Walking-Working Surfaces and Personal Protective Equipment (Fall Protection Systems)
Federal RegisterMay 24, 2010
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
29 CFR Part 1910
[Docket No. OSHA-2007-0072]
RIN 1218-AB80
Walking-Working Surfaces and Personal Protective Equipment (Fall Protection Systems)
AGENCY:
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Department of Labor.
ACTION:
Notice of proposed rule.
SUMMARY:
OSHA proposes to revise the walking-working surfaces standards and the personal protective equipment standards in our regulations. The proposal is estimated to reduce the number of fall-related employee deaths and injuries by updating the rule to include new technology (including personal fall protection systems) and industry methods. OSHA believes that the proper use of personal fall protection systems can protect employees from injury and death due to falls to different elevations. The proposal reorganizes the rule in a clearer, more logical manner and provides greater compliance flexibility. The proposed rule is written in plain-language to make it easier to understand, thereby facilitating compliance. Additionally, the proposal increases consistency between construction, maritime, and general industry standards, and eliminates duplication.
DATES:
Submit comments (including comments on the information-collection (paperwork) determination described under the section titled
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
of this document), hearing requests, and other information by August 23, 2010. All submissions must bear a postmark or provide other evidence of the submission date. (
See
the following section titled
ADDRESSES
for methods you can use in making submissions.)
ADDRESSES:
Comments and hearing requests may be submitted as follows:
Electronic:
Comments may be submitted electronically to
http://www.regulations.gov,
which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting comments.
Facsimile:
OSHA allows facsimile transmission of comments and hearing requests that are 10 pages or fewer in length (including attachments). Send these documents to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-1648; hard copies of these documents are not required. Instead of transmitting facsimile copies of attachments that supplement these documents (
e.g.,
studies, journal articles), commenters may submit these attachments, in triplicate hard copy, to the OSHA Docket Office, Technical Data Center, Room N-2625, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20210. These attachments must clearly identify the sender's name, date, subject, and Docket ID (
i.e.,
OSHA-2007-0072) so that the Agency can attach them to the appropriate document.
Regular mail, express delivery, hand (courier) delivery, and messenger service:
Submit three copies of comments and any additional material (
e.g.,
studies, journal articles) to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket ID OSHA-2007-0072 or RIN No. 1218-AB80, Technical Data Center, Room N-2625, OSHA, Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-2350. (OSHA's TTY number is (877) 889-5627.) Please contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about security procedures concerning delivery of materials by express delivery, hand delivery, and messenger service. The hours of operation for the OSHA Docket Office are 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
Instructions.
All submissions must include the Agency name and the OSHA Docket ID (i.e., OSHA-2007-0072). Comments and other material, including any personal information, are placed in the public docket without revision, and will be available online at
http://www.regulations.gov
. Therefore, the Agency cautions commenters about submitting statements they do not want made available to the public, or submitting comments that contain personal information (either about themselves or others) such as Social Security numbers, birth dates, and medical data.
Docket.
To read or download comments or other material in the docket, go to
http://www.regulations.gov
or to the OSHA Docket Office at the address above. Documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov
index; however, some information (
e.g.,
copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download through this Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for assistance in locating docket submissions.
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 Ms. Virginia Fitzner, Directorate of Standards and Guidance, Room N-3609, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-2052 or fax (202) 693-1663.
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.”
Additional information for submitting documents. See
section XI (“Public Participation”) of this notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Replacement of previously proposed rule.
This proposed revision of subparts D and I replaces the proposed rules originally published in the
Federal Register
(55 FR 47660) on April 10, 1990, and republished in the
Federal Register
on May 2, 2003 (69 FR 23528).
References and exhibits.
In this
Federal Register
notice, OSHA references a number of supporting materials. References to these materials are given as “Ex.” followed by the number of the document (
e.g.,
Ex. 23). The referenced materials are posted in Docket Nos. OSHA-2007-0072, OSHA-S041-2006-0666 (formerly Docket No. S-041), OSHA-S029-2006-0662 (formerly Docket No. S-029), and OSHA-S057-2006-0680 (formerly Docket No. S-057)
all
of which are available at
http://www.regulations.gov.
The documents are also available at the OSHA Docket Office (
see
ADDRESSES
section). For further information about accessing exhibits referenced in this
Federal Register
notice,
see
the “Public Participation” section of this document.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Analysis of Risk
III. Issues
IV. Summary and Explanation of the Proposed Rule
V. Preliminary Economic and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Screening Analysis
VI. Applicability of Existing National Consensus Standards
VII. OMB Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
VIII. Federalism
IX. State Plan States
X. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
XI. Public Participation
XII. Authority and Signature
XIII. Proposed Regulatory Text
I. Background
The majority of employees in general industry workplaces walk or work on level surfaces, such as floors, where slips, trips, and falls are common occurrences. These occurrences, however, are not likely to result in major injuries or fatalities. On the other hand, there are many employees who work on ladders, scaffolds, towers, outdoor advertising signs, and similar surfaces where slips, trips, or falls are likely to result in serious injury or death.
The existing OSHA general industry standards recognize the use of guardrails and physical barriers as the primary methods for employee protection against falls. However, those standards do not directly recognize that personal fall protection systems can also provide effective means for employee protection. OSHA believes that the proposed rules will give employers the necessary flexibility to decide which fall protection method or system works best for the work operation being performed, while ensuring employees receive a level of protection that is effective and necessary. OSHA believes many of these slips, trips, and falls can be prevented and has devoted many years to assembling and analyzing information aimed at the elimination and prevention of hazards that cause these incidents. The Agency used that information to form the basis for this proposed rule.
History of the earlier rulemaking effort.
OSHA's efforts to address slips, trips, and falls began with its initial standards. Those standards, which address a variety of walking-working surface hazards, were part of the initial package of standards promulgated by OSHA in 1971 under section 6(a) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the Act) (29 U.S.C. 651
et seq.
). Since that time, a number of interested parties suggested changes to the standard. In particular, the suggested changes addressed updating the existing standard to reflect the current national consensus standards.
Subpart D.
Efforts to revise the initial standards in subpart D have been ongoing for many years. In September 1973, OSHA published a proposed revision of subpart D in the
Federal Register
(38 FR 24300).
In April 1976, OSHA withdrew the 1973 proposal (41 FR 17227) because it was outdated. In the same year, to obtain public input on revising subpart D, OSHA conducted several informal public meetings around the country. After reviewing the information gathered from the public, OSHA determined that a more thorough, scientific and technical research effort was needed to develop objective information upon which an effective revision to the subpart D standard could be based.
From 1976 through the 1980s, OSHA accumulated a wide variety of technical information. This included recommendations for fall prevention, ladders, scaffolds, slip-resistance, and handrails from the University of Michigan; studies concerning guardrails, slip-resistance, scaffolds, and fall prevention from the National Bureau of Standards (now the National Institute of Standards and Technology); analysis of various walking-working surfaces from Texas Tech University; accident and injury data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics; and various national consensus standards from the American National Standards Institute, American Society of Testing and Materials, and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. This technical information provided the basis for a new proposal that was published in 1990; that proposal was not finalized due to other regulatory activities that took precedent.
Subpart I.
Many of the Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) standards in subpart I, like subpart D, were also adopted by OSHA under section 6(a) of the Act. Existing subpart I contains general requirements for personal protective equipment, as well as specific performance and use requirements for certain types of personal protective equipment, including eye and face protection, respiratory protection, head protection, foot protection, protective clothing, hand protection, and electrical protective devices. Existing subpart I does not, however, contain any specific requirements addressing the performance or use of PPE used for
fall
protection; hence the need for this proposal.
OSHA first proposed to revise subpart I to address fall protection PPE in 1990 in combination with a proposal to revise subpart D. As noted above, the 1990 rule was not finalized. On April 6, 1994, OSHA updated other portions of the PPE standard (59 FR 16334) by adding new requirements for employers to conduct hazard assessments; to select the proper PPE; to remove defective or damaged PPE from service; and to provide training in the proper use, care, and disposal of PPE. Those provisions, however, only applied to PPE used for face and eye, head, foot, and hand protection. In this rulemaking, OSHA proposes to require the hazard assessments to address PPE used for fall protection as well.
The combined proposals for subparts D and I.
On April 10, 1990, OSHA proposed to revise both subparts D and I (55 FR 13360 and 55 FR 13423, respectively). The proposals were intended to remove ambiguities and redundancies in the existing standards, simplify and consolidate existing provisions, and use performance language instead of specifications where possible. Additionally, OSHA proposed adding new requirements to subpart I, Personal Protective Equipment, to set performance and use criteria for fall protection equipment. The two subparts were interdependent with respect to personal fall protection systems; that is, the duty requirements for personal fall protection systems were in subpart D and the criteria for the systems were in subpart I. OSHA received comments and held a public hearing on the proposals.
On May 2, 2003, OSHA reopened the rulemaking record and republished the 1990 proposal (68 FR 23528) to refresh the record due to the length of time that had elapsed since 1990. Based upon comments and information received in that reopening, and because of technological advances, particularly within the fall protection industry, OSHA determined the best course of action was to issue a new proposal for subparts D and I.
Today's proposed rule.
Today's proposed rule replaces the 1990 proposals (55 FR 13360). OSHA proposes to revise subpart D to accomplish the following:
(1) Reflect current industry practices and national consensus standards;
(2) Harmonize provisions, when possible, with other OSHA provisions (e.g., the construction standards in 29 CFR part 1926 and the Shipyard Employment Standards in 29 CFR part 1915); and
(3) Use performance-oriented language when possible, rather than specification-oriented language.
In subpart I, OSHA proposes to add new specific performance and use requirements for personal
fall
protection equipment. Existing subpart I contains general requirements for all types of personal protective equipment, as well as specific performance and use requirements for other types of personal protective equipment, but it does not specifically contain criteria for fall protection PPE.
To be effective, fall protection systems must be both strong enough to provide
the necessary fall protection and capable of absorbing fall impact so that the forces imposed on employees when stopping falls do not result in injury or death. The ability of the human body to tolerate the arresting force imposed on it by a fall protection system has been addressed directly in general industry only by § 1910.66, Powered Platforms for Building Maintenance. Throughout this proposed rule, OSHA will make reference to the general industry powered platform standard; the construction industry standard for fall protection; and the shipyard employment standards for personal fall protection systems. Experience gained by the Agency in enforcing those rules provides additional guidance in the development of this proposed rule. OSHA's objective is to make consistent all of its requirements for the use of personal fall protection systems. The listed fall protection standards contain requirements that are identical to, or essentially the same as, those proposed in this document.
The proposed rule for subpart I, to be codified at § 1910.140 (Fall protection), would apply whenever another standard requires or allows the use of fall protection PPE. In these situations, the system used must comply with the requirements of § 1910.140. For example, subparts D, F, and R of the general industry standards (part 1910) each contain a requirement (a duty) to use fall protection. Where an employer uses a
personal
fall protection system to meet the duty, that system would have to meet the criteria and performance requirements proposed in this rule. Many of the requirements proposed here for personal fall arrest systems are already in effect when employees are working on platforms regulated by OSHA's general industry standard in subpart F—Powered Platforms for Building Maintenance (§ 1910.66). Appendix C of § 1910.66 sets out mandatory requirements for personal fall arrest systems. Therefore, the entire powered platform rulemaking record is hereby incorporated into this proposed rulemaking (Dockets S-700 and S-700A).
In addition to proposing new requirements for personal protective equipment (PPE) used for fall protection, OSHA proposes to amend a number of general industry standards that already set a duty to use PPE by requiring that PPE meet the new requirements of subpart I. For example, paragraph (g) of § 1910.269 requires personal fall arrest systems to meet the requirements of subpart M of part 1926 (the construction industry requirements). This provision would be revised to require personal fall arrest systems to meet the mostly parallel criteria requirements of subpart I of 1910 (the general industry requirements). Subpart M of part 1926 differs from proposed subpart I in that subpart M addresses fall arrest systems used in the construction of elevator shafts, while subpart I does not address the construction of elevator shafts. In addition, subpart I uses performance language with regard to anchorages for fall arrest systems, while subpart M specifically prohibits the use of guardrails as anchorage points.
Finally, OSHA proposes to add two non-mandatory appendices to subpart I to provide examples of test methods and procedures that will assist employers and PPE manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with the criteria proposed in § 1910.140.
OSHA believes that many equipment manufacturers are currently following the criteria and test methods of the above-mentioned standards. Therefore, the vast majority of equipment covered by the proposed rule already complies with the requirements in this proposal. Also, OSHA notes that equipment that meets the proposed standards is readily available to any employer that does not already meet the proposed standard because personal fall protection systems required to be used by other OSHA standards (
e.g.,
the construction standards in 29 CFR part 1926 and the Shipyard Employment Standards in 29 CFR part 1915) must meet essentially the same criteria and testing requirements as in this proposed rule.
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 significantly. (
See Industrial Union Dep't
v.
American Petroleum Institute,
448 U.S. 607 (1980).) As discussed in section II of this preamble, OSHA preliminarily finds that slips, trips, and falls constitute a significant risk, and estimates that the proposed standard will prevent 20 fatalities and 3,706 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 preliminarily finds that this proposed standard is economically and technologically feasible.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, as amended) requires that OSHA determine whether a proposed standard will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small firms. As discussed in section VI, OSHA examined the small firms affected by this standard and certifies that the proposed 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 proposed standards. The table below summarizes OSHA's preliminary 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 the decisionmaking criterion in determining what standards to promulgate.
Net Benefits and Cost Effectiveness of the Proposed Revision to OSHA's Walking-Working Standards
Annualized Costs
§ 1910.22 General Requirements
$15.7 million.
§ 1910.23 Ladders
$9.7 million.
§ 1910.24 Step Bolts and Manhole Steps
$3.7 million.
§ 1910.27 Scaffolds
$73.0 million.
§ 1910.28 Duty to Have Fall Protection
$0.09 million.
§ 1910.29 Fall Protection Systems Criteria and Practices
$8.4 million.
§ 1910.30 Training Requirements
$44.1 million.
§ 1910.140 Fall Protection
$18.5 million.
Total Annual Costs
$173.2 million.
Annual Benefits
Number of Injuries Prevented
3,706.
Number of Fatalities Prevented
20.
Monetized Benefits (assuming $50,000 per injury and $7.2 million per fatality prevented)
$328.5 million.
OSHA standards that are updated and consistent with voluntary standards
Unquantified.
Net Benefits (benefits minus costs)
$155.4 million.
Cost Effectiveness: Compliance with the proposed standards would result in the prevention of 1 fatality and 231 injuries for every $10 million in costs, or alternatively, $1.90 in benefits per dollar of costs.
Source:
U.S. Dept. of Labor, OSHA, Directorate of Evaluation and Analysis, Office of Regulatory Analysis, 2009.
II. Analysis of Risk
Nature of the risk.
Falls and other hazards associated with walking-working surfaces, primarily resulting in slips, trips, and falls, and hazards leading to combustible dust explosions and other accidents, are addressed in this proposal. These hazards are encountered by millions of employees working in industry sectors regulated by OSHA under 29 CFR part 1910. There are many causal factors for slips, trips, and falls, such as ice, wet areas, grease, loose flooring or carpeting, inattention to surroundings, uneven scaffolding planking, clutter, worn rope on descent systems, open desk drawers and filing cabinets, damaged ladder steps, and a more subtle cause—a belief that the action being taken will not lead to an accident. For example, where a ladder is not readily available, employees may improvise and use a chair, or even a 5-gallon bucket, as a way to reach a higher level. In fact, accident data show that many falls could be prevented if existing OSHA regulations and recommended safe practices were followed. The hazards generally can be grouped into three (often interrelated) factors: Equipment, human, and environmental. Examples of some equipment factors include improper footwear, uneven surfaces, foreign substances on surfaces such as oil or litter, and unguarded sides and edges of elevated platforms. Some human factors are inattention, haste, human error, failure to follow instructions, and fatigue. Environmental factors may include poor lighting and weather-related conditions. The presence of multiple factors increases the risk. For instance, a polished marble floor may not present a slipping hazard to someone wearing rubber-soled shoes; however, when the floor is wet from mopping or snow being tracked in from the outdoors, the risk of slipping greatly increases. The addition of other factors such as poor lighting, inattention, and haste are likely to further increase the risk.
Slips and trips can lead to falls that cause injuries such as back strains or other injuries when individuals try to “catch” themselves. Falls on the same level can cause injuries such as sprains, strains, fractures, and contusions that may affect any area of the body and, on occasion, can be fatal. Falling from an elevated surface increases injury severity and the likelihood of fatalities. Falls from elevations occur in all industries, in all occupations, and in a myriad of work settings—from the employee washing windows from a rope descent system 40 feet from the ground, to the stock clerk retrieving goods from a shelf using a 4-foot stepladder. These tasks represent only two of the numerous tasks that can result in injury or death to employees caused by failures to recognize fall hazards, to use fall protection equipment, or to take appropriate action to abate fall hazards.
Identifying fall hazards and deciding how best to protect employees is the first step in reducing or eliminating the hazards. Therefore, OSHA is proposing to expand existing § 1910.132(d), Hazard assessment and equipment selection, to apply to hazards covered in new § 1910.140—Fall protection. This expansion would require employers to assess the workplace to identify fall hazards and select and require the use of appropriate PPE. In addition, the employer must train (
see
§ 1910.132(f)) the employee on the proper use of PPE. Once employers determine that the use of PPE is the most appropriate way to protect their employees from falls, the proposed rule requires employers to provide equipment that meets certain strength and performance requirements.
Injury and fatality data.
Recent employment data taken from the U.S. Census Bureau's 2007 Statistics of U.S. Businesses and the Bureau of Labor Statistics' (BLS) Occupational Employment Statistics indicate that over 106 million employees work in over 6 million establishments regulated by OSHA under its subpart D standards. Slips, trips, and falls constitute 15 percent of all accidental deaths, and are second only to motor vehicles as a cause of employee fatalities.
The BLS Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) has listed falls as one of the leading causes of traumatic injury and death in the workplace for many years. Fall-related injury and fatality statistics show that employees encounter hazards associated with walking-working surfaces at their worksites on a daily basis.
Tables V-10 and V-11 of section V (“Preliminary Economic and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Screening Analysis”) depict BLS data from 1992 to 2004. During this time period, BLS reported an annual average of 300 fatal falls, 213 (71%) of which resulted from falling from a higher level. Furthermore, of an annual average of 299,404 non-fatal falls resulting in lost-workday injuries, 79,593 (26%) were as a result of falling from a higher level.
An examination of more recent BLS data, shows that falls continue to be a significant source of workplace fatalities.
Fatal Falls
Fatal falls
Fatal falls from height
Percentage of fatal falls that were falls from height
1992-2004 (Average per Year)
300
213
71
2005
320
257
80
2006
343
285
83
2007
357
267
75
According to this table, the number of falls resulting in death is increasing, although the percentage of fatal falls that are due to falls from heights dropped in 2007.
Significance of risk.
As described more fully in section V of this preamble, many of the falls that occur in general industry could be prevented through the maintenance of safe conditions and the use of safe work practices on walking-working surfaces, as well as through the proper use of appropriate personal fall protection equipment when necessary. The Agency estimates that compliance with the proposed requirements in subparts D and I would prevent 20 fall-related fatalities and 3,706 fall related lost-workday injuries annually (
see
section V of this notice).
The Agency has concluded, on a preliminary basis, that these proposed standards address a significant risk. Furthermore, OSHA believes that compliance with these proposed requirements is reasonably necessary to protect employees from fall hazards and would substantially reduce this risk.
Basis for Agency action.
In the 1990 proposed rule (55 FR 13361), OSHA described a number of studies and investigations conducted by both government agencies (OSHA, Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the former National Bureau of Standards, now called the National Institute for Standards and Technology) and academia (University of Michigan, Texas A&M, and the University of Texas). These studies, which are available in the earlier rulemaking docket (S-029) or from the sources listed in Appendix C of the 1990 proposed rule, provide useful information about the ways in which employees fall from various surfaces, and the forces applied when stepping on surfaces, particularly ladders and stairways. Additionally, they provide information about the strength necessary for various surfaces, the minimum and maximum spacing between rungs on ladders and steps on stairways, and other similar details. They also address the need for toe and hand clearances, the height of stair rail and guardrail systems, and the size of openings in guardrails that would permit passage of employees. Many of the recommendations contained in referenced reports and studies are validated by inclusion of identical or essentially similar requirements in the national consensus standards applicable to the topic.
There are various ways of protecting employees from the hazards associated with walking-working surfaces. This proposal, in conjunction with the criteria for personal fall protection systems in the subpart I proposed rule, addresses conventional fall protection systems such as guardrail systems, safety net systems, and personal fall protection systems (travel restraint systems, fall arrest systems, and positioning systems). The proposal also includes non-conventional means such as allowing employees to work in a designated area (without conventional fall protection), provided they receive specific training and use safe work practices.
OSHA intends to ensure that all PPE requirements for fall protection in general industry are the same, and therefore is proposing to replace existing requirements in other general industry standards with references to subpart I, Personal Fall Protection Systems. This change will facilitate compliance, since all general industry fall protection criteria will be consolidated into subpart I.
Additionally, the rule requires employers to take easy-to-use measures, such as placing covers over holes in floors and using indicators or signs to warn employees that they are approaching a fall hazard.
The proposed standard would also require employers to ensure that walking-working surfaces are designed, constructed, maintained, and used in a safe manner, and that proper work practices are used by the employees. For example, when climbing a ladder, the employee must always maintain three points of contact and never use the top of a stepladder as a step. Many of the design requirements in the proposed standard (such as those for step bolts, mobile ladder stands, and portable ladders) reflect the manufacturing specifications prescribed by national consensus standards. In most instances, the Agency used the most recent version of consensus standards in writing this proposal.
1
1
Consensus standards are updated on a cyclical basis, thus staying current with industry practice and technological advances.
OSHA proposes the requirements in subparts D and I as the minimum necessary to protect employees from significant hazards that can cause falls and other events which may result in serious injury and death. OSHA believes that many employers are already in compliance with the updated proposed rules because the majority of the proposed requirements are either already in existing OSHA rules or are prescribed by national consensus standards organizations in voluntary standards on the topic. The Agency believes that codifying more current consensus standard provisions, establishing personal fall protection systems criteria in subpart I, and specifying training requirements will lead to higher compliance with standards. The updated rules will make it easier and more effective to prevent slips, trips, and falls and other events.
A safety or health standard is a standard “which requires conditions, or the adoption or use of one or more practices, means, methods, operations, or processes, reasonably necessary or appropriate to provide safe or healthful employment” (29 U.S.C. 652(8)). In addition, all standards must be highly protective (
see
58 FR at 16614-16615;
International Union, UAW
v.
OSHA,
37 F.3d 669 (DC Cir. 1994)) and, whenever practical, standards shall “be expressed in terms of objective criteria and of the performance desired.”
Id.
In this preamble, OSHA discusses the hazards associated with walking and working on elevated, slippery, or other surfaces, and explains why the provisions of the proposed rule are reasonably necessary to protect affected employees from those risks. The Agency estimates that compliance with the revised walking-
working surfaces standard will reduce the risks associated with these hazards by preventing an estimated 20 fatalities annually based upon the 1992-2007 BLS data and 1995-2001 OSHA data. OSHA believes that this constitutes a substantial reduction in the risk of material harm. Since falls from heights result in more fatalities and more serious injuries than falls on the same level, this proposed rule places emphasis on falls from heights.
III. Issues
Issue #1—Fall Protection on Rolling Stock and Motor Vehicles
OSHA is requesting additional comment on whether specific regulations are needed to cover falls from rolling stock and commercial motor vehicles. Existing subpart D does not specifically address or exclude fall protection on rolling stock or motor vehicles from coverage. For the purposes of this issue, the term “rolling stock” means any locomotive, railcar, or vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails, or a trolley bus operated by electric power supplied from an overhead wire. The term “motor vehicle” means commercial buses, vans, and trucks (including tractor trailer trucks, tank trucks, and hopper trucks). For the purposes of this rule, the term “motor vehicle” does not include powered industrial trucks. OSHA is specifically seeking comment on whether it should include requirements specifying that when employees are exposed to falls from rolling stock and motor vehicles at heights greater than 4 feet, protective work practices, methods, or systems must be instituted. OSHA is also requesting comment on how it should define “rolling stock” and “motor vehicles,” or if the terms as defined are sufficiently inclusive.
The 1990 “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Walking-Working Surfaces” (68 FR 23530) generated one comment on the subject. The American Feed Industry Association said:
The section on Scope and Applications provides that this Subpart D does not apply to “surfaces that are an integral part of self-propelled, motorized mobile equipment”. [§ 1910.21.] This is, obviously and correctly, meant to exclude work surfaces that are on railroad cars, truck trailers, and barges.
OSHA should add a line to section 1910.21(a)(1) that says: Railroad cars, truck trailers, barges and similar equipment designed for use with a separable source of propulsion are excluded from coverage by this subpart even when temporarily detached from any source of propulsion for purposes of loading or unloading.
In 1996, OSHA was asked to clarify its fall protection rules involving the unloading of grain from rolling stock (meaning rail cars). In response, OSHA issued a memorandum to its Regional Administrators on October 18, 1996 (Ex. OSHA-S029-2006-0662-0018), directing OSHA inspectors not to cite rolling stock under subpart D. The memorandum also said that it would not be appropriate to use the PPE standard (29 CFR 1910.132(d)) to cite employee exposure to fall hazards on the tops of rolling stock unless the rolling stock was positioned inside of or contiguous to a building or other structure where the installation of fall protection is feasible. The memorandum did not result in clear direction to the public or to OSHA's field staff. As a result, OSHA raised the issue of fall protection on rolling stock and motor vehicles in a separate
Federal Register
notice—the 2003 Reopening Notice. In response to that notice, OSHA received a number of comments that supported and opposed the inclusion of specific requirements regulating fall hazards from rolling stock and motor vehicles.
Commenters expressed diverse views on the approach that OSHA should pursue to regulate falls from rolling stock and motor vehicles. Some commenters supported an exclusion of rolling stock and motor vehicles from subpart D while other commenters supported the inclusion of new, specific rules. Referring to advances in fall protection technology, some of these commenters said they believed that it would be feasible to protect employees from falls, and cited the type of equipment that could be used to provide that protection. Other commenters simply stated their support for the policy OSHA set forth in the 1996 memorandum. However, the understanding of the 1996 memorandum also varied among commenters. Commenters provided little information to the record regarding injuries and deaths associated with falls from rolling stock and motor vehicles.
OSHA plans to continue gathering information and evidence to determine whether there is a need to propose
specific
requirements for the protection of employees exposed to falls from rolling stock and motor vehicles. Additionally, OSHA needs more information about what employers are presently doing and any feasibility and cost concerns associated with a requirement to provide protection. Therefore, OSHA is not including any
specific
requirements pertinent to rolling stock and motor vehicles in proposed § 1910.28. Rather, it will wait until the record is more fully developed to determine the appropriate course of action. If, in response to this issue, the Agency receives sufficient comments and evidence to warrant additional rulemaking, a
separate
proposed rule will be issued.
In an effort to collect and assemble the information needed for OSHA to make an informed decision about the need for specific provisions regulating fall hazards from rolling stock and motor vehicles, the Agency requests comprehensive responses to the questions posed below. The Agency requests that the responses be directed specifically to individual questions and be clearly labeled with the number of the question.
With respect to rolling stock, OSHA is not soliciting information relating to personal fall protection equipment used on rolling stock involved in “railroad operations,” which include the movement of equipment over rails. The Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) “Railroad Occupational Safety and Health Standards Policy Statement” (the Policy Statement) sets out the respective areas of jurisdiction between FRA and OSHA. That Policy Statement provides that FRA has jurisdiction over railroad operations, including personal protective equipment and walking-working surfaces on rolling stock. With regard to FRA's jurisdiction over personal protective equipment, the FRA Policy Statement notes, “OSHA regulations concerning personal protective equipment apply according to their terms, except to the extent the general requirements might be read to require protective equipment responsive to hazards growing out of railroad operations.” (
See
43 FR 10583, 10588 (1978).) Addressing FRA's jurisdiction over walking-working surfaces, the FRA Policy Statement reads, “[OSHA regulations] would not apply with respect to the design of locomotives and other rolling equipment used on a railroad, since working conditions related to such surfaces are regulated by FRA as major aspects of railroad operations.” (
Id.
at 10587.) A copy of the FRA's Policy Statement can be found on FRA's Web site. OSHA is, however, requesting comment and information regarding rolling stock not involved in railroad operations, such as, but not limited to, when rolling stock is being loaded or unloaded off railroad property by non-railroad employees or contractors to railroads, or when such rolling stock is being retrofitted or repaired off railroad property.
In regard to rolling stock:
1. In your establishment and/or industry, how many or what percentage of employees working on top of rolling stock are exposed to fall hazards?
2. How are these employees protected from fall hazards while working on such equipment?
3. If employee training on the recognition of fall hazards is provided in your workplace, please describe the nature and frequency of the training.
4. If fall protection equipment is used, please provide detailed information on the types and costs of the fall protection used on rolling stock and please explain how it is used.
5. If fall protection equipment is not used, please explain what technological and/or economic obstacles to such use may be involved.
6. Are there alternative means to protect employees from fall hazards while working on rolling stock? Please explain.
7. What is your safety experience with fall hazards on or from rolling stock?
8. Should OSHA exclude rolling stock from coverage under subpart D? Please explain and provide data and information to support your comments.
In regard to motor vehicles:
9. In your establishment and/or industry, how many or what percentage of employees working on top of motor vehicles are exposed to fall hazards?
10. How are these employees protected from fall hazards while working on such equipment?
11. If employee training on the recognition of fall hazards is provided in your workplace, please describe the nature and frequency of the training.
12. If fall protection equipment is used, please provide detailed information on the types and costs of the fall protection used on motor vehicles and please explain how it is used.
13. If fall protection equipment is not used, please explain what technological and/or economic obstacles may be involved.
14. Are there alternative means to protect employees from fall hazards while working on motor vehicles? Please explain.
15. What is your safety experience with fall hazards on or from motor vehicles?
16. Should OSHA exclude motor vehicles from coverage under subpart D? Please explain and provide data and information to support your comments.
Issue #2—Fall Protection for Employees Standing or Climbing on Stacked Materials (e.g., Steel and Precast Concrete Products)
OSHA is seeking comment on whether there is a need to promulgate a specific requirement in subpart D to address those situations where an employer can demonstrate that it is infeasible or creates a greater hazard to use conventional fall protection to protect employees exposed to falling 4 feet (1.2 m) or more from stacked materials. Some commenters have recommended that OSHA allow the use of safe work practices by trained employees in lieu of conventional fall protection for certain activities. OSHA seeks comment on the current fall protection measures that are in use, and the degree to which conventional fall protection is infeasible or creates a greater hazard.
This issue was brought to OSHA's attention by the Precast Concrete Institute (PCI) and the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI). OSHA notes that neither the existing nor the proposed revision to subpart D contains a
specific
requirement addressing fall protection for employees who must climb onto and stand on stacked materials (e.g., stacks of steel or concrete products) to perform their work—for example, rigging materials in preparation for transport. Rather, OSHA has enforced the general fall protection rules of subpart D (§ 1910.23) and subpart I (§ 1910.132), as well as the general duty clause (5)(a)(1) of the OSH Act, to protect workers. OSHA has considered the comments of both PCI and AISI and has conducted an information-gathering site visit to become more familiar with the specific concerns raised by the commenters. At this point, OSHA is unconvinced that its existing enforcement policy, which makes allowances for situations where a greater hazard exists or where it is infeasible to provide fall protection, does not adequately address the concerns of the commenters. Nonetheless, OSHA is considering adding a specific requirement to subpart D if sufficient information and support is received to demonstrate the need for such a specific requirement. Additionally, OSHA requests comment on whether there are other similar situations where employees work on stacked materials.
For background, the PCI, in correspondence to OSHA from 2000 to 2003, outlined its concerns regarding the feasibility of providing fall protection for employees working at precast concrete manufacturing plants who are working/walking on precast concrete products. Additionally, PCI expressed concern about the feasibility of providing fall protection for employees who are rigging precast products, placing them on trailers, and securing them for transport to construction sites. Specifically, in a letter dated January 3, 2000 (Ex. 1), PCI asked for an “interpretation and exception for riggers loading/unloading precast concrete products on trucks * * * and for riggers stacking, storing, loading or unloading precast concrete products in the plant, relative to fall protection. * * *” PCI provided the following rationale:
When stacking, storing, loading or unloading precast concrete products, the need for employees to access the top of concrete products in excess of four (4) feet, for very short periods [of] time, to connect or disconnect lifting devices or rigging is necessary. The use of a conventional fall protection system is a greater hazard and in most cases infeasible because, while installing a fall protection system, employees are exposed to a fall hazard for an extended period of time. Since conventional fall protection is infeasible, employees shall be given individual instruction as well as have a mentor system hands-on process for training.
PCI also noted that OSHA does not require fall protection for employees off-loading the precast concrete products at construction sites because the definition of a walking-working surface in the construction rule excluded “vehicles or trailers on which employees must be located to perform their job duties.” PCI included the following recommended work procedure:
A ladder shall be used to climb onto or off the vehicle deck and product. Employees shall not jump off [the] trailer or from product to product. Corrective and detail work shall be completed at ground level or from a ladder or mobile elevating work platform.
On May 20, 2004, the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) raised the same concern in its response to a request for comments from the Office of Management and Budget (67 FR 15014) on the “Draft Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations.” (Ex. 2) The AISI identified OSHA's subpart D as needing revision to permit employees standing on stacks of steel to work without fall protection when fall protection is not practical. Specifically, AISI said the following:
OSHA requires employers to provide either guardrails or tie-off protection to workers who must perform their duties 48 inches or greater above the ground (1910.23 and 1910.66). These requirements are infeasible for operations that exist in steel and steel products companies where individuals need to stand on “stacks” of product that have a large surface area in order to rig bundles for crane lifts and similar activities. These rules also affect the loading of product onto truck trailers and railcars that are, with rare exception, over 48 inches above the ground. OSHA's list of “solutions” are to build guardrails around the product stacks, use magnet cranes, or provide safety lines around trailers and railcars, but these solutions are not feasible. Use of fixed guardrails around
truck trailers and railcars is not feasible and would, additionally, create its own serious safety hazard. The use of magnet cranes that do not require a rigger is also infeasible because magnet [sic] cannot connect to only a single bundle. Providing safety lines around the stacks, trailers and railcars is infeasible because customer orders necessitate bundles to be in varied stack heights, based on quantity ordered. Finally, because product placement for shipment requires traversing the trailers and railcars, it would require product to move through required safety lines. These rules should provide employers with some flexibility by stating that activities that are over 48 inches above the ground should use either guardrails or tie-off protection, “where practical.” In situations where their use is not practical, the employer should be permitted to use an alternative practice and to provide appropriate training to the employee.
OSHA requests comment on PCI's recommended procedures and AISI's position. The Agency also refers readers to Issue #1 above which also pertains to providing fall protection for employees on vehicles and railcars.
Issue #3—Qualified Climber
In the 1990 proposal (55 FR 13366), OSHA first introduced the concept of a “qualified climber.” A qualified climber was defined as “an employee who, by virtue of physical capabilities, training, work experience, and job assignment is authorized by the employer to routinely climb fixed ladders, step bolts or similar climbing devices attached to structures.” OSHA proposed that rather than always providing conventional fall protection (cages, wells, ladder safety systems, or other fall protection) to employees climbing fixed ladders over 24 feet (7.3 m), the employer could allow qualified climbers to climb without fall protection provided certain criteria were met.
On March 1, 1991, OSHA granted a variance to Gannett Outdoor Companies (56 FR 8801) permitting it to use qualified climbers as defined in the 1990 NPRM for outdoor advertising (billboard) applications. On January 26, 1993, OSHA issued a compliance directive applying these conditions to all outdoor-billboard applications.
The criteria included that the ladder be climbed two or fewer times per year and that installing a ladder safety system, cage, or well would create a greater hazard. The premise of the proposal was that many fixed ladders in use at the time were not equipped with cages or wells as required by the existing standard. In addition, installing them would be extremely costly and the installation process itself might pose a greater hazard to workers than simply climbing the ladder without fall protection. Newer, anecdotal information available to OSHA indicates just the opposite—that most fixed ladders over 24 feet (7.3 m) in height are already equipped with a well, cage, or some other type of fall protection (ladder safety system or personal fall protection system). OSHA notes that newer fall protection systems have emerged that can be installed in one climb of a fixed ladder. Some ladders are even manufactured with a ladder safety system already installed as an integral part of the ladder. For these reasons OSHA is not proposing the use of qualified climbers in this rule, except in the outdoor advertising (billboard) industry. Permitting the exception for billboard applications would codify the aforementioned 1993 variance. However, considering the advances in fall protection since publication of the 1990 proposed rule, OSHA requests comment on the need for the qualified-climber provision for the outdoor advertising industry. Removing this proposed provision would result in requiring fall protection for this industry that is the same as on all other fixed ladders covered by subpart D; therefore, commenters are requested to also address the technological and economic feasibility of removing this proposed provision. Commenters should provide supporting rationale for all responses.
OSHA is not proposing to impose a duty to provide fall protection where an existing subpart D standard already requires the use of fall protection equipment. Thus, the proposed rule would not apply to electric power generation, transmission, or distribution work covered by § 1910.269(g)(2)(v), or to telecommunications work covered by § 1910.268(n)(7) or (n)(8). These two industry-specific standards generally permit employees to free climb to work locations on poles, towers, and similar structures without the use of fall protection equipment. These standards protect employees by requiring adequate training in climbing (§§ 1910.268(c) and 1910.269(a)(2)(i)) and, in the case of the electric power generation standard in § 1910.269, by ensuring that employees are proficient in safe climbing techniques (§ 1910.269(a)(2)(vii)). OSHA invites comment on whether §§ 1910.268(n)(7) and (n)(8) and 1910.269(g)(2)(v), which generally require fall protection only after the employee reaches the working position, adequately protect employees. In addition, the Agency requests information on the technological feasibility of requiring fall protection for employees climbing and changing position on electric power and telecommunications poles and structures, and the costs and benefits of complying with such a requirement.
Issue #4—Building Anchorages for Rope Descent Systems
Section 1910.27(b) of the proposal addresses rope descent systems and includes a provision (in proposed § 1910.27(b)(2)(iv)) requiring “sound” anchorages. OSHA believes that sound anchorage points are necessary to ensure that rope descent systems can be safely attached to the building for any type of suspended work, not just window cleaning. The ideal solution is for anchorages to be installed and maintained as part of the regular schedule for renovating and inspecting commercial buildings.
Existing subpart D does not address the installation and maintenance of anchorages on buildings or other structures. Under the proposed rule, separate anchorages are required for personal fall arrest systems and for rope descent systems. The requirements for anchorages for personal fall arrest systems are contained in proposed subpart I, § 1910.140. However, no specific requirements for anchorages used with rope descent systems are included in this subpart D proposal, other than to specify that they be “sound.”
OSHA raised this issue in the 1990 proposal (55 FR 29224, 29227-28, July 18, 1990) and again in the 2003 Reopening Notice (68 FR 23534). In those documents, OSHA requested comment on whether it should add an installation and maintenance provision to subpart D for “all structures where it is reasonably foreseeable that employees will need anchorage points” to attach rope descent systems and other equipment. OSHA raised the issue after the International Window Cleaning Association (IWCA) and small window cleaning companies told OSHA that quite often there were no anchorage points on rooftops for attaching their lines. Since they did not own the building, they had no control over the presence or location of anchorage points. They urged OSHA to require building owners to install anchorages on rooftops or designate existing structural members that would be strong enough to serve as anchor points to attach scaffolds, control descent devices, and safety lines (Ex. OSHA-S041-2006-0666-0543; Ex. OSHA-S041-2006-0666-1252, pp. 311, 313, 330-31; Ex. OSHA-S041-2006-0666-1253, pp. 483-84, 503, 543-44, 565-66, 596-97, 629-30).
OSHA also noted that the Building Owners and Managers Association International (BOMA) objected to
requiring building owners to provide anchor points, stating that window cleaners were generally able to find supports on which to tie off (Ex. OSHA-S041-2006-0666-1255, p. 1443), but agreed that new buildings completed two to five years after the effective date of the final rule should be equipped with anchor points (Ex. OSHA-S041-2006-0666-1212).
The ANSI standard for Window Cleaning Safety, ANSI I-14.1-2001 (Ex. OSHA-S029-2006-0662-0014), in section 3.9 prescribes criteria for anchorages used for rope descent systems and independent life lines, specifying, “Building owners and window cleaning contractors shall not allow suspended work to be performed unless it has been determined that the building has provided, identified and certified anchorages * * *.” OSHA notes that IWCA and BOMA participated on the ANSI committee that developed the national consensus standard addressing safety in window cleaning operations. According to the ANSI standard, anchorages must be capable of sustaining a 5,000 pound (2268 kg) load, or a minimum 4-to-1 safety factor, whichever is greater, in any direction that the load may be applied, among other requirements. It should be noted that ANSI/IWCA I-14.1 contained a recommendation in Appendix A that the requirements be implemented within 5 years of its publication on October 25, 2001. OSHA requests comment on whether it should include the language of the ANSI/IWCA standard in the final rule or should it require some other criteria for building anchorages?
For example, under § 1910.66, Powered platforms for building maintenance, OSHA requires building owners to provide an employer with a certification of inspection, testing, and maintenance of anchorages for powered platforms used in building maintenance. OSHA requests comments on whether it should require building owners to provide employers with the same information required by § 1910.66.
OSHA is aware that some window cleaning companies are using the powered platform certified anchorages for rope descent systems. If OSHA were to adopt the same requirement, those building's owners would have no additional obligation to comply with the language under consideration.
OSHA believes that many building owners already meet the § 1910.66 requirements or the provisions of ANSI/IWCA I-14.1. For instance, it is the Agency's understanding that the General Services Administration (GSA) updated its policy to require building anchors to be installed during construction or extensive remodeling of government buildings.
Issue #5—Technological Advances in Fall Protection and Fall Arrest
The Agency is aware of a newer dual-mode operation self-retracting lanyard that, in the event of a fall, arrests the fall and then automatically lowers the worker at a controlled, slow rate of speed to the ground or to the next lower level. These devices show promise, for example, in rescuing some workers following a fall. OSHA requests comment regarding the current use and effectiveness of these devices, appropriate and inappropriate conditions of use, as well as relevant costs and benefits.
In addition, OSHA requests information on other new fall protection and fall arrest equipment that is not mentioned in this proposal. Please include a detailed explanation of the equipment, sources of supply, costs and benefits, applications, and conditions of use.
IV. Summary and Explanation of the Proposed Rule
A. Format of Proposed Changes to Subparts D and I
OSHA's proposed revisions to subpart D include a reorganization of the existing rule to make the rule clearer, necessitating reformatting the entire subpart. OSHA's proposed format changes are set forth in the following redesignation table:
Redesignation Table
Existing
Proposed rule
§ 1910.21 Definitions.
§ 1910.21 Scope, application, and definitions.
§ 1910.22 General requirements.
§ 1910.22 General requirements.
§ 1910.23 Guarding floor and wall openings and holes.
§ 1910.23 Ladders.
§ 1910.24 Fixed industrial stairs.
§ 1910.24 Step bolts and manhole steps.
§ 1910.25 Portable wood ladders.
§ 1910.25 Stairways.
§ 1910.26 Portable metal ladders.
§ 1910.26 Dockboards (bridge plates).
§ 1910.27 Fixed ladders.
§ 1910.27 Scaffolds (including rope descent systems).
§ 1910.28 Safety requirements for scaffolding.
§ 1910.28 Duty to have fall protection.
§ 1910.29 Manually propelled mobile ladder stands and scaffolds (towers).
§ 1910.29 Fall protection systems criteria and practices.
§ 1910.30 Other working surfaces.
§ 1910.30 Training requirements.
The Agency seeks comment regarding this reorganization of subpart D, and rationale, to support any suggested modification(s). OSHA's proposed revisions to subpart I includes the addition of a new § 1910.140 and appendices C and D.
B. Proposed Changes to Subpart D
As mentioned earlier in the Summary statement of this notice, OSHA is publishing proposed rules for subpart D, Walking-Working Surfaces and subpart I, Personal Protective Equipment for Fall Protection concurrently. Proposed subpart D establishes requirements for general industry walking-working surfaces and prescribes the use of fall protection systems (including
personal
fall protection systems) to protect employees from falls. Proposed subpart I contains performance criteria for
personal
fall protection systems only. OSHA notes that wherever subpart D makes specific reference to the requirements in subpart I, the reference is to the pertinent provisions in the proposed rule of subpart I (which accompanies this proposed rule), and not to the existing subpart I requirements, unless specifically stated.
The following discussion explains the purpose of the proposed rule, and explains the differences between the proposed rule and existing standards. The rulemaking history is quite lengthy; to date two proposals have been issued, one in 1973 and one in 1990. Since the earlier proposals, technology has advanced greatly and many of the requirements proposed by OSHA in the two earlier rulemakings are no longer
appropriate. Similarly, OSHA believes that many of the comments received on those proposals are no longer relevant. Therefore, OSHA will only discuss comments from the 1990 proposal that are pertinent to today's proposal. However, all the comments are available for review in Docket No. S-041, located in the OSHA Docket Office.
References in parentheses are to exhibits in the current rulemaking record and are available in the OSHA Docket Office under Docket No. OSHA-2007-0072. Where references are made to the earlier proposal (1990), and the reopening of that record (2003), both the exhibit and docket number will be noted.
Throughout this proposal, where possible, performance-oriented language is used. Any employer who experiences difficulty applying these performance-oriented standards may consult the applicable national consensus standards for additional information.
Section 1910.21 Scope, Application, and Definitions
Paragraph (a) Scope and Application
Proposed § 1910.21 sets the scope and application for subpart D and also lists and defines the major terms used. Existing subpart D does not contain a scope and application section for the entire subpart, but it does contain several separate “application” requirements in various sections of subpart D. For example, each of the following existing sections contains “application” statements: the introductory text to § 1910.22 General requirements; paragraph (a) of § 1910.24 Fixed industrial stairs; paragraph (a) of § 1910.25 Portable wood ladders; paragraph (e)(3) of § 1910.27, Fixed ladders; and paragraph (a)(1) to § 1910.29 Manually propelled mobile ladder stands and scaffolds (towers). None of the other sections in existing subpart D address the scope or application.
Proposed paragraph (a) provides to the public a clear understanding of the rule and is consistent with the Agency's interpretation and enforcement of subpart D since its inception. That is, as a whole, existing subpart D applies to all general industry workplaces. However, as proposed, there are some sections within subpart D that do not apply to certain operations or activities. These exceptions are addressed in individual sections of this subpart.
An exclusion contained in a specific section applies to that section only; all other sections in subpart D do apply. For example, if an employee is working on a ladder on an entertainment stage, the applicable requirements of proposed § 1910.23, Ladders, apply, as would § 1910.22, General requirements, even though § 1910.28, Duty to have fall protection, does not apply to exposed perimeters of entertainment stages.
Paragraph (b) Definitions
Proposed paragraph (b) of § 1910.21 lists and defines all major terms used in the proposed standard. The existing rule defines 125 terms and, in some cases, the same term is defined differently several times due to the context in which it is used. For example, in existing § 1910.21(a)(4) the term “platform” is defined as “A working space for persons, elevated above the surrounding floor or ground; such as a balcony or platform for the operation of machinery and equipment.” In existing § 1910.21(b)(4), “platform” is defined as “an extended step or landing breaking a continuous run of stairs.”
Another example of the same term being defined differently in the existing rule is the term “handrail.” In existing § 1910.21(a)(3), the term is defined as “A single bar or pipe supported on brackets from a wall or partition, as on a stairway or ramp, to furnish persons with a handhold in case of tripping,” whereas § 1910.21(b)(1) and (g)(8) define “handrail” as “a rail connected to a ladder stand running parallel to the slope and/or top step.”
Likewise, the term “toeboard” is defined in § 1910.21(a)(9) as “a vertical barrier at floor level erected along exposed edges of a floor opening, wall opening, platform, runway, or ramp to prevent falls of materials,” whereas in § 1910.21(g)(16) the term is defined as “a barrier at platform level erected along the exposed sides and ends of a scaffold platform to prevent falls of materials.”
In today's proposal, all major terms are listed and defined in paragraph (b), and the term will have the same meaning in all sections of proposed subpart D. Many of the definitions are the same as those in the existing standard, although some have been reworded for uniformity or clarity.
OSHA seeks to improve subpart D by making it easier to understand, as well as consistent with other Agency rules regulating the same topics. To that end, where terms used in subpart D have been defined in other general industry, construction, or maritime standards, the Agency has, where possible, used the same definition. OSHA believes such consistency will lead to a better understanding of the rules, and to greater compliance, resulting in increased employee safety. The following terms are defined in the proposed rule: alternating tread-type stair; authorized; cage; carrier; combination ladder; designated area; dockboard (bridge plate); equivalent; extension ladder; failure; fall hazard; fall protection; fixed ladder; grab bars; guardrail system; handrail; hoist area; hole; individual rung ladder; ladder; ladder safety system; lower level; manhole steps; maximum intended load (designed working load); mobile; mobile ladder stand (ladder stand); mobile ladder stand platform; open riser; opening; platform; portable ladder; qualified; qualified climber; ramp; riser; rope descent system; rung, step, or cleat; runway; safety factor; scaffold; ship stairs (ship ladders); side-step ladder; single-point adjustable suspension scaffold; spiral stairway; stair rail system; standard stairs; stepladder; step-bolt (pole step); stepstool; through ladder; tieback; toeboard; tread; unprotected sides and edges; walking-working surface; and well.
Some terms defined in the existing standard are not defined in the proposal because they are: (1) not used in the proposal, or (2) do not need to be defined because their meaning is clear without further explanation. An example of a term that does not need definition is the term “working level.” This term does not need to be defined because it is obvious that the level at which the employee is working is the working level.
Many of the existing terms and definitions pertain to scaffolds. Because OSHA is proposing that scaffolds used in general industry comply with the construction industry scaffold requirements of subpart L of part 1926 (§§ 1926.450 through 1926.454), there is no need to define scaffold terms in this general industry proposal. For example, the term “check” refers to the lengthwise separation of wood in scaffold planking. Because subpart D is referring to § 1926 for scaffolding requirements, there is no need for this definition in § 1910.21(b).
Although many definitions remain unchanged, the following proposed terms have been added or revised from the existing definitions:
Alternating tread-type stair.
This term means a series of treads usually attached to a center support in an alternating manner so that a user of the stair normally does not have both feet on the same level at any time whether ascending, descending, or standing. The proposed definition is consistent with ANSI A1264.1-1995(R2002), Safety Requirements for Workplace Floor and Wall Openings, Stairs and Railing Systems.
Authorized.
This term describes an employee who is approved or assigned by the employer to perform a specific
type of duty or an employee who is permitted by the employer to be at a specific location.
Cage.
This term means a barrier mounted on the side rails of a fixed ladder or fastened to the structure behind the fixed ladder designed to encircle the climbing space of the ladder to safeguard the employee while climbing the ladder. A cage may also be called a “cage guard” or “basket guard.” The proposed definition is essentially the same as the definition in existing paragraph (e)(11), but was revised for clarity. This proposed definition is also consistent with ANSI A14.3-2002, American National Standard for Ladders—Fixed—Safety Requirements.
Combination ladder.
This term means a portable ladder that can be used as a stepladder, single extension ladder, trestle ladder, or a stairwell ladder. Its components may be used as a single ladder. This definition is consistent with ANSI A14.1-2000, American National Standard for Safety Requirements for Portable Wood Ladders; A14.2-2000, American National Standard for Safety Requirements for Portable Metal Ladders; and A14.5-2000, American National Standard for Safety Requirements for Portable Reinforced Plastic Ladders.
Designated area.
This term means a distinct portion of a walking-working surface delineated by a perimeter warning line in which temporary work may be performed by employees without additional fall protection. The concept of a designated area is patterned after controlled access zones and warning line systems used in OSHA's construction standards at subpart M of part 1926.
Dockboard (bridge plate).
This term means a portable or fixed device for spanning the gap or compensating for the difference in level between loading platforms and carriers.
Equivalent.
This term means alternate designs, materials, or methods that the employer can demonstrate will provide an equal or greater degree of safety for employees compared to the design, material, or method specified in this subpart. The existing definition in paragraph (g)(6) has been revised for consistency with OSHA's construction standards at subpart M of part 1926. To be deemed “equivalent,” the employer would have the burden of demonstrating that the alternate designs, materials, or methods will provide an equal or greater degree of safety for employees than the design, material, or method specified in this subpart.
Extension ladder.
This term means a non-self-supporting portable ladder, adjustable in length. This proposed definition is consistent with ANSI A14.1-2000, ANSI A14.2-2000, and ANSI A14.5-2000, and removes the overly specific measurement criteria and is clearer and more concise than the definition in existing paragraphs (c)(4) and (d)(4) of § 1910.21.
Failure.
This term means a load refusal, breakage, or separation of component parts. Load refusal is the point where the ultimate strength is exceeded. This term is consistent with OSHA's construction fall protection standard at § 1926.500(b), Definitions.
Fall hazard.
This term means any condition on a walking-working surface that exposes an employee to injury from a fall on the same level or to a lower level.
Fall protection.
This term means any equipment, device, or system that prevents an employee from experiencing a fall from elevation or that mitigates the effect of such a fall. Examples of fall protection include, but are not limited to, guardrail systems, ladder safety systems, and personal fall arrest systems.
Fixed ladder.
This term means a ladder, including an individual rung ladder, which is permanently attached to a structure, building, or equipment. It does not include ship stairs or manhole steps. This definition is essentially the same as existing paragraph (e)(2) of § 1910.21, and clarifies that the term includes individual rung ladders but not ship stairs or manhole steps. The proposed definition is consistent with ANSI A14.3-2002.
Grab bars.
This term means individual handholds placed adjacent to or as an extension of ladder side rails for the purpose of providing access beyond the limits of a ladder.
Guardrail system.
This term means a barrier erected to prevent employees from falling to lower levels. Existing subpart D uses the terms “guardrail” and “standard railing.” Both terms are defined as a barrier to prevent falls to lower levels. OSHA proposes to use one term—guardrail system to describe this type of barrier. The proposed definition is consistent with both subparts L—Scaffolds, and M—Fall Protection of the construction industry standards.
Handrail.
This term means a rail used to provide employees with a handhold for support. There are three definitions for the term “handrail” in existing subpart D. OSHA proposes to define the term to be consistent with Subpart X—Stairways and Ladders of the construction industry standards.
Hoist area.
This term means any elevated access opening to a walking-working surface where hoisted equipment or materials are loaded or received. The existing rule does not use the term “hoist area,” whereas the proposed rule does.
Hole.
This term means a gap or void 2 inches (5 cm) or more in its least dimension, in a floor, roof, or other walking-working surface. The existing standard defines holes and openings separately; however, the treatment of each is essentially the same. The existing rule defines a floor
hole
as an opening less than 12 inches (30 cm) but more than 1 inch (3 cm) in its least dimension through which materials may fall, and defines a floor
opening
as a hole measuring 12 inches (30 cm) or more in its least dimension through which persons may fall. To bring clarity to the terms and consistency with its fall protection rules in construction industry standards, OSHA is proposing to use the term “hole” to describe all voids and gaps (holes and openings) in floors, roofs, and other walking-working surfaces. Likewise, OSHA is proposing to use the term “opening” to describe voids and gaps in vertical surfaces such as walls and partitions.
Individual rung ladder.
This term means a ladder consisting of rungs individually attached to a structure, building, or piece of equipment. It does not include manhole steps. The proposed definition has been editorially revised from the existing definition in paragraph (e)(3) to clarify its meaning, and to make it clear that manhole steps are not considered individual rung ladders.
Ladder.
This term means a device with rungs, steps, or cleats typically used to gain access to a different elevation. This proposed definition for the term is consistent with the definitions used in the ANSI A14 consensus standards that are applicable to various types of ladders. Additionally, the proposed language is more concise than the existing definitions of the term.
Ladder safety system.
This term means a device, other than a cage or well, designed to eliminate or reduce the possibility of falls from ladders. A ladder safety system usually consists of a carrier (the track of flexible cable or rigid rail), safety sleeve (moving component which travels on the carrier), lanyard, connectors, and body belt or harness. The term “ladder safety system” is not used or defined in existing OSHA standards; however, the synonymous term “ladder safety device” is defined in existing construction industry standards for fixed ladders at subpart X. The proposed definition is consistent with the definition in the
national consensus standard applicable to fixed ladders, ANSI A14.3-2002.
Lower level.
This term means an area to which an employee could fall. Such areas include ground levels, floors, roofs, ramps, runways, excavations, pits, tanks, materials, water, equipment, and similar surfaces. This definition is consistent with that located in the construction industry standards in subpart M.
Manhole steps.
This term means steps individually attached or set into the walls of a manhole structure.
Maximum intended load.
This term (also referred to as the “designed working load”) means the total load of all employees, equipment, tools, materials, transmitted loads, and other loads reasonably anticipated to be applied to a walking-working surface. It is based on and consistent with the definition in the construction industry standards in subpart M.
Mobile.
This term means manually propelled and/or movable. This is a clarification of existing paragraph (g)(12) which simply defines the term as “manually propelled.” The proposed definition is consistent with ANSI A14.7-2006, Safety Requirements for Mobile Ladder Stands and Mobile Ladder Stand Platforms, and facilitates the definition of the next two terms. OSHA requests comment on whether the term “mobile” is so common that defining it in the final rule is unnecessary.
Mobile ladder stand.
This term (also known as “ladder stand”) means a mobile, fixed-size, self-supporting ladder consisting of wide flat treads in the form of steps accessing a top step. The assembly may include handrails and is intended for use by one employee. This definition is consistent with ANSI A14.7-2006, American National Standard for Mobile Ladder Stands and Mobile Ladder Stand Platforms. The definition for ladder stand in existing paragraph (g)(9) of § 1910.21 has been incorporated into the proposed definition of “mobile ladder stand.”
Mobile ladder stand platform.
This term means a mobile fixed-height, self-supporting unit having one or more standing levels, provided with means of access to or egress from the platform or platforms. This definition is consistent with ANSI A14.7-2006, American National Standard for Mobile Ladder Stands and Mobile Ladder Stand Platforms.
Opening.
This term means a gap or void 30 inches (76 cm) or more high and 18 inches (46 cm) or more wide in any wall or partition through which employees can fall to a lower level. This definition is consistent with ANSI A10.18-1996, Safety Requirements for Temporary Floor Holes, Wall Openings, Stairways and Other Unprotected Edges—American National Standard for Construction and Demolition Operations, and the construction industry standard at § 1926.500, and would replace existing paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(11) of § 1910.21 that defined “floor opening” and “wall opening” (
see
above discussion under “hole”). This is another area where the Agency would harmonize construction and general industry regulations to make them more understandable, thereby increasing compliance and employee safety.
Platform.
This term means a walking-working surface elevated above the surrounding area. This definition is based on and consistent with the construction industry standard at § 1926.450(b), and would replace existing definitions in paragraphs (a)(4) and (b)(4) of § 1910.21.
Portable ladder.
This term means a ladder that can readily be moved or carried and usually consists of side rails joined at intervals by steps, rungs, cleats, or rear braces. The definition is identical to ANSI A14.1-2000, American National Standard for Safety Requirements for Portable Wood Ladders, ANSI A14.2-2000, American National Standard for Ladders—Portable Metal—Safety Requirements, and ANSI A14.5-2000, American National Standard for Safety Requirements for Portable Reinforced Plastic Ladders.
Qualified.
This term describes a person who, by possession of a recognized degree, certificate, or professional standing,
or
who by extensive knowledge, training, and experience has successfully demonstrated the ability to solve or resolve problems relating to the subject matter, the work, or the project. This definition is consistent with proposed subpart I, the shipyard employment standards, and the construction industry standard in § 1926.32.
Qualified climber.
This term means an employee engaged in outdoor advertising work who, by virtue of physical capabilities, training, work experience and job assignment, is authorized by the employer to climb fixed ladders without using fall protection.
Rope descent system.
This term means a suspension device that supports one employee in a chair (seat board) and allows the user to descend in a controlled manner and to stop at any time at a desired level of descent. A rope descent system is a variation of the single-point adjustable suspension scaffold. It is also known as a controlled descent device, controlled descent equipment, or controlled descent apparatus. Existing subpart D does not regulate rope decent systems, thus there is no existing definition for the term. The proposal, on the other hand, contains new requirements for rope decent systems since these are widely used in general industry. The proposed definition is based on the national consensus standard ANSI/IWCA I-14.1-2007, Window Cleaning Safety.
Rung, step, or cleat.
This term means, when used on a ladder, a cross-piece on which a person may step to ascend or descend. The proposed definition combines the existing definitions for rungs, steps, and cleats.
Runway.
This term means a passageway for employees, elevated above the surrounding floor or ground level, such as a catwalk, a foot walk along shafting, or a walkway between buildings. The proposed definition is consistent with the existing definition, and has been revised for clarity.
Safety factor.
This term means the ratio of the design load and the ultimate strength of the material.
Scaffold.
This term means any temporary elevated or suspended platform, and its supporting structure, including points of anchorage, used to support employees or materials or both. The term “scaffold” would not include crane or derrick suspended personnel platforms. This term is consistent with § 1926.450(b), and replaces the definitions in existing paragraphs (f)(27) and (g)(15) of § 1910.21.
Ship stairs (ship ladders).
This term means a stairway that is equipped with treads and stair rails that has a slope between 50 and 70 degrees from the horizontal and has open risers. Ship stairs are also called “ship ladders.”
Spiral stairway.
This term means a stairway having a helical (spiral) structure attached to a supporting pole.
Stair rail or stair rail system.
This term means a vertical barrier (such as rails, decorative panels, and mesh) erected along open sides of stairways to prevent employees from falling to lower levels. The top surface of a stair rail system may also serve as a handrail. The proposed definition would replace existing definitions in paragraphs (a)(8), (b)(5), and (e)(5) of § 1910.21.
Standard stairs.
This term means a permanently installed stairway. Ship stairs, spiral stairs, and alternating tread-type stairs are not standard stairs.
Stepladder.
This term means a self-supporting portable ladder, non-adjustable in length, with flat steps and a hinged back. The definition would replace those found in existing paragraphs (c)(2) and (d)(2) of § 1910.21
that also contain specifications for length measurements.
Step bolt (pole step).
This term means a bolt or rung attached at intervals along a structural member and used for foot placement during climbing or standing. Step bolts are also called “pole steps.” This definition is consistent with the one found in § 1910.269.
Stepstool.
This term means a self-supporting, foldable, portable ladder, nonadjustable in length, 32 inches (81 cm) or less in overall size, with flat steps and without a pail shelf, designed so that the ladder top cap, as well as all steps, can be climbed on. The side rails may continue above the top cap. This definition is consistent with ANSI A14.2-2000.
Through ladder.
This term means a type of fixed ladder designed to allow a person to get off at the top by stepping through the ladder to reach a landing. The existing term found in § 1910.21(e)(15) is revised for clarity.
Tieback.
This term means an attachment from an anchorage (e.g., structural member) to a supporting device. This definition is consistent with ANSI A10.8-2001, American National Standard for Construction and Demolition Operations—Safety Requirements for Scaffolding.
Toeboard.
This term means a low protective barrier that will prevent the fall of materials and equipment to lower levels and provide protection from falls for employees. This definition is consistent with OSHA's construction industry standards at § 1926.500(b), and is consistent with, and would replace, the existing definition in § 1910.21(a)(9), (f)(31), and (g)(16).
Unprotected sides and edges.
This term means any side or edge of a walking-working surface (except at entrances to points of access) where there is no wall or guardrail system at least 39 inches (99 cm) high. This definition is consistent with § 1926.500(b) and replaces the phrase “open-sided floors, platforms, and runways” used in existing § 1910.23(c)(1).
Walking-working surface.
This term means any surface, horizontal or vertical, on or through which an employee walks, works, or gains access to a workplace location. Walking-working surfaces include, but are not limited to, floors, stairs, steps, roofs, ladders, ramps, runways, aisles, and step bolts.
Section 1910.22 General Requirements
OSHA proposes to revise the existing requirements contained in § 1910.22, and introduce new requirements addressing general hazards associated with all walking-working surfaces. The existing requirements in § 1910.22 address the scope of subpart D—housekeeping, aisles and passageways, covers and guardrails, and floor loading protection. Where language of the existing standards appropriately addresses surface hazards, OSHA proposes to use that language with editorial corrections as necessary. The revised performance-oriented provisions are designed to eliminate detailed specifications and facilitate compliance.
Proposed paragraph (a)(1) requires that all places of employment, passageways, storerooms, and service rooms be kept clean and orderly, and in a sanitary condition. Proposed paragraph (a)(2) requires that floors of workrooms be maintained in a clean and, so far as possible, dry condition. It also requires that, where wet processes are used, drainage be maintained, and false floors, platforms, mats, or other dry standing places be provided when practicable. OSHA does not expect all surfaces to be maintained in a pristine manner; however, surfaces must be maintained in a condition that will prevent slips, trips, falls, and other hazards. These two provisions are identical to existing § 1910.22(a)(1) and (a)(2).
Historically, OSHA interpreted these provisions as applying to combustible-dust accumulations associated with fire and explosion hazards. Regarding this interpretation, one court stated that “the housekeeping standard is not limited to tripping and falling hazards, but may be applied to [a] significant accumulation of combustible dust.”
Con Agra, Inc.
v.
Occupational Safety and Health Review Com'n,
672 F.2d 699, 702 (8th Cir. 1982), citing
Bunge Corp.
v.
Secretary of Labor,
638 F.2d 831, 834 (5th Cir. 1981), which reached the same conclusion. (
See,
also,
Farmer's Co-op, 1982
WL 2222661 (O.S.H.R.C.);
CTA Acoustics (KY 2003),
CSB Report No. 2003-09-I-KY (February 2005);
Hayes Lemmerz Int'l (Indiana 2003),
CSB Report No. 2004-01-I-IN (September 2005).)
As these cases show, § 1910.22(a) serves as one of OSHA's most important enforcement tools for preventing combustible-dust accumulations, and it continues to be an important element of OSHA's enforcement strategy for this hazard;
see,
e.g., “Combustible Dust in Industry: Preventing and Mitigating the Effects of Fire and Explosion,” OSHA Safety and Health Information Bulletin (SHIB) 07-31-2005, (2005, July 31), available at
http://www.osha.gov/dts/shib/shib073105.html
; “Hazard Alert: Combustible Dust Explosions,” OSHA Fact Sheet (2008, March), available at
http://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/data_General_Facts/OSHAcombustibledust.pdf;
and OSHA Compliance Directive CPL-03-00-008, “Combustible Dust National Emphasis Program,” (March 11, 2008), (replacing CPL 03-00-006, “Combustible Dust National Emphasis Program,” October 18, 2007) available at
http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=DIRECTIVES&p_id=3830.
The Agency seeks comment on whether it should include an explicit reference to combustible dust or other hazardous material in the regulatory language of the final rule. This language would merely clarify OSHA's long-held interpretation: That § 1910.22(a) is not limited to the hazards of slips, trips, and falls, but also addresses any hazard that can be created when floors and work areas are not maintained in an orderly, clean, dry, and sanitary condition. Therefore, OSHA is seeking comment on the following questions: (1) Should OSHA reference combustible dust in either paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2), or both; and (2) should OSHA reference other types of dust or other materials? Please explain your answers.
On December 27, 2007, in the notice of proposed rulemaking for General Working Conditions in Shipyard Employment (FR 72:72451), OSHA used the following language in proposed § 1915.81(d):
The employer shall ensure that the floor or deck of every work area shall be maintained, so far as practicable, in a dry condition. Where wet processes are used, drainage shall be maintained and the employer shall provide false floors, platforms, mats or other dry standing places. Where this is not practicable, the employer shall provide appropriate waterproof footgear, such as rubber overboots, in accordance with Sec. 1915.152.
The Agency requests comment on whether it would be appropriate to use similar language in place of that proposed in paragraph 1910.22(a)(2). Furthermore, OSHA requests comment on the costs and benefits of this alternative.
In proposed paragraph (a)(3), OSHA requires employers to ensure that all surfaces be designed, constructed, and maintained free of recognized hazards that can result in death or serious injury to employees. This requirement's performance language replaces the more specific language in existing paragraph (a)(3) of § 1910.22.
Proposed paragraph (b) sets requirements for the application of loads. Proposed paragraph (b)(1) requires employers to ensure that all walking-working surfaces are designed, constructed, and maintained to support
their maximum intended load. These surfaces include, for example, platforms used with fixed ladders, and dockboards. Proposed paragraph (b)(2) would prohibit exceeding the maximum intended load. Proposed paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) would replace existing paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of § 1910.22, which addressed floor and roof load limits. The intent of the proposed provisions is to ensure that walking-working surfaces are strong enough to support loads placed on them to protect employees from injury. The proposed language imposes essentially the same burden as the existing rule, but has been reworded for clarity and ease of understanding.
Additionally, the proposed provisions do not continue the existing requirement that employers post plates indicating load limits of the building/structure. This information was posted to indicate how much weight could safely be loaded onto a walking-working surface. Currently, this information is available from building plans, and usage and expected loads are taken into consideration when surfaces are designed. The proposed requirement puts the burden on the employer to ensure walking-working surfaces are strong enough to support any loads placed on them. OSHA believes the proposed language provides adequate protection to employees without the added burden on employers to gather and post information.
Proposed paragraph (c) requires employers to provide, and ensure use of, a safe means of access and egress from one level to another. This provision is patterned after a similar provision in the construction industry standards. The proposed language clearly expresses the Agency's intent—to ensure that employees are provided with and use appropriate, suitable means (such as stairways, ladders, or ramps) to go from one walking-working surface to another.
Proposed paragraph (d) is new and addresses the maintenance and repair of walking-working surfaces in general industry. Proposed paragraph (d)(1) requires the employer to ensure through regular and periodic inspection and maintenance that walking-working surfaces are in a safe condition for employee use. Proposed paragraph (d)(2) requires the employer to ensure that all hazardous conditions are corrected, repaired, or guarded to prevent employee use until repairs are made. Proposed paragraph (d)(3) requires that where hazardous conditions may affect the structural integrity of the walking-working surface, a qualified person must perform or supervise the maintenance or repair of that surface.
The intent of proposed paragraph (d) is to ensure that the employer, or the employer's designee, monitors walking-working surfaces to identify hazards that may lead to injury or death and to address those hazards promptly. A qualified person must perform or supervise the repair where hazards are of such a nature that the structural integrity of the walking-working surface may be affected. While the provision does not require the employer to develop an inspection schedule, or keep records of inspections, it does require the employer to ensure that inspections are conducted frequently enough so that hazards are corrected in a timely manner.
OSHA notes that the existing requirements in § 1910.22(b) and (c) are not retained in proposed subpart D because they duplicate provisions in § 1910.176, or the hazards are addressed elsewhere in the proposed rule, such as in the fall protection section.
Section 1910.23 Ladders
Proposed § 1910.23 is a revision and consolidation of existing ladder requirements in §§ 1910.25, 1910.26, and 1910.27, that regulate portable wooden, portable metal, and fixed ladders, respectively. Many of these requirements are retained in the proposed rule as OSHA believes they provide a reasonable and appropriate level of safety. Some requirements are revised for reasons of clarity, consistency, or to improve safety. Requirements common to all types of ladders are located in proposed paragraph (b), General requirements. Requirements specific to a particular type of ladder are located in proposed paragraphs (c), Portable ladders, or (d), Fixed ladders. Proposed paragraph (e) regulates mobile ladder stands and mobile ladder stand platforms. The proposed requirements have been updated and rewritten to be consistent with OSHA's construction industry ladder standard and the national consensus standards,
i.e.,
the ANSI A14 series for ladders.
Throughout this proposal, OSHA uses performance language whenever appropriate. However, in this section, a number of specifications are proposed with regard to clearances and rung widths for ladders. OSHA believes the specifications in this section, which are based upon human factors engineering (Ex. OSHA-S041-2006-0666-0004), are necessary and reflect the requirements of the ANSI A14 series for ladders.
Paragraph (a) Application
Proposed paragraph (a) states that § 1910.23 covers all ladders used in general industry, except ladders that are designed into (an integral part of) a machine or piece of equipment and ladders that are used only for firefighting or rescue operations. OSHA recognizes that it would not be reasonable or practicable to write standards for ladders designed into a part of a machine or piece of equipment because of variable design restrictions such as limited space and unlimited equipment configurations. Therefore, OSHA is exempting such equipment from specific ladder requirements. However, OSHA reminds employers that any surface on which employees walk or work would still have to meet the general requirements of proposed § 1910.22.
OSHA is also proposing to exempt ladders used in firefighting or rescue operations because such ladders are used only in emergency situations. The Agency notes that the primary concern expressed in the design of some of those ladders, such as single-rail ladders, is for fast placement and access. By contrast, this proposed paragraph focuses on the need to protect employees who use ladders routinely, in non-emergency situations. Therefore, given the circumstance in which firefighting and rescue operations are conducted, OSHA believes that it would be inappropriate to regulate firefighting and rescue ladders under proposed § 1910.23. When employees are members of a company fire brigade they must be trained as required by § 1910.156 in the use of such ladders.
Paragraph (b) General Requirements for All Ladders
As noted above, OSHA is consolidating some of the existing requirements for portable and fixed ladders. Requirements that apply in general to all types of ladders are included in paragraph (b), reducing redundancy and enhancing consistency of ladder requirements.
Proposed paragraph (b)(1) requires ladder rungs and steps to be parallel, level, and uniformly spaced when the ladder is in position for use. The proposed provision is consistent with and based upon existing § 1910.25(c)(2)(i)(
b
) for portable wood stepladders and existing § 1910.27(b)(1)(ii) for fixed ladders. The proposed language is consistent with the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(2).
Proposed paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) provide spacing requirements for rungs,
cleats, and steps. Spacing is measured between the center lines of the rungs, cleats, and steps.
Proposed paragraph (b)(2) applies to all ladders except ladders in elevator shafts and telecommunication towers. Proposed paragraph (b)(2) permits flexibility in rung, step, and cleat spacing, as long as the rungs are parallel, level, and uniformly spaced, as required in the preceding paragraph. The proposed paragraph is a revision of requirements in existing § 1910.26(a)(1)(iii) which requires rungs to be spaced 12 inches (30 cm) apart, and existing paragraphs § 1910.25(c)(2)(i)(
b
) and § 1910.27(b)(1)(ii), which require rungs to be spaced not more than 12 inches (30 cm) apart. The proposed provision, which permits spacing of not less than 10 nor more than 14 inches apart, is consistent with the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(3)(i). It will not require any change to ladders that are already in compliance with the existing standard.
An exception to the spacing requirement in proposed paragraph (b)(2) of this section provides that rungs and steps on ladders in elevator shafts must be spaced no less than 6 inches (15 cm) apart, nor more than 16.5 inches (42 cm) apart, as measured along the ladder siderails. Another exemption is provided for fixed ladders on telecommunication towers which sets rung or step spacing at a maximum of 18 inches (46 cm). These exceptions are necessary due to the space restrictions in these areas. The latter part of the provision is consistent with the existing requirements for rungs and steps in § 1910.268(h)(2).
Proposed paragraph (b)(3) requires rungs, cleats, and steps of stepstools to be spaced between 8 inches (20 cm) and 12 inches (30 cm) apart, as measured between center lines of the rungs, cleats, or steps. There is no existing requirement regulating spacing on stepstools. OSHA is proposing this requirement because it believes that stepstools are routinely used in general industry and they should not be treated as portable ladders. This provision is consistent with the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(3)(ii) and is based on the national consensus standards ANSI A14.1-2000 and ANSI A14.2-2000. OSHA believes that virtually all stepstools currently in use already meet the proposed requirements.
Proposed paragraph (b)(4) requires ladder rungs and steps to have a minimum clear width of 11.5 inches (29 cm) for portable ladders and 16 inches (41 cm) for individual rung and fixed ladders. The proposal consolidates existing requirements in § 1910.25(c)(2)(i)(
c
), § 1910.26(a)(2)(i), and § 1910.27(b)(1)(iii). The proposed revision is consistent with both the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(4)(i) and (a)(4)(ii) and the national consensus standards in the ANSI A14 series for ladders. A note to proposed paragraph (b)(4) explains how to measure the width when a ladder safety system is used on a fixed ladder. An exception to the provision is provided in (b)(4)(i) for narrow rungs that are not designed to be stepped on, such as those on the top end of fruit pickers' ladders.
Proposed paragraph (b)(4)(ii) provides an exception for manhole entry ladders that are supported by manhole openings, and requires that they have rungs or steps with a clear width of at least 9 inches (23 cm). The width would increase the available climbing space for employees to pass through the manhole opening.
A final exception is provided in proposed paragraph (b)(4)(iii), which permits rolling ladders used in the telecommunication industry to have a minimum clear step or rung width of 8 inches (20 cm). This provision has been moved, without change, from § 1910.268(h)(5).
Proposed paragraph (b)(5) prohibits wooden ladders from being coated or covered with any material that may obscure structural defects. For the purposes of this paragraph, OSHA does not consider manufacturer-applied warning and informational labels to be coverings that obscure structural defects. This requirement is consistent with the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(12) and national consensus standard, ANSI A14.1-2000.
Proposed paragraph (b)(6) requires that metal ladders be protected against corrosion. For example, ladders may be made more corrosion resistant by painting or the ladder may be made of a material that is inherently corrosion-resistant. The proposed requirement is essentially the same as existing requirements in § 1910.26(a)(1) and § 1910.27(b)(7)(i), which require employers to take some action to protect against corrosion.
Proposed paragraph (b)(7) requires ladder surfaces to be free of puncture or laceration hazards. The proposed provision is a consolidation of similar requirements found in existing § 1910.25(b)(1)(i) and (c)(2)(i)(f), § 1910.26(a)(1) and (a)(3)(viii), and § 1910.27(b)(1)(iv).
Proposed paragraph (b)(8) requires that ladders be used only for the purposes for which they were designed. This proposed requirement is based on requirements applicable to portable wooden ladders in existing § 1910.25(d)(2) and portable metal ladders in existing § 1910.26(c)(3)(vii). The intent of this requirement is to prohibit the use of a ladder as a scaffold plank, gangway, material hoist, brace, or other application unless it is designed for that application. The intent of the proposed paragraph is
not
to prohibit employees from working while on ladders, for example, performing painting activities while on a ladder. OSHA believes the requirement is reasonable for all ladders, and no additional burden is anticipated.
Proposed paragraph (b)(9) requires ladders to be inspected before use to identify any visible defects that could cause employee injury. This requirement is essentially the same as requirements in existing § 1910.25(d)(1)(x) for portable wooden ladders and § 1910.27(f) for fixed ladders. It is also consistent with requirements in the ANSI A14 series national consensus standards for ladders.
OSHA's intent is that a short visual inspection of the ladder be made to ensure that it is properly set up and safe to use. The inspection may include such things as checking for firm footing, engagement of spreader or locking devices (if so equipped) and missing or damaged components of the ladder. OSHA does not expect a ladder to be inspected multiple times per work shift, unless there is a reason to believe a ladder may have been damaged due to an event such as being dropped. After the employee is trained to inspect ladders (
see
§ 1910.30, Training) the actual inspection process could be accomplished as the employee sets up, approaches, or climbs the ladder.
Proposed paragraph (b)(10) requires ladders with structural or other defects to be tagged “Do Not Use” or with similar language, in accordance with § 1910.145. It also requires the ladder to be removed from service until repaired, in accordance with § 1910.22(d), or replaced. This proposed paragraph is a consolidation and editorial revision of existing requirements in § 1910.25(d)(1), § 1910.26(c)(2), and § 1910.27(b).
Proposed paragraphs (b)(11), (b)(12), and (b)(13), together, enable employees to climb ladders safely by using proper climbing techniques and prohibiting employers from permitting employees to carry materials that would prevent them from having both hands free to hold onto the ladder. The proposed paragraphs are consistent with the construction industry standards at § 1926.1053(b)(20), (b)(21), and (b)(22),
and generally consistent with the ANSI A14 series consensus standards for ladders. OSHA's intent is for employers to ensure that employees maintain three points of contact with the ladder when ascending or descending. (Please note this requirement
only
addresses the act of moving up or down a ladder, not working from a ladder.)
Paragraph (c) Portable Ladders
Proposed paragraph (c) sets specific, additional requirements for portable ladders. OSHA proposes to: (1) Remove many existing paragraphs that contain detailed specifications for the design and construction of portable ladders, and (2) no longer address special-purpose ladders, such as painter's stepladders and mason's ladders, in individual paragraphs. In this rulemaking, OSHA uses performance-oriented language, where possible.
Proposed paragraph (c)(1) requires that rungs and steps of portable metal ladders be corrugated, knurled, dimpled, coated with skid-resistant material, or otherwise treated to minimize the possibility of slipping. This provision is nearly identical to existing § 1910.26 (a)(1)(v), and has been editorially changed for clarity.
Proposed paragraph (c)(2) requires that each stepladder or any combination ladder that is used in a stepladder mode be designed with a metal spreader or locking device to hold the front and back sections securely in an open position while in use. This requirement has been changed for clarity and is consistent with existing requirements in § 1910.25(c)(2)(i)(
f
) and § 1910.26(a)(3)(viii).
Proposed paragraph (c)(3) prohibits loading ladders beyond the maximum intended load for which they were designed and tested, or beyond the manufacturer's rated capacity. The maximum intended load, as defined in proposed paragraph § 1910.21(b), includes the weight of the worker and all tools and supplies carried. Manufactured ladders are designed, tested, and in most cases, load-rated and labeled.
Proposed paragraph (c)(4) requires that ladders be used only on stable and level surfaces unless the ladders are secured or stabilized to prevent accidental displacement. The proposed paragraph replaces similar language in existing § 1910.25(d)(2)(iii) and § 1910.26(c)(3)(iii) and is consistent with the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(b)(6) and ANSI A14.1-2000.
Proposed paragraph (c)(5) prohibits the use of portable single-rail ladders. The provision is consistent with the construction industry ladder standard at § 1926.1053(b)(19). In the preamble to the final rule of that standard (55 FR 47681, November 14, 1990), OSHA said it was prohibiting their use because it believed “that single-rail ladders are inherently difficult to use and hazardous because of their instability * * *.” OSHA believes that single rail ladders are also unsafe in general industry.
Proposed paragraph (c)(6) is new and requires that ladders not be moved, shifted, or extended while occupied by an employee. Moving a ladder while it is occupied is unsafe, whether an employee on a ladder “hops” with the ladder in a lateral direction, or a ladder is extended or moved laterally by one employee while occupied by another. This is identical to the construction industry requirement at § 1926.1053(b)(11).
Proposed paragraph (c)(7) requires that ladders placed in any location where they can be displaced by other activities or by traffic, such as ladders used in passageways, doorways, or driveways, be secured to prevent accidental displacement unless a temporary barricade, such as a row of traffic cones, is used to keep the activities or traffic away from the ladder. The proposed paragraph is clearer than existing § 1910.25(d)(2)(iv) and identical to the existing construction industry requirement at § 1926.1053(b)(8).
Proposed paragraph (c)(8) is an editorial revision of existing § 1910.25(d)(2)(xii) which prohibits the top of a stepladder from being used as a step because it may decrease stability.
Proposed paragraph (c)(9) prohibits the use of a non-self-supporting ladder on slippery surfaces unless it is secured and stabilized to prevent accidental displacement. This paragraph is consistent with existing requirements in § 1910.25(d)(2)(i) and the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(b)(7). It is based upon ANSI A14.1-2000.
Proposed paragraph (c)(10) requires the top of a non-self-supporting ladder be placed with the two rails supported unless it is equipped with a single support attachment. Such an attachment is designed to provide greater stability. This is consistent with the existing requirement in § 1910.26(c)(3)(iv) and the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(b)(10).
Proposed paragraph (c)(11) requires that when portable ladders are used to gain access to an upper landing surface, the ladder side rails must extend at least 3 feet (0.9 m) above that upper landing surface. This additional length enables an employee to hold onto the ladder while stepping from the ladder onto the upper landing surface, providing safer access. The proposed paragraph is consistent with the existing requirement in § 1910.25(d)(2)(xv) and ANSI A14.1-2000. OSHA notes that after-market ladder extensions, such as walk-through railing systems, may be used to increase the length of a ladder to meet this requirement. When the ladder's top rung is level with or slightly below the upper landing surface, and the rail extensions are securely attached (that is, secured to the extent necessary to stabilize the extension and not expose the employee to a falling hazard from the extension's displacement), the rail extensions would be considered part of the ladder itself. The use of ladder extensions would also have to meet the requirements of proposed (c)(14) of this section which states that ladders shall not have their reach increased by other means unless specifically designed for the application.
Proposed paragraph (c)(12) requires that when work is performed on or near electrical circuits, the work practice requirements of subpart S, Electrical, apply to protect against electrical hazards. The proposed requirement is essentially the same as existing § 1910.26(c)(3)(viii).
Proposed paragraph (c)(13) prohibits ladders and ladder sections from being tied or fastened together to provide a longer length unless they are specifically designed for such use. The proposed provision is essentially the same as existing § 1910.26(c)(3)(vi), and is intended to prevent employees from using unsafe rigging methods.
Proposed paragraph (c)(14) prohibits ladders and ladder sections from having their reach increased by other means (for example, placing a box under a ladder), unless the length extension is specifically designed for the application. This proposed requirement replaces existing § 1910.25(d)(2)(v), which explicitly lists boxes and barrels, with more general language. This proposed paragraph is consistent with the ANSI A14 series consensus standards.
Paragraph (d) Fixed Ladders
In paragraph (d), OSHA proposes to revise existing § 1910.27 to eliminate unnecessary, overly specific requirements and to clarify and update others. To assist in compliance, OSHA has included figures D-2 through D-5 in the regulatory language.
In paragraph (d)(1), OSHA proposes that fixed ladders be capable of supporting their maximum intended load. This provision replaces the current specification requirement with a more
general performance requirement. The Agency requests comment on whether the existing provisions should be maintained in lieu of the proposed requirement.
Proposed paragraph (d)(2) would apply to new installations, requiring that fixed ladders installed on or after the effective date of the final rule be designed, constructed, and maintained as proposed in (d)(2)(i) and (ii).
Proposed paragraph (d)(2)(i) requires that fixed ladders be capable of supporting at least two live loads of at least 250 pounds (113 kg) each, concentrated between any two consecutive attachments, as well as anticipated loads caused by ice buildup, winds, rigging, and impact loads (e.g., impact load resulting from an employee falling onto the ladder). If it is anticipated that the ladder will be used by more than two employees simultaneously, then the number and position of additional concentrated live loads of 250 pounds (113 kg) must also be included in determining the capabilities of fixed ladders. Proposed paragraph (d)(2)(ii) requires that each step or rung be capable of supporting at least a single concentrated load of 250 pounds (113 kg) applied in the middle of the step or rung.
OSHA proposes the two provisions in (d)(2)(i) and (d)(2)(ii) as a replacement for existing requirements in § 1910.27(a)(1)(i) to (iv). Existing § 1910.27(a)(1)(i) requires the ladder to support only a single concentrated load of 200 pounds, whereas the proposal requires the ladder to support greater loads. The proposal is consistent with the national consensus standard, ANSI A14.3-2002, and OSHA's construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(1)(iii). The Agency notes that the ANSI requirement, which is based on loads of 250 pounds (113 kg), reflects OSHA's belief that 250 pounds (113 kg) is the average weight of an employee with tools.
Proposed paragraph (d)(3) requires that the minimum perpendicular distance from the centerline of the steps and rungs, or grab bars, or both, to the nearest permanent object in back of the ladder be 7 inches (18 cm), except in the case of an elevator pit ladder, for which a minimum perpendicular clearance of 4.5 inches (11 cm) is required. In addition, the employer must ensure that grab bars do not protrude on the climbing side beyond the rungs of the ladder which they serve. The proposed requirement is a revision of existing § 1910.27(c)(4) and (c)(5) in which OSHA has removed the language that allows for a reduction of the minimum clearance to account for unavoidable obstructions. As OSHA stated in the final rule to the construction industry standard, “[it] believes that, in general, the minimum clearance requirement is necessary, regardless of any obstructions, so that employees can get safe footholds on ladders.” (55 FR 47675.) This change is consistent with the most recent edition of the pertinent provisions of the national consensus standard, ANSI A14.3-2002, as well as the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(13).
Proposed paragraphs (d)(4) through (d)(8) address ladder extensions and grab bars. To provide safe transition from a fixed ladder to a landing surface, fixed ladders (except those at the top of manholes) must extend above the access or egress level or landing platform either by the continuation of the rungs for use as horizontal grab bars or by providing vertical grab bars. Proposed paragraph (d)(4) requires side rails of through or side-step ladders to extend 42 inches (1.1 m) above the top of the access level or landing platform served by the ladder. For a parapet ladder, the access level must be the roof if the parapet is cut to permit passage through the parapet; if the parapet is continuous, the access level must be the top of the parapet.
Proposed paragraph (d)(5) requires the steps or rungs of through ladder extensions to be omitted from the extensions. In addition, the extensions of the side rails must be flared to provide not less than 24 inches (61 cm) nor more than 30 inches (76 cm) clearance between side rails. Where ladder safety systems are provided, the maximum clearance between side rails of the extensions must not exceed 36 inches (91 cm). Proposed paragraph (d)(6) requires the side rails and the steps or rungs of side-step ladders to be continuous in the extension.
The proposed requirements in (d)(4), (d)(5), and (d)(6) are a revision and update of the existing requirement at § 1910.27(d)(3). The proposed provisions are consistent with OSHA's construction industry standard at §§ 1926.1053(a)(24) through (a)(26) and with the national consensus standard, ANSI A14.3-2002.
Proposed paragraphs (d)(7) and (d)(8) specify criteria for grab bars. The proposed requirements are consistent with existing § 1910.27(d)(4), but are editorially revised for clarity.
Proposed paragraph (d)(9) addresses ladders that terminate at hatch covers. The proposed provision requires that the opening be large enough for the employee to pass and that it be counterbalanced to remain open, thus preventing accidental closure. The proposed requirement replaces the overly specific provision of existing § 1910.27(c)(7) and is consistent with similar provisions in the national consensus standard, ANSI A14.3-2002.
Proposed paragraph (d)(10) requires fixed individual rung ladders to be constructed to prevent the employee's feet from sliding off the end. This requirement replaces existing § 1910.27(b)(1)(v) and is consistent with the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(5).
Proposed paragraph (d)(11) prohibits the use of fixed ladders having a pitch greater than 90 degrees from the horizontal. The proposed provision is a revision of the existing requirements in § 1910.27(d)(1) through (d)(4). The existing requirements are overly specific and complex, whereas the proposed provisions are easier to understand.
Proposed paragraph (d)(12) addresses the step-across distance from the centerline of the steps or rungs of a fixed ladder. Proposed paragraph (d)(12)(i) requires that the step-across distance for
through ladders
be between 7 inches (18 cm) and 12 inches (30 cm) to the nearest edge of the structure, building, or equipment accessed. Proposed paragraph (d)(12)(ii) requires that the step-across distance be between 15 inches (38 cm) and 20 inches (51 cm), measured from the centerline of the ladder, at the point of access and egress to a platform edge for
side-step ladders.
(
See
Figure D-2.) The proposed provisions are based on existing § 1910.27(c)(6), which address the step-across distances for all fixed ladders. In the proposal, OSHA addresses step-across distances for through ladders and side-step ladders separately. OSHA believes the revised language allows greater flexibility and provides the same degree of safety. It is also consistent with the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(16) and the national consensus standard for fixed ladders, ANSI A14.3-2002.
Proposed paragraph (d)(13) addresses fixed ladders without cages or wells. Proposed paragraph (d)(13)(i) requires ladders without cages or wells to have a clear width of at least 15 inches (38 cm) on each side of the centerline of the ladder to the nearest permanent object to allow safe climbing clearance (
see
Figure D-2). This proposed provision revises existing § 1910.27(c)(2) for clarity. It is also consistent with the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(17) and the national consensus standard for fixed ladders, ANSI 14.3-2002.
Proposed paragraph (d)(13)(ii) requires a minimum perpendicular distance of 30 inches (76 cm) from the
center line of the steps and rungs to the nearest object on the climbing side to allow safe climbing clearance. This proposed provision would replace a number of specifications found at existing § 1910.27(c)(1) for clearance distances based on the pitch of the ladder. The proposed language removes the overly detailed information and establishes a single, minimum clearance distance regardless of pitch. This proposed provision is consistent with the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(14) and the national consensus standard for fixed ladders, ANSI A14.3-2002. An exception is permitted when unavoidable obstructions on the climbing side of a fixed ladder are encountered. The minimum clearance then may be reduced to 24 inches (61 cm), as long as deflector plates are provided to protect the employee's head. A similar exception may be found in existing § 1910.27(c)(7) and its accompanying Figure D-5. This proposed paragraph is consistent with the construction industry standard at § 1926.1053(a)(15) and national consensus standard, ANSI A14.3-2002.
Paragraph (d) ends with a note stating that the duty to provide fall protection for employees working on fixed ladders is found at proposed § 1910.28 and the criteria for such fall protection systems is found at proposed § 1910.29.
Paragraph (e) Mobile Ladder Stands and Mobile Ladder Stand Platforms (Mobile Ladder Stands and Platforms)
Proposed paragraph (e) covers mobile ladder stands and mobile ladder stand platforms (mobile ladder stands and platforms). The proposed design requirements are a performance language revision of the design specifications provided in existing paragraphs (a) and (f) of § 1910.29. All of the requirements proposed in this paragraph are consistent with the consensus standard, ANSI A14.7-2006.
Proposed paragraph (e)(1) addresses general design requirements for mobile ladder stands and platforms. Proposed paragraph (e)(1)(i) requires mobile ladder stands and platforms to have a step width of at least 16 inches (41 cm). Proposed paragraph (e)(1)(ii) requires steps, standing levels, and platforms of mobile ladder stands and platforms be provided with a slip-resistant surface. This surface may be an integral part of the structure or may be provided by a durable, secondary process or operation, e.g., dimpling, knurling, shot-blasting, coating, metal spraying, or slip-resistant tape. These requirements provide employees with a reasonable level of safe footing.
The next two proposed paragraphs are important to the stability of the unit and the balance of the employee using it. Proposed paragraph (e)(1)(iii) requires that wheels or casters, when under load, be designed to support their proportional share of four times the rated load, plus the proportional share of the unit's weight. This requirement is consistent with the existing provision at § 1910.29(a)(4).
Proposed paragraph (e)(1)(iv) requires mobile ladder stands and platforms, which use wheels or casters, to be equipped with a system to impede horizontal movement. This proposed provision is written in performance language, replacing the existing specification requirements in § 1910.29(a)(4).
Proposed paragraph (e)(1)(v) requires that the maximum work surface heights of mobile ladder stands and platforms not exceed four times the least base dimension without additional support. When greater heights are needed to prevent toppling, outriggers, counterweights, or comparable means must be used to maintain this minimum base ratio. The proposed paragraph would replace similar existing requirements in § 1910.29(a)(3)(i) and (f)(2).
Proposed paragraph (e)(1)(vi) requires mobile ladder stands and platforms to be capable of supporting at least four times their intended load. This proposed paragraph replaces a similar requirement in existing § 1910.29(f)(5), which requires a safety factor of four.
Proposed paragraph (e)(1)(vii) prohibits moving mobile ladder stands and platforms when occupied. This new requirement is based on the national consensus standard ANSI A14.7-2006, and is intended to prevent employees from falling from a mobile ladder stand or platform when it is being moved. When the additional weight of an employee is added to the top of a unit, the center of gravity is raised and the unit is less stable than when there is no weight on it. Also, an employee may lose his or her balance when a unit moves suddenly, or when simply riding on a unit.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2) addresses design requirements for mobile ladder stands. Proposed paragraph (e)(2)(i) requires that steps be uniformly spaced and arranged with a rise of not more than 10 inches (25 cm), and a depth of not less than 7 inches (18 cm). The slope of the step stringer (inclined side step support) to which the steps are attached must not be more than 60 degrees measured from the horizontal. This proposed paragraph is essentially the same as existing § 1910.29(f)(3) except that the existing provision requires the slope of the steps section to be a minimum of 55 degrees, and a maximum of 60 degrees, measured from the horizontal.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2)(ii) requires all ladder stands with a top step height between 4 and 10 feet (1.2 m and 3 m) to be provided with handrails having a vertical height of 29.5 inches (75 cm) to 37 inches (94 cm) as measured from the front edge of a step. The use of removable gates or non-rigid members, such as chains, is permitted for special use applications. This proposed requirement is essentially the same as the existing provision at § 1910.29(f)(4)(ii), except that the existing requirement does not set a maximum height.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2)(iii) requires all ladder stands with a top step over 10 feet high (3 m) to have the top step protected on three sides by a handrail that has a vertical height of at least 36 inches (91 cm). The use of removable gates or non-rigid members such as chains is permitted for special use applications. Top steps that are 20 inches (51 cm) or more, front to back, must be provided with a midrail and toeboard.
Proposed paragraphs (e)(2)(ii) and (e)(2)(iii) replace existing paragraph § 1910.29(f)(4)(i), which requires units to be equipped with handrails when they have more than five (5) steps or measure 5 feet (1.5 m) in vertical height to the top step. This provision ensures employees have a handhold to prevent falling while they climb.
Proposed paragraph (e)(2)(iv) is new and requires the standing areas of mobile ladder stands to be within the base frame. This requirement enhances the stability of the unit by keeping the center of gravity within the base frame, thus reducing the chance of tipping.
Proposed paragraph (e)(3) addresses design requirements for mobile ladder stand platforms. Proposed paragraph (e)(3)(i) requires steps on a ladder stand platform to conform to paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section. An exception to this requirement is provided when the employer demonstrates that conforming to paragraph (e)(2)(i) is not practicable. Steeper slopes or vertical ladders may be used, provided the unit is stabilized to prevent its overturning. OSHA realizes that in a few applications the steps to a mobile ladder stand platform may have to be greater than the required 60 degree maximum prescribed in proposed paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this paragraph. OSHA does not seek to prohibit the use of such units; however, this exception acknowledges that need and still provides for employee safety.
Proposed paragraph (e)(3)(ii) requires all mobile ladder stand platforms with a platform height between 4 feet and 10 feet (1.2 m and 3 m) to be provided with handrails having a vertical height of 29.5 inches (75 cm) to 37 inches (94 cm) measured from the front edge of a step. Handrails in the platform area are required to have a vertical height of at least 36 inches (91 cm) and include a midrail to protect employees from the fall hazard. This requirement is a clarification of the general provision found in proposed § 1910.29(b)(1). The use of removable gates or non-rigid members, such as chains, is permitted for special-use applications. This proposed requirement is essentially the same as the existing provision at § 1910.29(f)(4)(ii), except the existing requirement does not set a maximum height. OSHA is proposing a maximum height in accordance with anthropomorphic studies (Ex. OSHA-S041-2006-0666-0004).
Proposed paragraph (e)(3)(iii) requires all mobile ladder stand platforms with a platform height of over 10 feet (3 m) to have guardrails and toeboards provided on the exposed sides and ends of the platform. The use of removable gates or non-rigid members, such as chains, would be permitted for special-use applications. Toeboards prevent objects from falling onto employees who may be below the unit. The requirements in proposed paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(3) are based on ANSI A14.7-2006, American National Standard for Mobile Ladder Stands and Mobile Ladder Stand Platforms.
Section 1910.24 Step Bolts and Manhole Steps
Proposed § 1910.24 establishes requirements for step bolts and manhole steps. Step bolts and manhole steps are used in the telecommunications industry, gas and electric utility industries, and some large manufacturing plants, usually in lieu of conventional ladders (
e.g.,
fixed ladders). While the Agency has a number of requirements addressing ladders, those requirements are not consistently or directly applicable to step bolts and manhole steps. For this reason OSHA is proposing requirements that address the design, capacity, and strength of step bolts and manhole steps. OSHA believes that these requirements provide for the safe use of this equipment. The provisions include the general requirements in existing § 1910.268(h) for pole steps and manhole ladders. Pole steps (normally used on wooden utility poles) and step bolts (normally used on metal poles or towers) are covered jointly under the proposed provisions for step bolts, and are based upon provisions in § 1910.268, Telecommunications, and the national consensus standards, American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) C 478-07, Standard Specification for Precast Reinforced Concrete Manhole Sections, and ANSI/TIA/EIA 222G-1996 and 2006, Structural Standard for Antenna Supporting Structures and Antennas.
OSHA recognizes that many workplaces already have step bolts or manhole steps installed, and that it could be unreasonably disruptive and burdensome to require employers to retrofit those bolts and steps to comply with certain provisions of the proposed standard. Therefore, OSHA is proposing certain design changes to step bolts and manhole steps on new installations performed 90 days after the standard's effective date. These proposed provisions are described individually below.
As part of this proposal, OSHA is removing the requirements in § 1910.268(h), and instead requiring that the telecommunications industry comply with the provisions for ladders, step bolts, and manhole steps in subpart D. Additionally, as per § 1910.269 (Electric power generation, transmission, and distribution), ladders, step bolts, and manhole steps used in the electric power industry must meet the requirements of subpart D. Therefore, OSHA is proposing § 1910.24 as the minimum requirements necessary to ensure the safety of employees climbing and descending step bolts and manhole steps. These provisions are essentially the same as those in the 1990 proposed rule (55 FR 13360).
The rules in proposed § 1910.24 are performance-based where possible. For example, proposed paragraph § 1910.24(a)(6) sets performance-based strength requirements that do not specify the types or sizes of materials that must be used. Where dimensions are specified, such as in paragraphs (b)(2)(iii) and (b)(2)(iv), they are based on anthropometrics, existing § 1910.268, and current industry practices and standards, such as the national consensus standard, ASTM C 478-07.
Paragraph (a) Step Bolts
Proposed paragraph (a) addresses the design, capacity, and use of step bolts. Proposed paragraph (a)(1) requires that all step bolts installed on or after the effective date of the final rule that are used in corrosive environments be constructed of, or coated with, a material that will retard corrosion of the step or bolt. This is important to protect against deterioration, and the resultant weakening of the step bolt.
Proposed paragraph (a)(2) requires step bolts to be designed to prevent the employee's foot from slipping or sliding off the end of the step bolt, which could contribute to a fall.
Proposed paragraph (a)(3) requires step bolts to be spaced uniformly, 12 inches (30 cm) minimum center to center, alternately spaced, and an 18 inches (46 cm) maximum spacing. To assist in compliance, OSHA has included figure D-6 in the proposed regulatory text. The proposed paragraph matches existing § 1910.268(h)(2) and the 1996 version of ANSI/EIA/TIA 222, both of which allow step bolts to be spaced as much as 18 inches (46 cm) apart, 36 inches (91 cm) on any one side. An exception to this requirement permits the spacing from the entry and exit surface to the first step bolt to be different from the spacing between the other step bolts. This exception allows the height of the entry or exit surface to be modified without necessitating the reinstallation of all the step bolts.
OSHA notes that the 2006 version of ANSI/EIA/TIA 222 specifies that the center to center spacing between alternately spaced step bolts be 10 inches (25 cm) minimum and 16 inches (41 cm) maximum as opposed to the 12- and 18-inch (30 and 46 cm) requirements of the proposal. The Agency requests comment on whether to adopt the language of the 2006 ANSI/EIA/TIA standard.
Proposed paragraph (a)(4) requires that the minimum clear width of each step bolt be 4.5 inches (11 cm). Proposed paragraph (a)(5) requires the minimum perpendicular distance between the centerline of the step bolt to the nearest permanent object in back of the bolt to be at least 7 inches (18 cm). Where obstructions cannot be avoided, toe clearances may be reduced to 4.5 inches (11 cm). Both of these provisions ensure there is adequate room both on and behind the step bolt to enable the employee to stand securely.
Proposed paragraph (a)(6) requires step bolts installed before the effective date of the final rule to be capable of supporting their maximum intended load. All walking-working surfaces must be capable of supporting employees and equipment, without failure. The proposed language of (a)(6) “grandfathers,” or allows the continued use of, existing step bolts that are capable of supporting their maximum intended load.
Proposed paragraph (a)(7) requires each step bolt installed on or after the effective date of the final rule to be
capable of supporting, without failure, at least four times its maximum intended load. OSHA believes that this requirement is necessary to provide a safety factor to ensure that step bolts do not fail during use. Common engineering practice demands that a safety factor be provided in any product design to account for any unanticipated factors that may stress the product beyond its designed capabilities. OSHA's understanding is that a
5/8
-inch (1.6-cm) diameter steel step bolt is normally expected to meet this requirement, and step bolts of this size are currently used in the industry.
Proposed paragraph (a)(8) requires step bolts to be visually inspected before each use and to be maintained in accordance with proposed § 1910.22. This provision reinforces the necessity to meet the general requirements of all walking-working surfaces. As with the requirements in proposed § 1910.22, this visual inspection is not intended to be burdensome, and can be performed as the employee climbs the unit.
Proposed paragraph (a)(9) requires step bolts that are bent more than 15 degrees from the perpendicular to be removed and replaced with bolts that meet the requirements of this section. The proposed requirement is intended to apply to displacement in any direction the bolt may be bent. The intent of this provision is to replace bolts that are bent to such a degree that an employee's foot may slip or slide off the end of the step bolt, which may cause an employee to fall.
Paragraph (b) Manhole Steps
Proposed paragraph (b) addresses the design, capacity, and use of manhole steps. Proposed paragraph (b)(1) requires manhole steps installed before the effective date of the final rule to be capable of supporting their maximum intended load. The proposed language “grandfathers,” or allows the continued use of, existing manhole steps. Under proposed § 1910.22(b), employers would be obligated to ensure that all walking-working surfaces are designed, constructed, and maintained to support their maximum intended load. This provision is consistent with the requirements in existing § 1910.268(h) that address steps in manholes used in the telecommunications industry.
Proposed paragraph (b)(2) sets requirements for the design of manhole steps. The requirements apply to manhole steps installed on or after the effective date of the final rule. Proposed paragraph (b)(2)(i) requires that all manhole steps be provided with slip-resistant surfaces such as corrugated, knurled, or dimpled surfaces.
Proposed paragraph (b)(2)(ii) requires all manhole steps that are used in corrosive environments to be constructed of, or coated with, a material that will retard corrosion of the step. This corrosion resistance will help prevent deterioration that can lead to failure of the manhole step, which may cause the employee to fall.
Proposed paragraph (b)(2)(iii) requires that manhole steps have a minimum clear step width of 10 inches (25 cm). Proposed paragraph (b)(2)(iv) requires that steps be spaced uniformly, not more than 16 inches (41 cm) apart. As in proposed paragraph (a)(3) above, an exception to this requirement permits the spacing from the entry and exit surface to the first manhole step to be different from the spacing between the other steps. This exception allows for the height of the entry or exit surface to be modified without necessitating the reinstallation of the entire set of manhole steps.
Proposed paragraph (b)(2)(v) would require manhole steps to have a minimum perpendicular distance between the centerline of the manhole step to the nearest permanent object in back of the step of at least 4.5 inches (11 cm). Proposed paragraph (b)(2)(vi) requires the steps be designed to prevent the employee's foot from slipping or sliding off the end of the manhole step, which may result in a fall.
Proposed paragraph (b)(3) requires manhole steps to be visually inspected before each use and maintained in accordance with proposed § 1910.22. The purpose of the inspection is to ensure that no manhole steps are damaged or missing. This proposed paragraph is essentially a restatement of the requirements in proposed § 1910.22 for inspecting and maintaining walking-working surfaces. The visual inspection is expected to take only a few seconds before use of each step.
Section 1910.25 Stairways
Proposed § 1910.25 provides stairway design and installation criteria. This proposed section combines, clarifies, and updates existing requirements, and adds new provisions for stairs and stairways. The majority of the requirements for this section are derived from existing § 1910.24, Fixed industrial stairs, and are consistent with American National Standard Institute (ANSI) A1264.1-2007, Safety Requirements for Workplace Walking/Working Surfaces and Their Access; Workplace, Floor, Wall and Roof Openings; Stairs and Guardrail Systems, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 101-2006, Life Safety Code, and the International Code Council's (ICC's) International Building Code ICC-2003.
On March 28, 2002, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) published a request for comment regarding the “Draft Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations” (67 FR 15014), specifically requesting nominations of rules and regulations in need of reform. In response to this request, the Copper and Brass Fabricators Council (CBFC) (Ex. 3) identified OSHA's subpart D as in need of revision to permit use of ship and spiral stairs. Specifically, CBFC requested that OSHA revise its existing rule in § 1910.24(b), which requires fixed stairs (referred to as standard stairs in this proposal) and prohibits spiral stairs except for special limited use and secondary access situations where it is not practical to provide a conventional stairway. CBFC suggested that OSHA revise this standard to permit the installation and use of ship stairs and spiral stairs in more circumstances. In the earlier rulemaking (1990), OSHA had proposed to allow more flexibility in the use of these stairs. In this proposed rule, OSHA would permit the installation of spiral, ship, and alternating tread-type stairs for limited secondary use where it is not practical to provide a standard stairway and provides design criteria for them. Provisions to prevent employees from falling from unprotected sides or edges of stairway landings are provided in proposed § 1910.28, Duty to have fall protection.
Paragraph (a) General Requirements
Proposed paragraph (a) contains general requirements applicable to all stairways. In this proposed rule, the Agency is using the term “standard stairs” in place of the term “fixed industrial stairs” which is used in the existing standard. OSHA has used the term “fixed industrial stair” since 1971 because the term was used in the national consensus standard ANSI A64.1-1968 (now ANSI A1264.1-2007) that prescribed requirements for them. OSHA believes the term “standard stairs” is clearer and easier to understand and therefore is proposing to use the new term. The Agency is proposing to define the term “standard stairs” to mean a permanently installed stairway and to make it clear that ship stairs, spiral stairs, and alternating tread-type stairs are not standard stairs.
OSHA's proposed change in terminology is consistent with current industry codes and standards that use the terms “standard stairs,” “stairways,” and “fixed stairs” interchangeably. The Life Safety Code (NFPA 101-2006)
includes requirements for “standard stairs” that are similar to OSHA's requirements for “fixed industrial stairs,” but does not define “standard stairs.” The International Building Code (IBC-2003) defines “stairways,” but not “fixed” or “standard stairs,” and also includes requirements similar to OSHA's for “fixed industrial stairs.” The consensus standard ANSI A1264.1-2007 uses the term “fixed stairs.” The Agency requests comment on whether this change in terminology (from fixed industrial stairs to standard stairs) is appropriate or whether it leaves a gap in the coverage of stairways.
Proposed paragraph (a)(1) establishes the scope of this section, making it clear that generally all stairs, including standard stairs, spiral stairs, ship stairs, and alternating tread-type stairs, are covered. Additional requirements for stairs serving as required exit routes are located in subpart E, Means of Egress. This provision is based on existing paragraph § 1910.24(a) and is consistent with ANSI A1264.1-2007. It also makes clear that this section does
not
cover stairs serving floating roof tanks, stairs on scaffolds, stairs designed into a machine or piece of equipment, or stairs on self-propelled motorized mobile equipment. To ensure consistency among OSHA standards and assist those working in both construction and general industries, requirements for stairs on scaffolds also are provided in the construction industry standards at § 1926.451. Stairs serving floating roof tanks, stairs designed into a machine or piece of equipment, and stairs on self-propelled motorized mobile equipment are not covered by recognized industry standards, and the Agency does not have any information or sufficient evidence on how to regulate these types of stairs. OSHA requests comments on whether there is a need to regulate these stairs.
Proposed paragraph (a)(2) is intended to protect employees from falling off unprotected sides and edges. It requires that stairs be equipped with handrails and stair rail systems that meet the requirements of proposed § 1910.28, Duty to have fall protection. OSHA notes that the top rail of a stair rail system may also serve as a handrail when installed in accordance with proposed § 1910.29(f).
Paragraph (a)(3) proposes that the vertical clearance above any stair tread to an overhead obstruction must be at least 6 feet, 8 inches (1.8 m) measured from the leading edge of the tread, except as proposed in (c)(3) below. This is a change from the existing rule, found in § 1910.24(i), where the clearance is required to be at least 7 feet (2.1 m). This proposed change is consistent with national consensus standards (i.e., ANSI A1264.1-2007).
In paragraphs (a)(4) through (a)(6), OSHA proposes requirements for riser heights and stairway landing platform widths. All three provisions are based on requirements in existing subpart D but are rewritten in performance-based language for ease of compliance and enforcement. These proposed requirements are the minimum criteria OSHA feels are necessary to ensure employee safety when traversing stairs.
In paragraph (a)(4), OSHA proposes that stairs be installed with uniform riser heights and tread depths between landings. This provision is essentially the same as the existing requirement in § 1910.24(f).
OSHA proposes, in § 1910.25(a)(5), that stairway landings and platforms be no less than the width of the stair and not less than 30 inches (76 cm) in length as measured in the direction of travel. The proposed language is essentially the same as that in existing § 1910.24(g).
In paragraph (a)(6), OSHA proposes to revise the platform width requirements where doors or gates open directly on a stairway. Specifically, OSHA proposes that when a door or a gate opens directly on a stairway, a platform must be provided, and the swing of the door or gate must not reduce the effective usable depth to less than 20 inches (51 cm) for platforms installed before 90 days after the effective date of the final rule; and 22 inches (56 cm) for platforms installed thereafter. The 20 or 22 inches (51 or 56 cm) is measured beyond the swing radius of the door after the door is opened fully. (
See
Figure D-7.) This change increases the effective usable depth of the platform, required in existing § 1910.23(a)(10), by 2 inches (5 cm), making OSHA's proposal consistent with the national consensus standard, ANSI A1264.1-1995 (R2002). OSHA notes that the 2007 version of ANSI/ASSE A1264.1, section 6.11,
Door and Gate Openings,
states, “Stairs shall have landings at door openings and gate openings. During its swing, the door shall leave not less than one-half of the required width of the landing unobstructed. The door shall project not more than seven inches (180 mm) into the required width of the landing when the door is fully open.” OSHA requests comment on how much clear, unobstructed space is necessary on landing platforms where doors or gates open directly onto them.
In paragraph (a)(7), OSHA proposes that stairs be designed and constructed to carry five times the normal anticipated live load, but never less than a concentrated load of 1,000 pounds (454 kg) applied at any point. This provision is nearly the same as existing § 1910.24(c), which applies to fixed industrial stairs, except that the proposed provision will apply to
all
stairs covered by this section. In addition, it is consistent with ANSI/ASSE A1264.1-2007.
In paragraph (a)(8), OSHA proposes that standard stairs be provided for access from one walking-working surface to another where operations necessitate regular and routine travel between levels and for access to operating platforms for equipment. An exception allows the use of winding stairways on tanks and similar round structures where the diameter of the structure is five (5) feet (1.5 m) or more. OSHA recognizes that standard stairs are the principal means of providing safe access from one working level to another. Therefore, this provision is designed to ensure that employees have a reasonable means of access to different walking-working surfaces. This provision is essentially the same as the existing requirement in § 1910.24(b) except that it has been rewritten for clarity. OSHA does not intend for this section to preclude the use of fixed ladders for access to elevated tanks, towers, and similar structures, or to overhead traveling cranes, when the use of fixed ladders is common practice. The proposed provision is consistent with the national consensus standard, ANSI/ASSE A1264.1-2007.
In paragraph (a)(9), OSHA proposes to limit the use of spiral stairs, ship stairs, or alternating tread-type stairs to “special limited usage” and “secondary access” situations when the employer demonstrates that it is not practical to provide a standard stairway. This is consistent with the national consensus standard, ANSI/ASSE A1264.1-2007. ANSI does not define “special limited usage” or “secondary access.” The ICC Building Code, however, refers to “special limited use” as “a space not more than 250 square feet (23 m
2
) in area and serving not more than five occupants, or from galleries, catwalks and gridirons. * * *” The proposal would require employers to demonstrate that it is not practical to provide a standard stairway before using an alternate type of stairway in “special limited use” situations; therefore, it may be helpful to employers if OSHA defines special limited usage. For the purpose of this proposed rule, OSHA's use of the term is the same as the ICC's; however there may be other usages that warrant inclusion. OSHA requests comment on these points. The term “secondary access” is self explanatory and refers to any stairway that is not used as a
primary means of egress. OSHA notes that where spiral stairs, ship stairs, or alternating tread-type stairs are permitted, those stairs must meet the general requirements in proposed § 1910.25(a) and the additional specific requirements for each stair type in paragraphs (c), (d), or (e) of proposed § 1910.25, respectively. Proposed paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) for spiral stairways, ship stairs, and alternating-type stairs respectively, are new and have no counterparts in existing § 1910.24.
Paragraph (b) Standard Stairs
In paragraph (b), OSHA proposes specific requirements for standard stairs. The proposed requirements are the minimum criteria OSHA believes are necessary to allow adequate clearance for employees to negotiate standard stairs safely. These requirements apply in addition to the general requirements in proposed paragraph (a) above. All of the proposed requirements in this paragraph are consistent with the national consensus standard, ANSI/ASSE A1264.1-2007. For compliance assistance, OSHA has included figures D-7 through D-10 in the regulatory language.
Paragraph (b)(1) proposes that standard stairs be installed at angles between 30 and 50 degrees from the horizontal, which is equivalent to existing § 1910.24(e). However, the existing rule allows any combination of riser height and tread depth necessary to achieve the 30 to 50 degree angle, whereas the proposed rule sets a maximum and minimum range, respectively. Proposed paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) set the maximum riser height and the minimum tread depth, allowing an exception when open risers are used. In paragraph (b)(2), OSHA proposes that standard stairs have a maximum riser height of 9.5 inches (24 cm). In paragraph (b)(3), OSHA proposes that standard stairs have a minimum tread depth of 9.5 inches (24 cm) except when open risers are used; that is, standard stairs having open risers can have tread depths of less than 9.5 inches (24 cm). Proposed paragraph (b)(3) differs from the existing rule in that it uses the term “tread depth” instead of “tread run.” OSHA believes that stairs currently used in general industry already meet these requirements.
In paragraph (b)(4), OSHA proposes that standard stairs have a minimum width of 22 inches (56 cm) between vertical barriers (such as a stair rail, guardrail, or wall). This requirement is essentially the same as existing § 1910.24(d).
The proposed criteria for spiral stairs, ship stairs, and alternating tread-type stairs presented below in proposed paragraphs (c), (d), and (e), respectively, parallel the provisions provided for standard stairs. They represent the minimum requirements OSHA believes are necessary for employees to traverse spiral stairs, ship stairs, and alternating tread-type stairs safely.
Paragraph (c) Spiral Stairs
In paragraph (c), OSHA proposes specific requirements for spiral stairs. These requirements apply in addition to the general requirements in proposed paragraph (a) above. These provisions are based on NFPA 101-2006.
Proposed paragraph (c)(1) requires that spiral stairways have a clear width not less than 26 inches (66 cm). Proposed paragraph (c)(2) requires spiral stairways to have risers with a maximum height of 9.5 inches (24 cm). In paragraph (c)(3), OSHA proposes that spiral stairs have a minimum amount of headroom above the spiral stairway of 6 feet, 6 inches (2 m) measured vertically from the center of the leading edge of the tread. To maintain a safe tread depth and size for spiral stairs, OSHA proposes in paragraph (c)(4) that spiral stair treads have a minimum depth of 7.5 inches (19 cm) at a point 12 inches (30 cm) from the narrowest edge. Proposed paragraph (c)(5) requires that spiral stairs have uniform size treads.
Paragraph (d) Ship Stairs
In paragraph (d), OSHA proposes specific requirements for ship stairs. These requirements apply in addition to the general requirements in proposed paragraph (a) above. Proposed paragraph (d)(1) requires that ship stairs be installed at a slope of 50 to 70 degrees from the horizontal. Paragraph (d)(2) proposes that ship stairs have open risers. In paragraph (d)(3), OSHA proposes that ship stairs have treads with a minimum depth of 4 inches (10 cm), a minimum width of 18 inches (46 cm), and a vertical rise between tread surfaces in the range of 6.5 to 12 inches (17 to 30 cm). These provisions are based on the national consensus standard, ANSI A1264.1-2007.
Paragraph (e) Alternating Tread-Type Stairs
In proposed paragraph (e), OSHA proposes specific requirements for alternating tread-type stairs. These requirements apply in addition to the general requirements in proposed paragraph (a) above. Proposed paragraph (e)(1) requires that alternating tread-type stairs be installed at a slope between 50 and 70 degrees from the horizontal. Proposed paragraph (e)(2) requires that the distance between handrails be between 20 and 24 inches (51 to 61 cm). Proposed paragraph (e)(3) requires that the stairs have treads with a minimum depth of 8.5 inches (22 cm). Proposed paragraph (e)(4) requires that alternating tread-type stairs have open risers if the depth is less than 9.5 inches (24 cm), and proposed paragraph (e)(5) requires treads that are a minimum of 7 inches (18 cm) wide at the leading edge of the step (nosing). The proposed requirements of this paragraph are based on ANSI A1264.1-2007, NFPA 101-2006, and the 2003 International Building Code.
Section 1910.26 Dockboards (Bridge Plates)
Proposed § 1910.26 establishes requirements for dockboards (bridge plates). This section relocates, updates, and clarifies requirements for dockboards located in existing § 1910.30, Other working surfaces. In addition, two requirements in existing § 1910.30(b) and (c), Forging machine and Veneer machinery, respectively, would be revoked because the hazards addressed in those provisions are already covered elsewhere in proposed subpart D (
e.g.,
§ 1910.22) or in other subparts in the general industry standards (e.g., subpart O, Machinery and Machine Guarding, and in particular § 1910.218, Forging machines).
In paragraph (a), OSHA proposes that portable and powered dockboards be capable of supporting their maximum intended load. This requirement essentially restates the general requirement for load support in proposed § 1910.22(b) for all walking-working surfaces, and it is essentially the same as existing provision § 1910.30(a)(1).
In paragraph (b), OSHA proposes that dockboards put into service at least 90 days after the effective date of the final rule be designed, constructed, and maintained to prevent equipment (such as hand trucks and vehicles) from running off the edge. This performance language provision requires that where equipment is used on dockboards, the dockboard must be provided with a means, such as edging or curbing, to prevent equipment from running off the edge. This is a new requirement, which is being proposed to protect employees from injury in the event the equipment falls off the edge of the dockboard.
OSHA proposes in paragraph (c) that portable dockboards be secured in position, either by being anchored or equipped with devices that will prevent their slipping. Where this is infeasible,
the employer must ensure there is substantial contact between the portable dockboard and the unattached surface or surfaces. The dockboard and the unattached surface or surfaces should overlap with one another so that the dockboard does not rock, slide, or slip while being used by employees. The provision is essentially the same as existing provision § 1910.30(a)(2) and is based on ANSI/ASME B56.1-2000, Safety Standard for Low Lift and High Lift Trucks (sections 4.13.2 and 4.13.5).
In paragraph (d), OSHA proposes that vehicles onto which a dockboard has been placed must be prevented from moving (
e.g.,
by using wheel chocks) while the dockboard is being used by employees. If a vehicle rolls forward when a dockboard is in use, the dockboard may fall off the end of the vehicle and an employee may fall as well. The provision identifies positive steps to prevent movement of vehicles rolling forward away from the dock and is essentially the same as the existing § 1910.30(a)(5). The paragraph is consistent with ANSI MH30.2-2005, Portable Dock Leveling Devices: Safety, Performance and Testing.
OSHA proposes in paragraph (e) that portable dockboards be equipped with handholds or other means to permit safe handling. The provision is essentially the same as existing § 1910.30(a)(4) and is based on ANSI/ASME B56.1-2000, Safety Standard for Low Lift and High Lift Trucks (section 4.1
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.