We at Rescue Response Gear would like to point out this critical chance to give feedback to new OSHA standards regarding the Rope Access arena. Please read the following article.
To: SPRAT Members and Stakeholders
URGENT!!!
OSHA is proposing to revise their Walking-Working Surfaces Standard (Subpart D) and Addition of Personal Fall Protection Equipment Criteria (Subpart I). The proposed rule was recently announced in the Federal Register: “29 CFR Part 1910: Walking-Working Surfaces and Personal Protective Equipment (Fall Protection Systems); Proposed Rule”. You can find the proposal here: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-10418.pdf
Please take a moment to review and provide feedback as appropriate. The Comment Period ends August 23. Please take special care to recommend verbiage that might allow the use of Rope Access techniques and systems, but at the same time not condone “controlled descent” systems that do not require extra training or certification of technicians.
First of all, we should applaud OSHA for the proactive stance they are taking with this project. OSHA appears to be heading toward a reorganization of Subpart D similar to the 1926 Subpart M. What a concept: harmonization of fall protection standards! This is a step in the right direction. Throughout the document there is a clear intent to take account of modern industry techniques and equipment, and for this the effort should be commended. However, in the proposed rule you will find that OSHA changes its well established definition of competent person leaving out the authority to take corrective action. Ensuring that the competent person is one who has ability to take corrective action is very important and should remain.
One thing that could be more clearly specified in this new rule is specification of different types of equipment for different uses (ie, Fall Arrest does not need same equipment as Positioning, which in turn does not need same equipment specifications as Rope Access, etc). These requirements clearly should be in line with existing industry standards.
In addition, we do need to express a few specific concerns in the area of Rope Descent Systems (RDS) as described by the proposed rule. First of all, the proposal suggests that Rope Descent Systems will be addressed under 1910.27 Scaffolds (including rope descent systems). This is completely inappropriate, as training, equipment, and safety for Professional Rope Access is quite different from that for scaffolds. Rope Access should have it’s own regulatory section.
Rope descent systems are described in this document as representing a variation of the single-point adjustable suspension scaffold. This is a terribly antiquated view of what ropework really is, and does not adequately acknowledge the extreme versatility and safety record of rope access. This concept should be broadened to something like “rope access systems used for rope supported work” and criteria provided accordingly. There is precedent for this. The existing California General Safety Orders address these concepts quite well in Subchapter 7, General Industry Safety Orders; Group 1 General Physical Conditions and Structures; Article 4 Access, Work Space, and Work Areas; §3270.1. Use of Rope Access Equipment, which addresses the matter reasonably well. (see http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/3270_1.html)
Further, rope descent systems appear to be described as being “used by employees to lower themselves down the side of a building…”. In fact, the criteria given are largely based on ANSI/IWCA I–14.1–2007, Window Cleaning Safety. Some of the requirements in the document (such as requiring intermittent stabilization at 130 feet) are quite specific to window cleaning. This is incredibly restrictive to other trades in that it addresses only window cleaning and does not acknowledge such common and appropriate applications such as: Structural inspection; Non destructive testing; Oil Platform Maintenance; Concrete repair; Glazing; Painting; Pest Control; Façade Survey; Wind Turbine Repair; Water tank maintenance; Banner/Sign erection; Geotechnical Engineering ; Etc. Expanding the terminology to “rope access systems used for rope supported work” as described above, would resolve this matter to include other workers using roped systems and would allow for more techniques than just descent. Please make note for OSHA specific requirements that they’ve included which may not be appropriate to Rope Access, as well as requirements that seem to be missing.
I do not believe that the intent of OSHA is to limit the use of roped systems to Window Cleaners, but if this were an unintended result of the new rule it would have a detrimental effect on firms in these aforementioned industries, and would effectively drive some of these companies completely out of business. Overall anticipated cost of excluding rope access in the industries where it is frequently used would be excessive.
With an entire section dedicated to Rope Access, the rule would be able to address all critical aspects of good rope access safe practices, including
1. Training requirements for basic and advanced skills
2. Training requirements for supervisory level personel
3. Anchorage requirements, regardless of environment (ie, not just buildings!)
4. Equipment selection, care, and maintenance
5. Daily and periodic equipment inspections
6. Proper rigging techniques
7. Appropriate secondary/backup system requirements
8. Proper protection in areas where rope can be damaged (sharp edges, heat, etc.)
9. Rescue plan
The concept of training is of critical importance. While the need for training is acknowledged in the document, what that training should encompass… and more importantly what knowledge/capability should be exhibited by an employee using rope access techniques… should be spelled out more clearly. The requirement for training notes that training may be informal, or on-the-job training. This is not adequate. Specific to training for use of ropes for access in work at height, additional and specific training should be required – perhaps even to include licensure or certification by an industry organization such as the Society of Professional Rope Access Technicians, Industrial Rope Access Trade Association, etc.
Finally, in the subject of training, the concept of requiring an immigrant to undergo additional training is discriminatory and unjustifiable. There is nothing about being an immigrant that should necessitates any more or less training than a person born within the United States.
OSHA invites comments on the proposed rule, and is required by low to carefully review and evaluate comments, information, and data, submitted.
You should submit written data, views, and arguments concerning this proposal. In particular, the Agency welcomes comments on its determination of the economic or other regulatory impacts of the proposed rule on the regulated community.
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. 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).
Thank you for your consideration. I encourage you to seriously consider the importance of submitting comments, and do so in a timely fashion so as to have the greatest impact on the development of the document.
Warm Regards,
Loui McCurley
Regulatory Assistance Committee
