hazards associated with its operation.
(ii) The equipment operator must be at a set of equipment controls
that include boom and swing functions of the equipment, and must be on
site and in view of the equipment.
(iii) The platform operating manual must be in the platform or on
the equipment.
(8) Environmental conditions.
(i) Wind. When wind speed (sustained or gusts) exceeds 20 mph at
the personnel platform, a qualified person must determine if, in light
of the wind conditions, it is not safe to lift personnel. If it is not,
the lifting operation must not begin (or, if already in progress, must
be terminated).
(ii) Other weather and environmental conditions. A qualified person
must determine if, in light of indications of dangerous weather
conditions, or other impending or existing danger, it is not safe to
lift personnel. If it is not, the lifting operation must not begin (or,
if already in progress, must be terminated).
(9) Employees being hoisted must remain in direct communication
with the signal person (where used), or the operator.
(10) Fall protection.
(i) Except over water, employees occupying the personnel platform
must be provided and use a personal fall arrest system. The system must
be attached to a structural member within the personnel platform. When
working over or near water, the requirements of Sec. 1926.106 apply.
(ii) The fall arrest system, including the attachment point
(anchorage) used to comply with paragraph (i) of this section, must
meet the requirements in Sec. 1926.502.
(11) Other load lines.
(i) No lifts must be made on any other of the equipment's load
lines while personnel are being hoisted, except in pile driving
operations.
(ii) Factory-produced boom-mounted personnel platforms that
incorporate a winch as original equipment. Loads are permitted to be
hoisted by such a winch while employees occupy the personnel platform
only where the load on the winch line does not exceed 500 pounds and
does not exceed the rated capacity of the winch and platform.
(12) Traveling--equipment other than derricks.
(i) Hoisting of employees while the equipment is traveling is
prohibited, except for:
(A) Equipment that travels on fixed rails; or
(B) Where the employer demonstrates that there is no less hazardous
way to perform the work.
(C) This exception does not apply to rubber-tired equipment.
(ii) Where employees are hoisted while the equipment is traveling,
all of the following criteria must be met:
(A) Equipment travel must be restricted to a fixed track or runway.
(B) Where a runway is used, it must be a firm, level surface
designed, prepared and designated as a path of travel for the weight
and configuration of the equipment being used to lift and travel with
the personnel platform. An existing surface may be used as long as it
meets these criteria.
(C) Equipment travel must be limited to boom length.
(D) The boom must be parallel to the direction of travel, except
where it is safer to do otherwise.
(E) A complete trial run must be performed to test the route of
travel before employees are allowed to occupy the platform. This trial
run can be performed at the same time as the trial lift required by
paragraph (h) of this section which tests the lift route.
(13) Traveling--derricks. Derricks are prohibited from traveling
while personnel are hoisted.
(l) [Reserved.]
(m) Pre-lift meeting. A pre-lift meeting must be:
(1) Held to review the applicable requirements of this section and
the procedures that will be followed.
(2) Attended by the equipment operator, signal person (if used for
the
[[Page 48162]]
lift), employees to be hoisted, and the person responsible for the task
to be performed.
(3) Held prior to the trial lift at each new work location, and
must be repeated for any employees newly assigned to the operation.
(n) Hoisting personnel near power lines. Hoisting personnel within
20 feet of a power line that is up to 350 kV, and hoisting personnel
within 50 feet of a power line that is over 350 kV, is prohibited,
except for work covered by subpart V of this part (Power Transmission
and Distribution).
(o) Hoisting personnel in drill shafts. When hoisting employees
into and out of drill shafts that are up to and including 8 feet in
diameter, all of the following requirements must be met:
(1) The employee must be in either a personnel platform or on a
boatswain's chair.
(2) If using a personnel platform, paragraphs (a) through (n) of
this section apply.
(3) If using a boatswain's chair:
(i) The following paragraphs of this section apply: (a), (c),
(d)(1), (d)(3), (d)(4), (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (f)(1), (f)(2)(i),
(f)(3)(i), (g), (h), (k)(1), (k)(6), (k)(8), (k)(9), (k)(11)(i), (m),
(n). Where the terms ``personnel platform'' or ``platform'' are used in
these paragraphs, substitute them with ``boatswain's chair.''
(ii) A signal person must be stationed at the shaft opening.
(iii) The employee must be hoisted in a slow, controlled descent
and ascent.
(iv) The employee must use personal fall protection equipment,
including a full body harness, attached independent of the crane/
derrick.
(v) The fall protection equipment must meet the applicable
requirements in Sec. 1926.502.
(vi) The boatswain's chair itself (excluding the personal fall
arrest system anchorages), must be capable of supporting, without
failure, its own weight and at least five times the maximum intended
load.
(vii) No more than one person must be hoisted at a time.
(p) Hoisting personnel for pile driving operations. When hoisting
an employee in pile driving operations, the following requirements must
be met:
(1) The employee must be in a personnel platform or boatswain's
chair.
(2) For lattice boom cranes: Clearly mark the cable (so that it can
easily be seen by the operator) at a point that will give the operator
sufficient time to stop the hoist to prevent two-blocking, or use a
spotter who is in direct communication with the operator to inform the
operator when this point is reached. For telescopic boom cranes:
Clearly mark the cable (so that it can be easily seen by the operator)
at a point that will give the operator sufficient time to stop the
hoist to prevent two-blocking, and use a spotter who is in direct
communication with the operator to inform the operator when this point
is reached.
(3) If using a personnel platform, paragraphs (b) through (n) of
this section apply.
(4) If using a boatswain's chair:
(i) The following paragraphs of this section apply: (a), (c),
(d)(1), (d)(3), (d)(4), (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (f)(1), (f)(2)(i),
(f)(3)(i), (g), (h), (j), (k)(1), (k)(6), (k)(8), (k)(9), (k)(11)(i),
(m), and (n). Where the terms ``personnel platform'' or ``platform''
are used in these paragraphs, substitute them with ``boatswains
chair.''
(ii) The employee must be hoisted in a slow, controlled descent and
ascent.
(iii) The employee must use personal fall protection equipment,
including a full body harness, independently attached to the lower load
block or overhaul ball.
(iv) The fall protection equipment must meet the applicable
requirements in Sec. 1926.502.
(v) The boatswain's chair itself (excluding the personal fall
arrest system anchorages), must be capable of supporting, without
failure, its own weight and at least five times the maximum intended
load.
(vi) No more than one person must be hoisted at a time.
(q) [Reserved.]
(r) Hoisting personnel for marine transfer. When hoisting employees
solely for transfer to or from a marine worksite, the following
requirements must be met:
(1) The employee must be in either a personnel platform or a
marine-hoisted personnel transfer device.
(2) If using a personnel platform, paragraphs (a) through (n) of
this section apply.
(3) If using a marine-hoisted personnel transfer device:
(i) The following paragraphs of this section apply: (a), (c)(2),
(d)(1), (d)(3), (d)(4), (e)(1) through (5), (e)(12), (f)(1), (g), (h),
(j), (k)(1), (k)(8), (k)(9), (k)(10)(ii), (k)(11)(i), (k)(12), (m), and
(n). Where the terms ``personnel platform'' or ``platform'' are used in
these paragraphs, substitute them with ``marine-hoisted personnel
transfer device.''
(ii) The transfer device must be used only for transferring
workers.
(iii) The number of workers occupying the transfer device must not
exceed the maximum number it was designed to hold.
(iv) Each employee must wear a U.S. Coast Guard personal flotation
device approved for industrial use.
(s) Hoisting personnel for storage-tank (steel or concrete), shaft
and chimney operations. When hoisting an employee in storage tank
(steel or concrete), shaft and chimney operations, the following
requirements must be met:
(1) The employee must be in a personnel platform except when the
employer can demonstrate that use of a personnel platform is
infeasible; in such a case, a boatswain's chair must be used.
(2) If using a personnel platform, paragraphs (a) through (n) of
this section apply.
(3) If using a boatswain's chair:
(i) The following paragraphs of this section apply: (a), (c),
(d)(1), (d)(3), (d)(4), (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (f)(1), (f)(2)(i),
(f)(3)(i), (g), (h), (k)(1), (k)(6), (k)(8), (k)(9), (k)(11)(i), (m),
(n). Where the terms ``personnel platform'' or ``platform'' are used in
these paragraphs, substitute them with ``boatswains chair.''
(ii) The employee must be hoisted in a slow, controlled descent and
ascent.
(iii) The employee must use personal fall protection equipment,
including a full body harness, attached independent of the crane/
derrick. When there is no adequate structure for attachment of personal
fall arrest equipment as required in Sec. 1926.502(d)(15), the
attachment must be to the lower load block or overhaul ball.
(iv) The fall protection equipment must meet the applicable
requirements in Sec. 1926.502.
(v) The boatswain's chair itself (excluding the personal fall
arrest system anchorages), must be capable of supporting, without
failure, its own weight and at least five times the maximum intended
load.
(vi) No more than one person must be hoisted at a time.
Sec. 1926.1432 Multiple-crane/derrick lifts--supplemental
requirements.
(a) Plan development. Before beginning a crane/derrick operation in
which more than one crane/derrick will be supporting the load, the
operation must be planned. The planning must meet the following
requirements:
(1) The plan must be developed by a qualified person.
(2) The plan must be designed to ensure that the requirements of
this subpart are met.
(3) Where the qualified person determines that engineering
expertise is needed for the planning, the employer must ensure that it
is provided.
(b) Plan implementation.
(1) The multiple-crane/derrick lift must be directed by a person
who meets the criteria for both a competent person and a qualified
person, or by a competent person who is assisted by
[[Page 48163]]
one or more qualified persons (lift director).
(2) The lift director must review the plan in a meeting with all
workers who will be involved with the operation.
Sec. 1926.1433 Design, construction and testing.
The following requirements apply to equipment that has a
manufacturer-rated hoisting/lifting capacity of more than 2,000 pounds.
(a) Crawler, truck and locomotive cranes manufactured prior to
November 8, 2010 must meet the applicable requirements for design,
construction, and testing as prescribed in ANSI B30.5-1968
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 1926.6), PCSA Std. No. 2 (1968)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 1926.6), the requirements in
paragraph (b) of this section, or the applicable DIN standards that
were in effect at the time of manufacture.
(b) Mobile (including crawler and truck) and locomotive cranes
manufactured on or after November 8, 2010 must meet the following
portions of ASME B30.5-2004 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
1926.6) as applicable:
(1) In section 5-1.1.1 (``Load Ratings--Where Stability Governs
Lifting Performance''), paragraphs (a)--(d) (including subparagraphs).
(2) In section 5-1.1.2 (``Load Ratings--Where Structural Competence
Governs Lifting Performance''), paragraph (b).
(3) Section 5-1.2 (``Stability (Backward and Forward)'').
(4) In section 5-1.3.1 (``Boom Hoist Mechanism''), paragraphs (a),
(b)(1) and (b)(2), except that when using rotation resistant rope,
Sec. 1926.1414(c)(4)(ii)(A) applies.
(5) In section 5-1.3.2 (``Load Hoist Mechanism''), paragraphs
(a)(2) through (a)(4) (including subparagraphs), (b) (including
subparagraphs), (c) (first sentence only) and (d).
(6) Section 5-1.3.3 (``Telescoping Boom'').
(7) Section 5-1.4 (``Swing Mechanism'').
(8) In section 5-1.5 (``Crane Travel''), all provisions except 5-
1.5.3(d).
(9) In section 5-1.6 (``Controls''), all provisions except 5-1.6.1
(c).
(10) Section 5-1.7.4 (``Sheaves'').
(11) Section 5-1.7.5 (``Sheave sizes'').
(12) In section 5-1.9.1 (``Booms''), paragraph (f).
(13) Section 5-1.9.3 (``Outriggers'').
(14) Section 5-1.9.4 (``Locomotive Crane Equipment'').
(15) Section 5-1.9.7 (``Clutch and Brake Protection'').
(16) In section 5-1.9.11 (``Miscellaneous equipment''), paragraphs
(a), (c), (e), and (f).
(c) Prototype testing: mobile (including crawler and truck) and
locomotive cranes manufactured on or after November 8, 2010 must meet
the prototype testing requirements in Test Option A or Test Option B of
this section. Tower cranes manufactured on or after November 8, 2010
must meet the prototype testing requirements in BS EN 14439:2006
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 1926.6).
Note: Prototype testing of crawler, locomotive and truck cranes
manufactured prior to November 8, 2010 must conform to paragraph (a)
of this section.
(1) Test Option A.
(i) The following applies to equipment with cantilevered booms
(such as hydraulic boom cranes): All the tests listed in SAE J1063
(Nov. 1993) Table 1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 1926.6) must
be performed to load all critical structural elements to their
respective limits. All the strength margins listed in SAE J1063 (Nov.
1993) Table 2 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 1926.6) must be
met.
(ii) The following applies to equipment with pendant supported
lattice booms: All the tests listed in SAE J987 (Jun. 2003) Table 1
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 1926.6) must be performed to load
all critical structural elements to their respective limits. All the
strength margins listed in SAE J987 (Jun. 2003) Table 2 (incorporated
by reference, see Sec. 1926.6) must be met.
(2) Test Option B. The testing and verification requirements of BS
EN 13000:2004 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 1926.6) must be
met. In applying BS EN 13000:2004, the following additional
requirements must be met:
(i) The following applies to equipment with cantilevered booms
(such as hydraulic boom cranes): The analysis methodology (computer
modeling) must demonstrate that all load cases listed in SAE J1063
(Nov. 1993) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 1926.6) meet the
strength margins listed in SAE J1063 (Nov. 1993) Table 2.
(ii) The following applies to equipment with pendant supported
lattice booms: The analysis methodology (computer modeling) must
demonstrate that all load cases listed in SAE J987 (Jun. 2003)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 1926.6) meet the strength margins
listed in SAE J987 (Jun. 2003) Table 2.
(iii) Analysis verification. The physical testing requirements
under SAE J1063 (Nov. 1993) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
1926.6) and SAE J987 (Jun. 2003) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
1926.6) must be met unless the reliability of the analysis methodology
(computer modeling) has been demonstrated by a documented history of
verification through strain gauge measuring or strain gauge measuring
in combination with other physical testing.
(d) All equipment covered by this subpart must meet the following
requirements:
(1) Rated capacity and related information. The information
available in the cab (see Sec. 1926.1417(c)) regarding ``rated
capacity'' and related information must include, at a minimum, the
following information:
(i) A complete range of the manufacturer's equipment rated
capacities, as follows:
(A) At all manufacturer approved operating radii, boom angles, work
areas, boom lengths and configurations, jib lengths and angles (or
offset).
(B) Alternate ratings for use and nonuse of option equipment which
affects rated capacities, such as outriggers, stabilizers, and extra
counterweights.
(ii) A work area chart for which capacities are listed in the load
chart. (Note: An example of this type of chart is in ASME B30.5-2004,
section 5-1.1.3, Figure 11).
(iii) The work area figure and load chart must clearly indicate the
areas where no load is to be handled.
(iv) Recommended reeving for the hoist lines must be shown.
(v) Recommended parts of hoist reeving, size, and type of wire rope
for various equipment loads.
(vi) Recommended boom hoist reeving diagram, where applicable;
size, type and length of wire rope.
(vii) Tire pressure (where applicable).
(viii) Caution or warnings relative to limitations on equipment and
operating procedures, including an indication of the least stable
direction.
(ix) Position of the gantry and requirements for intermediate boom
suspension (where applicable).
(x) Instructions for boom erection and conditions under which the
boom, or boom and jib combinations, may be raised or lowered.
(xi) Whether the hoist holding mechanism is automatically or
manually controlled, whether free fall is available, or any combination
of these.
(xii) The maximum telescopic travel length of each boom telescopic
section.
(xiii) Whether sections are telescoped manually or with power.
(xiv) The sequence and procedure for extending and retracting the
telescopic boom section.
(xv) Maximum loads permitted during the boom extending operation,
and any limiting conditions or cautions.
(xvi) Hydraulic relief valve settings specified by the
manufacturer.
[[Page 48164]]
(2) Load hooks (including latched and unlatched types), ball
assemblies and load blocks must be of sufficient weight to overhaul the
line from the highest hook position for boom or boom and jib lengths
and the number of parts of the line in use.
(3) Hook and ball assemblies and load blocks must be marked with
their rated capacity and weight.
(4) Latching hooks.
(i) Hooks must be equipped with latches, except where the
requirements of paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this section are met.
(ii) Hooks without latches, or with latches removed or disabled,
must not be used unless:
(A) A qualified person has determined that it is safer to hoist and
place the load without latches (or with the latches removed/tied-back).
(B) Routes for the loads are pre-planned to ensure that no employee
is required to work in the fall zone except for employees necessary for
the hooking or unhooking of the load.
(iii) The latch must close the throat opening and be designed to
retain slings or other lifting devices/accessories in the hook when the
rigging apparatus is slack.
(5) Posted warnings. Posted warnings required by this subpart as
well as those originally supplied with the equipment by the
manufacturer must be maintained in legible condition.
(6) An accessible fire extinguisher must be on the equipment.
(7) Cabs. Equipment with cabs must meet the following requirements:
(i) Cabs must be designed with a form of adjustable ventilation and
method for clearing the windshield for maintaining visibility and air
circulation. Examples of means for adjustable ventilation include air
conditioner or window that can be opened (for ventilation and air
circulation); examples of means for maintaining visibility include
heater (for preventing windshield icing), defroster, fan, windshield
wiper.
(ii) Cab doors (swinging, sliding) must be designed to prevent
inadvertent opening or closing while traveling or operating the
machine. Swinging doors adjacent to the operator must open outward.
Sliding operator doors must open rearward.
(iii) Windows.
(A) The cab must have windows in front and on both sides of the
operator. Forward vertical visibility must be sufficient to give the
operator a view of the boom point at all times.
(B) Windows may have sections designed to be opened or readily
removed. Windows with sections designed to be opened must be designed
so that they can be secured to prevent inadvertent closure.
(C) Windows must be of safety glass or material with similar
optical and safety properties, that introduce no visible distortion or
otherwise obscure visibility that interferes with the safe operation of
the equipment.
(iv) A clear passageway must be provided from the operator's
station to an exit door on the operator's side.
(v) Areas of the cab roof that serve as a workstation for rigging,
maintenance or other equipment-related tasks must be capable of
supporting 250 pounds without permanent distortion.
(8) Belts, gears, shafts, pulleys, sprockets, spindles, drums, fly
wheels, chains, and other parts or components that reciprocate, rotate
or otherwise move must be guarded where contact by employees (except
for maintenance and repair employees) is possible in the performance of
normal duties.
(9) All exhaust pipes, turbochargers, and charge air coolers must
be insulated or guarded where contact by employees (except for
maintenance and repair employees) is possible in the performance of
normal duties.
(10) Hydraulic and pneumatic lines must be protected from damage to
the extent feasible.
(11) The equipment must be designed so that exhaust fumes are not
discharged in the cab and are discharged in a direction away from the
operator.
(12) Friction mechanisms. Where friction mechanisms (such as brakes
and clutches) are used to control the boom hoist or load line hoist,
they must be:
(i) Of a size and thermal capacity sufficient to control all rated
loads with the minimum recommended reeving.
(ii) Adjustable to permit compensation for lining wear to maintain
proper operation.
(13) Hydraulic load hoists. Hydraulic drums must have an integrally
mounted holding device or internal static brake to prevent load hoist
movement in the event of hydraulic failure.
(e) The employer's obligations under paragraphs (a) through (c) and
(d)(7) through (13) of this section are met where the equipment has not
changed (except in accordance with Sec. 1926.1434 (Equipment
modifications)) and it can refer to documentation from the manufacturer
showing that the equipment has been designed, constructed and tested in
accordance with those paragraphs.
Sec. 1926.1434 Equipment modifications.
(a) Modifications or additions which affect the capacity or safe
operation of the equipment are prohibited except where the requirements
of paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), or (a)(5) of this section
are met.
(1) Manufacturer review and approval.
(i) The manufacturer approves the modifications/additions in
writing.
(ii) The load charts, procedures, instruction manuals and
instruction plates/tags/decals are modified as necessary to accord with
the modification/addition.
(iii) The original safety factor of the equipment is not reduced.
(2) Manufacturer refusal to review request. The manufacturer is
provided a detailed description of the proposed modification/addition,
is asked to approve the modification/addition, but it declines to
review the technical merits of the proposal or fails, within 30 days,
to acknowledge the request or initiate the review, and all of the
following are met:
(i) A registered professional engineer who is a qualified person
with respect to the equipment involved:
(A) Approves the modification/addition and specifies the equipment
configurations to which that approval applies, and
(B) Modifies load charts, procedures, instruction manuals and
instruction plates/tags/decals as necessary to accord with the
modification/addition.
(ii) The original safety factor of the equipment is not reduced.
(3) Unavailable manufacturer. The manufacturer is unavailable and
the requirements of paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section are
met.
(4) Manufacturer does not complete the review within 120 days of
the request. The manufacturer is provided a detailed description of the
proposed modification/addition, is asked to approve the modification/
addition, agrees to review the technical merits of the proposal, but
fails to complete the review of the proposal within 120 days of the
date it was provided the detailed description of the proposed
modification/addition, and the requirements of paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and
(ii) of this section are met.
(5) Multiple manufacturers of equipment designed for use on marine
work sites. The equipment is designed for marine work sites, contains
major structural components from more than one manufacturer, and the
requirements of paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section are met.
(b) Modifications or additions which affect the capacity or safe
operation of the equipment are prohibited where the manufacturer, after
a review of the technical safety merits of the proposed modification/
addition, rejects the proposal and explains the reasons for
[[Page 48165]]
the rejection in a written response. If the manufacturer rejects the
proposal but does not explain the reasons for the rejection in writing,
the employer may treat this as a manufacturer refusal to review the
request under paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(c) The provisions in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section do not
apply to modifications made or approved by the U.S. military.
Sec. 1926.1435 Tower cranes.
(a) This section contains supplemental requirements for tower
cranes; all sections of this subpart apply to tower cranes unless
specified otherwise.
(b) Erecting, climbing and dismantling.
(1) Section 1926.1403 (Assembly/Disassembly--selection of
manufacturer or employer procedures), Sec. 1926.1404 (Assembly/
Disassembly--general requirements (applies to all assembly and
disassembly operations)), Sec. 1926.1405 (Disassembly--additional
requirements for dismantling of booms and jibs (applies to both the use
of manufacturer procedures and employer procedures)), and Sec.
1926.1406 (Assembly/Disassembly--employer procedures--general
requirements), apply to tower cranes (except as otherwise specified),
except that the term ``assembly/disassembly'' is replaced by
``erecting, climbing and dismantling,'' and the term ``disassembly'' is
replaced by ``dismantling.''
(2) Dangerous areas (self-erecting tower cranes). In addition to
the requirements in Sec. 1926.1404(e), for self-erecting tower cranes,
the following applies: Employees must not be in or under the tower,
jib, or rotating portion of the crane during erecting, climbing and
dismantling operations until the crane is secured in a locked position
and the competent person in charge indicates it is safe to enter this
area, unless the manufacturer's instructions direct otherwise and only
the necessary personnel are permitted in this area.
(3) Foundations and structural supports. Tower crane foundations
and structural supports (including both the portions of the structure
used for support and the means of attachment) must be designed by the
manufacturer or a registered professional engineer.
(4) Addressing specific hazards. The requirements in Sec.
1926.1404(h)(1) through (9) apply. In addition, the A/D director must
address the following:
(i) Foundations and structural supports. The A/D director must
determine that tower crane foundations and structural supports are
installed in accordance with their design.
(ii) Loss of backward stability. Backward stability before swinging
self erecting cranes or cranes on traveling or static undercarriages.
(iii) Wind speed. Wind must not exceed the speed recommended by the
manufacturer or, where manufacturer does not specify this information,
the speed determined by a qualified person.
(5) Plumb tolerance. Towers must be erected plumb to the
manufacturer's tolerance and verified by a qualified person. Where the
manufacturer does not specify plumb tolerance, the crane tower must be
plumb to a tolerance of at least 1:500 (approximately 1 inch in 40
feet).
(6) Multiple tower crane jobsites. On jobsites where more than one
fixed jib (hammerhead) tower crane is installed, the cranes must be
located such that no crane can come in contact with the structure of
another crane. Cranes are permitted to pass over one another.
(7) Climbing procedures. Prior to, and during, all climbing
procedures (including inside climbing and top climbing), the employer
must:
(i) Comply with all manufacturer prohibitions.
(ii) Have a registered professional engineer verify that the host
structure is strong enough to sustain the forces imposed through the
braces, brace anchorages and supporting floors.
(8) Counterweight/ballast.
(i) Equipment must not be erected, dismantled or operated without
the amount and position of counterweight and/or ballast in place as
specified by the manufacturer or a registered professional engineer
familiar with the equipment.
(ii) The maximum counterweight and/or ballast specified by the
manufacturer or registered professional engineer familiar with the
equipment must not be exceeded.
(c) Signs. The size and location of signs installed on tower cranes
must be in accordance with manufacturer specifications. Where these are
unavailable, a registered professional engineer familiar with the type
of equipment involved must approve in writing the size and location of
any signs.
(d) Safety devices.
(1) Section 1926.1415 does not apply to tower cranes.
(2) The following safety devices are required on all tower cranes
unless otherwise specified:
(i) Boom stops on luffing boom type tower cranes.
(ii) Jib stops on luffing boom type tower cranes if equipped with a
jib attachment.
(iii) Travel rail end stops at both ends of travel rail.
(iv) Travel rail clamps on all travel bogies.
(v) Integrally mounted check valves on all load supporting
hydraulic cylinders.
(vi) Hydraulic system pressure limiting device.
(vii) The following brakes, which must automatically set in the
event of pressure loss or power failure, are required:
(A) A hoist brake on all hoists.
(B) Swing brake.
(C) Trolley brake.
(D) Rail travel brake.
(viii) Deadman control or forced neutral return control (hand)
levers.
(ix) Emergency stop switch at the operator's station.
(x) Trolley end stops must be provided at both ends of travel of
the trolley.
(3) Proper operation required. Operations must not begin unless the
devices listed in this section are in proper working order. If a device
stops working properly during operations, the operator must safely stop
operations. The equipment must be taken out of service, and operations
must not resume until the device is again working properly. See Sec.
1926.1417(f). Alternative measures are not permitted to be used.
(e) Operational aids.
(1) Section 1926.1416 does not apply to tower cranes.
(2) The devices listed in this section (``operational aids'') are
required on all tower cranes covered by this subpart, unless otherwise
specified.
(3) Operations must not begin unless the operational aids are in
proper working order, except where the employer meets the specified
temporary alternative measures. More protective alternative measures
specified by the tower crane manufacturer, if any, must be followed.
See Sec. 1926.1417(j) for additional requirements.
(4) If an operational aid stops working properly during operations,
the operator must safely stop operations until the temporary
alternative measures are implemented or the device is again working
properly. If a replacement part is no longer available, the use of a
substitute device that performs the same type of function is permitted
and is not considered a modification under Sec. 1926.1434.
(5) Category I operational aids and alternative measures.
Operational aids listed in this paragraph that are not working properly
must be repaired no later than 7 calendar days after the deficiency
occurs. Exception: If the employer documents that it has ordered
[[Page 48166]]
the necessary parts within 7 calendar days of the occurrence of the
deficiency, the repair must be completed within 7 calendar days of
receipt of the parts.
(i) Trolley travel limiting device. The travel of the trolley must
be restricted at both ends of the jib by a trolley travel limiting
device to prevent the trolley from running into the trolley end stops.
Temporary alternative measures:
(A) Option A. The trolley rope must be marked (so it can be seen by
the operator) at a point that will give the operator sufficient time to
stop the trolley prior to the end stops.
(B) Option B. A spotter who is in direct communication with the
operator must be used when operations are conducted within 10 feet of
the outer or inner trolley end stops.
(ii) Boom hoist limiting device. The range of the boom must be
limited at the minimum and maximum radius. Temporary alternative
measures: Clearly mark the cable (so it can be seen by the operator) at
a point that will give the operator sufficient time to stop the boom
hoist within the minimum and maximum boom radius, or use a spotter who
is in direct communication with the operator to inform the operator
when this point is reached.
(iii) Anti two-blocking device. The tower crane must be equipped
with a device which automatically prevents damage from contact between
the load block, overhaul ball, or similar component, and the boom tip
(or fixed upper block or similar component). The device(s) must prevent
such damage at all points where two-blocking could occur. Temporary
alternative measures: Clearly mark the cable (so it can be seen by the
operator) at a point that will give the operator sufficient time to
stop the hoist to prevent two-blocking, or use a spotter who is in
direct communication with the operator to inform the operator when this
point is reached.
(iv) Hoist drum lower limiting device. Tower cranes manufactured
after November 8, 2011 must be equipped with a device that prevents the
last 2 wraps of hoist cable from being spooled off the drum. Temporary
alternative measures: Mark the cable (so it can be seen by the
operator) at a point that will give the operator sufficient time to
stop the hoist prior to last 2 wraps of hoist cable being spooled off
the drum, or use a spotter who is in direct communication with the
operator to inform the operator when this point is reached
(v) Load moment limiting device. The tower crane must have a device
that prevents moment overloading. Temporary alternative measures: A
radius indicating device must be used (if the tower crane is not
equipped with a radius indicating device, the radius must be measured
to ensure the load is within the rated capacity of the crane). In
addition, the weight of the load must be determined from a source
recognized by the industry (such as the load's manufacturer), or by a
calculation method recognized by the industry (such as calculating a
steel beam from measured dimensions and a known per foot weight), or by
other equally reliable means. This information must be provided to the
operator prior to the lift.
(vi) Hoist line pull limiting device. The capacity of the hoist
must be limited to prevent overloading, including each individual gear
ratio if equipped with a multiple speed hoist transmission. Temporary
alternative measures: The operator must ensure that the weight of the
load does not exceed the capacity of the hoist (including for each
individual gear ratio if equipped with a multiple speed hoist
transmission).
(vii) Rail travel limiting device. The travel distance in each
direction must be limited to prevent the travel bogies from running
into the end stops or buffers. Temporary alternative measures: A
spotter who is in direct communication with the operator must be used
when operations are conducted within 10 feet of either end of the
travel rail end stops; the spotter must inform the operator of the
distance of the travel bogies from the end stops or buffers.
(viii) Boom hoist drum positive locking device and control. The
boom hoist drum must be equipped with a control that will enable the
operator to positively lock the boom hoist drum from the cab. Temporary
alternative measures: The device must be manually set when required if
an electric, hydraulic or automatic control is not functioning.
(6) Category II operational aids and alternative measures.
Operational aids listed in this paragraph that are not working properly
must be repaired no later than 30 calendar days after the deficiency
occurs. Exception: If the employer documents that it has ordered the
necessary parts within 7 calendar days of the occurrence of the
deficiency, and the part is not received in time to complete the repair
in 30 calendar days, the repair must be completed within 7 calendar
days of receipt of the parts.
(i) Boom angle or hook radius indicator.
(A) Luffing boom tower cranes must have a boom angle indicator
readable from the operator's station.
(B) Hammerhead tower cranes manufactured after November 8, 2011
must have a hook radius indicator readable from the operator's station.
(C) Temporary alternative measures: Hook radii or boom angle must
be determined by measuring the hook radii or boom angle with a
measuring device.
(ii) Trolley travel deceleration device. The trolley speed must be
automatically reduced prior to the trolley reaching the end limit in
both directions. Temporary alternative measure: The employer must post
a notice in the cab of the crane notifying the operator that the
trolley travel deceleration device is malfunctioning and instructing
the operator to take special care to reduce the trolley speed when
approaching the trolley end limits.
(iii) Boom hoist deceleration device. The boom speed must be
automatically reduced prior to the boom reaching the minimum or maximum
radius limit. Temporary alternative measure: The employer must post a
notice in the cab of the crane notifying the operator that the boom
hoist deceleration device is malfunctioning and instructing the
operator to take special care to reduce the boom speed when approaching
the minimum or maximum radius limits.
(iv) Load hoist deceleration device. The load speed must be
automatically reduced prior to the hoist reaching the upper limit.
Temporary alternative measure: The employer must post a notice in the
cab of the crane notifying the operator that the load hoist
deceleration device is malfunctioning and instructing the operator to
take special care to reduce the load speed when approaching the upper
limits.
(v) Wind speed indicator. A device must be provided to display the
wind speed and must be mounted above the upper rotating structure on
tower cranes. On self erecting cranes, it must be mounted at or above
the jib level. Temporary alternative measures: Use of wind speed
information from a properly functioning indicating device on another
tower crane on the same site, or a qualified person estimates the wind
speed.
(vi) Load indicating device. Cranes manufactured after November 8,
2011 must have a device that displays the magnitude of the load on the
hook. Displays that are part of load moment limiting devices that
display the load on the hook meet this requirement. Temporary
alternative measures: The weight of the load must be determined from a
source recognized by the industry (such as the load's manufacturer), or
by a calculation method recognized by the industry (such as calculating
a steel beam from measured dimensions and a known per foot weight), or
by other equally reliable
[[Page 48167]]
means. This information must be provided to the operator prior to the
lift.
(f) Inspections.
(1) Section 1926.1412 (Inspections) applies to tower cranes, except
that the term ``assembly'' is replaced by ``erection.'' Section
1926.1413 (Wire rope--inspection) applies to tower cranes.
(2) Pre-erection inspection. Before each crane component is
erected, it must be inspected by a qualified person for damage or
excessive wear.
(i) The qualified person must pay particular attention to
components that will be difficult to inspect thoroughly during shift
inspections.
(ii) If the qualified person determines that a component is damaged
or worn to the extent that it would create a safety hazard if used on
the crane, that component must not be erected on the crane unless it is
repaired and, upon reinspection by the qualified person, found to no
longer create a safety hazard.
(iii) If the qualified person determines that, though not presently
a safety hazard, the component needs to be monitored, the employer must
ensure that the component is checked in the monthly inspections. Any
such determination must be documented, and the documentation must be
available to any individual who conducts a monthly inspection.
(3) Post-erection inspection. In addition to the requirements in
Sec. 1926.1412(c), the following requirements must be met:
(i) A load test using certified weights, or scaled weights using a
certified scale with a current certificate of calibration, must be
conducted after each erection.
(ii) The load test must be conducted in accordance with the
manufacturer's instructions when available. Where these instructions
are unavailable, the test must be conducted in accordance with written
load test procedures developed by a registered professional engineer
familiar with the type of equipment involved.
(4) Monthly. The following additional items must be included:
(i) Tower (mast) bolts and other structural bolts (for loose or
dislodged condition) from the base of the tower crane up or, if the
crane is tied to or braced by the structure, those above the upper-most
brace support.
(ii) The upper-most tie-in, braces, floor supports and floor wedges
where the tower crane is supported by the structure, for loose or
dislodged components.
(5) Annual. In addition to the items that must be inspected under
Sec. 1926.1412(f), all turntable and tower bolts must be inspected for
proper condition and torque.
Sec. 1926.1436 Derricks.
(a) This section contains supplemental requirements for derricks,
whether temporarily or permanently mounted; all sections of this
subpart apply to derricks unless specified otherwise. A derrick is
powered equipment consisting of a mast or equivalent member that is
held at or near the end by guys or braces, with or without a boom, and
its hoisting mechanism. The mast/equivalent member and/or the load is
moved by the hoisting mechanism (typically base-mounted) and operating
ropes. Derricks include: A-frame, basket, breast, Chicago boom, gin
pole (except gin poles used for erection of communication towers), guy,
shearleg, stiffleg, and variations of such equipment.
(b) Operation--procedures.
(1) Section 1926.1417 (Operation) applies except for Sec.
1926.1417(c) (Accessibility of procedures).
(2) Load chart contents. Load charts must contain at least the
following information:
(i) Rated capacity at corresponding ranges of boom angle or
operating radii.
(ii) Specific lengths of components to which the rated capacities
apply.
(iii) Required parts for hoist reeving.
(iv) Size and construction of rope must be included on the load
chart or in the operating manual.
(3) Load chart location.
(i) Permanent installations. For permanently installed derricks
with fixed lengths of boom, guy, and mast, a load chart must be posted
where it is visible to personnel responsible for the operation of the
equipment.
(ii) Non-permanent installations. For derricks that are not
permanently installed, the load chart must be readily available at the
job site to personnel responsible for the operation of the equipment.
(c) Construction.
(1) General requirements.
(i) Derricks must be constructed to meet all stresses imposed on
members and components when installed and operated in accordance with
the manufacturer's/builder's procedures and within its rated capacity.
(ii) Welding of load sustaining members must conform to recommended
practices in ANSI/AWS D14.3-94 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
1926.6) or AWS D1.1/D1.1M:2002 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
1926.6).
(2) Guy derricks.
(i) The minimum number of guys must be 6, with equal spacing,
except where a qualified person or derrick manufacturer approves
variations from these requirements and revises the rated capacity to
compensate for such variations.
(ii) Guy derricks must not be used unless the employer has the
following guy information from the manufacturer or a qualified person,
when not available from the manufacturer:
(A) The number of guys.
(B) The spacing around the mast.
(C) The size, grade, and construction of rope to be used for each
guy.
(iii) For guy derricks manufactured after December 18, 1970, in
addition to the information required in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this
section, the employer must have the following guy information from the
manufacturer or a qualified person, when not available from the
manufacturer:
(A) The amount of initial sag or tension.
(B) The amount of tension in guy line rope at anchor.
(iv) The mast base must permit the mast to rotate freely with
allowance for slight tilting of the mast caused by guy slack.
(v) The mast cap must:
(A) Permit the mast to rotate freely.
(B) Withstand tilting and cramping caused by the guy loads.
(C) Be secured to the mast to prevent disengagement during
erection.
(D) Be provided with means for attaching guy ropes.
(3) Stiffleg derricks.
(i) The mast must be supported in the vertical position by at least
two stifflegs; one end of each must be connected to the top of the mast
and the other end securely anchored.
(ii) The stifflegs must be capable of withstanding the loads
imposed at any point of operation within the load chart range.
(iii) The mast base must:
(A) Permit the mast to rotate freely (when necessary).
(B) Permit deflection of the mast without binding.
(iv) The mast must be prevented from lifting out of its socket when
the mast is in tension.
(v) The stiffleg connecting member at the top of the mast must:
(A) Permit the mast to rotate freely (when necessary).
(B) Withstand the loads imposed by the action of the stifflegs.
(C) Be secured so as to oppose separating forces.
(4) Gin pole derricks.
(i) Guy lines must be sized and spaced so as to make the gin pole
stable in both boomed and vertical positions. Exception: Where the size
and/or
[[Page 48168]]
spacing of guy lines do not result in the gin pole being stable in both
boomed and vertical positions, the employer must ensure that the
derrick is not used in an unstable position.
(ii) The base of the gin pole must permit movement of the pole
(when necessary).
(iii) The gin pole must be anchored at the base against horizontal
forces (when such forces are present).
(5) Chicago boom derricks. The fittings for stepping the boom and
for attaching the topping lift must be arranged to:
(i) Permit the derrick to swing at all permitted operating radii
and mounting heights between fittings.
(ii) Accommodate attachment to the upright member of the host
structure.
(iii) Withstand the forces applied when configured and operated in
accordance with the manufacturer's/builder's procedures and within its
rated capacity.
(iv) Prevent the boom or topping lift from lifting out under
tensile forces.
(d) Anchoring and guying.
(1) Load anchoring data developed by the manufacturer or a
qualified person must be used.
(2) Guy derricks.
(i) The mast base must be anchored.
(ii) The guys must be secured to the ground or other firm
anchorage.
(iii) The anchorage and guying must be designed to withstand
maximum horizontal and vertical forces encountered when operating
within rated capacity with the particular guy slope and spacing
specified for the application.
(3) Stiffleg derricks.
(i) The mast base and stifflegs must be anchored.
(ii) The mast base and stifflegs must be designed to withstand
maximum horizontal and vertical forces encountered when operating
within rated capacity with the particular stiffleg spacing and slope
specified for the application.
(e) Swingers and hoists.
(1) The boom, swinger mechanisms and hoists must be suitable for
the derrick work intended and must be anchored to prevent displacement
from the imposed loads.
(2) Hoists.
(i) Base mounted drum hoists must meet the requirements in the
following sections of ASME B30.7-2001 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 1926.6):
(A) Sections 7-1.1 (``Load ratings and markings'').
(B) Section 7-1.2 (``Construction''), except: 7-1.2.13
(``Operator's cab''); 7-1.2.15 (``Fire extinguishers'').
(C) Section 7-1.3 (``Installation'').
(D) Applicable terms in section 7-0.2 (``Definitions'').
(ii) Load tests for new hoists. The employer must ensure that new
hoists are load tested to a minimum of 110% of rated capacity, but not
more than 125% of rated capacity, unless otherwise recommended by the
manufacturer. This requirement is met where the manufacturer has
conducted this testing.
(iii) Repaired or modified hoists. Hoists that have had repairs,
modifications or additions affecting their capacity or safe operation
must be evaluated by a qualified person to determine if a load test is
necessary. If it is, load testing must be conducted in accordance with
paragraphs (e)(2)(ii) and (iv) of this section.
(iv) Load test procedure. Load tests required by paragraphs
(e)(2)(ii) or (e)(2)(iii) of this section must be conducted as follows:
(A) The test load must be hoisted a vertical distance to assure
that the load is supported by the hoist and held by the hoist brake(s).
(B) The test load must be lowered, stopped and held with the
brake(s).
(C) The hoist must not be used unless a competent person determines
that the test has been passed.
(f) Operational aids.
(1) Section 1926.1416 (Operational aids) applies, except for Sec.
1926.1416(d)(1) (Boom hoist limiting device), Sec. 1926.1416(e)(1)
(Boom angle or radius indicator), and Sec. 1926.1416(e)(4) (Load
weighing and similar devices).
(2) Boom angle aid. A boom angle indicator is not required but if
the derrick is not equipped with a functioning one, the employer must
ensure that either:
(i) The boom hoist cable must be marked with caution and stop
marks. The stop marks must correspond to maximum and minimum allowable
boom angles. The caution and stop marks must be in view of the
operator, or a spotter who is in direct communication with the
operator; or
(ii) An electronic or other device that signals the operator in
time to prevent the boom from moving past its maximum and minimum
angles, or automatically prevents such movement, is used.
(3) Load weight/capacity devices.
(i) Derricks manufactured more than one year after November 8, 2010
with a maximum rated capacity over 6,000 pounds must have at least one
of the following: load weighing device, load moment indicator, rated
capacity indicator, or rated capacity limiter. Temporary alternative
measures: The weight of the load must be determined from a source
recognized by the industry (such as the load's manufacturer), or by a
calculation method recognized by the industry (such as calculating a
steel beam from measured dimensions and a known per foot weight), or by
other equally reliable means. This information must be provided to the
operator prior to the lift. See Sec. 1926.1417(j) for additional
requirements.
(ii) A load weight/capacity device that is not working properly
must be repaired no later than 30 days after the deficiency occurs.
Exception: If the employer documents that it has ordered the necessary
parts within 7 days of the occurrence of the deficiency, and the part
is not received in time to complete the repair in 30 days, the repair
must be completed within 7 days of receipt of the parts.
(g) Post-assembly approval and testing--new or reinstalled
derricks.
(1) Anchorages.
(i) Anchorages, including the structure to which the derrick is
attached (if applicable), must be approved by a qualified person.
(ii) If using a rock or hairpin anchorage, the qualified person
must determine if any special testing of the anchorage is needed. If
so, it must be tested accordingly.
(2) Functional test. Prior to initial use, new or reinstalled
derricks must be tested by a competent person with no hook load to
verify proper operation. This test must include:
(i) Lifting and lowering the hook(s) through the full range of hook
travel.
(ii) Raising and lowering the boom through the full range of boom
travel.
(iii) Swinging in each direction through the full range of swing.
(iv) Actuating the anti two-block and boom hoist limit devices (if
provided).
(v) Actuating locking, limiting and indicating devices (if
provided).
(3) Load test. Prior to initial use, new or reinstalled derricks
must be load tested by a competent person. The test load must meet the
following requirements:
(i) Test loads must be at least 100% and no more than 110% of the
rated capacity, unless otherwise recommended by the manufacturer or
qualified person, but in no event must the test load be less than the
maximum anticipated load.
(ii) The test must consist of:
(A) Hoisting the test load a few inches and holding to verify that
the load is supported by the derrick and held by the hoist brake(s).
(B) Swinging the derrick, if applicable, the full range of its
swing, at
[[Page 48169]]
the maximum allowable working radius for the test load.
(C) Booming the derrick up and down within the allowable working
radius for the test load.
(D) Lowering, stopping and holding the load with the brake(s).
(iii) The derrick must not be used unless the competent person
determines that the test has been passed.
(4) Documentation. Tests conducted under this paragraph must be
documented. The document must contain the date, test results and the
name of the tester. The document must be retained until the derrick is
re-tested or dismantled, whichever occurs first. All such documents
must be available, during the applicable document retention period, to
all persons who conduct inspections in accordance with Sec. 1926.1412.
(h) Load testing repaired or modified derricks. Derricks that have
had repairs, modifications or additions affecting the derrick's
capacity or safe operation must be evaluated by a qualified person to
determine if a load test is necessary. If it is, load testing must be
conducted and documented in accordance with paragraph (g) of this
section.
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) Power failure procedures. If power fails during operations, the
derrick operator must safely stop operations. This must include:
(1) Setting all brakes or locking devices.
(2) Moving all clutch and other power controls to the off position.
(k) Use of winch heads.
(1) Ropes must not be handled on a winch head without the knowledge
of the operator.
(2) While a winch head is being used, the operator must be within
reach of the power unit control lever.
(l) [Reserved.]
(m) Securing the boom.
(1) When the boom is being held in a fixed position, dogs, pawls,
or other positive holding mechanisms on the boom hoist must be engaged.
(2) When taken out of service for 30 days or more, the boom must be
secured by one of the following methods:
(i) Laid down.
(ii) Secured to a stationary member, as nearly under the head as
possible, by attachment of a sling to the load block.
(iii) For guy derricks, lifted to a vertical position and secured
to the mast.
(iv) For stiffleg derricks, secured against the stiffleg.
(n) The process of jumping the derrick must be supervised by the A/
D director.
(o) Derrick operations must be supervised by a competent person.
(p) Inspections. In addition to the requirements in Sec.
1926.1412, the following additional items must be included in the
inspections:
(1) Daily: Guys for proper tension.
(2) Annual.
(i) Gudgeon pin for cracks, wear, and distortion.
(ii) Foundation supports for continued ability to sustain the
imposed loads.
(q) Qualification and Training. The employer must train each
operator of a derrick on the safe operation of equipment the individual
will operate. Section 1926.1427 of this subpart (Operator qualification
and certification) does not apply.
Sec. 1926.1437 Floating cranes/derricks and land cranes/derricks on
barges.
(a) This section contains supplemental requirements for floating
cranes/derricks and land cranes/derricks on barges, pontoons, vessels
or other means of flotation (i.e., vessel/flotation device). The
sections of this subpart apply to floating cranes/derricks and land
cranes/derricks on barges, pontoons, vessels or other means of
flotation, unless specified otherwise. The requirements of this section
do not apply when using jacked barges when the jacks are deployed to
the river, lake, or sea bed and the barge is fully supported by the
jacks.
(b) General requirements. The requirements in paragraphs (c)
through (k) of this section apply to both floating cranes/derricks and
land cranes/derricks on barges, pontoons, vessels or other means of
flotation.
(c) Work area control.
(1) The requirements of Sec. 1926.1424 (Work area control) apply,
except for Sec. 1926.1424(a)(2)(ii).
(2) The employer must either:
(i) Erect and maintain control lines, warning lines, railings or
similar barriers to mark the boundaries of the hazard areas; or
(ii) Clearly mark the hazard areas by a combination of warning
signs (such as, ``Danger--Swing/Crush Zone'') and high visibility
markings on the equipment that identify the hazard areas. In addition,
the employer must train each employee to understand what these markings
signify.
(d) Keeping clear of the load. Section 1926.1425 does not apply.
(e) Additional safety devices. In addition to the safety devices
listed in Sec. 1926.1415, the following safety devices are required:
(1) Barge, pontoon, vessel or other means of flotation list and
trim device. The safety device must be located in the cab or, when
there is no cab, at the operator's station.
(2) Positive equipment house lock.
(3) Wind speed and direction indicator. A competent person must
determine if wind is a factor that needs to be considered; if wind
needs to be considered, a wind speed and direction indicator must be
used.
(f) Operational aids.
(1) An anti two-block device is required only when hoisting
personnel or hoisting over an occupied cofferdam or shaft.
(2) Section 1926.1416(e)(4) (Load weighing and similar devices)
does not apply to dragline, clamshell (grapple), magnet, drop ball,
container handling, concrete bucket, and pile driving work performed
under this section.
(g) Accessibility of procedures applicable to equipment operation.
If the crane/derrick has a cab, the requirements of Sec. 1926.1417(c)
apply. If the crane/derrick does not have a cab, the employer must
ensure that:
(1) Rated capacities (load charts) are posted at the operator's
station. If the operator's station is moveable (such as with pendant-
controlled equipment), the load charts are posted on the equipment.
(2) Procedures applicable to the operation of the equipment (other
than load charts), recommended operating speeds, special hazard
warnings, instructions and operators manual, must be readily available
on board the vessel/flotation device.
(h) Inspections. In addition to meeting the requirements of Sec.
1926.1412 for inspecting the crane/derrick, the employer must inspect
the barge, pontoons, vessel or other means of flotation used to support
a floating crane/derrick or land crane/derrick, and ensure that:
(1) Shift. For each shift inspection, the means used to secure/
attach the equipment to the vessel/flotation device is in proper
condition, including wear, corrosion, loose or missing fasteners,
defective welds, and (when applicable) insufficient tension.
(2) Monthly. For each monthly inspection:
(i) The means used to secure/attach the equipment to the vessel/
flotation device is in proper condition, including inspection for wear,
corrosion, and, when applicable, insufficient tension.
(ii) The vessel/flotation device is not taking on water.
(iii) The deckload is properly secured.
(iv) The vessel/flotation device is watertight based on the
condition of the chain lockers, storage, fuel compartments, and
hatches.
(v) The firefighting and lifesaving equipment is in place and
functional.
[[Page 48170]]
(3) The shift and monthly inspections are conducted by a competent
person, and:
(i) If any deficiency is identified, an immediate determination is
made by a qualified person whether the deficiency constitutes a hazard.
(ii) If the deficiency is determined to constitute a hazard, the
vessel/flotation device is removed from service until the deficiency
has been corrected.
(4) Annual: external vessel/flotation device inspection. For each
annual inspection:
(i) The external portion of the barge, pontoons, vessel or other
means of flotation used is inspected annually by a qualified person who
has expertise with respect to vessels/flotation devices and that the
inspection includes the following items:
(A) The items identified in paragraphs (h)(1) (Shift) and (h)(2)
(Monthly) of this section.
(B) Cleats, bitts, chocks, fenders, capstans, ladders, and
stanchions, for significant corrosion, wear, deterioration, or
deformation that could impair the function of these items.
(C) External evidence of leaks and structural damage; evidence of
leaks and damage below the waterline may be determined through internal
inspection of the vessel/flotation device.
(D) Four-corner draft readings.
(E) Firefighting equipment for serviceability.
(ii) Rescue skiffs, lifelines, work vests, life preservers and ring
buoys are inspected for proper condition.
(iii) If any deficiency is identified, an immediate determination
is made by the qualified person whether the deficiency constitutes a
hazard or, though not yet a hazard, needs to be monitored in the
monthly inspections.
(A) If the qualified person determines that the deficiency
constitutes a hazard, the vessel/flotation device is removed from
service until it has been corrected. See requirements in Sec.
1926.1417(f).
(B) If the qualified person determines that, though not presently a
hazard, the deficiency needs to be monitored, the deficiency is checked
in the monthly inspections.
(5) Four-year: internal vessel/flotation device inspection. For
each four-year inspection:
(i) A marine engineer, marine architect, licensed surveyor, or
other qualified person who has expertise with respect to vessels/
flotation devices surveys the internal portion of the barge, pontoons,
vessel, or other means of flotation.
(ii) If the surveyor identifies a deficiency, an immediate
determination is made by the surveyor as to whether the deficiency
constitutes a hazard or, though not yet a hazard, needs to be monitored
in the monthly or annual inspections, as appropriate.
(A) If the surveyor determines that the deficiency constitutes a
hazard, the vessel/flotation device is removed from service until it
has been corrected.
(B) If the surveyor determines that, though not presently a hazard,
the deficiency needs to be monitored, the deficiency is checked in the
monthly or annual inspections, as appropriate.
(6) Documentation. The monthly and annual inspections required in
paragraphs (h)(2) and (h)(4) of this section are documented in
accordance with Sec. Sec. 1926.1412 (e)(3) and 1926.1412(f)(7),
respectively, and that the four-year inspection required in paragraph
(h)(5) of this section is documented in accordance with Sec.
1926.1412(f)(7), except that the documentation for that inspection must
be retained for a minimum of 4 years. All such documents must be made
available, during the applicable document retention period, to all
persons who conduct inspections in accordance with Sec. 1926.1412.
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) Working with a diver. The employer must meet the following
additional requirements when working with a diver in the water:
(1) If a crane/derrick is used to get a diver into and out of the
water, it must not be used for any other purpose until the diver is
back on board. When used for more than one diver, it must not be used
for any other purpose until all divers are back on board.
(2) The operator must remain at the controls of the crane/derrick
at all times.
(3) In addition to the requirements in Sec. Sec. 1926.1419 through
1926.1422 (Signals), either:
(i) A clear line of sight must be maintained between the operator
and tender; or
(ii) The signals between the operator and tender must be
transmitted electronically.
(4) The means used to secure the crane/derrick to the vessel/
flotation device (see paragraph (n)(5) of this section) must not allow
any amount of shifting in any direction.
(k) Manufacturer's specifications and limitations.
(1) The employer must ensure that the barge, pontoons, vessel, or
other means of flotation must be capable of withstanding imposed
environmental, operational and in-transit loads when used in accordance
with the manufacturer's specifications and limitations.
(2) The employer must ensure that the manufacturer's specifications
and limitations with respect to environmental, operational, and in-
transit loads for a barge, pontoon, vessel, or other means of flotation
are not exceeded or violated.
(3) When the manufacturer's specifications and limitations are
unavailable, the employer must ensure that the specifications and
limitations established by a qualified person with respect to
environmental, operational and in-transit loads for the barge,
pontoons, vessel, or other means of flotation are not exceeded or
violated.
(l) [Reserved.]
(m) Floating cranes/derricks. For equipment designed by the
manufacturer (or employer) for marine use by permanent attachment to
barges, pontoons, vessels or other means of flotation:
(1) Load charts.
(i) The employer must not exceed the manufacturer load charts
applicable to operations on water. When using these charts, the
employer must comply with all parameters and limitations (such as
dynamic and environmental parameters) applicable to the use of the
charts.
(ii) The employer must ensure that load charts take into
consideration a minimum wind speed of 40 miles per hour.
(2) The employer must ensure that the requirements for maximum
allowable list and maximum allowable trim as specified in Table M1 of
this section are met.
Table M1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Maximum
allowable allowable
Rated capacity list trim
(degrees) (degrees)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment designed for marine use by permanent
attachment (other than derricks):
25 tons or less................................... 5 5
Over 25 tons...................................... 7 7
Derricks designed for marine use by permanent
attachment:
Any rated capacity................................ 10 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) The employer must ensure that the equipment is stable under the
conditions specified in Tables M2 and M3 of this section. (Note:
Freeboard is the vertical distance between the water line and the main
deck of the vessel.)
[[Page 48171]]
Table M2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wind Minimum
Operated at speed freeboard
(mph) (ft)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rated capacity.................................... 60 2
Rated capacity plus 25%........................... 60 1
High boom, no load................................ 60 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table M3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operated at Wind speed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For backward stability of the boom:
High boom, no load, full back list (least 90 mph.
stable condition).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) If the equipment is employer-made, it must not be used unless
the employer has documents demonstrating that the load charts and
applicable parameters for use meet the requirements of paragraphs
(m)(1) through (3) of this section. Such documents must be signed by a
registered professional engineer who is a qualified person with respect
to the design of this type of equipment (including the means of
flotation).
(5) The employer must ensure that the barge, pontoons, vessel or
other means of flotation used:
(i) Are structurally sufficient to withstand the static and dynamic
loads of the crane/derrick when operating at the crane/derrick's
maximum rated capacity with all planned and actual deck loads and
ballasted compartments.
(ii) Have a subdivided hull with one or more longitudinal
watertight bulkheads for reducing the free-surface effect.
(iii) Have access to void compartments to allow for inspection and
pumping.
(n) Land cranes/derricks. For land cranes/derricks used on barges,
pontoons, vessels or other means of flotation, the employer must ensure
that:
(1) The rated capacity of the equipment (including but not limited
to modification of load charts) applicable for use on land is reduced
to:
(i) Account for increased loading from list, trim, wave action, and
wind.
(ii) Be applicable to a specified location(s) on the specific
barge, pontoons, vessel or other means of flotation that will be used,
under the environmental conditions expected and encountered.
(iii) The conditions required in paragraphs (n)(3) and (n)(4) of
this section are met.
(2) The rated capacity modification required in paragraph (n)(1) of
this section is performed by the equipment manufacturer, or a qualified
person who has expertise with respect to both land crane/derrick
capacity and the stability of vessels/flotation devices.
(3) For list and trim.
(i) The maximum allowable list and the maximum allowable trim for
the barge, pontoon, vessel or other means of flotation must not exceed
the amount necessary to ensure that the conditions in paragraph (n)(4)
of this section are met. In addition, the maximum allowable list and
the maximum allowable trim does not exceed the least of the following:
5 degrees, the amount specified by the crane/derrick manufacturer, or,
when, an amount is not so specified, the amount specified by the
qualified person.
(ii) The maximum allowable list and the maximum allowable trim for
the land crane/derrick does not exceed the amount specified by the
crane/derrick manufacturer, or, when, an amount is not so specified,
the amount specified by the qualified person.
(4) For the following conditions:
(i) All deck surfaces of the barge, pontoons, vessel or other means
of flotation used are above water.
(ii) The entire bottom area of the barge, pontoons, vessel or other
means of flotation used is submerged.
(5) Physical attachment, corralling, rails system and centerline
cable system meet the requirements in Option (1), Option (2), Option
(3), or Option (4) of this section, and that whichever option is used
also meets the requirements of paragraph (n)(5)(v) of this section.
(i) Option (1)--Physical attachment. The crane/derrick is
physically attached to the barge, pontoons, vessel or other means of
flotation. Methods of physical attachment include crossed-cable systems
attached to the crane/derrick and vessel/flotation device, bolting or
welding the crane/derrick to the vessel/flotation device, strapping the
crane/derrick to the vessel/flotation device with chains, or other
methods of physical attachment.
(ii) Option (2)--Corralling. The crane/derrick is prevented from
shifting by installing barricade restraints (i.e., a corralling
system). Employers must ensure that corralling systems do not allow the
equipment to shift by any amount of shifting in any direction.
(iii) Option (3)--Rails. The crane/derrick must be prevented from
shifting by being mounted on a rail system. Employers must ensure that
rail clamps and rail stops are used unless the system is designed to
prevent movement during operation by other means.
(iv) Option (4)--Centerline cable system. The crane/derrick is
prevented from shifting by being mounted to a wire rope system. The
employer must ensure that the wire rope system meets the following
requirements:
(A) The wire rope and attachments are of sufficient size and
strength to support the side load of crane/derrick.
(B) The wire rope is attached physically to the vessel/flotation
device.
(C) The wire rope is attached to the crane/derrick by appropriate
attachment methods (such as shackles or sheaves) on the undercarriage,
and that the method used will allow the crew to secure the crane/
derrick from movement during operation and to move the crane/derrick
longitudinally along the vessel/flotation device for repositioning.
(D) Means are installed to prevent the crane/derrick from passing
the forward or aft end of the wire rope attachments.
(E) The crane/derrick is secured from movement during operation.
(v) The systems/means used to comply with Option (1), Option (2),
Option (3), or Option (4) of this section are designed by a marine
engineer, registered professional engineer familiar with floating
crane/derrick design, or qualified person familiar with floating crane/
derrick design.
(6) Exception. For mobile auxiliary cranes used on the deck of a
floating crane/derrick, the requirement specified by paragraph (n)(5)
of this section to use Option (1), Option (2), Option (3), or Option
(4) does not apply when the employer demonstrates implementation of a
plan and procedures that meet the following requirements:
(i) A marine engineer or registered professional engineer familiar
with floating crane/derrick design develops and signs a written plan
for the use of the mobile auxiliary crane.
(ii) The plan is designed so that the applicable requirements of
this section are met despite the position, travel, operation, and lack
of physical attachment (or corralling, use of rails or cable system) of
the mobile auxiliary crane.
(iii) The plan specifies the areas of the deck where the mobile
auxiliary crane is permitted to be positioned, travel, and operate, and
the parameters and limitations of such movements and operation.
(iv) The deck is marked to identify the permitted areas for
positioning, travel, and operation.
(v) The plan specifies the dynamic and environmental conditions
that must be present for use of the plan.
(vi) If the dynamic and environmental conditions in paragraph
(n)(6)(v) of this section are exceeded, the mobile auxiliary crane is
attached physically or corralled in accordance with Option (1),
[[Page 48172]]
Option (2) or Option (4) of paragraph (n)(5) of this section.
(7) The barge, pontoons, vessel or other means of flotation used:
(i) Are structurally sufficient to withstand the static and dynamic
loads of the crane/derrick when operating at the crane/derrick's
maximum rated capacity with all anticipated deck loads and ballasted
compartments.
(ii) Have a subdivided hull with one or more longitudinal
watertight bulkheads for reducing the free surface effect.
(iii) Have access to void compartments to allow for inspection and
pumping.
Sec. 1926.1438 Overhead & gantry cranes.
(a) Permanently installed overhead and gantry cranes. The
requirements of Sec. 1910.179, except for Sec. 1910.179(b)(1), and
not the requirements of this subpart CC, apply to the following
equipment when used in construction and permanently installed in a
facility: overhead and gantry cranes, including semigantry, cantilever
gantry, wall cranes, storage bridge cranes, and others having the same
fundamental characteristics.
(b) Overhead and gantry cranes that are not permanently installed
in a facility.
(1) This paragraph applies to the following equipment when used in
construction and not permanently installed in a facility: Overhead and
gantry cranes, overhead/bridge cranes, semigantry, cantilever gantry,
wall cranes, storage bridge cranes, launching gantry cranes, and
similar equipment having the same fundamental characteristics,
irrespective of whether it travels on tracks, wheels, or other means.
(2) The following requirements apply to equipment identified in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section:
(i) Sections 1926.1400 through 1926.1414; Sec. Sec. 1926.1417
through 1926.1425; Sec. 1926.1426(d), Sec. Sec. 1926.1427 through
1926.1434; Sec. 1926.1437, Sec. 1926.1439, and Sec. 1926.1441.
(ii) The following portions of Sec. 1910.179:
(A) Paragraphs (b)(5),(6),(7); (e)(1),(3),(5),(6); (f)(1),(4); (g);
(h)(1),(3); (k); and (n) of Sec. 1910.179.
(B) The definitions in Sec. 1910.179(a) except for ``hoist'' and
``load.'' For those words, the definitions in Sec. 1926.1401 apply.
(C) Section 1910.179(b)(2), but only where the equipment identified
in paragraph (b)(1) of this section (Sec. 1926.1438) was manufactured
before September 19, 2001.
(iii) For equipment manufactured on or after September 19, 2001,
the following sections of ASME B30.2-2005 (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 1926.6) apply: 2-1.3.1; 2-1.3.2; 2-1.4.1; 2-1.6; 2-1.7.2; 2-
1.8.2; 2-1.9.1; 2-1.9.2; 2-1.11; 2-1.12.2; 2-1.13.7; 2-1.14.2; 2-
1.14.3; 2-1.14.5; 2-1.15.; 2-2.2.2; 2-3.2.1.1. In addition, 2-3.5
applies, except in 2-3.5.1(b), ``29 CFR 1910.147'' is substituted for
``ANSI Z244.1.''
Sec. 1926.1439 Dedicated pile drivers.
(a) The provisions of subpart CC apply to dedicated pile drivers,
except as specified in this section.
(b) Section 1926.1416(d)(3) (Anti two-blocking device) does not
apply.
(c) Section 1926.1416(e)(4) (Load weighing and similar devices)
applies only to dedicated pile drivers manufactured after November 8,
2011.
(d) In Sec. 1926.1433, only Sec. Sec. 1926.1433(d) and (e) apply
to dedicated pile drivers.
Sec. 1926.1440 Sideboom cranes.
(a) The provisions of this standard apply, except Sec. 1926.1402
(Ground conditions), Sec. 1926.1415 (Safety devices), Sec. 1926.1416
(Operational aids), and Sec. 1926.1427 (Operator qualification and
certification).
(b) Section 1926.1426 (Free fall and controlled load lowering)
applies, except Sec. 1926.1426(a)(2)(i). Sideboom cranes in which the
boom is designed to free fall (live boom) are permitted only if
manufactured prior to November 8, 2010.
(c) Sideboom cranes mounted on wheel or crawler tractors must meet
all of the following requirements of ASME B30.14-2004 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 1926.6):
(1) Section 14-1.1 (``Load Ratings'').
(2) Section 14-1.3 (``Side Boom Tractor Travel'').
(3) Section 14-1.5 (``Ropes and Reeving Accessories'').
(4) Section 14-1.7.1 (``Booms'').
(5) Section 14-1.7.2 (``General Requirements--Exhaust Gases'').
(6) Section 14-1.7.3 (``General Requirements--Stabilizers (Wheel-
Type Side Boom Tractors)'').
(7) Section 14-1.7.4 (``General Requirements--Welded
Construction'').
(8) Section 14-1.7.6 (``General Requirements--Clutch and Brake
Protection'').
(9) Section 14-2.2.2 (``Testing--Rated Load Test''), except that it
applies only to equipment that has been altered or modified.
(10) In section 14-3.1.2 (``Operator Qualifications''), paragraph
(a), except the phrase ``When required by law.''
(11) In section 14-3.1.3 (``Operating Practices''), paragraphs (e),
(f)(1)--(f)(4), (f)(6), (f)(7), (h), and (i).
(12) In section 14-3.2.3 (``Moving the Load''), paragraphs (j),
(l), and (m).
Sec. 1926.1441 Equipment with a rated hoisting/lifting capacity of
2,000 pounds or less.
The following paragraphs of this section specify requirements for
employers using equipment with a maximum rated hoisting/lifting
capacity of 2,000 pounds or less.
(a) The employer using this equipment must comply with the
following provisions of this subpart: Sec. 1926.1400 (Scope); Sec.
1926.1401 (Definitions); Sec. 1926.1402 (Ground conditions); Sec.
1926.1403 (Assembly/disassembly--selection of manufacturer or employer
procedures); Sec. 1926.1406 (Assembly/disassembly--employer
procedures); Sec. Sec. 1926.1407 through 1926.1411 (Power line
safety); Sec. 1926.1412(c) (Post-assembly); Sec. Sec. 1926.1413
through 1926.1414 (Wire rope); Sec. 1926.1418 (Authority to stop
operation); Sec. Sec. 1926.1419 through 1926.1422 (Signals); Sec.
1926.1423 (Fall protection); Sec. 1926.1425 (Keeping clear of the
load) (except for Sec. 1926.1425(c)(3) (qualified rigger)); Sec.
1926.1426 (Free fall and controlled load lowering); Sec. 1926.1432
(Multiple crane/derrick lifts--supplemental requirements); Sec.
1926.1434 (Equipment modifications); Sec. 1926.1435 (Tower cranes);
Sec. 1926.1436 (Derricks); Sec. 1926.1437 (Floating cranes/derricks
and land cranes/derricks on barges); Sec. 1926.1438 (Overhead & gantry
cranes).
(b) Assembly/disassembly.
(1) In addition to compliance with Sec. Sec. 1926.1403 (Assembly/
disassembly--selection of manufacturer or employer procedures) and
1926.1406 (Assembly/disassembly--employer procedures), the employer
must also comply with Sec. 1926.1441(b)(2)-(3).
(2) Components and configuration. The employer must ensure that:
(i) The selection of components, and the configuration of the
equipment, that affect the capacity or safe operation of the equipment
complies with either the:
(A) Manufacturer instructions, recommendations, limitations, and
specifications. When these documents and information are unavailable, a
registered professional engineer familiar with the type of equipment
involved must approve, in writing, the selection and configuration of
components; or
(B) Approved modifications that meet the requirements of Sec.
1926.1434 (Equipment modifications).
(ii) Post-assembly inspection. Upon completion of assembly, the
equipment is inspected to ensure that it is in compliance with
paragraph (b)(2)(i) of
[[Page 48173]]
this section (see Sec. 1926.1412(c) for post-assembly inspection
requirements).
(3) Manufacturer prohibitions. The employer must comply with
applicable manufacturer prohibitions.
(c) Operation--procedures.
(1) The employer must comply with all manufacturer procedures
applicable to the operational functions of the equipment, including its
use with attachments.
(2) Unavailable operation procedures. The employer must:
(i) When the manufacturer's procedures are unavailable, develop,
and ensure compliance with, all procedures necessary for the safe
operation of the equipment and attachments.
(ii) Ensure that procedures for the operational controls are
developed by a qualified person.
(iii) Ensure that procedures related to the capacity of the
equipment are developed and signed by a registered professional
engineer familiar with the equipment.
(3) Accessibility. The employer must ensure that:
(i) The load chart is available to the operator at the control
station;
(ii) Procedures applicable to the operation of the equipment,
recommended operating speeds, special hazard warnings, instructions,
and operator's manual are readily available for use by the operator.
(iii) When rated capacities are available at the control station
only in electronic form and a failure occurs that makes the rated
capacities inaccessible, the operator immediately ceases operations or
follows safe shut-down procedures until the rated capacities (in
electronic or other form) are available.
(d) Safety devices and operational aids.
(1) The employer must ensure that safety devices and operational
aids that are part of the original equipment are maintained in
accordance with manufacturer procedures.
(2) Anti two-blocking. The employer must ensure that equipment
covered by this section manufactured more than one year after November
8, 2010 have either an anti two-block device that meets the
requirements of Sec. 1926.1416(d)(3), or is designed so that, in the
event of a two-block situation, no damage or load failure will occur
(for example, by using a power unit that stalls in response to a two-
block situation).
(e) Operator qualifications. The employer must train each operator,
prior to operating the equipment, on the safe operation of the type of
equipment the operator will be using.
(f) Signal person qualifications. The employer must train each
signal person in the proper use of signals applicable to the use of the
equipment.
(g) [Reserved.]
(h) Inspections. The employer must ensure that equipment is
inspected in accordance with manufacturer procedures.
(i) [Reserved.]
(j) Hoisting personnel. The employer must ensure that equipment
covered by this section is not used to hoist personnel.
(k) Design. The employer must ensure that the equipment is designed
by a qualified engineer.
Sec. 1926.1442 Severability.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction hold any provision(s) of
subpart CC to be invalid, such action shall not affect any other
provision of the subpart.
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P
Appendix A to Subpart CC of Part 1926--Standard Hand Signals
[[Page 48174]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09AU10.003
BILLING CODE 4510-26-C
[[Page 48175]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09AU10.004
Appendix B to Subpart CC of Part 1926--Assembly/Disassembly: Sample
Procedures for Minimizing the Risk of Unintended Dangerous Boom
Movement
1. Section 1926.1404(f)(1) provides that when pins (or similar
devices) are being removed, employees must not be under the boom,
jib, or other components, except where the requirements of Sec.
1926.1404(f)(2) are met. The exception in Sec. 1926.1404(f)(2)
applies when the employer demonstrates that site constraints require
one or more employees to be under the boom, jib, or other components
when pins (or similar devices) are being removed. In such a
situation, the A/D director must implement procedures that minimize
the risk of unintended dangerous movement and minimize the duration
and extent of exposure under the boom.
The following scenario is an example of how the exception
applies: A boom cannot be disassembled on the ground because of
aboveground piping (as might be found, for example, in an oil
refinery) that precludes lowering the boom to the ground. The boom
must therefore be disassembled in the air, and the employees who
remove the pins must perform that work from an aerial lift whose
base is positioned on one side (the near side) of the boom. To gain
access to the pins on the far side, the aerial lift basket must move
under the boom, since, due to lack of room, the aerial lift cannot
be repositioned on the far side. Due to lack of room, the aerial
lift cannot be repositioned on the far side, so the aerial basket
must move under the boom to gain access to the pins on the far side.
To minimize the risk of unintended dangerous movement while the
pins are removed, the A/D director uses an assist crane that is
rigged to support the boom section that is being detached, using
particular care to ensure that the section end that is near the
employee(s) removing the pins is well supported. The duration and
extent of exposure is minimized by removing the far side pins first,
moving the aerial lift basket as soon as possible to the near side
so that the employees are no longer under the boom, and then
removing the near side pins.
2. Section 1926.1404(h)(6)(i) provides that, during assembly/
disassembly, the center of gravity of the load must be identified if
that is necessary for the method used for maintaining stability.
Section 1926.1404(h)(6)(ii) states that, where there is insufficient
information to accurately identify the center of gravity, measures
designed to prevent unintended dangerous movement resulting from an
inaccurate
[[Page 48176]]
identification of the center of gravity must be used.
An example of the application of Sec. 1926.1404(h)(6)(ii) is as
follows: The boom is assembled by lowering boom sections
sequentially into place using an assist crane. The A/D director's
plan is to keep the boom sections stable while they are lowered into
place by attaching the assist crane hoist line above the center of
gravity of each section. However, in assembling the non-symmetrical
top section of the boom, the A/D director is not able to determine
where to attach the assist crane hoist line so that it is above the
center of gravity. In this situation, before raising the section,
all personnel are kept clear of the section and the section is first
raised a few inches to determine whether it tips when raised (if it
did tip, it would indicate it is not rigged over the center of
gravity). If this occurs, the hoist line is repositioned and the
procedure repeated (with employees kept clear of the section while
it is raised) until the A/D director determines that it is rigged
over the center of gravity and can be moved into place without
dangerous movement.
Appendix C to Subpart CC of Part 1926--Operator Certification: Written
Examination: Technical Knowledge Criteria
This appendix contains information for employers, accredited
testing organizations, auditors and government entities developing
criteria for a written examination to test an individual's technical
knowledge relating to the operation of cranes.
(a) General technical information.
(1) The functions and limitations of the crane and attachments.
(2) Wire rope:
(i) Background information necessary to understand the
inspection and removal from service criteria in Sec. 1926.1413 and
Sec. 1926.1414.
(ii) Capacity and when multi-part rope is needed.
(iii) Relationship between line pull and safe working load.
(iv) How to determine the manufacturer's recommended rope for
the crane.
(3) Rigging devices and their use, such as:
(i) Slings.
(ii) Spreaders.
(iii) Lifting beams.
(iv) Wire rope fittings, such as clips, shackles and wedge
sockets.
(v) Saddles (softeners).
(vi) Clamps (beams).
(4) The technical limitations of protective measures against
electrical hazards:
(i) Grounding.
(ii) Proximity warning devices.
(iii) Insulated links.
(iv) Boom cages.
(v) Proximity to electric power lines, radii, and microwave
structures.
(5) The effects of load share and load transfer in multi-crane
lifts.
(6) Basic crane terms.
(7) The basics of machine power flow systems.
(i) Mechanical.
(ii) Electrical.
(iii) Pneumatic.
(iv) Hydraulic.
(v) Combination.
(8) The significance of the instruments and gauge readings.
(9) The effects of thermal expansion and contraction in
hydraulic cylinders.
(10) Background information necessary to understand the
requirements of pre-operation and inspection.
(11) How to use the safety devices and operational aids required
under Sec. 1926.1415 and Sec. 1926.1416.
(12) The difference between duty-cycle and lifting operations.
(13) How to calculate net capacity for every possible
configuration of the equipment using the manufacturer's load chart.
(14) How to use manufacturer-approved attachments and their
effect on the equipment.
(15) How to obtain dimensions, weight, and center of gravity of
the load.
(16) The effects of dynamic loading from:
(i) Wind.
(ii) Stopping and starting.
(iii) Impact loading.
(iv) Moving with the load.
(17) The effect of side loading.
(18) The principles of backward stability.
(b) Site information.
(1) How to identify the suitability of the supporting ground/
surface to support the expected loads of the operation. Elements
include:
(i) Weaknesses below the surface (such as voids, tanks, loose
fill).
(ii) Weaknesses on the surface (such as retaining walls, slopes,
excavations, depressions).
(2) Proper use of mats, blocking/cribbing, outriggers,
stabilizers, or crawlers.
(3) Identification of site hazards such as power lines, piping,
and traffic.
(4) How to review operation plans with supervisors and other
workers (such as the signal person), including how to determine
working height, boom length, load radius, and travel clearance.
(5) How to determine if there is adequate room for extension of
crawlers or outriggers/stabilizers and counterweights.
(c) Operations.
(1) How to pick, carry, swing and place the load smoothly and
safely on rubber tires and on outriggers/stabilizers or crawlers
(where applicable).
(2) How to communicate at the site with supervisors, the crew
and the signal person.
(3) Proper procedures and methods of reeving wire ropes and
methods of reeving multiple-part lines and selecting the proper load
block and/or ball.
(4) How to react to changes in conditions that affect the safe
operation of the equipment.
(5) How to shut down and secure the equipment properly when
leaving it unattended.
(6) Know how to apply the manufacturer's specifications for
operating in various weather conditions, and understand how
environmental conditions affect the safe operation of the equipment.
(7) How to properly level the equipment.
(8) How to verify the weight of the load and rigging prior to
initiating the lift.
(9) How to determine where the load is to be picked up and
placed and how to verify the radii.
(10) Know basic rigging procedures.
(11) How to carry out the shift inspection required in this
subpart.
(12) Know that the following operations require specific
procedures and skill levels:
(i) Multi-crane lifts.
(ii) Hoisting personnel.
(iii) Clamshell/dragline operations.
(iv) Pile driving and extracting.
(v) Concrete operations, including poured-in-place and tilt-up.
(vi) Demolition operations.
(vii) Operations on water.
(viii) Magnet operations.
(ix) Multi-drum operations.
(13) Know the proper procedures for operating safely under the
following conditions:
(i) Traveling with suspended loads.
(ii) Approaching a two-block condition.
(iii) Operating near power lines.
(iv) Hoisting personnel.
(v) Using other than full outrigger/crawler or stabilizer
extensions.
(vi) Lifting loads from beneath the surface of the water.
(vii) Using various approved counterweight configurations.
(viii) Handling loads out of the operator's vision (``operating
in the blind'').
(ix) Using electronic communication systems for signal
communication.
(14) Know the proper procedures for load control and the use of
hand-held tag lines.
(15) Know the emergency response procedure for:
(i) Fires.
(ii) Power line contact.
(iii) Loss of stability.
(iv) Control malfunction.
(v) Two-blocking.
(vi) Overload.
(vii) Carrier or travel malfunction.
(16) Know how to properly use outriggers and stabilizers in
accordance with manufacturer specifications.
(d) Use of load charts.
(1) Know the terminology necessary to use load charts.
(2) Know how to ensure that the load chart is the appropriate
chart for the equipment in its particular configuration and
application.
(3) Know how to use load charts. This includes knowing:
(i) The operational limitations of load charts and footnotes.
(ii) How to relate the chart to the configuration of the crane,
crawlers, or outriggers/stabilizers extended or retracted, jib
erected or offset, and various counterweight configurations.
(iii) The difference between structural capacity and capacity
limited by stability.
(iv) What is included in capacity ratings.
(v) The range diagram and its relationship to the load chart.
(vi) The work area chart and its relationship to the load chart.
(vii) Where to find and how to use the ``parts-of-line''
information.
[[Page 48177]]
(4) Know how to use the load chart together with the load
indicators and/or load moment devices.
[FR Doc. 2010-17818 Filed 7-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P