Kiewit Power Constructors Co. et al. (Avalotis Corp., Bowen Engineering Corporation, Commonwealth Dynamics, Inc., Gibraltar Chimney International, LLC, Hamon Custodis, Inc., Hoffmann, Inc., International Chimney Corporation, Karrena International Chimney, Matrix SME, Inc., NAES Power Contractors, Pullman Power, LLC, R and P Industrial Chimney Co., Inc., T. E. Ibberson Company, TIC-The Industrial Company); Grant of a Permanent Variance, 60900-60918 [2013-23625]
Download as PDF
60900
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA
cautions commenters about submitting
personal information such as social
security numbers and date of birth.
Although all submissions are listed in
the https://www.regulations.gov index,
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.
Information on using the https://
www.regulations.gov Web site to submit
comments and access the docket is
available at the Web site’s ‘‘User Tips’’
link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office
for information about materials not
available through the Web site, and for
assistance in using the Internet to locate
docket submissions.
V. Authority and Signature
David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20210, authorized the preparation of
this notice. Accordingly, the Agency is
issuing this notice pursuant to Section
8(g)(2) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 657(g)(2)),
Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 1–2012
(77 FR 3912, Jan. 25, 2012), and 29 CFR
1910.7. Signed at Washington, DC, on
September 26, 2013.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2013–23946 Filed 10–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
[Docket No. OSHA–2012–0015]
Kiewit Power Constructors Co. et al.
(Avalotis Corp., Bowen Engineering
Corporation, Commonwealth
Dynamics, Inc., Gibraltar Chimney
International, LLC, Hamon Custodis,
Inc., Hoffmann, Inc., International
Chimney Corporation, Karrena
International Chimney, Matrix SME,
Inc., NAES Power Contractors,
Pullman Power, LLC, R and P
Industrial Chimney Co., Inc., T. E.
Ibberson Company, TIC—The
Industrial Company); Grant of a
Permanent Variance
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Notice of grant of a permanent
variance.
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
This notice announces the
grant of a permanent variance to
Avalotis Corp., Bowen Engineering
Corporation, Commonwealth Dynamics,
Inc., Gibraltar Chimney International,
LLC, Hamon Custodis, Inc., Hoffmann,
Inc., International Chimney
Corporation, Karrena International
Chimney, Kiewit Power Constructors
Co., Matrix SME, Inc., NAES Power
Contractors, Pullman Power, LLC, R and
P Industrial Chimney Co., Inc., T. E.
Ibberson Company, TIC—The Industrial
Company (‘‘the employers’’). From 1973
to the present, the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA or
the Agency) granted permanent
variances to a number of chimneyconstruction companies from the
provisions of the OSHA standards that
regulate boatswain’s chairs and hoist
towers, specifically paragraph (o)(3) of
29 CFR 1926.452 and paragraphs (c)(1)
through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i),
and (c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552. These
variances use temporary personnel hoist
systems to transport workers to and
from worksites in a personnel cage
while constructing chimneys of various
configurations using jump-form
construction techniques and
procedures. The Agency received
applications from 15 employers for a
variance addressing chimney and
chimney-related construction that, like
the previous variances, propose to use
temporary personnel hoist systems to
transport workers to and from worksites
in a personnel cage. These variance
applications, however, included
conditions that address construction of
chimneys and chimney-related
structures using temporary hoist
systems and procedures in association
with two different methods of
construction (i.e., jump-form and slipform construction), regardless of the
structures’ configurations (i.e., tapered
or straight-barreled of any diameter).
OSHA consolidated these variance
applications into a single application
and published the application and
request for comments in the Federal
Register on March 21, 2013 (78 FR
17432).
After considering the record as a
whole, OSHA finds that these
alternative conditions protect workers at
least as well as the requirements
specified by 29 CFR 1926.452(o)(3) and
29 CFR 1926.552(c)(1) through (c)(4),
(c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16). This
permanent variance applies in Federal
OSHA enforcement jurisdictions and in
those states and territories with OSHAapproved State-Plans covering privatesector employers that have identical
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
standards and agree to the terms of the
variance.
DATES: The permanent variance is
effective on October 2, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
General information and press
inquiries. For general information and
press inquiries about this notice, contact
Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, U.S. Department of
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Room N–3647, Washington, DC 20210;
telephone: (202) 693–1999.
Technical information. For technical
information about this notice, contact
Stefan Weisz, Office of Technical
Programs and Coordination Activities,
OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Room N–
3655, Washington, DC 20210; telephone:
(202) 693–2110; fax: (202) 693–1644.
Copies of this Federal Register notice.
Electronic copies of this Federal
Register notice are available at https://
www.regulations.gov. This Federal
Register notice, as well as news releases
and other relevant information, also are
available at OSHA’s Web page at
https://www.osha.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Fifteen companies (or applicants)
submitted applications for a permanent
variance under Section 6(d) of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970 (29 U.S.C. 655) and 29 CFR
1905.11 (‘‘Variances and other relief
under section 6(d)’’) (see Document ID
Nos. OSHA–2012–0015–0002 to
–0019 1). The applicants construct,
renovate, repair, maintain, inspect, and
demolish tall chimneys and similar
structures made of concrete, brick, and
steel. This work, which occurs
throughout the United States, requires
the applicants to transport employees
and construction tools and materials to
and from elevated worksites located
inside and outside these structures. The
following list provides specific
information about each applicant,
including the company name and
location:
Avalotis Corp; 400 Jones Street, Verona,
PA 15147
Bowen Engineering Corporation
(merged with Mid-Atlantic Boiler &
Chimney, Inc., (formerly Alberici
Mid-Atlantic, LLC)), 8802 N. Meridian
St.Indianapolis, IN 46260
Commonwealth Dynamics, Inc., 95
Court Street, Portsmouth, NH 03801,
Gibraltar Chimney International, LLC,
92 Cooper Ave. Tonawanda, NY
14150
1 In Docket No. OSHA–2012–0015 for this
variance application.
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
Hamon Custodis, Inc. (formerly
Custodis Construction Co., Inc., then
Custodis Cuttrell, Inc.), 58 East Main
Street, Somerville, NJ 08876
Hoffmann, Inc., 6001 49th Street South,
Muscatine, IA 52761
International Chimney Corporation, 55
South Long Street, Williamsville, NY
14221
Karrena International Chimney, 57
South Long Street, Williamsville, NY
14221
Kiewit Power Constructors Co., 9401
Renner Blvd., Lenexa, KS 66219
Matrix SME, Inc. (formerly Matrix
Service Industrial Contractors, Inc.),
1510 Chester Pike, Suite 500,
Eddystone, PA 19022
NAES Power Contractors (formerly
American Boiler and Chimney
Company), 167 Anderson Rd.,
Cranberry Township, PA 16066
Pullman Power, LLC (formerly M. W.
Kellogg Co., then Pullman Power
Products Corporation), 6501 E.
Commerce Avenue, Suite 200, Kansas
City, MO 64120
R and P Industrial Chimney Co., Inc.,
244 Industrial Parkway, Nicholasville,
KY 40356
T. E. Ibberson Company, 828 5th St.
South, Hopkins, MN 55343
TIC—The Industrial Company, 9780 Mt.
Pyramid Ct., Suite 100, Englewood,
CO 80112
The applicants seek a permanent
variance from paragraphs (o)(3) of 29
CFR 1926.452, which regulates the
tackle used to rig a boatswain’s chair, as
well as (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8),
(c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR
1926.552 that regulate hoist towers.
These paragraphs specify the following
requirements:
• (o)(3)—Requirements for the tackle
used to rig a boatswain’s chair;
• (c)(1)—Construction requirements
for hoist towers outside a structure;
• (c)(2)—Construction requirements
for hoist towers inside a structure;
• (c)(3)—Anchoring a hoist tower to a
structure;
• (c)(4)—Hoistway doors or gates;
• (c)(8)—Electrically interlocking
entrance doors or gates to the hoistway
and cars;
• (c)(13)—Emergency stop switch
located in the car;
• (c)(14)(i)—Using a minimum of two
wire ropes for drum hoisting; and
• (c)(16)—Material and component
requirements for construction of
personnel hoists.
The applicants contend that the
permanent variance would provide their
employees with a place of employment
that is at least as safe and healthful as
they would receive under the existing
provisions.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
The places of employment affected by
this variance application are the present
and future projects where the applicants
construct chimneys and chimneyrelated structures using jump-form and
slip-form construction 2 techniques and
procedures, regardless of structural
configuration when such construction
involves the use of temporary personnel
hoist systems. These projects would be
in states under federal authority, as well
as State-Plan states that have safety and
health plans approved by OSHA under
Section 18 of the Occupational Safety
and Health (OSH) Act (29 U.S.C. 667)
and 29 CFR part 1952 (‘‘Approved State
Plans for Enforcement of State
Standards’’), and that have plans
covering private-sector employers and
standards identical to the standards that
are the subject of this variance, and that
agree to the terms of the variance.
The permanent variance permits the
employers to operate temporary hoist
systems to raise and lower workers to
and from elevated worksites on
chimneys, chimney linings, stacks,
silos, and chimney-related structures
such as towers and similar structures
constructed using jump-form and slipform construction techniques and
procedures regardless of structural
configuration of the structure (such as
tapered or straight barreled of any
diameter). This variance also provides
consistent conditions across the
employers named in this application.
OSHA published the employers’
variance applications and request for
comments in the Federal Register on
March 21, 2013 (78 FR 17432).
II. Multi-State Variance
The applicants state that they perform
chimney and other related construction
work in a number of states and
territories that operate OSHA-approved
safety and health programs under
Section 18 of the Occupational Safety
and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651
et seq.). State Plans and territories have
primary enforcement responsibility over
the work performed in those states and
territories. Under the provisions of 29
CFR 1952.9 (‘‘Variance affecting multistate employers’’) and 29 CFR
1905.14(b)(3) (‘‘Actions on
applications’’), a permanent variance
granted by the Agency becomes effective
in State-Plans and territories as an
authoritative interpretation of the
applicants’ compliance obligation when:
(1) The relevant standards are the same
as the Federal OSHA standards from
2 Throughout this notice, OSHA uses the terms
‘‘jump-form construction’’ and ‘‘slip-form
construction’’ instead of ‘‘jump-form formwork
construction’’ and ‘‘slip-form formwork
construction,’’ respectively.
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60901
which the applicants are seeking the
permanent variance; and (2) the StatePlan or territory does not object to the
terms of the variance application.
OSHA received one comment on the
variance application from the state of
Michigan (see Document ID No. OSHA–
2012–0015–0022). OSHA continues to
assume that, absent additional
comments received to the contrary, the
state’s position regarding grant of this
permanent variance is the same as its
position regarding grant of prior
variances involving chimney
construction.
As noted above and in section IV of
this notice (‘‘Comments on Proposed
Variance Application’’), OSHA received
just one comment on the variance
application published in the Federal
Register (78 FR 17432) from any state
State-Plan or territory. However, several
State Plans and territories commented
on earlier variance applications
published in the Federal Register
involving the same standards and
submitted by other employers engaged
in chimney construction and repair;
OSHA is relying on these previous
comments to determine the position of
these State Plans and territories on the
variance applications submitted by the
present employers. The remaining
paragraphs in this section provide a
summary of the positions taken by the
State Plans and territories on the
proposed alternative conditions.
Twenty-seven states and territories
have OSHA-approved safety and health
programs.3 In this regard, 17 State Plans
and 1 territory have standards identical
to the Federal OSHA standards: Alaska,
Arizona, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa,
Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota,
Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina,
Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina,
Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, and
Wyoming. However, Hawaii and Iowa
previously declined to accept the terms
of variances for chimney-related
construction work granted previously by
Federal OSHA. Kentucky stated that its
statutory law requires affected
employers to apply to the state for a
state variance. South Carolina noted
that, for the South Carolina
Commissioner of Labor to accept a
Federal OSHA grant of a variance,
3 Four State-Plan states (Connecticut, Illinois,
New Jersey, and New York) and one territory
(Virgin Islands) limit their occupational safety and
health authority to public-sector employers only.
State-Plan states and territories that exercise their
occupational safety and health authority over
private-sector employers are: Alaska, Arizona,
California, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky,
Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South
Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia,
Washington, and Wyoming.
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
60902
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
employers must file the grant at the
Commissioner’s office in Columbia,
South Carolina. Employers must comply
with any special variance procedures
required by these states prior to
initiating chimney-related construction
work addressing the conditions
specified by this variance. The
permanent Federal OSHA variance will
be effective in the following thirteen
State-Plan States and one Territory:
Alaska, Arizona, Indiana, Maryland,
Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North
Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico,
Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont, and
Wyoming.
Four states (California, Michigan,
Utah, and Washington) have different
requirements for chimney-related
construction work than Federal OSHA
standards. In its comments (Document
ID No. OSHA–2012–0015–0022),
Michigan noted that its standards are
not identical to the OSHA standards,
and those employers electing to use a
variance in that state must comply with
several provisions in the Michigan
standards not addressed in the OSHA
standards. Additionally, Michigan
stated that employers who operate
under the OSHA variance in Michigan
also must obtain a Michigan
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration variance (see Michigan
Rules 1065(a)(1), 1065(a)(2), and
1072(a)(15)).
In comments on earlier variance
applications, Utah also imposed specific
additional requirements in the past
when Federal OSHA granted similar
variances for chimney-related
construction work.4 California and
Washington declined to accept the
terms of variances for chimney-related
construction work granted by Federal
OSHA in the past.5 Employers,
therefore, must apply separately to these
states for a variance from construction
work on structures covered by this
variance.
The remaining State Plans and
territories with OSHA-approved state
plans (Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey,
New York, and the Virgin Islands) cover
only public-sector workers and have no
authority over the private-sector
workers addressed in this variance (i.e.,
that authority continues to reside with
Federal OSHA).
4 See 68 FR 52961 (Oak Park Chimney Corp. and
American Boiler & Chimney Co.)
5 See 70 FR 72659 (International Chimney
Corporation, Karrena International, LLC, and Matrix
Service Industrial Contractors, Inc.), 71 FR 10557
(Commonwealth Dynamics, Inc., Mid-Atlantic
Boiler & Chimney, Inc., and R and P Industrial
Chimney Co., Inc.), and 75 FR 22424 (Avalotis
Corp.).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
III. Supplementary Information
A. Previous Chimney-Construction
Variances
From 1973 to the present, the Agency
granted permanent variances to a
number of chimney-construction
companies from the provisions of the
OSHA standards that regulate
boatswains’ chairs, personnel platforms,
and hoist towers, specifically, paragraph
(o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452 and
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8),
(c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR
1926.552.6 The National Stack and
Chimney Safety and Health Advisory
Committee reports 7 that four of its
member companies (i.e., Pullman
Power, Hamon Custodis, International
Chimney Corp, and Commonwealth
Constructors) using temporary
personnel hoist systems in accordance
with the conditions of the present
permanent variances for chimneyrelated construction work had no
recordable injuries or fatalities (as
reported on the OSHA 300 Forms 8) over
the past seven years.
OSHA generally based the alternative
conditions in the variances granted by
this notice on the alternative conditions
included in previous variances.
However, several of the previous
variances (for example, 38 FR 8545
granted April 3, 1973, and 71 FR 10557
granted March 1, 2006) included
conditions that did not limit the use of
the variance to the construction of
tapered chimneys, and did not specify
any methods of construction.
Conditions included in recently granted
chimney-construction variances limited
the scope of the variance to the
construction of tapered chimneys using
jump-form construction techniques and
procedures. For example, this limitation
applied to the Avalotis Corp. variance
(75 FR 22424; April 28, 2010) used for
comparison purposes in this variance.
The alternative conditions specified
in the permanent variance granted by
this notice apply to chimney-related
construction, including work on
chimneys, chimney linings, stacks,
silos, towers, and similar structures,
built using jump-form and slip-form
construction methods of construction,
6 See 38 FR 8545 (April 3, 1973), 44 FR 51352
(August 31, 1979), 50 FR 20145 (May 14, 1985), 50
FR 40627 (October 4, 1985), 52 FR 22552 (June 12,
1987), 68 FR 52961 (September 8, 2003), 70 FR
72659 (December 6, 2005), 71 FR 10557 (March 1,
2006), 72 FR 6002 (February 8, 2007), 74 FR 34789
(July 17, 2009), 74 FR 41742 (August 18, 2009), and
75 FR 22424 (April 28, 2010)).
7 Private communication from Mr. John Huchko,
Secretary of the National Stack and Chimney Safety
and Health Advisory Committee, January 2, 2013.
8 See 29 CFR part 1904, Recording and Reporting
Occupational Injuries and Illnesses.
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
regardless of the structural
configuration, and that involve the use
of temporary personnel hoist systems.
B. Kiewit Variance Application
On February 8, 2007, OSHA
published a variance application
submitted by Kiewit Power Constructors
Co. (Kiewit; see 72 FR 6002). This
publication included an interim order
that permitted Kiewit to use a ropeguided hoist system to transport
employees to elevated worksites when it
complies with the conditions specified
in the variance application. One of the
conditions specified in the publication
limited the application and interim
order to tapered chimneys, which was
the basis for previous variances granted
by OSHA to other chimney-construction
companies (see subsection A
(Background) of this section for a
discussion of previously granted
chimney variances). Kiewit notified
OSHA on February 23, 2007, that it
required a permanent variance to
perform work on small-diameter,
straight-barreled chimneys built using
conventional jump-form construction
techniques and procedures and straightbarreled chimneys of any diameter built
using slip-form construction techniques
and procedures, as well as tapered
chimneys constructed using jump-form
construction techniques and
procedures. Kiewit submitted a revised
variance application addressing the
conditions included in previously
granted chimney-construction variances
to OSHA on March 1, 2007 (superseded
by Kiewit’s variance application of
November 16, 2012; see Exhibit No.
OSHA–2012–0015–0011).
According to its March 1, 2007,
variance application, Kiewit was
seeking a variance from the provisions
of OSHA standards that regulate
boatswain’s chairs and hoist towers for
the construction of small-diameter,
straight-barreled chimneys constructed
using jump-form construction
techniques and procedures, and
chimneys of any diameter constructed
using slip-form construction techniques
and procedures. Regarding smalldiameter, straight-barreled chimneys
constructed using jump-form
construction techniques and
procedures, Kiewit contended that the
extreme height and limited space inside
these chimneys make it infeasible to
attach a hoist tower to the interior walls
of the chimneys during construction. In
some cases, it also is infeasible to use a
personnel cage in such small-diameter,
straight-barreled chimneys. Under these
conditions, Kiewit proposed to adopt
alternative measures of complying with
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
the relevant boatswain’s-chair and
personnel-platform requirements.
With respect to straight-barreled
chimneys constructed using slip-form
construction techniques and
procedures, Kiewit asserted that the
unique techniques and procedures
involved in slip-form construction make
it difficult and unsafe to attach a hoist
tower to both the interior and exterior
walls of a chimney during construction.
Slip-form construction is an alternative
to using jump-form construction
techniques and procedures to shape
concrete structures, including chimney
walls. When using slip-form techniques
and procedures to construct chimney
walls, Kiewit pours concrete into forms
attached to a platform that moves slowly
up either climbing rods imbedded in the
previously poured concrete wall or a
mast secured to the interior floor of the
structure. Kiewit’s employees operate
the platform, pour the fresh concrete,
inspect the formed concrete, and
perform other tasks both inside and
outside the chimney from a work deck
on the platform, as well as from
scaffolds hung from the platform. As a
result of this progressive construction
process, the concrete wall immediately
below the platform for a distance of 20
to 30 feet is insufficiently cured to
safely attach a hoist tower to the wall.
Consequently, during slip-form
construction, it is unsafe to attach a
hoist tower either inside or outside the
chimney wall for the purpose of
transporting employees to elevated
worksites, at least for the last 20 to 30
feet of elevation.
Kiewit proposed to use a rope-guided
hoist system to raise and lower
personnel-transport devices 9 when
constructing chimneys using jump-form
construction techniques and
procedures. This system would consist
of a hoist engine, located and controlled
outside the chimney, to power the ropeguided hoist system. The system also
would consist of a wire rope that: spools
off the hoist drum into the interior of
the chimney; passes to a footblock that
redirects the rope from the horizontal to
the vertical plane; goes from the
footblock through the overhead sheaves
above the elevated platform at the
cathead; and finally drops to the bottom
landing of the chimney where it
connects to the personnel or material
transport.10 The cathead, which is a
9 Throughout this document, ‘‘rope’’ refers only to
wire rope.
10 While Kiewit proposed to use temporary
personnel hoist systems solely to transport
employees with the tools and materials necessary
to do their work (i.e., Kiewit would not use these
systems to transport only materials or tools in the
absence of employees), it would attach a hopper or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
superstructure at the top of a derrick,
supports the overhead sheaves. The
overhead sheaves (and the vertical span
of the hoist system) move upward with
the derrick as chimney construction
progresses. Two guide ropes, suspended
from the cathead, eliminate swaying and
rotation of the load (including a cage).
If the hoist rope breaks, safety clamps
activate and grip the guide ropes to
prevent the load from falling. Kiewit
would use a headache ball, located on
the hoist rope directly above the load,
to counterbalance the rope’s weight
between the cathead sheaves and the
footblock.
Kiewit proposed to implement
additional conditions to improve
employee safety, including:
• Attaching the wire rope to the
personnel cage using a keyed-screwpin
shackle or positive-locking link;
• Adding limit switches to the hoist
system to prevent overtravel by the
personnel-transport or materialtransport devices;
• Providing the safety factors and
other precautions required for personnel
hoists as specified by the pertinent
provisions of 29 CFR 1926.552(c),
including canopies and shields to
protect employees located in a
personnel cage from material that may
fall during hoisting and other overhead
activities;
• Providing falling-object protection
for personnel platforms as specified by
29 CFR 1926.451(h)(1);
• Conducting tests and inspections of
the hoist system as required by 29 CFR
1926.20(b)(2) and 1926.552(c)(15);
• Establishing an accident-prevention
program that conforms to 29 CFR
1926.20(b)(3);
• Ensuring that employees who use a
personnel platform or boatswain’s chair
wear full-body harnesses and lanyards,
and that they attach the lanyards to
independent lifelines during the entire
period of vertical transit; and
• Securing the lifelines (used with a
personnel platform or boatswain’s chair)
to the rigging at the top of the chimney
and to a weight at the bottom of the
chimney to provide maximum stability
to the lifelines.
Paragraph (c) of 29 CFR 1926.552
specifies the requirements for enclosed
hoist systems used to transport
personnel from one elevation to another.
This paragraph ensures that employers
transport employees safely to and from
elevated work platforms by mechanical
means during the construction,
alteration, repair, maintenance, or
demolition of structures such as
concrete bucket to the empty cage to raise or lower
material to the worksite.
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60903
chimneys. However, this paragraph does
not provide specific safety requirements
for hoisting personnel to and from
elevated work platforms and scaffolds
used in straight-barreled chimneys
constructed using jump-form or slipform construction techniques and
procedures, which require frequent
relocation of, and adjustment to, work
platforms and scaffolds. Kiewit
contended in its variance application
that the great height and limited space
of small-diameter, straight-barreled
chimneys built using jump-form
construction techniques and procedures
make it infeasible to attach a hoist tower
to the interior walls of these chimneys
during construction. With respect to
chimneys constructed using slip-form
techniques and procedures, Kiewit
asserted that, because of the progressive
process involved in constructing these
chimneys, the concrete wall
immediately below the work platform
for a distance of 20 to 30 feet is
insufficiently cured to safely attach a
hoist tower. Consequently, Kiewit
cannot attach a hoist tower securely to
either the inside or outside of the
chimney wall for the purpose of
transporting employees to the work
platform, at least for the last 20 to 30
feet of elevation.
Paragraph (c)(1) of 29 CFR 1926.552
requires employers to enclose hoist
towers on the side or sides used for
entrance to, and exit from, the chimney;
these enclosures must extend the full
height of the hoist tower. Paragraph
(c)(2) specifies that employers must
enclose all four sides of a hoist tower.
This enclosure also must extend the full
height of the tower. Again, Kiewit
argued that these paragraphs are
inapplicable because constructing hoist
towers inside small-diameter, straightbarreled chimneys is infeasible, while
attaching hoist towers to either the
inside or outside walls of chimneys
constructed using slip-form techniques
and procedures is impossible, at least
for the last 20 or 30 feet of elevation.
As an alternative to complying with
the hoist-tower requirements of 29 CFR
1926.552(c)(1) and (c)(2), Kiewit
proposed to use the rope-guided hoist
system described previously in this
preamble to transport its employees to
and from elevated work platforms and
scaffolds. Use of this hoist system
would eliminate the need for Kiewit to
comply with other provisions of 29 CFR
1926.552(c) that specify requirements
for hoist towers. Therefore, Kiewit
requested a permanent variance from
these other provisions, as follows:
• (c)(3)—Anchoring the hoist tower to
a structure;
• (c)(4)—Hoistway doors or gates;
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
60904
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
• (c)(8)—Electrically interlocking
entrance doors or gates that prevent
hoist movement when the doors or gates
are open;
• (c)(13)—Emergency stop switch
located in the car;
• (c)(14)(i)—Using a minimum of two
wire ropes for drum-type hoisting; and
• (c)(16)—Construction specifications
for personnel hoists, including
materials, assembly, structural integrity,
and safety devices.
C. The Current Variance Application
The conditions in the current variance
differ from the conditions included in
the most recent permanent variance
granted by OSHA for chimney
construction, which was to Avalotis
Corp. (75 FR 22424). The following table
provides a brief summary of the
differences between the conditions in
the Avalotis variance and the conditions
described in the current variance.
Conditions in the current variance application
Differences in conditions
1. Scope of the Permanent Variance ..........
1. Scope .....................................................
2. Replacing a Personnel Cage With a Personnel Platform or a Boatswain’s Chair.
2. Application ..............................................
3. Definitions ................................................
3. Definitions ...............................................
4. Qualified Competent Person ...................
4. Qualified Person and Competent Person.
5. Hoist Machine ..........................................
5. Hoist Machine .........................................
6. Methods of Operation ..............................
6. Methods of Operation .............................
7. Hoist Rope ...............................................
7. Hoist Rope ..............................................
8. Footblock .................................................
8. Footblock ................................................
9. Cathead and Sheave ...............................
9. Cathead and Sheaves ............................
10. Guide Ropes ..........................................
10. Guide Ropes ........................................
11. Personnel Cage .....................................
11. Personnel Cage ....................................
12. Safety Clamps .......................................
13. Overhead Protection ..............................
12. Safety Clamps ......................................
13. Overhead Protection ............................
14. Emergency-Escape Device ...................
15. Personnel Platforms ..............................
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Conditions in the Avalotis variance
14. Emergency-Escape Device ..................
15. Personnel Platforms and Boatswain’s
Chairs.
16. Protecting Workers From Fall and
Shearing Hazards.
17. Exclusion Zone ......................................
16. Protecting Workers from Fall and
Shearing Hazards.
17. Exclusion Zone .....................................
Broadens the scope to include work on chimneys and
chimney-related structures built using jump-form
and slip-form construction techniques and procedures, regardless of structural configuration; does
not limit the scope to tapered chimneys, built using
jump-form construction techniques and procedures,
which was the limitation imposed by the Avalotis
variance.
New condition; addresses the application of the variance, and specifies a number of best practices and
other requirements employers must meet for the
variance to apply. Also provides the option of replacing a personnel cage with a personnel platform
or a boatswain’s chair for the construction of tapered chimneys only.
New condition; defines 29 key terms, usually technical terms, used in the variance to standardize
and clarify the meaning of these terms.
Corrects the inadvertent use of the combined term
‘‘qualified competent person’’ used in the Avalotis
variance and distinguishes between the terms
‘‘qualified person’’ and ‘‘competent person.’’
Updates the requirements for the design and use of
hoist machines based on guidance provided by
ANSI A10.22–2007.
Expands and clarifies the training requirements for
both the operators of the hoist machine and the
employees who ride in the cage. The condition
adopts several provisions of ANSI A10.22–2007.
Revises the safety factor used for the hoist rope and
updates the requirements for rope lay based on
guidance provided by ANSI A10.22–2007.
Revises the safety factor for rated workloads and updates the requirements for the design and use of
footblocks based on guidance provided by ANSI
A10.22–2007.
Revises the requirements for the design and use of
catheads and sheaves based on guidance provided by ANSI A10.22–2007.
Revises the requirements for the design and use of
guide ropes based on guidance provided by ANSI
A10.22–2007.
Revises the requirements for the design and use of
personnel cages based on guidance provided by
ANSI A10.22–2007.
Minor revisions and clarification of terms.
Contains a new requirement, in performance-based
language, providing overhead protection for workers accessing the bottom landing.
Minor revisions and clarification of terms.
Contains new provisions for the use of a personnel
platform or a boatswain’s chair by requiring compliance with the applicable portions of 29 CFR
1926.1431 and 1926.452(o)(3).
Minor revisions.
18. Inspections, Tests, and Accident Prevention.
19. Welding ..................................................
18. Inspections, Tests, and Accident Prevention.
19. Welding .................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Specifies new requirements for establishing an exclusion zone.
Expands and describe the inspection, test, and accident-prevention requirements.
Adds definition for ‘‘qualified’’ welder.
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
60905
Conditions in the Avalotis variance
Conditions in the current variance application
Differences in conditions
20. OSHA Notification ..................................
20. OSHA Notification ................................
Revises the requirements for, and description of, employers’ duty to notify OSHA of events and conditions associated with their hoisting operations.
The remainder of this section
provides additional detail about the
conditions in this permanent variance
and distinguishes, as appropriate,
between these conditions and the
conditions in the Avalotis variance.11
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
1. Condition 1: Scope
Several important revisions occur in
the first condition covering the scope of
the variance. Condition 1(a) of the
variance broadens the scope of the
former variance to include work on
chimneys and chimney-related
structures constructed using jump-form
and slip-form construction techniques
and procedures regardless of a
structure’s configuration when the work
involves using temporary personnel
hoist systems. The permanent variance,
therefore, does not limit the scope to
structural configurations (such as small
or large diameter, and tapered or
straight-barreled, chimneys), which was
the limitation imposed on the former
variance, nor does it limit the scope to
chimneys. OSHA believes that
experience with the alternative
conditions as specified in previous
variances demonstrates that these
conditions are safe. Therefore,
employers can apply the conditions
specified in the variance safely to
structures that have a configuration
similar to that of chimneys (i.e.,
‘‘chimney-related structures’’),
including silos, towers, and other
circular structures, because the hazards
associated with these structures (e.g.,
falls, impacts, falling objects) are the
same as the hazards associated with
chimneys. It is not the name of the
structure, nor its diameter and structural
configuration (i.e., straight-barreled or
tapered), that determines whether it is
within the scope of the variance; rather,
it is the use of jump-form and slip-form
construction techniques and procedures
and the use of temporary personnel
hoist systems.
Further, Condition 1(a) clarifies that
the permanent variance applies to
‘‘construction,’’ which includes
construction, renovation, repair,
maintenance, inspection, and
demolition of chimney-related
structures. The variance does not apply
11 The discussion below will refer to the Avalotis
variance and its conditions using the terms
‘‘former’’ and ‘‘formerly.’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
to work that falls under OSHA’s general
industry standards at 29 CFR part 1910.
The variance applies only to work that
falls under OSHA’s construction
standards at 29 CFR part 1926. Various
letters of interpretation and directives
establish the factors that determine
whether maintenance work falls under
general industry or construction
standards. Generally, work that replaces
a structure or component with an
identical structure or component is
under the general industry standards,
while construction standards cover
work that improves a structure or
component. Additionally, scale and
complexity of the work are factors.
Work involving repair, removal, or
replacement of large structures (e.g.,
when replacing a steel beam in a
building), or work involving complex
steps, tools, or equipment (e.g., when
replacing a section of limestone
cladding on a building), is construction
work. See OSHA’s November 18, 2003,
letter of interpretation to Raymond V.
Knobbs (available at https://
www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/
owadisp.show_document?p_
table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=24789
for more information about how to
determine if general industry or
construction standards cover specific
work. Some simple maintenance work
on chimney-related structures may fall
under general industry standards and,
thus, be outside the scope of this
variance.
Subparagraphs (1)(a)(i) and (1)(a)(ii) of
Condition 1 expand on former
Conditions 1(b)(i) and 1(b)(ii) by
clarifying what material employers can
hoist. These subparagraphs make clear
that the ‘‘temporary hoist systems’’ may
not transport construction materials
concurrently with personnel. Condition
2(c) under ‘‘Application’’ further
clarifies this hoisting requirement.
The permanent variance modifies
former Condition 1(c), which addressed
personnel platforms and boatswain’s
chairs, by introducing new Condition
2(g). The variance application did not
include requirements for personnel
platforms and boatswain’s chairs
because employers have alternate
equipment (reflecting advances in
technology) available to accomplish
tasks that previously required personnel
platforms or boatswain’s chairs raised
and lowered by a hoist system.
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
However, Condition 2(g) provides the
option of replacing a personnel cage
with a personnel platform or a
boatswain’s chair when the employer
can demonstrate that available space
makes it infeasible to use a personnel
cage for transporting employees. OSHA
would still enforce the provisions in
§§ 1926.452(o) and .1431(s), and other
applicable standards, when employers
use personnel platforms and
boatswain’s chairs on chimneys that
have space available to accommodate
the use of a personnel cage.
Condition 2(d) leaves intact the
remainder of former Condition 1(c).
Except for the requirements specified
for hoist towers by 29 CFR
1926.552(c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8),
(c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16), the current
and former conditions require
employers to comply fully with the
applicable provisions of 29 CFR parts
1910 and 1926.
Additionally, OSHA modified the
Scope section further in response to
comments provided by the National
Stack and Chimney Safety and Health
Advisory Committee (NSCSHAC). (See
Section IV of this notice (‘‘Comments on
Proposed Variance Application’’) for a
discussion of the modifications
included in the variance.)
2. Condition 2: Application
Condition 2 addresses the application
of the permanent variance, and specifies
a number of best practices and other
requirements employers must meet for
the variance to apply. For example,
Condition 2(a) states a general
applicability requirement:
The employer must use a hoist system
equipped with a dedicated personneltransport device (i.e., a personnel cage) as
specified by this variance to raise or lower its
workers and/or other construction-related
tools, equipment, and supplies between the
bottom landing of a chimney-related
structure and an elevated work location
while performing construction inside and
outside the structure.
Condition 2(b) ensures the proper
design and operation of the hoist
system, while Condition 2(c) regulates
the transportation of materials and
proper use of material-transport devices
so as to ensure employee safety.
As noted above in the discussion of
Condition 1, Condition 2(d) leaves
intact the remainder of former
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
60906
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
Condition 1(c), which states that the
variance conditions cover only specific
requirements for hoist towers, and that
employers must comply with all other
applicable requirements of 29 CFR parts
1910 and 1926. If an employer is not
complying with a condition specified by
the variance, the Agency will
implement the citation policy described
in OSHA’s Field Operations Manual
(Directive Number: CPL 02–00–150),
Chapter 3, Inspection Procedures
(Section I: Variances). The citation
policy states:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
1. No Citation Issued. An employer granted
a variance will not be subject to citation if
the observed condition is in compliance with
an existing variance issued to that employer.
2. Citations. In the event that an employer
is not in compliance with the requirement(s)
of the issued variance, a violation of the
applicable standard shall be cited with a
reference in the citation to the variance
provision that has not been met.
Regarding the second provision of this
policy (i.e., ‘‘Citations’’), if OSHA finds
that an employer is not complying with
a variance condition, and the variance
condition is not based directly on one
of the hoist-tower standards from which
OSHA granted the variance (e.g., the
condition is based on a consensus
standard or best-work practice not
specified by an OSHA standard), OSHA
will cite the non-compliance as a
violation only of the variance provision.
Under no circumstances will OSHA cite
non-compliance with a variance
condition as a violation of both an
applicable standard and the variance
condition.
Condition 2(e), not found in the
former variance, allows the employer
flexibility in the event compliance with
a variance condition is infeasible.12 In
such a case, the employer may use an
alternative means of compliance that
provides equivalent or improved
protection to workers. The employer
must demonstrate that compliance with
the variance conditions is infeasible and
that the alternative means of compliance
is as equivalent to the protection
afforded by the variance condition.
Condition 2(f), the final provision
under ‘‘Application,’’ ensures that
workers can understand the required
communications. This condition
requires that employers communicate
with workers in a language the workers
understand; communications includes
any training and signs required by the
variance. OSHA considers this
condition, not found in the former
variance, important to employee safety
12 See OSHA’s Field Operations Manuel (FOM)
Chapter VIII.E, available at https://www.osha.gov/
OshDoc/Directive_pdf/CPL_02-00-150.pdf.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
and health in that it is critical that
employees understand the hazards
associated with personnel hoisting
operations, and the means the employer
is using to protect them from these
hazards.
The permanent variance modified
Condition 2 of the former variance,
entitled ‘‘2. Replacing a Personnel Cage
with a Personnel Platform or a
Boatswain’s Chair.’’ Accordingly,
Condition 2(g) permits employers to use
personnel platforms and boatswain’s
chairs when using jump-form and slipform construction techniques and
procedures (regardless of the structure’s
configuration) to construct chimneys
and chimney-related structures, but
only under specific, limited conditions.
Employers may use personnel platforms
and boatswain’s chairs only when they
demonstrate that it is infeasible to use
personnel cages because of space
limitations. Under these circumstances,
employers must use personnel platforms
unless space limitations necessitate use
of boatswain’s chairs. When replacing a
personnel cage with a personnel
platform or boatswain’s chair,
employers must follow the requirements
of 29 CFR 1926.1431(b) through
.1431(s), and 1926.452 (o)(3),
respectively.
Additionally, OSHA modified the
Application section further in response
to comments provided by NSCSHAC.
(See Section IV of this notice
(‘‘Comments on Proposed Variance
Application’’) for a discussion of the
modifications included in the variance.)
3. Condition 3: Definitions
Condition 3 defines 29 key terms,
usually technical terms, used in the
permanent variance to standardize and
clarify the meaning of these terms. This
condition was not part of the former
variance, but OSHA believes that
defining these terms will enhance
employer and employee understanding
of, and subsequent compliance with, the
variance conditions, thereby ensuring
that employees receive the requisite
level of protection afforded to them by
the variance.
4. Condition 4: Qualified Person and
Competent Person
Condition 4 addresses the
requirements of a qualified person and
a competent person. In the former
variance, OSHA inadvertently combined
these terms into ‘‘qualified competent
person.’’ The terms ‘‘qualified person’’
and ‘‘competent person’’ have separate
definitions in OSHA’s construction
standards, and this condition uses these
terms consistent with their meaning in
the construction standards. Although an
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
employee or contract worker can be
both a qualified person and competent
person, they usually are not. Indeed,
§ 1926.32(f) defines ‘‘competent person’’
as ‘‘one who is capable of identifying
existing and predictable hazards in the
surroundings or working conditions
which are unsanitary, hazardous, or
dangerous to employees, and who has
authorization to take prompt corrective
measures to eliminate them.’’ In
contrast, § 1926.32(m) defines ‘‘qualified
person’’ as ‘‘one who, by possession of
a recognized degree, certificate, or
professional standing, or who by
extensive knowledge, training, and
experience, has successfully
demonstrated his ability to solve or
resolve problems relating to the subject
matter, the work, or the project.’’ The
provisions of Condition 4 distinguish
the two terms. Unlike former Condition
3(a)(i), this condition allows for the use
of more than one competent and/or
qualified person to perform the various
tasks. This condition would enable
employers to distribute the workload
evenly among available personnel and
not rely on having available a single
individual with expertise in the various
tasks.
Condition 4(a)(ii) emphasizes that,
operationally, a competent person (not a
‘‘qualified competent person’’ as in
former Condition 3(a)(ii)) must be
present. Condition 4(b) requires that a
qualified person (not a ‘‘qualified
competent person’’ as in former
Condition 3(b)) must design and
maintain the cathead. Finally, Condition
4(c) specifies that the employer must
train the competent and qualified
persons in the applicable variance
provisions. This condition, which is not
in the former variance, will ensure that
competent persons and qualified
persons assigned responsibilities under
the variance have the knowledge
necessary to perform their tasks
effectively under the conditions
specified by the variance.
5. Condition 5: Hoist Machine
Condition 5 (formerly Condition 4)
addresses the requirements of a hoist
machine. Condition 5(a)(i) removes the
distinction of ‘‘a portable personnel
hoist’’ and, instead, designates the hoist
machine as a hoist system. Moreover,
Condition 5(a)(ii) adds language to
ensure the proper use and maintenance
of the hoist machine.
Conditions 5(b) through 5(e), which
address raising or lowering a transport,
power source, constant-pressure control
switch, and line-speed indicator remain
as before, with the exception of the
former Condition 4(d)(ii) (Constantpressure control switch), which is
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
substantively addressed in Condition
5(s), Overhead Protection. Note:
Employers should consider adopting as
a best practice ANSI’s A10.22–2007 (at
4.2(2)), which specifies that employers
are not to use chains, as well as belts,
as drive components between the power
source and the winding drum.
Condition 5(f), Overspeed, is a new
condition adapted from ANSI A10.22. It
will alert the hoist operator in the event
the personnel cage travels at excess
speed, thereby preventing speed-related
accidents and associated worker injury.
The text of Condition 5(g), Braking
systems, remains the same as the text of
former Condition 4(f). Note that ANSI
A10.22–2007 (at Section 4.6) provides
additional guidelines for braking
systems that employers should consider
following.
Condition 5(h), Slack-rope protection
(formerly Condition 4(g), Slack-rope
switch), differs somewhat from the
former condition by requiring hoist
design features that will prevent a slackrope condition. The condition will limit
stress on the rope caused by snaps,
thereby preventing premature rope
failure.
Condition 5(i), Frame, formerly
Condition 4(h), varies slightly from the
former condition by ensuring that the
frame of the hoist machine meets design
specifications, thereby improving hoist
machine safety. Condition 5(j), Stability,
formerly Condition 4(i), also is a slight
redraft of the former condition. The
condition requires employers to secure
hoist machines in accordance with
design specifications, which will ensure
the stability of the hoist machine during
operation.
Condition 5(k), Location, formerly
Condition 4(j), is a slight variation of the
former condition in that it adds the term
‘‘winding’’ for clarification. The
footnote in the condition defining the
term ‘‘fleet angle’’ duplicates a footnote
in the former condition.
Condition 5(l), Drum and flange
diameter, formerly Condition 4(k),
remains the same as the former
condition, while Condition 5(m),
Spooling of the rope, formerly
Condition 4(l), differs somewhat from
the former condition by allowing
employers to store the rope on the drum
closer than two inches from the flange
when the hoist machine is not in use.
The two-inch gap is necessary when the
hoist is in operation to prevent the rope
from leaving the drum, causing hoisting
accidents. However, employers may
store the rope closer than two inches
from the flange when transporting or
storing the drum, which OSHA believes
does not endanger employees.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
Condition 5(n) is a new condition that
requires employers to secure the rope
firmly to the drum. This condition
prevents inadvertent unwinding of the
rope in the event an operator lowers the
hoist load beyond its lowest point of
travel by requiring employers to secure
the hoist end of the rope mechanically
to the hoist drum.
Condition 5(o), Electrical system,
formerly Condition 4(m), retains the text
of the former condition, which reduces
the risk of electric shock. Condition
5(p), Grounding, is a new condition
adopted from ANSI A10.22. The
condition also will reduce the risk of
electric shock.
Condition 5(q), Limit switches,
formerly Condition 4(n), revised the
former condition by differentiating
personnel hoisting from material
hoisting.
A new condition, Condition 5(r),
ensures proper guarding of the hoist
machine. A note added to the condition
clarifies that when employers limit
access to the hoist drum to only
authorized personnel (usually the hoist
operator), OSHA will consider the drum
as guarded under this condition. This
new condition will prevent inadvertent
operation of the hoist machine, which
could endanger employees involved in
the hoisting operations.
As indicated above under the
discussion of Conditions 5(b) through
5(e), Condition 5(s), Overhead
protection, is an adaptation of former
Condition 4(d)(ii). The condition will
protect the hoist operator and the hoist
machine from falling or moving objects.
6. Condition 6: Methods of Operation
Condition 6 (formerly Condition 5),
addresses methods of operation. This
condition expands and clarifies the
training requirements for both the
operators of the hoist machine and the
employees who ride in the cage. The
condition adopts several provisions of
ANSI A10.22–2007.
Condition 6(a)(i) requires employers
to ensure that hoist operators and their
supervisors receive effective training in
the safe operation of hoist machines,
and document the training. Conditions
6(a)(ii) and 6(a)(iii) require that only
trained and authorized workers operate
the hoist; address the timing of the
documented training for each worker
who uses the cage for transportation;
and specify the frequency of all required
training. Conditions 6(a)(i), (ii), and (iii),
based on former Conditions 5(a)(i) and
5(a)(ii), will ensure the safe use of the
hoist machine and cage.
Condition 6(b) is a new condition that
requires employers to use a job-hazard
analyses (JHA) to provide enhanced
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60907
jobsite safety by identifying safety
hazards at the worksite not covered
explicitly by the current conditions.
OSHA publication 3071, entitled ‘‘Job
Hazard Analysis’’ defines JHA as
follows:
A job hazard analysis is a technique that
focuses on job tasks as a way to identify
hazards before they occur. It focuses on the
relationship between the worker, the task, the
tools, and the work environment. Ideally,
after uncontrolled hazards are identified,
steps will be taken to eliminate or reduce
them to an acceptable risk-level.
Condition 6(b) requires that
employers conduct one or more JHAs
for the operation of the temporary
personnel hoist system. The condition
also requires employers to review these
analyses with the workers exposed to
any identified hazards.
Condition 6(c), Speed limitations,
formerly Condition 5(b), differs from the
former condition in that it revises hoist
speed requirements. To prevent
overtravel accidents, Condition 6(c)(i)
adds a requirement to slow the hoist
speed at extremes of hoist travel, as well
as an overspeed allowance from ANSI
A10.22–2007. A note in this condition
contains the requirement from former
Condition 5(b)(iii) that specifies limits
on hoist speed when hoisting material
only, again to prevent accidents related
to overtravel. Condition 6(c)(ii) retains
the speed limitation in former Condition
5(b)(ii) of 100 feet per minute for
personnel platforms and boatswain’s
chairs when used to transport workers.
The slower speed for these devices
(compared to personnel cages) is
necessary because of the impact and
shearing hazards present when workers
are using these devices (see discussion
below for Condition 16).
Condition 6(d), Communication,
redrafted former Condition 5(c) to
clarify the requirement for
communication equipment by replacing
the term ‘‘voice-mediated
intercommunication system’’ with the
term ‘‘electronic voice-communication
system (such as two-way radio)’’ to
allow employers flexibility in selecting
this type of equipment. In addition, as
with the former condition, the current
condition requires that employers
maintain at all times communication
between the hoist operator and the
workers located in a moving personnel
cage. OSHA notes that a ‘‘failure of
communication’’ requiring employers to
stop hoisting as specified by Condition
6(d)(ii) includes lack of clarity in
communication, as well as equipment
failure. Accordingly, the condition
requires clear and unambiguous
communication at all times, thereby
ensuring continuous employee
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
60908
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
protection in the event of procedural or
equipment failures.
7. Condition 7: Hoist Rope
Condition 7 (formerly 6), addresses
the hoist rope. Although Conditions 7(a)
and (c) remain the same as former
Conditions 6(a) and (c), revisions to the
remaining conditions focus on making
the requirements consistent with other
OSHA standards (e.g.,
1926.552(c)(14)(iii)), and adopting
updated safety requirements specified
by ANSI A10.22–2007. For example,
Condition 7(b), Safety factor, increases
the safety factor of the rope from 8 to 8.9
times the total suspended load as
opposed to a ‘‘safe workload’’ as
specified by former Condition 6(b). To
clarify the load calculation, the current
conditions added the parenthetical
phrase, ‘‘(including the weight of the
suspended rope).’’ New condition 7(d),
adopted from the ANSI standard,
addresses rope lay; this new condition
will prevent rope rotation and kinking,
thereby reducing stress on the rope and
ensuring smooth hoisting operations.
Except for minor editorial revisions, the
text of Condition 7(e), Inspection,
removal, and replacement of hoist
ropes, remains the same as the text of
former Condition 6(d); this provision
will prevent the employer from using
hoist ropes that could fail during
hoisting operations.
Revisions made to former Condition
6(e) by Condition 7(f), Attachments,
provide alternative requirements similar
to the requirements in ANSI A10.22–
2007. OSHA believes these alternatives
will provide safer means of positively
connecting and securing the hoist rope
to the personnel cage than provided by
the former condition, thus preventing
accidents involving connection failure.
The text of provisions (i) through (iv)
of Condition 7(g), Wire-rope fastenings,
remains much the same as former
Condition 6(f), with only minor editorial
revisions. However, Condition 7(g)
includes three new provisions, 7(g)(v)
through 7(g)(vii), that specify how and
when to tighten and retighten clip
fastenings. These new provisions should
compensate for decreases in rope
diameter caused by repeated application
of the load and, thus, serve to maintain
proper torque on the rope and improve
rope integrity. Additionally, the
permanent variance added two new
requirements: Condition 7(h), Rotationresistant ropes and swivels, and
Condition 7(i), Rope protection. These
added conditions should increase
worker safety by preventing rope
damage and improving rope integrity.
The conditions also are consistent with
provisions in ANSI A10.22–2007, which
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
requires barricading the hoisting rope
between the hoisting machine and the
footblock, thereby preventing the rope
from making abrasive contact with the
ground and providing falling-object
protection when appropriate.
Since employers are free to exceed the
requirements of the conditions (with
respect to worker protection), employers
may use extra-extra-improved plow
steel as the rope grade. Note also that
ANSI A10.22–2007 (at Section 6)
provides additional guidelines for hoist
rope that employers should consider
following.
8. Condition 8: Footblock
Condition 8 (formerly Condition 7)
addresses the footblock on hoist
machines. Condition 8(a)(i) revised the
safety factor found in the former
condition from 4 to 5 times the applied
workload ;13 to be consistent with the
safety factor of the cathead (see
Condition 9). Provisions (a)(iii) and (iv)
of Condition 8 vary from provisions of
former Condition 7(a)(iii) and 7(a)(iv) to
be more performance oriented and more
consistent with alternatives presented in
ANSI A10.22–2007. These revisions will
ensure that the moving wire rope
effectively and safely accommodates
turning from the horizontal to vertical
axes as required by the direction of rope
travel. While Conditions 8(b) and 8(c)
remain the same as former Conditions
7(b) and 7(c), the variance has a new
condition, 8(d), that allows a properly
mounted sheave as a footblock
substitute, consistent with the ANSI
standard and Condition 9, Cathead and
Sheave. Allowing a sheave substitute
also will serve to ensure that the moving
wire rope effectively and safely
accommodates turning from horizontal
to vertical axes as required by the
direction of rope travel.
9. Condition 9: Cathead and Sheaves
Condition 9 (formerly Condition 8)
addresses catheads and sheaves.
Condition 9(a) revises former Condition
8(a) to allow use of aluminum for the
cathead because of its light weight,
provided the employer complies with
the cathead design drawings. Condition
9(b) remains the same as former
Condition 8(b). OSHA believes that
following the design drawings, along
with the requirements specified by
Condition 9(e) (see below), will assure
the safety of the cathead. Provisions (c)
and (d) of Condition 10 remain as in
former Condition 9. However, Condition
9 also contains three new paragraphs,
(e) through (g), based on the ANSI
13 The applied workload is equivalent to the total
suspended load.
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
A10.22–2007 standard. Condition 9(e),
Design basis, requires that the design of
steel catheads conform to the American
Institute of Steel Construction (AISC),
and that aluminum catheads follow the
Aluminum Association’s design
manual. Both types of catheads must
have a safety factor of 5 for the
maximum intended working load
(equivalent to the total intended
suspended load) for personnel and
material hoisting. This provision will
ensure the structural integrity and safety
of the cathead up to workloads 5 times
the maximum intended working load of
the cathead.
Provision (f)(i) of Condition 9,
Clearance, requires adequate clearance
between the bottom of cathead and the
cable attachment at the top of the hoist
cage to eliminate the risk of contact
between the cathead and the cage if
operation of the upper limit switch
stops the cage. The second provision of
this paragraph (subparagraph (f)(ii))
specifies that the cage must travel
without obstruction along the full length
of the guide ropes. Both of these
provisions will improve safety by
reducing stress on the guide ropes that
would occur should the cage come into
contact with the cathead or other
obstruction. Finally, Condition 9(g),
Sheave substitute, allows a properly
mounted construction block as a
substitute for a sheave, which serves to
ensure that the moving wire rope
effectively and safely accommodates
turning from the horizontal to vertical
axes as required by the direction of rope
travel; this condition also refers to
Condition 8(d), which addresses sheave
substitutes.
10. Condition 10: Guide Ropes
Condition 10 (formerly Condition 9)
addresses guide ropes. This condition
contains several revisions made for
clarification and precision. For example,
Condition 10(a) added the term
‘‘securely’’ before the phrase ‘‘two guide
ropes to the cathead’’ and the phrase ‘‘or
to overhead supports designed for the
purpose of accepting the guide ropes’’ at
the end of this provision. The term
‘‘securely’’ ensures that guide ropes
remain affixed to the cathead or
overhead support during hoisting
operations, while the added phrase
addressing overhead supports
acknowledges that hoist machines often
use overhead supports other than
catheads to secure guide ropes. Also,
Condition 10(a)(ii) references 29 CFR
1926.552(c)(17)(iv) to ensure that steel
wire rope is free of damage or defects at
all times. In addition, Condition 10(b)
added the phrase ‘‘During the hoisting
of personnel’’ to clarify when the
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
requirement applies to hoisting
operations, while Condition 10(c)
replaced the verb ‘‘to rig’’ with the verb
‘‘to install’’ to clarify the meaning of the
term. Note that ANSI A10.22–2007 (at
Section 9.2) provides additional
guidelines for alignment tension that
employers should consider following.
11. Condition 11: Personnel Cage
Condition 11 (formerly Condition 10)
addresses personnel cages. There are
several revisions to the former
condition. Condition 11(a) removes the
requirement that the cage be made of
steel, relying on the performance-based
language ‘‘capable of supporting a load
that is eight (8) times its rated load
capacity.’’ This revision will provide
employers with flexibility with regard to
the materials used to construct
personnel cages, while ensuring worker
safety. The provision also raises the
safety factor from 4 to 8 to improve
worker protection; this revision is
consistent with ANSI A10.22–2007.
Former Conditions 10(a)(v) and 12(a)
were inconsistent regarding the
thickness of the roof of the personnel
cage: Former Condition 10(a)(v)
required that the roof be constructed of
one-eighth (1/8) inch aluminum or
equivalent material, while former
Condition 12(a) specified that the roof
be constructed of three-sixteenth (3/16)
inch steel plate or equivalent material.
Condition 11(a)(v) requires that the roof
of the personnel cage be constructed of
three-sixteenths (3/16) inch steel plate
or equivalent material, the most
protective of the required thicknesses.
This provision also requires that the
roof slope to the outside of the
personnel cage to ensure that falling
objects do not remain on the cage and
add to the weight of the load.
The revision to Condition 11(a)(vi)
clarifies that employers cannot use rails
or hard protrusions when their presence
creates an impact hazard. This
clarification should increase worker
safety by reducing impact hazards
should workers lose their balance
because of cage movement.
Condition 11(b) revised the former
term ‘‘overhead weight’’ to the
commonly used term ‘‘overhaul weight’’
for clarification. To improve worker
safety, Condition 11(e) added a design
requirement that the rated load capacity
of the cage be at least 250 pounds for
each occupant, or the actual weight if an
occupant exceeds 250 pounds. With this
added design requirement increasing
the safety of the personnel cages, the
second provision of this condition
revised the former phrase ‘‘Hoist no
more than four (4) occupants at any one
time’’ to ‘‘Hoist at any one time no more
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
than the number of occupants for which
the cage is designed’’ to allow flexibility
in the number of employees who can
occupy a cage simultaneously during
use.
Condition 11(f) clarifies the workernotification requirement of former
Condition 10(f). Accordingly, the
condition added a new requirement in
provision 11(f)(ii) to notify workers of
the number of occupants the cage can
accommodate, while provision 11(f)(iii)
revised the former phrase ‘‘The reduced
rated load for the specific job’’ to ‘‘Any
reduction in rated load capacity (in
pounds) if applicable (due to change in
conditions of the specific job).’’ These
revisions will serve as an additional
check to prevent overloading the
personnel cage.
Condition 11(g), Static drop tests,
updated the reference to the ANSI
A10.22 standard to the latest, 2007,
edition. Also, to be consistent with this
new edition, Condition 11(g)(ii) limited
the former test criteria (i.e., the initial
test criterion included in former
Condition 10(g)(ii) of 125% of the
maximum rated load of the personnel
cage, and subsequent drop tests at no
less than 100% of its maximum rated
load) to the updated test criteria; these
updated criteria require employers to
use the rated load of the personnel cage
during testing to avoid causing
unnecessary damage to the cage.
Condition 11(h) is a new provision
that prevents the cage from catching on
the platform at the top landing or on
intermediate platforms. OSHA believes
this condition will decrease stress on
the hoist rope and prevent impact
injuries among employees who use the
cage.
12. Condition 12: Safety Clamps
Condition 12 (formerly Condition 11)
addresses safety clamps, with only a few
revisions to the former condition. For
clarity, Condition 12(a)(ii) revised the
term ‘‘when in use’’ to ‘‘when the cage
is in motion.’’ Condition 12(c) added the
phrase ‘‘The employer must ensure’’ to
former Condition 11(c) to place the
burden of proving compliance on the
employer. In addition, Condition
12(c)(i) updates the ANSI reference in
former Condition 11(c)(i) to ANSI
standard A10.22–2007.
13. Condition 13: Overhead Protection
The requirements of paragraphs (a)
and (b) of former Condition 12,
Overhead Protection, specified the
requirements for constructing sloped
roofs for personnel cages. Condition 11,
Personnel Cage, now covers these
requirements under subparagraph
11(a)(v). Therefore, Condition 13
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60909
contains a new requirement, in
performance-based language, providing
overhead protection for workers
accessing the bottom landing. OSHA
believes this provision will increase the
safety of employees working around the
bottom landing during hoist operations.
14. Condition 14: Emergency Escape
Devices
Condition 14 (formerly Condition 13)
continues to address emergency escape
devices with minor revisions. Condition
14(a) in this variance adds the phrase
‘‘For workers using a personnel cage’’ as
a preface to the provision to clarify the
requirement. In addition, the training
provision, Condition 14(c), references
Condition 6(a)(iii), which addresses the
timing of training (e.g., before initial
use, and periodically thereafter).
15. Condition 15: Personnel Platforms
and Boatswain’s Chairs
Condition 15 replaces and updates
former Condition 14 (Personnel
Platforms) by addressing the hazards
and required safeguarding methods
associated with the use of personnel
platforms and boatswain’s chairs.
Accordingly, when meeting the criteria
specified in Condition 2(g), employers
may use personnel platforms and
boatswain’s chairs only when they
demonstrate that it is infeasible to use
personnel cages because of space
limitations in a chimney or a chimneyrelated structure. In these situations,
employers must use personnel platforms
unless space limitations require the use
of boatswain’s chairs. When replacing a
personnel cage with a personnel
platform or boatswain’s chair,
employers must follow the applicable
requirements of 29 CFR 1926.1431(b)
through .1431(s) and 1926.452(o)(3),
respectively.
16. Condition 16: Protecting Workers
From Fall and Shearing Hazards
Condition 2(g) of this variance
provides the option of replacing a
personnel cage with a personnel
platform or a boatswain’s chair when
using jump-form or slip-form
construction techniques and procedures
to construct chimneys and chimneyrelated structures, but only when the
employer demonstrates that it is
infeasible because of space limitations
to use a personnel cage to transport
workers to and from elevated worksites.
Condition 16 of this variance also
continues to address shearing hazards
(as did former Condition 15, Protecting
Workers from Fall and Shearing
Hazards) because these hazards are
present when workers use personnel
platforms and boatswain’s chairs under
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
60910
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
the limitations specified by Condition
2(g). This condition also redrafted the
fall-hazard provisions of former
Condition 15 to address fall hazards
associated with both the hoist areas and
the cage, with references to relevant
requirements of 29 CFR part 1926.
OSHA believes these revisions cover fall
hazards more thoroughly than the
former condition, thereby increasing
worker protection from these hazards.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
17. Condition 17: Exclusion Zone
Condition 17 (formerly Condition 16),
which covers exclusion zones, made
substantial revisions to the former
condition. Accordingly, the condition
specifies requirements for establishing
an exclusion zone; these requirements
were not part of the former condition.
OSHA believes that these requirements
will improve worker safety by ensuring
that unauthorized persons do not enter
the zone, thereby reducing their risk of
injury from being struck by the hoisting
equipment, falling objects, and the
personnel cage.
Condition 17(d) is a new provision
that clarifies when workers can enter
the exclusion zone during operations
involving a material-transport device.
This provision will reduce worker
exposure to the hazards associated with
these operations, including impact and
crushing hazards from the hoisting
equipment and material-transport
device.
18. Condition 18: Inspections, Tests,
and Accident Prevention
Paragraphs (a) and (b) of Condition 18
expand the inspection, test, and
accident-prevention requirements of
former Condition 17 by specifying that
employers: (1) Conduct frequent and
regular (at least weekly) inspections of
the hoist system and the area around the
hoist system; (2) inspect the hoist
system prior to reuse following periods
of idleness lasting more than one week;
and (3) remove hoisting equipment from
service when a competent person
determines that the equipment is
unsafe. These revisions will ensure that
hoist systems are safe for worker use.
Paragraph (c) adds a requirement that
employers document tests, inspections,
and corrective actions. This requirement
will provide employers with
information needed to schedule tests
and inspections, and to determine the
actions taken to correct defects in
hoisting equipment prior to returning it
to service.
19. Condition 19: Welding
Condition 19 (formerly Condition 18)
revised paragraph (a) of the former
condition by defining the term
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
‘‘qualified’’ to mean a welder who meets
the requirements of the American
Welding Society, specifically, the
qualification requirements of American
Welding Society (AWS) D1.1 Structural
Welding Code—Steel, or AWS D1.2
Structural Welding Code—Aluminum,
as applicable. Specifying the
qualifications for welders will improve
worker safety by providing assurance
that personnel who weld components of
hoist systems possess the skills
necessary to perform this work, and will
do so competently and in a manner that
maintains the operational integrity and
safety of the systems.
20. Condition 20: OSHA Notification
Condition 20 (Condition 19 in the
former variance) addresses the duty of
employers to notify OSHA of events and
conditions associated with their
hoisting operations. Paragraphs (a) and
(b) of the condition made substantial
revisions to paragraph (a) of the former
condition, including: (1) Specifying the
legal test (due diligence) that OSHA
must apply to these notification
requirements; (2) identifying the Office
of Technical Programs and Coordination
Activities (OTPCA) at national OSHA
headquarters (not the nearest OSHA
area office) or the appropriate State-Plan
office as the offices to receive
notification and the required
information (i.e., the location of the
operation and the date the operation
will begin); (3) providing contact
information (i.e., telephone and
facsimile numbers, and email address)
for OTPCA; and (4) requiring employers
to notify OTPCA or the appropriate
State-Plan office at least 15 days prior to
beginning any emergency operation or
short-notice project that uses the
conditions specified by the variance of
the location and date of the operation or
project or, if such an operation will
occur in less than 15 days, then as soon
as possible after the employer knows
when the operation will begin.
Former paragraph (b) addressed
notification requirements when the
employer ceases to do business or
transfers the activities covered by the
variance to a successor company.
Paragraphs (c) and (d) of Condition 20
in this variance expand on the former
requirements by: (1) Reiterating the legal
test (due diligence) that OSHA will
apply to these notification requirements;
(2) specifying that employers notify
OTPCA of any changes in the location
and address of the main office for
managing the activities covered by the
variance; and (3) stipulating that OSHA
must approve the transfer of the
variance to a successor company.
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
OSHA believes that the revisions
made to former Condition 19 by
Condition 20 in this variance will
expedite receipt of information by
OSHA and State-Plan states regarding
the initiation and location of hoisting
operations covered by the variance, and
will clarify that the notification
requirements apply as well to
emergency operations and short-term
projects. Accordingly, these revisions
will improve worker safety by ensuring
that OSHA and State-Plan states have
complete and accurate information
about the chimney-construction
activities covered by the variance so that
these agencies can carefully monitor
employer compliance with the
conditions specified by the variance.
While Condition 20 now clearly notifies
employers of the legal test they must
meet in complying with the
requirements of this condition, OSHA
notes that it will not issue a citation if
an employer’s violation of Condition 20
does not immediately affect worker
safety or health; in these circumstances,
OSHA may, however, issue a notice of
de minimis violation.
Requiring employers to notify OTPCA
of any changes in the location and
address of their main offices will allow
OSHA to communicate effectively with
employers regarding the status of the
variance. Stipulating that an employer
must have OSHA’s approval to transfer
a variance to a successor company
provides assurance that the successor
company has the resources, and agrees,
to comply with the conditions of the
variance. OSHA believes this
requirement is necessary to ensure the
safety of workers involved in
performing the operations covered by
the variance.
IV. Comments on the Proposed
Variance Application
Two public commenters submitted
comments on the proposed variance
application. Additionally, OSHA
received comments on the proposed
variance application from the state of
Michigan. See Section II (‘‘Multi-State
Variance’’) of this notice for a
discussion of Michigan’s comment.
The first public commenter was Mr.
Barry A. Cole of Cole-Preferred Safety
Consulting, Inc., who supported
granting the permanent variance
(Document ID No. OSHA–2012–0015–
0003). Mr. Cole also provided comments
unrelated to the published variance
applications; these comments addressed
OSHA’s variance and enforcement
process, which is beyond the scope of
the variance application.
The National Stack and Chimney
Safety and Health Advisory Committee
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
(NSCSHAC) submitted the second
public comment (Document ID No.
OSHA–2012–0015–0021). This
comment: (1) Compared the proposed
variance conditions to the conditions in
the prior chimney variances; and (2)
addressed the scope of the variance
application. NSCSHAC also requested a
hearing under 29 CFR 1905.15 if OSHA
either rejected its comments or made
substantive revisions to them; OSHA
adopted all of NSCSHAC’s comments
without revision, so a hearing is
unnecessary.
The remainder of this section
describes the specific comments
submitted by NSCSHAC, and OSHA’s
response to them.
Comment 1: NSCSHAC stated that the
second paragraph in the Background
section of the variance application
contained an incorrect statement
regarding the alternative conditions
described in previous chimney
variances, notably that the conditions
applied only to tapered chimneys
constructed using jump-form
construction techniques and
procedures. NSCSHAC requested that
OSHA revise or remove the subject
sentences from the Background section,
and also revise or remove all other
comparable sentences in the variance
application.
OSHA’s response: The Agency made
the requested revisions.
Comment 2: NSCSHAC requested that
OSHA modify the scope condition
(proposed Condition 1) of the variance
application such that it covers all
chimney-related construction,
regardless of the construction method
and configuration, when such
construction involves the use of
temporary personnel hoisting systems.
NSCSHAC provided the following
rationale for its comment:
(1) The language used in the Notice is not
the actual language included in the
Permanent Variance Applications submitted
in November 2012 (see Variance Application
Attachment A; Exhibit No. OSHA–2012–
0015–0018).
(2) [NSCSHAC] has demonstrated through
it meetings with OSHA that the chimney
hoist variance is applicable for the two
different construction methods of jump-form
formwork (described as ‘‘formwork
techniques’’ in the Notice) and slip-form
formwork construction, regardless of the
structural configuration, i.e. tapered or
straight barreled.
(3) Chimneys constructed by the slip-form
method can also be of tapered configurations
and need to be included in the variance. Slipform formwork for tapered chimneys has the
same conditions for use of the chimney hoist
system as for slip-form formwork for straight
barreled chimneys.
(4) Chimneys constructed by the jumpform method can be tapered and straight
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
barrel chimneys, and of small and large
diameters. The reasons for obtaining a
variance for large barreled chimneys are
similar to the reasons for a variance for small
barreled chimneys, and include the
following:
I. Per the original variance dated 4/3/73, a
hoist (tower) would interfere with the design
and construction of the proper scaffolding.
The inside of the chimney for the jump-form
formwork construction includes support
sling cables for the work platform and
formwork support structure at multiple
locations around the perimeter of the top
sections of concrete, for both large and small
diameter chimneys. These cables are
positioned 360 degrees around the
circumference at this location, making it
almost impossible to get any access on the
inside of the chimney adjacent to the wall.
There are also trailing scaffolds that extend
down as much as 17 ft. on the outside for
finishing work and adjusting the equipment.
All access/egress for the jump-form formwork
for small and large barrel, and tapered
chimneys has always been obtained at a
distance away from the walls using the
chimney hoist system integrated into these
types of formworks.
II. The majority of work during the
construction of the jump-form formwork for
small and large straight-barrel, and tapered
chimneys is at the perimeter wall location,
with hazards of falling concrete, tools, and
equipment. This is the reason for the
designated exclusion zones and overhead
protection, and for locating the personnel
cage away from the chimney wall.
III. Small barreled chimneys may have only
one liner flue, and large barreled chimneys
may have multiple liner flues. Therefore, the
available room inside a large barreled
chimney may be no larger than for a small
barreled chimney regardless of the
construction methods due to the multiple
flues.
IV. When performing liner construction,
access is also required to the inside of the
chimney liner, which limits the usefulness of
attaching a hoist tower to the interior or
exterior of the chimney walls. In addition,
when a hoist system is used inside of a liner
the ability to erect and brace a hoist tower
is infeasible due to interference with, and the
usually unsuitable support provided by, the
liner while being constructed.
V. The unique concrete techniques and
procedures involved in jump-form formwork,
similar to slip-form construction, make it also
difficult and unsafe to attach a hoist tower to
both the interior or exterior walls of a
chimney during construction. The fresh
concrete is poured into forms that are 7.5 ft.
to 10.0 ft. tall on a daily basis. As a result
of this progressive construction process, the
concrete wall immediately below the
platform for a distance of 15 ft. to 30 ft. is
insufficiently cured to safely attach a hoist
tower to the wall.
VI. The frequent extensions of a hoist
tower to keep up with the moving work
platforms involves many difficulties in
erection, bracing, and guying as was
discussed in the original variance in 4/3/73.
Also discussed were the extra precautions to
obtain substantial bracing if a hoist tower is
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60911
constructed, since both the chimney and the
hoist tower would be exposed to high winds.
Therefore, personnel would be exposed to
greater safety hazards due to weather
elements, erection procedures, and working
underneath the work platform and installing
a hoist tower to the exterior wall, than they
would be by using the personnel cage with
the hoist variance. These difficulties and
increased hazards involved in use of a hoist
tower are applicable to both jump form and
slip form methods and for both tapered and
straight barreled chimneys.
Therefore, according to NSCSHAC,
the scope condition (Condition 1) of the
variance should include tapered
chimneys constructed by slip-form
construction techniques and procedures
and large-barreled chimneys
constructed by jump-form construction
techniques and procedures; in sum, the
variance should apply to all chimneys
regardless of construction method or
structural configuration.
OSHA’s response: The Agency
corrected the scope condition in the
variance (Condition 1) to include both
jump-form and slip-form construction
methods and procedures, regardless of
configuration (i.e., straight-barreled or
tapered).
Comment 3: NSCSHAC stated that
OSHA should delete or revise paragraph
(b) of the scope condition (proposed
Condition 1) in the variance application
to apply only to structures other than
chimneys, and provided the following
rationale for this comment:
(1) This paragraph is not in the actual
Permanent Variance Applications submitted
in November, 2012.
(2) [NSCSHAC] has demonstrated though
its meetings with OSHA and again with the
explanations above, that this variance is
applicable to small and large straightbarreled chimneys for both jump-form and
slip form formwork and there should be no
further reason to demonstrate that it is
infeasible to erect a hoist tower inside or
outside of the structure for these construction
methods.
(3) The condition that ‘‘only after
demonstrating that it is infeasible to erect a
hoist tower either inside or outside the
structure’’ is subjective and the application of
it is unclear. Is the grantee to obtain approval
from OSHA prior to use? How long will it
take for OSHA to approve the use on a
particular project and will this occur during
the project bidding stage? Can the work be
stopped by OSHA until the grantee
demonstrates it is infeasible? These and other
questions create undue schedule and cost
concerns for the project participants.
OSHA’s response: The Agency
inadvertently included paragraph (b) in
proposed Condition 1, and removed the
paragraph from the permanent variance
as requested by NSCSHAC.
Comment 4: NSCSHAC noted that the
last paragraph in the Supplementary
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
60912
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Information Section (and similar
paragraphs throughout the variance)
unnecessarily limited the scope of the
variance application. NSCSHAC
recommended that OSHA revise this
language (and similar language
elsewhere in the variance application)
to include both jump-form and slip-form
construction techniques and
procedures, and straight-barreled or
tapered configurations. NSCSHAC
provided the following rationale for this
comment: ‘‘NSCSHAC has explained
above that the variance’s scope should
be broad enough to include jump-form
and slip-form formwork construction, as
well as accommodate different
structural configurations of large or
small-diameter tapered and straight
barreled chimneys.’’
OSHA’s response: The Agency made
the requested revisions.
Comment 5: NSCSHAC pointed out
that the first and second introductory
sentences of paragraph (g) of proposed
Condition 2 (Application) are
inconsistent regarding the variance
application’s coverage. The first
sentence refers to covering construction
of tapered chimneys, and smalldiameter, straight-barreled chimneys
and chimney-related structures, while
the wording of the next (second)
sentence states that the variance
application would cover only the
construction of tapered chimneys.
Accordingly, NSCSHAC requested that
OSHA revise paragraph (g) to read:
‘‘Replacing the personnel cage with a
personnel platform or a boatswain’s
chair.’’
OSHA’s response: The Agency
inadvertently limited the second
introductory sentence of paragraph (g)
to tapered chimneys. However, because
the conditions specified by the
permanent variance cover both jumpform and slip-form construction
techniques and procedures regardless of
the configuration of the chimney or
chimney-related structure (i.e., tapered
or straight-barreled chimneys and
chimney-related structures of any
diameter) (see OSHA’s response to
NSCSHAC comment 2 above), the
Agency removed both introductory
sentences from the permanent variance.
Note: In addition to the revisions made in
response to NSCSHAC’s comments, OSHA
made a number of minor stylistic, technical,
or editorial corrections to the variance
conditions to correct previous errors or to
improve clarity.
V. Decision
As noted previously in this preamble,
from 1973 to the present the Agency
granted a number of permanent
variances from the tackle requirements
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
provided for boatswain’s chairs by 29
CFR 1926.452(o)(3) and the
requirements for hoist towers specified
by paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4),
(c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29
CFR 1926.552. In view of the Agency’s
history with the variances granted for
chimney construction, OSHA
determined that the alternative
conditions specified by the application
will protect employees at least as
effectively as the requirements of
paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452 and
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8),
(c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR
1926.552.
Under section 6(d) of the
Occupational safety and Health Act of
1970 (29 U.S.C. 655), and based on the
record discussed above, the Agency
finds that when the employers comply
with the conditions of the following
order, the working conditions of the
employers’ workers will be at least as
safe and healthful as if the employers
complied with the working conditions
by paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452,
and paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4),
(c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29
CFR 1926.552. This decision is
applicable in all states under Federal
OSHA enforcement authority, and in the
State-Plan states and territories when:
(1) The relevant standards are the same
as the Federal OSHA standards from
which the applicants are seeking the
permanent variance; and (2) the StatePlan state or territory does not object to
the terms of the variance application
(see Section II, Multi-State Variance, of
this notice for a description of the
applicability of this decision in StatePlan states and territories).
VI. Order
OSHA issues this order authorizing
Kiewit Power Constructors Co. et al.
(‘‘the employers’’) to comply with the
following conditions instead of
complying with paragraph (o)(3) of 29
CFR 1926.452, and paragraphs (c)(1)
through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i),
and (c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552. This
order applies in Federal OSHA
enforcement jurisdictions, and in those
states with OSHA-approved State plans
that have identical standards and have
agreed to the terms of the variance.
1. Scope
This permanent variance applies to
chimney-related construction, including
work on chimneys, chimney linings,
stacks, and chimney-related structures
such as silos, towers, and similar
structures (hereafter referred to
collectively as ‘‘chimney-related
structure’’ or ‘‘structure,’’) built using
jump-form and slip-form construction
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
techniques and procedures, regardless
of the structural configuration (such as
tapered or straight barreled of any
diameter) when such construction
involves the use of temporary personnel
hoist systems (hereafter referred to as
‘‘hoist system’’) for the transportation of:
(a) Personnel to and from the bottom
landing of a chimney or chimneyrelated structure to working elevations
inside or outside of the chimney or
structure using a personnel cage during
construction work subject to 29 CFR
part 1926, including construction,
renovation, repair, maintenance,
inspection, and demolition; or
(b) Materials, but not concurrently
with hoisting of personnel, through
attachment of a hopper, material basket,
concrete bucket, or other appropriate
rigging to the hoist system to raise and
lower all other materials inside or
outside a chimney or chimney-related
structure. See also Condition 2(c)(ii)
below.
2. Application
(a) The employer must use a hoist
system equipped with a dedicated
personnel-transport device (i.e., a
personnel cage) as specified by this
variance to raise or lower its workers
and/or other construction-related tools,
equipment, and supplies between the
bottom landing of a chimney or
chimney-related structure and an
elevated work location while
performing construction inside and
outside the chimney or structure.
(b) Prior to initial use of the hoist
system, the employer must have all
drawings containing designs and
construction details showing the
integration of the hoist system with the
construction technique and procedures
in use (such as a slip-form construction)
sealed by a professional engineer
registered in the United States. A
professional engineer registered in the
United States also must approve any
modifications to these drawings.14
(c) When using a hoist system, the
employer must:
(i) Use the personnel cages raised and
lowered by the hoist system solely to
transport workers with the tools and
small supplies necessary to do their
work (e.g., fasteners, paint, caulk);
(ii) Attach a dedicated materialtransport device directly to the hoist
rope solely to raise and lower all other
materials and tools; and
(iii) Attach the material-transport
device directly to the hoisting hook and
never to the personnel cage.
14 Any reference to ‘‘design’’ or ‘‘designed’’ in
these conditions means that a professional engineer
registered in the United States must approve the
design.
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
(d) Except for the requirements
specified by 29 CFR 1926.552(c)(1)
through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i),
and (c)(16), the employer must comply
fully with all other applicable
provisions of 29 CFR parts 1910 and
1926.
(e) When an employer demonstrates
that it is infeasible to comply with these
conditions, the employer may use other
devices or methods to comply, but only
when the employer clearly demonstrates
that these devices and methods provide
its workers with protection that is at
least equivalent to the protection
afforded to them by the conditions of
this variance.
(f) The employer must convey any
communication, written or verbal,
required by this variance in a language
that each worker can understand.
(g) Replacing a personnel cage with a
personnel platform or a boatswain’s
chair.
The following provisions apply:
(i) Personnel platform. Before using a
personnel platform, an employer must:
(A) Demonstrate that available space
makes it infeasible to use a personnel
cage for transporting employees;
(B) Limit use of a personnel platform
to elevations above the last work
location that the personnel cage can
reach; and
(C) Use a personnel platform in
accordance with requirements specified
by 29 CFR 1926.1431(s), unless the
employer can demonstrate that the
structural arrangement of the chimney
precludes such use.
(ii) Boatswain’s chair. Before using a
boatswain’s chair, an employer must:
(A) Demonstrate that available space
makes it infeasible to use a personnel
platform for transporting employees;
(B) Limit use of a boatswain’s chair to
elevations above the last work location
that the personnel platform can reach;
and
(C) Use a boatswain’s chair in
accordance with block-and-tackle
requirements specified by 29 CFR
1926.452(o)(3), unless the employer can
demonstrate that the structural
arrangement of the chimney precludes
such use.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
3. Definitions
The following definitions apply to
this permanent variance; these
definitions do not necessarily apply in
other contexts.
(a) Authorized person—a person
approved or assigned by the employer to
perform a specific type of duty or duties
or to be at a specific location or
locations at the jobsite.15
15 See
29 CFR 1926.32(d).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
(b) Barricade—barrier used to confine
or mark off limits to access.
(c) Base-mounted drum hoist—a drum
hoist fastened to, and supported by, a
designed steel frame with mounting
attachments for securing to a
foundation.*
(d) Broken rope principle—the
principle by which, if the main support
rope fails, the lack of tension will cause
the safety clamps attached to the
personnel cage to grip the guide ropes
and stop it within 18 inches (457.2mm)
(maximum) of travel from the activation
point.*
(e) Cage—an enclosed load-carrying
unit or car, including its platform,
frame, enclosure, and gate, in which
personnel are transported.*
(f) Cathead—the structure directly
supporting the overhead sheaves.*
(g) Competent person—one who is
capable of identifying existing and
predictable hazards in the surroundings
or working conditions that are
unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to
employees, and who has authorization
to take prompt corrective measures to
eliminate them.16
(h) Deadman control—a constant
pressure, hand-operated or footoperated control designed so that, when
released, it automatically returns to a
neutral or deactivated position and
stops movement of the hoist drum.*
(Referred to in this order as ‘‘deadman
control switch.’’)
(i) Design factor—the ratio of the
failure load to the maximum designed
working load. (Also referred to as
‘‘Safety Factor’’ or ‘‘Factor of Safety.’’)*
(Referred to in this order as ‘‘safety
factor.’’)
(j) Exclusion zone—a clearly
designated zone around the bottom
landing of the hoist system designed to
restrict the zone to authorized persons
only.
(k) Footblock—a wire-rope block
mounted at or near the bottom of a
structure for the purpose of changing
the direction of the hoisting rope from
approximately horizontal to
approximately vertical.*
(l) Hoist (verb)—to raise, lower, or
otherwise move a load in the air.
(m) Hoist (noun)—same as ‘‘hoist
machine.’’
(n) Hoist area—the area (including,
but not limited to, the area directly
beneath the load) in which it is
reasonably foreseeable that partially or
* ANSI/ASSE kindly permitted OSHA to use the
definition of this term from Section 3 of its A10.22–
2007 standard, Safety Requirements for RopeGuided and Non-guided Workers’ Hoists. In some
cases, OSHA made slight editorial revisions to the
text of the definition for clarity.
16 See 29 CFR 1926.32(f).
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60913
completely suspended materials could
fall in the event of an accident.
(o) Hoist-way—a clearly designated
walkway or path used to provide safe
access to and from personnel cages.
(p) Hoist machine—a mechanical
device for lifting and lowering loads by
winding a line onto or off a drum.
(q) Hoist system—a collection of
mechanical devices and support
equipment assembled and used in
combination for lifting and lowering
loads, including personnel cages.
(r) Job hazard analysis—an evaluation
of the tasks or operations involving the
use of hoist systems performed to
identify potential hazards and to
determine the necessary controls.
(s) Lifeline—an independently
suspended line used for attaching the
employee’s safety harness lanyard,
usually by means of a rope grab, as part
of the fall-arrest system.*
(t) Line run—a condition whereby the
free end of the hoistline (wire rope) may
be overhauled by the deadweight of the
downline portion of the hoistline on the
footblock side of the cathead.*
(u) Non-guided workman’s hoist
(worker’s hoist)—a hoist involving the
transportation of a person in a
boatswain’s chair, or equivalent, not
attached to fixed guide ropes.* (Note:
While the conditions of this variance do
not use this term directly, ANSI
A10.22–2007, referenced under
Condition 11, uses the term.)
(v) Qualified person—one who, by
possession of a recognized degree,
certificate, or professional standing, or
who by extensive knowledge, training,
and experience, has successfully
demonstrated his ability to solve or
resolve problems relating to the subject
matter, the work, or the project.17
(w) Rope—wire rope, unless
otherwise specified.*
(x) Rotation-resistant rope—a wire
rope consisting of an inner layer of
strand laid in one direction covered by
a layer of strand laid in the opposite
direction. This has the effect of
counteracting torque by reducing the
tendency of the finished rope to rotate.*
(y) Safety clamp—a fall-arresting
device (or rope-grab) designed to grip
the lifeline and prevent the person being
transported in a boatswain’s chair, or
equivalent, from falling.*
(z) Static drop test—a test performed
by suspending the personnel cage in a
fixed position with a quick-release
device or equivalent method separating
the cage from the hoistline. The quickrelease device is tripped allowing the
cage to freefall until the safety clamps
(cage) activate and stop the cage.*
17 See
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
29 CFR 1926.32(m).
02OCN1
60914
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
(aa) Total suspended load—the
combined weight of any and all objects
and persons in transport, including the
weight of the suspended rope.
(bb) Weatherproof—constructed or
protected so that exposure to the
weather will not interfere with
successful operations.*
4. Qualified Person and Competent
Person
(a) The employer must:
(i) Provide one or more competent
person(s) and/or qualified person(s), as
specified in paragraphs (f) and (m) of 29
CFR 1926.32, who is/are responsible for
ensuring that the installation,
maintenance, and inspection of the
hoist system comply with the
conditions specified herein, and with
the applicable requirements of 29 CFR
part 1926 (‘‘Safety and Health
Regulations for Construction’’); and
(ii) Ensure that a competent person(s)
is/are present at ground-level to assist in
an emergency whenever the hoist
system is raising or lowering workers.
(b) The employer must use a qualified
person to design, and a competent
person to maintain, the cathead
described under Condition 9 (‘‘Cathead
and Sheave’’) below.
(c) The employer must train each
competent person and each qualified
person regarding the conditions of this
variance and the requirements of 29
CFR part 1926 that are applicable to
their respective roles.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
5. Hoist Machine
(a) Type of hoist. The employer must:
(i) Designate the hoist machine as a
hoist system; and
(ii) Use and maintain the hoist
machine in accordance with the
manufacturer’s instructions. When the
manufacturer’s instructions are not
available, the employer must ensure that
a qualified person develops written
instructions, and that these instructions
are available on-site.
(b) Raising or lowering a transport.
The employer must ensure that:
(i) The hoist machine includes a basemounted drum hoist designed to control
line-speed;
(ii) When lowering an empty or
occupied transport, the drive
components are engaged continuously
(i.e., ‘‘powered down’’ or not
‘‘freewheeling’’);
(iii) The drive system is
interconnected, on a continuous basis,
through a torque converter, mechanical
coupling, or an equivalent coupling
(e.g., electronic controller, fluid
clutches, and hydraulic drives);
(iv) The braking mechanism is
applied automatically when the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
transmission is in the neutral position
and a forward-reverse coupling or
shifting transmission is being used; and
(v) No belts are used between the
power source and the winding drum.
(c) Power source. The employer must
power the hoist machine by an air,
electric, hydraulic, or internalcombustion drive mechanism.
(d) Constant-pressure control switch.
The employer must equip the hoist
machine with a hand-operated or a footoperated constant-pressure control
switch (i.e., a ‘‘deadman control
switch’’) that deactivates the engine and
stops the hoist rotation immediately
upon release by the hoist operator.
(e) Line-speed indicator. The
employer must:
(i) Equip the hoist machine with a
line-speed indicator maintained in
working order; and
(ii) Ensure that the line-speed
indicator is in clear view of the hoist
operator during hoisting operations.
(f) Overspeed. The employer must
equip the hoist machine with an audible
or visual overspeed-indicator alarm that
will activate before the line-speed
exceeds 275 feet per minute (includes
10% overspeed allowance) when
transporting personnel.
(g) Braking systems. The employer
must equip the hoist machine with at
least two (2) independent braking
systems (i.e., one automatic and one
manual) applied on the winding side of
the clutch or couplings, with each
braking system capable of stopping and
holding 150 percent of the maximum
rated line load.
(h) Slack-rope protection. The
employer must equip the hoist machine
with a slack-rope device to prevent
rotation of the winding drum under
slack-rope conditions, or a slack-rope
circuit that stops or limits the hoist
speed to a creep speed when there is no
tension on the load line.
(i) Frame. The employer must ensure
that the frame of the hoist machine is a
self-supporting, rigid, steel structure,
and that holding brackets for anchor
lines and legs for anchor bolts are
integral components of the frame in
accordance with the applicable design
drawings.
(j) Stability. The employer must
secure hoist machines in position to
prevent movement, shifting, or
dislodgement in accordance with the
applicable design drawings.
(k) Location. The employer must:
(i) Locate the hoist machine far
enough from the footblock to obtain the
correct fleet angle for proper winding or
spooling of the cable on the drum; and
(ii) Ensure that the fleet angle remains
between one-half degree (1⁄2°) and one
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and one-half degrees (11⁄2°) for smooth
drums, and between one-half degree
(1⁄2°) and two degrees (2°) for grooved
drums, with the lead sheave centered on
the drum.18
(l) Drum and flange diameter. The
employer must:
(i) Provide a winding drum for the
hoist that is at least 30 times the
nominal diameter of the rope used for
hoisting; and
(ii) Ensure that the winding drum has
a flange diameter that is at least one and
one-half (11⁄2) times the winding-drum
diameter.
(m) Spooling of the rope. The
employer must never spool the rope
closer than two (2) inches (5.1 cm) from
the outer edge of the winding-drum
flange when the hoist is in operation.
(n) Minimum rope turns on drum. The
employer must ensure that the drum has
three turns of rope when the hoist load
is at the lowest point of travel, and that
the hoist end of the rope is
mechanically secured to the hoist drum
in accordance with the manufacturer’s
instructions.
(o) Electrical system. The employer
must ensure that all electrical
equipment is weatherproof.
(p) Grounding. The employer must
ensure that the hoisting machine is
grounded at all times in accordance
with the requirements of 29 CFR
1926.404(f).
(q) Limit switches.
(i) When the employer uses a hoist
system with a personnel cage, the
employer must equip the hoist system
with limit switches and related
equipment that automatically prevent
overtravel of the transport device at the
top of the supporting structure and at
the bottom of the hoist-way or lowest
landing level.
(ii) When the employer uses a hoist
system with a material-transport device,
the employer must equip the hoist
system with limit switches and related
equipment that automatically prevents
overtravel of material-transport devices
at the top of the support structure.
(r) Guarding. The employer must
guard effectively all exposed moving
parts such as gears, projecting screws,
setscrews, chains, cables, belts, chain
sprockets, and reciprocating or rotating
parts, that might constitute a hazard
under normal operating conditions.
(Note: OSHA considers a hoist drum
18 This provision adopts the definition of, and
specifications for, fleet angle from Cranes and
Derricks, H. I. Shapiro, et al. (eds.); New York:
McGraw-Hill; 3rd ed., 1999, page 592. Accordingly,
the fleet angle is ‘‘[t]he angle the rope leading onto
a [winding] drum makes with the line
perpendicular to the drum rotating axis when the
lead rope is making a wrap against the flange.’’
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
that has access limited to authorized
persons as guarded.)
(s) Overhead Protection. The
employer must provide a shelter or
enclosure to protect the hoist operator,
hoist machine, and associated controls
from falling or moving objects.
6. Methods of Operation
(a) Worker qualifications and training.
The employer must:
(i) Ensure that each personnel hoist
operator and each of their supervisors
have effective and documented training
in the safe operation of hoist machines
covered by this variance.
(ii) Ensure that only a trained and
authorized person operates the hoist
machine.
(iii) Provide effective and documented
instruction, before initial use, to each
worker who uses a personnel cage for
transportation regarding the safe use of
the personnel cage and its emergency
systems. The employer must repeat the
instruction periodically and as
necessary (e.g., after making changes to
the personnel cage that affect its
operation).
(b) Use of job hazard analyses (JHAs).
The employer must:
(i) Complete one or more JHAs for the
operation of the hoist system; and
(ii) Review, periodically and as
necessary (e.g., after making changes to
the hoist machine that affect its
operation), the contents of the JHA with
affected personnel.
(c) Speed limitations. The employer
must not operate the hoist at a speed in
excess of:
(i) 250 feet per minute 19 or the design
speed of the hoist system, whichever is
lower, when using a personnel cage to
transport workers, and slow the hoist
appropriately at the extremes of hoist
travel. (Note: The employer may use a
line-speed that is consistent with the
design limitations of the hoist system
when hoisting material (i.e., using a
dedicated material-transport device) on
the hoist system); or
(ii) 100 feet per minute when a
personnel platform or boatswain’s chair
is being used to transport workers.
(d) Communication. The employer
must:
(i) Use an electronic voicecommunication system (such as twoway radio) at all times for
communication between the hoist
operator and the workers located in a
moving personnel cage, personnel
platform, or boatswain’s chair;
(ii) Stop hoisting if there is (a) a
failure of communication, or (b)
activation of a stop signal from the
19 When including 10% overspeed, the maximum
hoist speed must not exceed 275 feet per minute.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
workers in the personnel cage,
personnel platform, or boatswain’s
chair; resume hoisting only when a
supervisor determines that it is safe to
do so.
7. Hoist Rope
(a) Grade. The employer must use a
wire rope for the hoist system (i.e.,
‘‘hoist rope’’) that consists of extraimproved plow steel, an equivalent
grade of non-rotating rope, or a regular
lay rope with a suitable swivel
mechanism.
(b) Safety factor. For personnel
hoisting, the employer must maintain a
safety factor of at least eight and ninetenth (8.9) times the total suspended
load throughout the entire length of
hoist rope (including the weight of the
suspended rope).
(c) Size. The employer must use a
hoist rope that is at least one-half (1⁄2)
inch in diameter.
(d) Rope lay. Except when using
rotation-resistant rope, the employer
must use preformed regular-lay rope.
The direction of exterior lay (right or
left) must match the drum termination
and winding characteristics.
(e) Inspection, removal, and
replacement. The employer must:
(i) Thoroughly inspect the hoist rope
before the start of each job, and on
completing a new set-up;
(ii) Maintain the proper diameter-todiameter ratios between the hoist rope
and the footblock and the sheave by
inspecting the wire rope regularly (see
Conditions 8(c) and 9(d), below); and
(iii) Remove and replace the wire rope
with new wire rope when any condition
specified by 29 CFR 1926.552(a)(3)
occurs.
(f) Attachments. The employer must
attach the rope to a personnel cage,
personnel platform, or boatswain’s chair
using a positive connection such as:
(i) A screw-pin shackle with the pin
secured from rotation or loosening by
mousing to the shackle body;
(ii) A bolt-type shackle, nut, and
cotter pin; or
(iii) A positive-locking link.
(g) Wire-rope fastenings. When the
employer uses clip fastenings (e.g., Ubolt wire-rope clips) with wire ropes,
the employer must:
(i) Use Table H–20 of 29 CFR
1926.251 to determine the number and
spacing of the clips;
(ii) Use at least three (3) drop-forged
clips at each fastening;
(iii) Install the clips with the ‘‘U’’ of
the clips on the dead end of the rope
and the live end resting in the clip
saddle;
(iv) Space the clips so that the
distance between them is a minimum of
six (6) times the diameter of the rope.
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60915
(v) Tighten the clips evenly in
accordance with the manufacturer’s
specification;
(vi) Following initial application of
the load to the rope, retighten the clip
nuts to the specified torque to
compensate for any decrease in rope
diameter caused by the load; and
(vii) Retighten the rope clip nuts
periodically to compensate for any
further decrease in rope diameter during
usage.
(h) Rotation-resistant ropes and
swivels. The employer must not use a
swivel anywhere in the system when
using rotation-resistant ropes unless
approved by the wire-rope
manufacturer.
(i) Rope protection. The employer
must:
(i) Barricade the hoisting rope
between the hoisting machine and the
footblock;
(ii) Protect the hoisting rope from
abrasive contact with the ground; and
(iii) When the hoisting rope is subject
to falling material or debris, protect it
from such hazards.
8. Footblock
(a) Type of footblock. Except as
provided in paragraph (d) of this
condition, the employer must use a
footblock:
(i) Consisting of construction-type
rope blocks of solid single-piece bail
with a safety factor of at least five (5),
or an equivalent block with roller
bearings;
(ii) Designed for the applied loading,
size, and type of wire rope used for
hoisting;
(iii) Designed for returning the rope to
the sheave groove after a slack-rope
condition, or equipped with a guard that
contains the wire rope within the
sheave groove;
(iv) Attached to the base according to
the design drawings, with the anchorage
being capable of sustaining at least eight
(8) times the resultant force of the
horizontal and vertical loads
transmitted by the hoisting rope; and
(v) Designed and installed so that it
turns the moving wire rope to and from
the horizontal or vertical direction as
required by the direction of rope travel.
(b) Directional change. The employer
must ensure that the angle of change in
the hoist rope from the horizontal to the
vertical direction at the footblock is
approximately 90° (degrees).
(c) Diameter. The employer must
ensure that the line diameter of the
footblock sheave is at least 24 times the
diameter of the hoist rope.
(d) Sheave substitute. The employer
may substitute a properly mounted
sheave, as specified in Condition 9
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
60916
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
below (‘‘Cathead and Sheaves’’), for the
footblock described in this condition.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
9. Cathead and Sheaves
(a) Sheave support. The employer
must use a cathead (i.e., ‘‘overhead
support’’) constructed of steel or
aluminum that consists of a wide-flange
beam, or two (2) channel sections
securely bolted back-to-back, according
to the design drawings, to prevent
spreading.
(b) Installation. The employer must
ensure that:
(i) All sheaves revolve on shafts that
rotate on bearings; and
(ii) The bearings are mounted securely
to maintain the proper bearing position
at all times.
(c) Rope guides. The employer must
provide each sheave with appropriate
rope guides to prevent the hoist rope
from leaving the sheave grooves when
the rope vibrates or swings abnormally.
(d) Diameter. The employer must use
a sheave with a line diameter that is at
least 24 times the diameter of the hoist
rope.
(e) Design basis. The employer must
ensure that:
(i) The design of the cathead assembly
conforms to the American Institute of
Steel Construction (AISC) Manual of
Steel Construction or the Aluminum
Association’s Aluminum Design
Manual, whichever manual is
appropriate to the material used; and
(ii) The cathead has a safety factor of
at least five (5) for personnel and
material hoisting.
(f) Clearance. The employer must
provide:
(i) Adequate clearance so that there
will be no contact between the bottom
of cathead and the cable attachment at
the top of the hoist cage; and
(ii) A path free of obstruction (clear
travel) along the full length of the guide
ropes.
(g) Sheave substitute. The employer
may substitute construction blocks, of
the type described in Condition 8(a)(i)
above, for the top sheaves. (Note: See
also Condition 8(d) above.)
10. Guide Ropes
(a) Number and construction. The
employer must:
(i) Securely affix two (2) guide ropes
to the cathead or to overhead supports
designed for the purpose of accepting
the guide ropes; and
(ii) Ensure that the guide ropes:
(A) Consist of steel wire rope not less
than one-half (1/2) inch (1.3 cm) in
diameter; and
(B) Be free of damage or defect at all
times per 29 CFR 1926.552(c)(17)(iv).
(b) Guide rope fastening and
alignment tension. During the hoisting
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
of personnel, the employer must ensure
that one end of each guide rope is
fastened securely to the overhead
support, and that appropriate tension is
applied at the foundation end of the
rope.
(c) Height. The employer must install
the guide ropes along the entire height
of hoist travel.
11. Personnel Cage
(a) Construction. The employer must
ensure that the frame of the personnel
cage is capable of supporting a load that
is eight (8) times its rated load capacity.
The employer also must ensure that the
personnel cage has:
(i) A top and sides that are
permanently enclosed (except for the
entrance and exit);
(ii) A floor securely fastened in place;
(iii) Walls that consist of 14-gauge,
one-half (1/2) inch expanded metal
mesh, or an equivalent material;
(iv) Walls that cover the full height of
the personnel cage between the floor
and the overhead covering;
(v) A sloped roof constructed of at
least three-sixteenth (3/16) inch steel
plate, or material of equivalent strength
and impact resistance, that slopes to the
outside of the personnel cage;
(vi) Safe handholds (e.g., rope grips—
but not rails or hard protrusions when
their presence creates an impact hazard)
that accommodate each occupant; and
(vii) Attachment points for workers to
secure their personal fall-arrest
protection systems.
(b) Overhaul weight. The employer
must ensure that the personnel cage has
an overhaul weight (e.g., a headache
ball) to compensate for the weight of the
hoist rope between the cathead and
footblock. In addition, the employer
must:
(i) Ensure that the overhaul weight is
capable of preventing line run; and
(ii) Use a means to restrain the
movement of the overhaul weight so
that the weight does not interfere with
safe personnel hoisting.
(c) Gate. The employer must ensure
that the personnel cage has a gate that:
(i) Guards the full height of the
entrance opening; and
(ii) Has a functioning mechanical
latch that prevents accidental opening.
(d) Operating procedures. The
employer must post the procedures for
operating the personnel cage
conspicuously at the bottom landing.
(e) Capacity. The employer must:
(i) Ensure that the rated load capacity
of the cage is at least 250 pounds for
each occupant hoisted, or actual weight
if the person exceeds 250 pounds; and
(ii) Hoist at any one time no more
than the number of occupants for which
the cage is designed.
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(f) Worker notification. The employer
must post a sign on each personnel cage
notifying workers of the following
conditions:
(i) The standard rated load (in
pounds), as determined by the initial
static drop-test specified by Condition
11(g) (‘‘Static drop-tests’’);
(ii) The designated number of
occupants for which the cage is
designed; and
(iii) Any reduction in rated load
capacity (in pounds) if applicable (e.g.,
due to a change in conditions of the
specific job).
(g) Static drop-tests. The employer
must:
(i) Conduct static drop tests of each
personnel cage that comply with the
static drop-test procedures provided in
Section 13 (‘‘Inspections and Tests’’) of
American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) standard A10.22–2007 (‘‘Safety
Requirements for Rope-Guided and
Non-Guided Workers’ Hoists’’);
(ii) Perform the initial and subsequent
static drop-tests at the rated load of the
personnel cage; and
(iii) Use a personnel cage for raising
or lowering workers only when no
damage occurred to the components of
the cage as a result of the static droptests.
(h) Platform guides. The employer
must provide:
(i) Adequate guards, beveled or coneshaped attachments, or equivalent
devices at the underside of the working
platform or on the cage to prevent
catching when the cage passes through
the platform at the top landing; and
(ii) Sufficient clearance or adequate
guarding to prevent catching or snagging
when the cage passes through
intermediate landings.
12. Safety Clamps
(a) Fit to the guide ropes. The
employer must:
(i) Fit appropriately designed and
constructed safety clamps to the guide
ropes; and
(ii) Ensure that the safety clamps do
not damage the guide ropes when the
cage is in motion.
(b) Attach to the personnel cage. The
employer must attach safety clamps to
each personnel cage for gripping the
guide ropes.
(c) Operation. The employer must
ensure that the safety clamps attached to
the personnel cage:
(i) Operate on the ‘‘broken rope
principle’’;
(ii) Be capable of stopping and
holding a personnel cage that is carrying
100 percent of its maximum rated load
and traveling at its maximum allowable
speed if the hoist rope breaks at the
footblock; and
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
(iii) Use a pre-determined and pre-set
clamping force (i.e., the ‘‘spring
compression force’’) for each hoist
system.
(d) Maintenance. The employer must
keep the safety-clamp assemblies clean
and functional at all times.
13. Overhead Protection
The employer must provide overhead
protection for workers to access the
bottom landing of the hoist system.
14. Emergency-Escape Device
(a) Location. For workers using a
personnel cage, the employer must
provide an emergency-escape device,
adequate to allow each worker being
hoisted to escape, in at least one of the
following locations:
(i) In the personnel cage, provided
that the device is long enough to reach
the bottom landing from the highest
possible escape point; or
(ii) At the bottom landing, provided
that a means is available in the
personnel cage for an occupant to raise
the device to the highest possible escape
point.
(b) Operating instructions. The
employer must ensure that written
instructions for operating the
emergency-escape device are attached to
the device.
(c) Training. The employer must
provide effective and documented
training, as specified by Condition
6(a)(iii) above, to each worker who uses
a personnel cage for transportation on
how to operate the emergency-escape
device so as to effect a safe descent in
case of an emergency.
15. Personnel Platforms and
Boatswain’s Chairs
The employer must:
(a) Comply with the applicable
requirements specified by paragraphs
(b) through (r) of 29 CFR 1926.1431,
Hoisting personnel, when electing to
replace the personnel cage with a
personnel platform in accordance with
Condition 2(g)(i);
(b) Comply with the applicable
requirements specified by 29 CFR
1926.1431(s) and 1926.452(o)(3) when
electing to replace the personnel
platform with a boatswain’s chair in
accordance with Condition 2(g)(ii).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
16. Protecting Workers From Fall and
Shearing Hazards
The employer must:
(a) Ensure that the hoist areas meet
the requirements of 29 CFR
1926.501(b)(3) for hoist areas;
(b) Protect each worker in a hoist-way
area from falling six (6) feet or more to
lower levels by using guardrail systems
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
that meet the requirements of 29 CFR
1926.502(b) or personal fall-arrest
systems that meet the requirements of
29 CFR 1926.502(d);
(c) Ensure that workers using
personnel cages secure their fall-arrest
systems to attachment points located
inside the cage if the door of the
personnel cage needs to be opened for
emergency escape; and
(d) Provide safe access to and from
personnel cages.
(e) Shearing hazards. The employer
must:
(i) Provide workers who use
personnel platforms or boatswain’s
chairs with instruction on the shearing
hazards posed by the hoist system (e.g.,
work platforms, scaffolds), and the need
to keep their limbs or other body parts
clear of these hazards during hoisting
operations;
(ii) Provide the instruction on
shearing and struck-by hazards:
(A) Before a worker uses a personnel
platform or boatswain’s chair at the
worksite; and
(B) Periodically, and as necessary,
thereafter, including whenever a worker
demonstrates a lack of knowledge about
the hazards or how to avoid the hazards,
a modification occurs to an existing
shearing or struck-by hazard, or a new
shearing or struck-by hazard develops at
the worksite; and
(iii) Attach a readily visible warning
to each personnel platform and
boatswain’s chair notifying workers in a
language they understand of potential
shearing hazards they may encounter
during hoisting operations, and that
uses the following (or equivalent)
wording:
(A) For personnel platforms:
‘‘Warning—To avoid serious injury,
keep your hands, arms, feet, legs, and
other parts of your body inside this
platform while it is in motion’’; and
(B) For boatswain’s chairs:
‘‘Warning—To avoid serious injury, do
not extend your hands, arms, feet, legs,
or other parts your body from the side
or to the front of this chair while it is
in motion.’’
17. Exclusion Zone
The employer must:
(a) Establish a clearly designated
exclusion zone around the bottom
landing of the hoist system designed to
restrict the zone to authorized persons
only;
(b) The periphery of the exclusion
zone must be:
(i) Designed to keep unauthorized
persons out of the zone;
(ii) Well defined by visible boundary
demarcation;
(iii) Established with entry and exit
points; and
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60917
(iv) Posted with readily visible
warning signs limiting access.
(c) During personnel hoisting,
prohibit any worker from entering the
exclusion zone except authorized
persons involved in accessing a
personnel cage, and then only when the
device is at the bottom landing and not
in operation (i.e., when the drive
components of the hoist machine are
disengaged and the braking mechanism
is properly applied); and
(d) When hoisting material with the
personnel hoist system, prohibit any
worker from entering the exclusion zone
except to access a material-transport
device, and then only when the device
is near the bottom landing for the
purpose of loading, attaching, landing,
or tagging the load.
18. Inspections, Tests, and Accident
Prevention
(a) The employer must initiate and
maintain a program of frequent and
regular inspections of the hoist system
and associated work areas as required
by 29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2) by:
(i) Ensuring that a competent person
conducts daily visual checks and
weekly inspections of the hoist system,
and an inspection before reuse of the
system following periods of idleness
exceeding one week;
(ii) Ensuring that the competent
person conducts tests and inspections of
the hoist system in accordance with 29
CFR 1926.552(c)(15); and
(iii) Ensuring that a competent person
conducts weekly inspections of the
work areas associated with the use of
the hoist system.
(b) If the competent person
determines that the equipment
constitutes a safety hazard, the
employer must remove the equipment
from service and not return the
equipment to service until the employer
corrects the hazardous condition and
has the correction approved by a
qualified person.
(c) The employer must maintain at the
jobsite, for the duration of the job,
records of all tests and inspections of
the hoist system, as well as associated
corrective actions and repairs.
19. Welding
(a) The employer must ensure that
only welders qualified in accordance
with the requirements of the American
Welding Society weld components of
the hoist system. Accordingly, these
welders must meet the qualification
requirements of American Welding
Society (AWS) D1.1 Structural Welding
Code—Steel, or AWS D1.2 Structural
Welding Code—Aluminum, as
applicable.
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
02OCN1
60918
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Notices
(b) The employer must ensure that
these welders:
(i) Are familiar with the weld grades,
types, and materials specified in the
design of the system; and
(ii) Perform the welding tasks in
accordance with 29 CFR part 1926,
subpart J (‘‘Welding and Cutting’’).
(a) To assist OSHA in administering
the conditions of this variance, the
employer must exercise due diligence in
notifying the Office of Technical
Programs and Coordination Activities
(OTPCA) at OSHA’s national
headquarters, or the appropriate StatePlan Office, of:
(i) Any chimney-related construction
operation using the conditions specified
herein, including the location of the
operation and the date the operation
will commence, at least 15 calendar
days prior to commencing the operation;
(ii) Any emergency operation or shortnotice project using the conditions
specified herein, and when 15 days are
not available before start of work, as
soon as possible after the employer
knows when the operation will
commence. This information must
include the location and date of the
operation;
(b) The employer can notify OTPCA at
OSHA’s national headquarters of
pending chimney-related construction
operations by:
(i) Telephone at 202 639–2110;
(ii) Facsimile at 202 693–1644; or
(iii) Email at VarianceProgram@
dol.gov
(c) To assist OSHA in administering
the conditions of this variance, the
employer must exercise due diligence
by informing OTPCA at OSHA’s
national headquarters as soon as
possible after it has knowledge that it
will:
(i) Cease to do business;
(ii) Change the location and address of
the main office for managing the
activities covered by this variance; or
(iii) Transfer the activities covered by
this variance to a successor company.
(d) OSHA must approve the transfer
of this variance to a successor company.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
[FR Doc. 2013–23625 Filed 10–1–13; 8:45 am]
Dated: September 26, 2013.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC, authorized
the preparation of this notice. OSHA is
issuing this notice under the authority
specified by 29 U.S.C. 655, Secretary of
Labor’s Order No. 1–2012 (76 FR 3912;
Jan. 25, 2012), and 29 CFR part 1905.
Jkt 232001
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
Committee on Equal Opportunities in
Science and Engineering; Notice of
Meeting
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
In accordance with the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–
463, as amended), the National Science
Foundation announces the following
meeting:
Name: Committee on Equal Opportunities
in Science and Engineering (1173).
Dates/Time: October 30, 2013, 10:00 a.m.–
3:30 p.m.
Place: National Science Foundation, 4201
Wilson Boulevard, Room 1235, Arlington,
VA 22230.
Note: CEOSE Advisory Committee
Members will be attending virtually. If you
wish to attend, in-person attendance is
required. To help facilitate your entry into
the building, please contact Victoria Fung
(vfung@nsf.gov) on or prior to Oct 28, 2013.
Type of Meeting: Open.
Contact Person: Dr. Bernice T. Anderson,
Senior Advisor and CEOSE Executive
Secretary, Office of International and
Integrative Activities, National Science
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,
Arlington, VA 22230 (703) 292–5151 (direct)
(703) 292–8040 (main) Email Address:
banderso@nsf.gov.
Minutes: Meeting minutes and other
information may be obtained from the Senior
Advisor at the above address or the Web site
at https://www.nsf.gov/od/iia/activities/ceose/
index.jsp .
Purpose of Meeting: To study data,
programs, policies, and other information
pertinent to the National Science Foundation
and to provide advice and recommendations
concerning broadening participation in
science and engineering.
Agenda:
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
D
D
VII. Authority and Signature
18:48 Oct 01, 2013
D Panel Discussion about the Significance of
Financial Support for Underrepresented
Groups in STEM
D Discussion on CEOSE Unfinished Business
and New Business
[FR Doc. 2013–23981 Filed 10–1–13; 8:45 am]
20. OSHA Notification
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Signed at Washington, DC, on September
24, 2013.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health.
D
D
D
D
Opening Statement by the CEOSE Chair
Presentations and Discussions:
Delivery of the 2011–2012 Biennial CEOSE
Report
Presentation of Key Points from the Meeting
among the National Science Foundation
Acting Director and CEOSE officers
Update of Broadening Participation
Activities by the CEOSE Executive Liaison
Discussion with Dr. Cora B. Marrett, Acting
Director and Deputy Director of the
National Science Foundation
Reports of CEOSE Liaisons to NSF Advisory
Committees
Discussion by Federal Agency Liaisons
About Interagency Broadening
Participation Activities
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Innovation Corps Advisory Committee;
Notice of Meeting
In accordance with the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–
463, as amended), the National Science
Foundation announces the following
meeting:
Name: Innovation Corps (I-Corps) for
Advisory Committee, #80463.
Date/Time: October 28, 2013, 3:00 p.m.–
5:00 p.m. EDT.
Place: National Science Foundation, 4201
Wilson Boulevard, Room 530, Arlington, VA
22230.
I-Corps Advisory Committee Members will
be attending virtually. If you are interested in
attending, in-person attendance is required.
To help facilitate your entry into the
building, please contact Johnetta Lee (jlee@
nsf.gov) on or prior to October 24, 2013.
Type of Meeting: Open.
Contact Person: Rathindra DasGupta,
Program Director, Innovation Corps (I-Corps),
Engineering Directorate, National Science
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,
Arlington, VA 22230; Telephone number:
(703) 292–8353; email: rdasgupt@nsf.gov.
Purpose of Meeting: To provide updates on
I-Corps Teams, Sites and Nodes; and to
dissolve the advisory committee.
Agenda:
• Opening Statements by Dr. Pramod
Khargonekar (Assistant Director of
Engineering Directorate) and Dr. Farnam
Jahanian (Assistant Director of Computer
and Information Science and Engineering
Directorate).
• Updates on I-Corps Teams and Sites.
• Updates on I-Corps Nodes (a designated
individual from each Node will present).
• Discussion of the current I-Corps programs
and future directions, and dissolution of
the committee.
Dated: September 27, 2013.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013–24026 Filed 10–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Notice of Permit Applications Received
Under the Antarctic Conservation Act
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM
National Science Foundation.
02OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 2, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60900-60918]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23625]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
[Docket No. OSHA-2012-0015]
Kiewit Power Constructors Co. et al. (Avalotis Corp., Bowen
Engineering Corporation, Commonwealth Dynamics, Inc., Gibraltar Chimney
International, LLC, Hamon Custodis, Inc., Hoffmann, Inc., International
Chimney Corporation, Karrena International Chimney, Matrix SME, Inc.,
NAES Power Contractors, Pullman Power, LLC, R and P Industrial Chimney
Co., Inc., T. E. Ibberson Company, TIC--The Industrial Company); Grant
of a Permanent Variance
AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Notice of grant of a permanent variance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the grant of a permanent variance to
Avalotis Corp., Bowen Engineering Corporation, Commonwealth Dynamics,
Inc., Gibraltar Chimney International, LLC, Hamon Custodis, Inc.,
Hoffmann, Inc., International Chimney Corporation, Karrena
International Chimney, Kiewit Power Constructors Co., Matrix SME, Inc.,
NAES Power Contractors, Pullman Power, LLC, R and P Industrial Chimney
Co., Inc., T. E. Ibberson Company, TIC--The Industrial Company (``the
employers''). From 1973 to the present, the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA or the Agency) granted permanent variances
to a number of chimney-construction companies from the provisions of
the OSHA standards that regulate boatswain's chairs and hoist towers,
specifically paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452 and paragraphs (c)(1)
through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR
1926.552. These variances use temporary personnel hoist systems to
transport workers to and from worksites in a personnel cage while
constructing chimneys of various configurations using jump-form
construction techniques and procedures. The Agency received
applications from 15 employers for a variance addressing chimney and
chimney-related construction that, like the previous variances, propose
to use temporary personnel hoist systems to transport workers to and
from worksites in a personnel cage. These variance applications,
however, included conditions that address construction of chimneys and
chimney-related structures using temporary hoist systems and procedures
in association with two different methods of construction (i.e., jump-
form and slip-form construction), regardless of the structures'
configurations (i.e., tapered or straight-barreled of any diameter).
OSHA consolidated these variance applications into a single application
and published the application and request for comments in the Federal
Register on March 21, 2013 (78 FR 17432).
After considering the record as a whole, OSHA finds that these
alternative conditions protect workers at least as well as the
requirements specified by 29 CFR 1926.452(o)(3) and 29 CFR
1926.552(c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and
(c)(16). This permanent variance applies in Federal OSHA enforcement
jurisdictions and in those states and territories with OSHA-approved
State-Plans covering private-sector employers that have identical
standards and agree to the terms of the variance.
DATES: The permanent variance is effective on October 2, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
General information and press inquiries. For general information
and press inquiries about this notice, contact Frank Meilinger,
Director, OSHA Office of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3647, Washington, DC 20210; telephone:
(202) 693-1999.
Technical information. For technical information about this notice,
contact Stefan Weisz, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination
Activities, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue
NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-2110; fax:
(202) 693-1644.
Copies of this Federal Register notice. Electronic copies of this
Federal Register notice are available at https://www.regulations.gov.
This Federal Register notice, as well as news releases and other
relevant information, also are available at OSHA's Web page at https://www.osha.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Fifteen companies (or applicants) submitted applications for a
permanent variance under Section 6(d) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 655) and 29 CFR 1905.11 (``Variances and
other relief under section 6(d)'') (see Document ID Nos. OSHA-2012-
0015-0002 to -0019 \1\). The applicants construct, renovate, repair,
maintain, inspect, and demolish tall chimneys and similar structures
made of concrete, brick, and steel. This work, which occurs throughout
the United States, requires the applicants to transport employees and
construction tools and materials to and from elevated worksites located
inside and outside these structures. The following list provides
specific information about each applicant, including the company name
and location:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In Docket No. OSHA-2012-0015 for this variance application.
Avalotis Corp; 400 Jones Street, Verona, PA 15147
Bowen Engineering Corporation (merged with Mid-Atlantic Boiler &
Chimney, Inc., (formerly Alberici Mid-Atlantic, LLC)), 8802 N. Meridian
St.Indianapolis, IN 46260
Commonwealth Dynamics, Inc., 95 Court Street, Portsmouth, NH 03801,
Gibraltar Chimney International, LLC, 92 Cooper Ave. Tonawanda, NY
14150
[[Page 60901]]
Hamon Custodis, Inc. (formerly Custodis Construction Co., Inc., then
Custodis Cuttrell, Inc.), 58 East Main Street, Somerville, NJ 08876
Hoffmann, Inc., 6001 49th Street South, Muscatine, IA 52761
International Chimney Corporation, 55 South Long Street, Williamsville,
NY 14221
Karrena International Chimney, 57 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY
14221
Kiewit Power Constructors Co., 9401 Renner Blvd., Lenexa, KS 66219
Matrix SME, Inc. (formerly Matrix Service Industrial Contractors,
Inc.), 1510 Chester Pike, Suite 500, Eddystone, PA 19022
NAES Power Contractors (formerly American Boiler and Chimney Company),
167 Anderson Rd., Cranberry Township, PA 16066
Pullman Power, LLC (formerly M. W. Kellogg Co., then Pullman Power
Products Corporation), 6501 E. Commerce Avenue, Suite 200, Kansas City,
MO 64120
R and P Industrial Chimney Co., Inc., 244 Industrial Parkway,
Nicholasville, KY 40356
T. E. Ibberson Company, 828 5th St. South, Hopkins, MN 55343
TIC--The Industrial Company, 9780 Mt. Pyramid Ct., Suite 100,
Englewood, CO 80112
The applicants seek a permanent variance from paragraphs (o)(3) of
29 CFR 1926.452, which regulates the tackle used to rig a boatswain's
chair, as well as (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i),
and (c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552 that regulate hoist towers. These
paragraphs specify the following requirements:
(o)(3)--Requirements for the tackle used to rig a
boatswain's chair;
(c)(1)--Construction requirements for hoist towers outside
a structure;
(c)(2)--Construction requirements for hoist towers inside
a structure;
(c)(3)--Anchoring a hoist tower to a structure;
(c)(4)--Hoistway doors or gates;
(c)(8)--Electrically interlocking entrance doors or gates
to the hoistway and cars;
(c)(13)--Emergency stop switch located in the car;
(c)(14)(i)--Using a minimum of two wire ropes for drum
hoisting; and
(c)(16)--Material and component requirements for
construction of personnel hoists.
The applicants contend that the permanent variance would provide
their employees with a place of employment that is at least as safe and
healthful as they would receive under the existing provisions.
The places of employment affected by this variance application are
the present and future projects where the applicants construct chimneys
and chimney-related structures using jump-form and slip-form
construction \2\ techniques and procedures, regardless of structural
configuration when such construction involves the use of temporary
personnel hoist systems. These projects would be in states under
federal authority, as well as State-Plan states that have safety and
health plans approved by OSHA under Section 18 of the Occupational
Safety and Health (OSH) Act (29 U.S.C. 667) and 29 CFR part 1952
(``Approved State Plans for Enforcement of State Standards''), and that
have plans covering private-sector employers and standards identical to
the standards that are the subject of this variance, and that agree to
the terms of the variance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Throughout this notice, OSHA uses the terms ``jump-form
construction'' and ``slip-form construction'' instead of ``jump-form
formwork construction'' and ``slip-form formwork construction,''
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The permanent variance permits the employers to operate temporary
hoist systems to raise and lower workers to and from elevated worksites
on chimneys, chimney linings, stacks, silos, and chimney-related
structures such as towers and similar structures constructed using
jump-form and slip-form construction techniques and procedures
regardless of structural configuration of the structure (such as
tapered or straight barreled of any diameter). This variance also
provides consistent conditions across the employers named in this
application. OSHA published the employers' variance applications and
request for comments in the Federal Register on March 21, 2013 (78 FR
17432).
II. Multi-State Variance
The applicants state that they perform chimney and other related
construction work in a number of states and territories that operate
OSHA-approved safety and health programs under Section 18 of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.).
State Plans and territories have primary enforcement responsibility
over the work performed in those states and territories. Under the
provisions of 29 CFR 1952.9 (``Variance affecting multi-state
employers'') and 29 CFR 1905.14(b)(3) (``Actions on applications''), a
permanent variance granted by the Agency becomes effective in State-
Plans and territories as an authoritative interpretation of the
applicants' compliance obligation when: (1) The relevant standards are
the same as the Federal OSHA standards from which the applicants are
seeking the permanent variance; and (2) the State-Plan or territory
does not object to the terms of the variance application.
OSHA received one comment on the variance application from the
state of Michigan (see Document ID No. OSHA-2012-0015-0022). OSHA
continues to assume that, absent additional comments received to the
contrary, the state's position regarding grant of this permanent
variance is the same as its position regarding grant of prior variances
involving chimney construction.
As noted above and in section IV of this notice (``Comments on
Proposed Variance Application''), OSHA received just one comment on the
variance application published in the Federal Register (78 FR 17432)
from any state State-Plan or territory. However, several State Plans
and territories commented on earlier variance applications published in
the Federal Register involving the same standards and submitted by
other employers engaged in chimney construction and repair; OSHA is
relying on these previous comments to determine the position of these
State Plans and territories on the variance applications submitted by
the present employers. The remaining paragraphs in this section provide
a summary of the positions taken by the State Plans and territories on
the proposed alternative conditions.
Twenty-seven states and territories have OSHA-approved safety and
health programs.\3\ In this regard, 17 State Plans and 1 territory have
standards identical to the Federal OSHA standards: Alaska, Arizona,
Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee,
Vermont, Virginia, and Wyoming. However, Hawaii and Iowa previously
declined to accept the terms of variances for chimney-related
construction work granted previously by Federal OSHA. Kentucky stated
that its statutory law requires affected employers to apply to the
state for a state variance. South Carolina noted that, for the South
Carolina Commissioner of Labor to accept a Federal OSHA grant of a
variance,
[[Page 60902]]
employers must file the grant at the Commissioner's office in Columbia,
South Carolina. Employers must comply with any special variance
procedures required by these states prior to initiating chimney-related
construction work addressing the conditions specified by this variance.
The permanent Federal OSHA variance will be effective in the following
thirteen State-Plan States and one Territory: Alaska, Arizona, Indiana,
Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Puerto
Rico, Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont, and Wyoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Four State-Plan states (Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey,
and New York) and one territory (Virgin Islands) limit their
occupational safety and health authority to public-sector employers
only. State-Plan states and territories that exercise their
occupational safety and health authority over private-sector
employers are: Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa,
Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North
Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah,
Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Four states (California, Michigan, Utah, and Washington) have
different requirements for chimney-related construction work than
Federal OSHA standards. In its comments (Document ID No. OSHA-2012-
0015-0022), Michigan noted that its standards are not identical to the
OSHA standards, and those employers electing to use a variance in that
state must comply with several provisions in the Michigan standards not
addressed in the OSHA standards. Additionally, Michigan stated that
employers who operate under the OSHA variance in Michigan also must
obtain a Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration
variance (see Michigan Rules 1065(a)(1), 1065(a)(2), and 1072(a)(15)).
In comments on earlier variance applications, Utah also imposed
specific additional requirements in the past when Federal OSHA granted
similar variances for chimney-related construction work.\4\ California
and Washington declined to accept the terms of variances for chimney-
related construction work granted by Federal OSHA in the past.\5\
Employers, therefore, must apply separately to these states for a
variance from construction work on structures covered by this variance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 68 FR 52961 (Oak Park Chimney Corp. and American Boiler
& Chimney Co.)
\5\ See 70 FR 72659 (International Chimney Corporation, Karrena
International, LLC, and Matrix Service Industrial Contractors,
Inc.), 71 FR 10557 (Commonwealth Dynamics, Inc., Mid-Atlantic Boiler
& Chimney, Inc., and R and P Industrial Chimney Co., Inc.), and 75
FR 22424 (Avalotis Corp.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The remaining State Plans and territories with OSHA-approved state
plans (Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, and the Virgin
Islands) cover only public-sector workers and have no authority over
the private-sector workers addressed in this variance (i.e., that
authority continues to reside with Federal OSHA).
III. Supplementary Information
A. Previous Chimney-Construction Variances
From 1973 to the present, the Agency granted permanent variances to
a number of chimney-construction companies from the provisions of the
OSHA standards that regulate boatswains' chairs, personnel platforms,
and hoist towers, specifically, paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452 and
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and
(c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552.\6\ The National Stack and Chimney Safety
and Health Advisory Committee reports \7\ that four of its member
companies (i.e., Pullman Power, Hamon Custodis, International Chimney
Corp, and Commonwealth Constructors) using temporary personnel hoist
systems in accordance with the conditions of the present permanent
variances for chimney-related construction work had no recordable
injuries or fatalities (as reported on the OSHA 300 Forms \8\) over the
past seven years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See 38 FR 8545 (April 3, 1973), 44 FR 51352 (August 31,
1979), 50 FR 20145 (May 14, 1985), 50 FR 40627 (October 4, 1985), 52
FR 22552 (June 12, 1987), 68 FR 52961 (September 8, 2003), 70 FR
72659 (December 6, 2005), 71 FR 10557 (March 1, 2006), 72 FR 6002
(February 8, 2007), 74 FR 34789 (July 17, 2009), 74 FR 41742 (August
18, 2009), and 75 FR 22424 (April 28, 2010)).
\7\ Private communication from Mr. John Huchko, Secretary of the
National Stack and Chimney Safety and Health Advisory Committee,
January 2, 2013.
\8\ See 29 CFR part 1904, Recording and Reporting Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSHA generally based the alternative conditions in the variances
granted by this notice on the alternative conditions included in
previous variances. However, several of the previous variances (for
example, 38 FR 8545 granted April 3, 1973, and 71 FR 10557 granted
March 1, 2006) included conditions that did not limit the use of the
variance to the construction of tapered chimneys, and did not specify
any methods of construction. Conditions included in recently granted
chimney-construction variances limited the scope of the variance to the
construction of tapered chimneys using jump-form construction
techniques and procedures. For example, this limitation applied to the
Avalotis Corp. variance (75 FR 22424; April 28, 2010) used for
comparison purposes in this variance.
The alternative conditions specified in the permanent variance
granted by this notice apply to chimney-related construction, including
work on chimneys, chimney linings, stacks, silos, towers, and similar
structures, built using jump-form and slip-form construction methods of
construction, regardless of the structural configuration, and that
involve the use of temporary personnel hoist systems.
B. Kiewit Variance Application
On February 8, 2007, OSHA published a variance application
submitted by Kiewit Power Constructors Co. (Kiewit; see 72 FR 6002).
This publication included an interim order that permitted Kiewit to use
a rope-guided hoist system to transport employees to elevated worksites
when it complies with the conditions specified in the variance
application. One of the conditions specified in the publication limited
the application and interim order to tapered chimneys, which was the
basis for previous variances granted by OSHA to other chimney-
construction companies (see subsection A (Background) of this section
for a discussion of previously granted chimney variances). Kiewit
notified OSHA on February 23, 2007, that it required a permanent
variance to perform work on small-diameter, straight-barreled chimneys
built using conventional jump-form construction techniques and
procedures and straight-barreled chimneys of any diameter built using
slip-form construction techniques and procedures, as well as tapered
chimneys constructed using jump-form construction techniques and
procedures. Kiewit submitted a revised variance application addressing
the conditions included in previously granted chimney-construction
variances to OSHA on March 1, 2007 (superseded by Kiewit's variance
application of November 16, 2012; see Exhibit No. OSHA-2012-0015-0011).
According to its March 1, 2007, variance application, Kiewit was
seeking a variance from the provisions of OSHA standards that regulate
boatswain's chairs and hoist towers for the construction of small-
diameter, straight-barreled chimneys constructed using jump-form
construction techniques and procedures, and chimneys of any diameter
constructed using slip-form construction techniques and procedures.
Regarding small-diameter, straight-barreled chimneys constructed using
jump-form construction techniques and procedures, Kiewit contended that
the extreme height and limited space inside these chimneys make it
infeasible to attach a hoist tower to the interior walls of the
chimneys during construction. In some cases, it also is infeasible to
use a personnel cage in such small-diameter, straight-barreled
chimneys. Under these conditions, Kiewit proposed to adopt alternative
measures of complying with
[[Page 60903]]
the relevant boatswain's-chair and personnel-platform requirements.
With respect to straight-barreled chimneys constructed using slip-
form construction techniques and procedures, Kiewit asserted that the
unique techniques and procedures involved in slip-form construction
make it difficult and unsafe to attach a hoist tower to both the
interior and exterior walls of a chimney during construction. Slip-form
construction is an alternative to using jump-form construction
techniques and procedures to shape concrete structures, including
chimney walls. When using slip-form techniques and procedures to
construct chimney walls, Kiewit pours concrete into forms attached to a
platform that moves slowly up either climbing rods imbedded in the
previously poured concrete wall or a mast secured to the interior floor
of the structure. Kiewit's employees operate the platform, pour the
fresh concrete, inspect the formed concrete, and perform other tasks
both inside and outside the chimney from a work deck on the platform,
as well as from scaffolds hung from the platform. As a result of this
progressive construction process, the concrete wall immediately below
the platform for a distance of 20 to 30 feet is insufficiently cured to
safely attach a hoist tower to the wall. Consequently, during slip-form
construction, it is unsafe to attach a hoist tower either inside or
outside the chimney wall for the purpose of transporting employees to
elevated worksites, at least for the last 20 to 30 feet of elevation.
Kiewit proposed to use a rope-guided hoist system to raise and
lower personnel-transport devices \9\ when constructing chimneys using
jump-form construction techniques and procedures. This system would
consist of a hoist engine, located and controlled outside the chimney,
to power the rope-guided hoist system. The system also would consist of
a wire rope that: spools off the hoist drum into the interior of the
chimney; passes to a footblock that redirects the rope from the
horizontal to the vertical plane; goes from the footblock through the
overhead sheaves above the elevated platform at the cathead; and
finally drops to the bottom landing of the chimney where it connects to
the personnel or material transport.\10\ The cathead, which is a
superstructure at the top of a derrick, supports the overhead sheaves.
The overhead sheaves (and the vertical span of the hoist system) move
upward with the derrick as chimney construction progresses. Two guide
ropes, suspended from the cathead, eliminate swaying and rotation of
the load (including a cage). If the hoist rope breaks, safety clamps
activate and grip the guide ropes to prevent the load from falling.
Kiewit would use a headache ball, located on the hoist rope directly
above the load, to counterbalance the rope's weight between the cathead
sheaves and the footblock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Throughout this document, ``rope'' refers only to wire rope.
\10\ While Kiewit proposed to use temporary personnel hoist
systems solely to transport employees with the tools and materials
necessary to do their work (i.e., Kiewit would not use these systems
to transport only materials or tools in the absence of employees),
it would attach a hopper or concrete bucket to the empty cage to
raise or lower material to the worksite.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kiewit proposed to implement additional conditions to improve
employee safety, including:
Attaching the wire rope to the personnel cage using a
keyed-screwpin shackle or positive-locking link;
Adding limit switches to the hoist system to prevent
overtravel by the personnel-transport or material-transport devices;
Providing the safety factors and other precautions
required for personnel hoists as specified by the pertinent provisions
of 29 CFR 1926.552(c), including canopies and shields to protect
employees located in a personnel cage from material that may fall
during hoisting and other overhead activities;
Providing falling-object protection for personnel
platforms as specified by 29 CFR 1926.451(h)(1);
Conducting tests and inspections of the hoist system as
required by 29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2) and 1926.552(c)(15);
Establishing an accident-prevention program that conforms
to 29 CFR 1926.20(b)(3);
Ensuring that employees who use a personnel platform or
boatswain's chair wear full-body harnesses and lanyards, and that they
attach the lanyards to independent lifelines during the entire period
of vertical transit; and
Securing the lifelines (used with a personnel platform or
boatswain's chair) to the rigging at the top of the chimney and to a
weight at the bottom of the chimney to provide maximum stability to the
lifelines.
Paragraph (c) of 29 CFR 1926.552 specifies the requirements for
enclosed hoist systems used to transport personnel from one elevation
to another. This paragraph ensures that employers transport employees
safely to and from elevated work platforms by mechanical means during
the construction, alteration, repair, maintenance, or demolition of
structures such as chimneys. However, this paragraph does not provide
specific safety requirements for hoisting personnel to and from
elevated work platforms and scaffolds used in straight-barreled
chimneys constructed using jump-form or slip-form construction
techniques and procedures, which require frequent relocation of, and
adjustment to, work platforms and scaffolds. Kiewit contended in its
variance application that the great height and limited space of small-
diameter, straight-barreled chimneys built using jump-form construction
techniques and procedures make it infeasible to attach a hoist tower to
the interior walls of these chimneys during construction. With respect
to chimneys constructed using slip-form techniques and procedures,
Kiewit asserted that, because of the progressive process involved in
constructing these chimneys, the concrete wall immediately below the
work platform for a distance of 20 to 30 feet is insufficiently cured
to safely attach a hoist tower. Consequently, Kiewit cannot attach a
hoist tower securely to either the inside or outside of the chimney
wall for the purpose of transporting employees to the work platform, at
least for the last 20 to 30 feet of elevation.
Paragraph (c)(1) of 29 CFR 1926.552 requires employers to enclose
hoist towers on the side or sides used for entrance to, and exit from,
the chimney; these enclosures must extend the full height of the hoist
tower. Paragraph (c)(2) specifies that employers must enclose all four
sides of a hoist tower. This enclosure also must extend the full height
of the tower. Again, Kiewit argued that these paragraphs are
inapplicable because constructing hoist towers inside small-diameter,
straight-barreled chimneys is infeasible, while attaching hoist towers
to either the inside or outside walls of chimneys constructed using
slip-form techniques and procedures is impossible, at least for the
last 20 or 30 feet of elevation.
As an alternative to complying with the hoist-tower requirements of
29 CFR 1926.552(c)(1) and (c)(2), Kiewit proposed to use the rope-
guided hoist system described previously in this preamble to transport
its employees to and from elevated work platforms and scaffolds. Use of
this hoist system would eliminate the need for Kiewit to comply with
other provisions of 29 CFR 1926.552(c) that specify requirements for
hoist towers. Therefore, Kiewit requested a permanent variance from
these other provisions, as follows:
(c)(3)--Anchoring the hoist tower to a structure;
(c)(4)--Hoistway doors or gates;
[[Page 60904]]
(c)(8)--Electrically interlocking entrance doors or gates
that prevent hoist movement when the doors or gates are open;
(c)(13)--Emergency stop switch located in the car;
(c)(14)(i)--Using a minimum of two wire ropes for drum-
type hoisting; and
(c)(16)--Construction specifications for personnel hoists,
including materials, assembly, structural integrity, and safety
devices.
C. The Current Variance Application
The conditions in the current variance differ from the conditions
included in the most recent permanent variance granted by OSHA for
chimney construction, which was to Avalotis Corp. (75 FR 22424). The
following table provides a brief summary of the differences between the
conditions in the Avalotis variance and the conditions described in the
current variance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conditions in the current
Conditions in the Avalotis variance variance application Differences in conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Scope of the Permanent Variance...... 1. Scope........................ Broadens the scope to include work
on chimneys and chimney-related
structures built using jump-form
and slip-form construction
techniques and procedures,
regardless of structural
configuration; does not limit the
scope to tapered chimneys, built
using jump-form construction
techniques and procedures, which
was the limitation imposed by the
Avalotis variance.
2. Replacing a Personnel Cage With a 2. Application.................. New condition; addresses the
Personnel Platform or a Boatswain's application of the variance, and
Chair. specifies a number of best
practices and other requirements
employers must meet for the
variance to apply. Also provides
the option of replacing a personnel
cage with a personnel platform or a
boatswain's chair for the
construction of tapered chimneys
only.
3. Definitions.......................... 3. Definitions.................. New condition; defines 29 key terms,
usually technical terms, used in
the variance to standardize and
clarify the meaning of these terms.
4. Qualified Competent Person........... 4. Qualified Person and Corrects the inadvertent use of the
Competent Person. combined term ``qualified competent
person'' used in the Avalotis
variance and distinguishes between
the terms ``qualified person'' and
``competent person.''
5. Hoist Machine........................ 5. Hoist Machine................ Updates the requirements for the
design and use of hoist machines
based on guidance provided by ANSI
A10.22-2007.
6. Methods of Operation................. 6. Methods of Operation......... Expands and clarifies the training
requirements for both the operators
of the hoist machine and the
employees who ride in the cage. The
condition adopts several provisions
of ANSI A10.22-2007.
7. Hoist Rope........................... 7. Hoist Rope................... Revises the safety factor used for
the hoist rope and updates the
requirements for rope lay based on
guidance provided by ANSI A10.22-
2007.
8. Footblock............................ 8. Footblock.................... Revises the safety factor for rated
workloads and updates the
requirements for the design and use
of footblocks based on guidance
provided by ANSI A10.22-2007.
9. Cathead and Sheave................... 9. Cathead and Sheaves.......... Revises the requirements for the
design and use of catheads and
sheaves based on guidance provided
by ANSI A10.22-2007.
10. Guide Ropes......................... 10. Guide Ropes................. Revises the requirements for the
design and use of guide ropes based
on guidance provided by ANSI A10.22-
2007.
11. Personnel Cage...................... 11. Personnel Cage.............. Revises the requirements for the
design and use of personnel cages
based on guidance provided by ANSI
A10.22-2007.
12. Safety Clamps....................... 12. Safety Clamps............... Minor revisions and clarification of
terms.
13. Overhead Protection................. 13. Overhead Protection......... Contains a new requirement, in
performance-based language,
providing overhead protection for
workers accessing the bottom
landing.
14. Emergency-Escape Device............. 14. Emergency-Escape Device..... Minor revisions and clarification of
terms.
15. Personnel Platforms................. 15. Personnel Platforms and Contains new provisions for the use
Boatswain's Chairs. of a personnel platform or a
boatswain's chair by requiring
compliance with the applicable
portions of 29 CFR 1926.1431 and
1926.452(o)(3).
16. Protecting Workers From Fall and 16. Protecting Workers from Fall Minor revisions.
Shearing Hazards. and Shearing Hazards.
17. Exclusion Zone...................... 17. Exclusion Zone.............. Specifies new requirements for
establishing an exclusion zone.
18. Inspections, Tests, and Accident 18. Inspections, Tests, and Expands and describe the inspection,
Prevention. Accident Prevention. test, and accident-prevention
requirements.
19. Welding............................. 19. Welding..................... Adds definition for ``qualified''
welder.
[[Page 60905]]
20. OSHA Notification................... 20. OSHA Notification........... Revises the requirements for, and
description of, employers' duty to
notify OSHA of events and
conditions associated with their
hoisting operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The remainder of this section provides additional detail about the
conditions in this permanent variance and distinguishes, as
appropriate, between these conditions and the conditions in the
Avalotis variance.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The discussion below will refer to the Avalotis variance
and its conditions using the terms ``former'' and ``formerly.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Condition 1: Scope
Several important revisions occur in the first condition covering
the scope of the variance. Condition 1(a) of the variance broadens the
scope of the former variance to include work on chimneys and chimney-
related structures constructed using jump-form and slip-form
construction techniques and procedures regardless of a structure's
configuration when the work involves using temporary personnel hoist
systems. The permanent variance, therefore, does not limit the scope to
structural configurations (such as small or large diameter, and tapered
or straight-barreled, chimneys), which was the limitation imposed on
the former variance, nor does it limit the scope to chimneys. OSHA
believes that experience with the alternative conditions as specified
in previous variances demonstrates that these conditions are safe.
Therefore, employers can apply the conditions specified in the variance
safely to structures that have a configuration similar to that of
chimneys (i.e., ``chimney-related structures''), including silos,
towers, and other circular structures, because the hazards associated
with these structures (e.g., falls, impacts, falling objects) are the
same as the hazards associated with chimneys. It is not the name of the
structure, nor its diameter and structural configuration (i.e.,
straight-barreled or tapered), that determines whether it is within the
scope of the variance; rather, it is the use of jump-form and slip-form
construction techniques and procedures and the use of temporary
personnel hoist systems.
Further, Condition 1(a) clarifies that the permanent variance
applies to ``construction,'' which includes construction, renovation,
repair, maintenance, inspection, and demolition of chimney-related
structures. The variance does not apply to work that falls under OSHA's
general industry standards at 29 CFR part 1910. The variance applies
only to work that falls under OSHA's construction standards at 29 CFR
part 1926. Various letters of interpretation and directives establish
the factors that determine whether maintenance work falls under general
industry or construction standards. Generally, work that replaces a
structure or component with an identical structure or component is
under the general industry standards, while construction standards
cover work that improves a structure or component. Additionally, scale
and complexity of the work are factors. Work involving repair, removal,
or replacement of large structures (e.g., when replacing a steel beam
in a building), or work involving complex steps, tools, or equipment
(e.g., when replacing a section of limestone cladding on a building),
is construction work. See OSHA's November 18, 2003, letter of
interpretation to Raymond V. Knobbs (available at https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=24789
for more information about how to determine if general industry or
construction standards cover specific work. Some simple maintenance
work on chimney-related structures may fall under general industry
standards and, thus, be outside the scope of this variance.
Subparagraphs (1)(a)(i) and (1)(a)(ii) of Condition 1 expand on
former Conditions 1(b)(i) and 1(b)(ii) by clarifying what material
employers can hoist. These subparagraphs make clear that the
``temporary hoist systems'' may not transport construction materials
concurrently with personnel. Condition 2(c) under ``Application''
further clarifies this hoisting requirement.
The permanent variance modifies former Condition 1(c), which
addressed personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs, by introducing
new Condition 2(g). The variance application did not include
requirements for personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs because
employers have alternate equipment (reflecting advances in technology)
available to accomplish tasks that previously required personnel
platforms or boatswain's chairs raised and lowered by a hoist system.
However, Condition 2(g) provides the option of replacing a personnel
cage with a personnel platform or a boatswain's chair when the employer
can demonstrate that available space makes it infeasible to use a
personnel cage for transporting employees. OSHA would still enforce the
provisions in Sec. Sec. 1926.452(o) and .1431(s), and other applicable
standards, when employers use personnel platforms and boatswain's
chairs on chimneys that have space available to accommodate the use of
a personnel cage.
Condition 2(d) leaves intact the remainder of former Condition
1(c). Except for the requirements specified for hoist towers by 29 CFR
1926.552(c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and
(c)(16), the current and former conditions require employers to comply
fully with the applicable provisions of 29 CFR parts 1910 and 1926.
Additionally, OSHA modified the Scope section further in response
to comments provided by the National Stack and Chimney Safety and
Health Advisory Committee (NSCSHAC). (See Section IV of this notice
(``Comments on Proposed Variance Application'') for a discussion of the
modifications included in the variance.)
2. Condition 2: Application
Condition 2 addresses the application of the permanent variance,
and specifies a number of best practices and other requirements
employers must meet for the variance to apply. For example, Condition
2(a) states a general applicability requirement:
The employer must use a hoist system equipped with a dedicated
personnel-transport device (i.e., a personnel cage) as specified by
this variance to raise or lower its workers and/or other
construction-related tools, equipment, and supplies between the
bottom landing of a chimney-related structure and an elevated work
location while performing construction inside and outside the
structure.
Condition 2(b) ensures the proper design and operation of the hoist
system, while Condition 2(c) regulates the transportation of materials
and proper use of material-transport devices so as to ensure employee
safety.
As noted above in the discussion of Condition 1, Condition 2(d)
leaves intact the remainder of former
[[Page 60906]]
Condition 1(c), which states that the variance conditions cover only
specific requirements for hoist towers, and that employers must comply
with all other applicable requirements of 29 CFR parts 1910 and 1926.
If an employer is not complying with a condition specified by the
variance, the Agency will implement the citation policy described in
OSHA's Field Operations Manual (Directive Number: CPL 02-00-150),
Chapter 3, Inspection Procedures (Section I: Variances). The citation
policy states:
1. No Citation Issued. An employer granted a variance will not
be subject to citation if the observed condition is in compliance
with an existing variance issued to that employer.
2. Citations. In the event that an employer is not in compliance
with the requirement(s) of the issued variance, a violation of the
applicable standard shall be cited with a reference in the citation
to the variance provision that has not been met.
Regarding the second provision of this policy (i.e.,
``Citations''), if OSHA finds that an employer is not complying with a
variance condition, and the variance condition is not based directly on
one of the hoist-tower standards from which OSHA granted the variance
(e.g., the condition is based on a consensus standard or best-work
practice not specified by an OSHA standard), OSHA will cite the non-
compliance as a violation only of the variance provision. Under no
circumstances will OSHA cite non-compliance with a variance condition
as a violation of both an applicable standard and the variance
condition.
Condition 2(e), not found in the former variance, allows the
employer flexibility in the event compliance with a variance condition
is infeasible.\12\ In such a case, the employer may use an alternative
means of compliance that provides equivalent or improved protection to
workers. The employer must demonstrate that compliance with the
variance conditions is infeasible and that the alternative means of
compliance is as equivalent to the protection afforded by the variance
condition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See OSHA's Field Operations Manuel (FOM) Chapter VIII.E,
available at https://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/Directive_pdf/CPL_02-00-150.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Condition 2(f), the final provision under ``Application,'' ensures
that workers can understand the required communications. This condition
requires that employers communicate with workers in a language the
workers understand; communications includes any training and signs
required by the variance. OSHA considers this condition, not found in
the former variance, important to employee safety and health in that it
is critical that employees understand the hazards associated with
personnel hoisting operations, and the means the employer is using to
protect them from these hazards.
The permanent variance modified Condition 2 of the former variance,
entitled ``2. Replacing a Personnel Cage with a Personnel Platform or a
Boatswain's Chair.'' Accordingly, Condition 2(g) permits employers to
use personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs when using jump-form and
slip-form construction techniques and procedures (regardless of the
structure's configuration) to construct chimneys and chimney-related
structures, but only under specific, limited conditions. Employers may
use personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs only when they
demonstrate that it is infeasible to use personnel cages because of
space limitations. Under these circumstances, employers must use
personnel platforms unless space limitations necessitate use of
boatswain's chairs. When replacing a personnel cage with a personnel
platform or boatswain's chair, employers must follow the requirements
of 29 CFR 1926.1431(b) through .1431(s), and 1926.452 (o)(3),
respectively.
Additionally, OSHA modified the Application section further in
response to comments provided by NSCSHAC. (See Section IV of this
notice (``Comments on Proposed Variance Application'') for a discussion
of the modifications included in the variance.)
3. Condition 3: Definitions
Condition 3 defines 29 key terms, usually technical terms, used in
the permanent variance to standardize and clarify the meaning of these
terms. This condition was not part of the former variance, but OSHA
believes that defining these terms will enhance employer and employee
understanding of, and subsequent compliance with, the variance
conditions, thereby ensuring that employees receive the requisite level
of protection afforded to them by the variance.
4. Condition 4: Qualified Person and Competent Person
Condition 4 addresses the requirements of a qualified person and a
competent person. In the former variance, OSHA inadvertently combined
these terms into ``qualified competent person.'' The terms ``qualified
person'' and ``competent person'' have separate definitions in OSHA's
construction standards, and this condition uses these terms consistent
with their meaning in the construction standards. Although an employee
or contract worker can be both a qualified person and competent person,
they usually are not. Indeed, Sec. 1926.32(f) defines ``competent
person'' as ``one who is capable of identifying existing and
predictable hazards in the surroundings or working conditions which are
unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees, and who has
authorization to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them.''
In contrast, Sec. 1926.32(m) defines ``qualified person'' as ``one
who, by possession of a recognized degree, certificate, or professional
standing, or who by extensive knowledge, training, and experience, has
successfully demonstrated his ability to solve or resolve problems
relating to the subject matter, the work, or the project.'' The
provisions of Condition 4 distinguish the two terms. Unlike former
Condition 3(a)(i), this condition allows for the use of more than one
competent and/or qualified person to perform the various tasks. This
condition would enable employers to distribute the workload evenly
among available personnel and not rely on having available a single
individual with expertise in the various tasks.
Condition 4(a)(ii) emphasizes that, operationally, a competent
person (not a ``qualified competent person'' as in former Condition
3(a)(ii)) must be present. Condition 4(b) requires that a qualified
person (not a ``qualified competent person'' as in former Condition
3(b)) must design and maintain the cathead. Finally, Condition 4(c)
specifies that the employer must train the competent and qualified
persons in the applicable variance provisions. This condition, which is
not in the former variance, will ensure that competent persons and
qualified persons assigned responsibilities under the variance have the
knowledge necessary to perform their tasks effectively under the
conditions specified by the variance.
5. Condition 5: Hoist Machine
Condition 5 (formerly Condition 4) addresses the requirements of a
hoist machine. Condition 5(a)(i) removes the distinction of ``a
portable personnel hoist'' and, instead, designates the hoist machine
as a hoist system. Moreover, Condition 5(a)(ii) adds language to ensure
the proper use and maintenance of the hoist machine.
Conditions 5(b) through 5(e), which address raising or lowering a
transport, power source, constant-pressure control switch, and line-
speed indicator remain as before, with the exception of the former
Condition 4(d)(ii) (Constant-pressure control switch), which is
[[Page 60907]]
substantively addressed in Condition 5(s), Overhead Protection. Note:
Employers should consider adopting as a best practice ANSI's A10.22-
2007 (at 4.2(2)), which specifies that employers are not to use chains,
as well as belts, as drive components between the power source and the
winding drum.
Condition 5(f), Overspeed, is a new condition adapted from ANSI
A10.22. It will alert the hoist operator in the event the personnel
cage travels at excess speed, thereby preventing speed-related
accidents and associated worker injury. The text of Condition 5(g),
Braking systems, remains the same as the text of former Condition 4(f).
Note that ANSI A10.22-2007 (at Section 4.6) provides additional
guidelines for braking systems that employers should consider
following.
Condition 5(h), Slack-rope protection (formerly Condition 4(g),
Slack-rope switch), differs somewhat from the former condition by
requiring hoist design features that will prevent a slack-rope
condition. The condition will limit stress on the rope caused by snaps,
thereby preventing premature rope failure.
Condition 5(i), Frame, formerly Condition 4(h), varies slightly
from the former condition by ensuring that the frame of the hoist
machine meets design specifications, thereby improving hoist machine
safety. Condition 5(j), Stability, formerly Condition 4(i), also is a
slight redraft of the former condition. The condition requires
employers to secure hoist machines in accordance with design
specifications, which will ensure the stability of the hoist machine
during operation.
Condition 5(k), Location, formerly Condition 4(j), is a slight
variation of the former condition in that it adds the term ``winding''
for clarification. The footnote in the condition defining the term
``fleet angle'' duplicates a footnote in the former condition.
Condition 5(l), Drum and flange diameter, formerly Condition 4(k),
remains the same as the former condition, while Condition 5(m),
Spooling of the rope, formerly Condition 4(l), differs somewhat from
the former condition by allowing employers to store the rope on the
drum closer than two inches from the flange when the hoist machine is
not in use. The two-inch gap is necessary when the hoist is in
operation to prevent the rope from leaving the drum, causing hoisting
accidents. However, employers may store the rope closer than two inches
from the flange when transporting or storing the drum, which OSHA
believes does not endanger employees.
Condition 5(n) is a new condition that requires employers to secure
the rope firmly to the drum. This condition prevents inadvertent
unwinding of the rope in the event an operator lowers the hoist load
beyond its lowest point of travel by requiring employers to secure the
hoist end of the rope mechanically to the hoist drum.
Condition 5(o), Electrical system, formerly Condition 4(m), retains
the text of the former condition, which reduces the risk of electric
shock. Condition 5(p), Grounding, is a new condition adopted from ANSI
A10.22. The condition also will reduce the risk of electric shock.
Condition 5(q), Limit switches, formerly Condition 4(n), revised
the former condition by differentiating personnel hoisting from
material hoisting.
A new condition, Condition 5(r), ensures proper guarding of the
hoist machine. A note added to the condition clarifies that when
employers limit access to the hoist drum to only authorized personnel
(usually the hoist operator), OSHA will consider the drum as guarded
under this condition. This new condition will prevent inadvertent
operation of the hoist machine, which could endanger employees involved
in the hoisting operations.
As indicated above under the discussion of Conditions 5(b) through
5(e), Condition 5(s), Overhead protection, is an adaptation of former
Condition 4(d)(ii). The condition will protect the hoist operator and
the hoist machine from falling or moving objects.
6. Condition 6: Methods of Operation
Condition 6 (formerly Condition 5), addresses methods of operation.
This condition expands and clarifies the training requirements for both
the operators of the hoist machine and the employees who ride in the
cage. The condition adopts several provisions of ANSI A10.22-2007.
Condition 6(a)(i) requires employers to ensure that hoist operators
and their supervisors receive effective training in the safe operation
of hoist machines, and document the training. Conditions 6(a)(ii) and
6(a)(iii) require that only trained and authorized workers operate the
hoist; address the timing of the documented training for each worker
who uses the cage for transportation; and specify the frequency of all
required training. Conditions 6(a)(i), (ii), and (iii), based on former
Conditions 5(a)(i) and 5(a)(ii), will ensure the safe use of the hoist
machine and cage.
Condition 6(b) is a new condition that requires employers to use a
job-hazard analyses (JHA) to provide enhanced jobsite safety by
identifying safety hazards at the worksite not covered explicitly by
the current conditions. OSHA publication 3071, entitled ``Job Hazard
Analysis'' defines JHA as follows:
A job hazard analysis is a technique that focuses on job tasks
as a way to identify hazards before they occur. It focuses on the
relationship between the worker, the task, the tools, and the work
environment. Ideally, after uncontrolled hazards are identified,
steps will be taken to eliminate or reduce them to an acceptable
risk-level.
Condition 6(b) requires that employers conduct one or more JHAs for
the operation of the temporary personnel hoist system. The condition
also requires employers to review these analyses with the workers
exposed to any identified hazards.
Condition 6(c), Speed limitations, formerly Condition 5(b), differs
from the former condition in that it revises hoist speed requirements.
To prevent overtravel accidents, Condition 6(c)(i) adds a requirement
to slow the hoist speed at extremes of hoist travel, as well as an
overspeed allowance from ANSI A10.22-2007. A note in this condition
contains the requirement from former Condition 5(b)(iii) that specifies
limits on hoist speed when hoisting material only, again to prevent
accidents related to overtravel. Condition 6(c)(ii) retains the speed
limitation in former Condition 5(b)(ii) of 100 feet per minute for
personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs when used to transport
workers. The slower speed for these devices (compared to personnel
cages) is necessary because of the impact and shearing hazards present
when workers are using these devices (see discussion below for
Condition 16).
Condition 6(d), Communication, redrafted former Condition 5(c) to
clarify the requirement for communication equipment by replacing the
term ``voice-mediated intercommunication system'' with the term
``electronic voice-communication system (such as two-way radio)'' to
allow employers flexibility in selecting this type of equipment. In
addition, as with the former condition, the current condition requires
that employers maintain at all times communication between the hoist
operator and the workers located in a moving personnel cage. OSHA notes
that a ``failure of communication'' requiring employers to stop
hoisting as specified by Condition 6(d)(ii) includes lack of clarity in
communication, as well as equipment failure. Accordingly, the condition
requires clear and unambiguous communication at all times, thereby
ensuring continuous employee
[[Page 60908]]
protection in the event of procedural or equipment failures.
7. Condition 7: Hoist Rope
Condition 7 (formerly 6), addresses the hoist rope. Although
Conditions 7(a) and (c) remain the same as former Conditions 6(a) and
(c), revisions to the remaining conditions focus on making the
requirements consistent with other OSHA standards (e.g.,
1926.552(c)(14)(iii)), and adopting updated safety requirements
specified by ANSI A10.22-2007. For example, Condition 7(b), Safety
factor, increases the safety factor of the rope from 8 to 8.9 times the
total suspended load as opposed to a ``safe workload'' as specified by
former Condition 6(b). To clarify the load calculation, the current
conditions added the parenthetical phrase, ``(including the weight of
the suspended rope).'' New condition 7(d), adopted from the ANSI
standard, addresses rope lay; this new condition will prevent rope
rotation and kinking, thereby reducing stress on the rope and ensuring
smooth hoisting operations. Except for minor editorial revisions, the
text of Condition 7(e), Inspection, removal, and replacement of hoist
ropes, remains the same as the text of former Condition 6(d); this
provision will prevent the employer from using hoist ropes that could
fail during hoisting operations.
Revisions made to former Condition 6(e) by Condition 7(f),
Attachments, provide alternative requirements similar to the
requirements in ANSI A10.22-2007. OSHA believes these alternatives will
provide safer means of positively connecting and securing the hoist
rope to the personnel cage than provided by the former condition, thus
preventing accidents involving connection failure.
The text of provisions (i) through (iv) of Condition 7(g), Wire-
rope fastenings, remains much the same as former Condition 6(f), with
only minor editorial revisions. However, Condition 7(g) includes three
new provisions, 7(g)(v) through 7(g)(vii), that specify how and when to
tighten and retighten clip fastenings. These new provisions should
compensate for decreases in rope diameter caused by repeated
application of the load and, thus, serve to maintain proper torque on
the rope and improve rope integrity. Additionally, the permanent
variance added two new requirements: Condition 7(h), Rotation-resistant
ropes and swivels, and Condition 7(i), Rope protection. These added
conditions should increase worker safety by preventing rope damage and
improving rope integrity. The conditions also are consistent with
provisions in ANSI A10.22-2007, which requires barricading the hoisting
rope between the hoisting machine and the footblock, thereby preventing
the rope from making abrasive contact with the ground and providing
falling-object protection when appropriate.
Since employers are free to exceed the requirements of the
conditions (with respect to worker protection), employers may use
extra-extra-improved plow steel as the rope grade. Note also that ANSI
A10.22-2007 (at Section 6) provides additional guidelines for hoist
rope that employers should consider following.
8. Condition 8: Footblock
Condition 8 (formerly Condition 7) addresses the footblock on hoist
machines. Condition 8(a)(i) revised the safety factor found in the
former condition from 4 to 5 times the applied workload ;\13\ to be
consistent with the safety factor of the cathead (see Condition 9).
Provisions (a)(iii) and (iv) of Condition 8 vary from provisions of
former Condition 7(a)(iii) and 7(a)(iv) to be more performance oriented
and more consistent with alternatives presented in ANSI A10.22-2007.
These revisions will ensure that the moving wire rope effectively and
safely accommodates turning from the horizontal to vertical axes as
required by the direction of rope travel. While Conditions 8(b) and
8(c) remain the same as former Conditions 7(b) and 7(c), the variance
has a new condition, 8(d), that allows a properly mounted sheave as a
footblock substitute, consistent with the ANSI standard and Condition
9, Cathead and Sheave. Allowing a sheave substitute also will serve to
ensure that the moving wire rope effectively and safely accommodates
turning from horizontal to vertical axes as required by the direction
of rope travel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The applied workload is equivalent to the total suspended
load.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Condition 9: Cathead and Sheaves
Condition 9 (formerly Condition 8) addresses catheads and sheaves.
Condition 9(a) revises former Condition 8(a) to allow use of aluminum
for the cathead because of its light weight, provided the employer
complies with the cathead design drawings. Condition 9(b) remains the
same as former Condition 8(b). OSHA believes that following the design
drawings, along with the requirements specified by Condition 9(e) (see
below), will assure the safety of the cathead. Provisions (c) and (d)
of Condition 10 remain as in former Condition 9. However, Condition 9
also contains three new paragraphs, (e) through (g), based on the ANSI
A10.22-2007 standard. Condition 9(e), Design basis, requires that the
design of steel catheads conform to the American Institute of Steel
Construction (AISC), and that aluminum catheads follow the Aluminum
Association's design manual. Both types of catheads must have a safety
factor of 5 for the maximum intended working load (equivalent to the
total intended suspended load) for personnel and material hoisting.
This provision will ensure the structural integrity and safety of the
cathead up to workloads 5 times the maximum intended working load of
the cathead.
Provision (f)(i) of Condition 9, Clearance, requires adequate
clearance between the bottom of cathead and the cable attachment at the
top of the hoist cage to eliminate the risk of contact between the
cathead and the cage if operation of the upper limit switch stops the
cage. The second provision of this paragraph (subparagraph (f)(ii))
specifies that the cage must travel without obstruction along the full
length of the guide ropes. Both of these provisions will improve safety
by reducing stress on the guide ropes that would occur should the cage
come into contact with the cathead or other obstruction. Finally,
Condition 9(g), Sheave substitute, allows a properly mounted
construction block as a substitute for a sheave, which serves to ensure
that the moving wire rope effectively and safely accommodates turning
from the horizontal to vertical axes as required by the direction of
rope travel; this condition also refers to Condition 8(d), which
addresses sheave substitutes.
10. Condition 10: Guide Ropes
Condition 10 (formerly Condition 9) addresses guide ropes. This
condition contains several revisions made for clarification and
precision. For example, Condition 10(a) added the term ``securely''
before the phrase ``two guide ropes to the cathead'' and the phrase
``or to overhead supports designed for the purpose of accepting the
guide ropes'' at the end of this provision. The term ``securely''
ensures that guide ropes remain affixed to the cathead or overhead
support during hoisting operations, while the added phrase addressing
overhead supports acknowledges that hoist machines often use overhead
supports other than catheads to secure guide ropes. Also, Condition
10(a)(ii) references 29 CFR 1926.552(c)(17)(iv) to ensure that steel
wire rope is free of damage or defects at all times. In addition,
Condition 10(b) added the phrase ``During the hoisting of personnel''
to clarify when the
[[Page 60909]]
requirement applies to hoisting operations, while Condition 10(c)
replaced the verb ``to rig'' with the verb ``to install'' to clarify
the meaning of the term. Note that ANSI A10.22-2007 (at Section 9.2)
provides additional guidelines for alignment tension that employers
should consider following.
11. Condition 11: Personnel Cage
Condition 11 (formerly Condition 10) addresses personnel cages.
There are several revisions to the former condition. Condition 11(a)
removes the requirement that the cage be made of steel, relying on the
performance-based language ``capable of supporting a load that is eight
(8) times its rated load capacity.'' This revision will provide
employers with flexibility with regard to the materials used to
construct personnel cages, while ensuring worker safety. The provision
also raises the safety factor from 4 to 8 to improve worker protection;
this revision is consistent with ANSI A10.22-2007.
Former Conditions 10(a)(v) and 12(a) were inconsistent regarding
the thickness of the roof of the personnel cage: Former Condition
10(a)(v) required that the roof be constructed of one-eighth (1/8) inch
aluminum or equivalent material, while former Condition 12(a) specified
that the roof be constructed of three-sixteenth (3/16) inch steel plate
or equivalent material. Condition 11(a)(v) requires that the roof of
the personnel cage be constructed of three-sixteenths (3/16) inch steel
plate or equivalent material, the most protective of the required
thicknesses. This provision also requires that the roof slope to the
outside of the personnel cage to ensure that falling objects do not
remain on the cage and add to the weight of the load.
The revision to Condition 11(a)(vi) clarifies that employers cannot
use rails or hard protrusions when their presence creates an impact
hazard. This clarification should increase worker safety by reducing
impact hazards should workers lose their balance because of cage
movement.
Condition 11(b) revised the former term ``overhead weight'' to the
commonly used term ``overhaul weight'' for clarification. To improve
worker safety, Condition 11(e) added a design requirement that the
rated load capacity of the cage be at least 250 pounds for each
occupant, or the actual weight if an occupant exceeds 250 pounds. With
this added design requirement increasing the safety of the personnel
cages, the second provision of this condition revised the former phrase
``Hoist no more than four (4) occupants at any one time'' to ``Hoist at
any one time no more than the number of occupants for which the cage is
designed'' to allow flexibility in the number of employees who can
occupy a cage simultaneously during use.
Condition 11(f) clarifies the worker-notification requirement of
former Condition 10(f). Accordingly, the condition added a new
requirement in provision 11(f)(ii) to notify workers of the number of
occupants the cage can accommodate, while provision 11(f)(iii) revised
the former phrase ``The reduced rated load for the specific job'' to
``Any reduction in rated load capacity (in pounds) if applicable (due
to change in conditions of the specific job).'' These revisions will
serve as an additional check to prevent overloading the personnel cage.
Condition 11(g), Static drop tests, updated the reference to the
ANSI A10.22 standard to the latest, 2007, edition. Also, to be
consistent with this new edition, Condition 11(g)(ii) limited the
former test criteria (i.e., the initial test criterion included in
former Condition 10(g)(ii) of 125% of the maximum rated load of the
personnel cage, and subsequent drop tests at no less than 100% of its
maximum rated load) to the updated test criteria; these updated
criteria require employers to use the rated load of the personnel cage
during testing to avoid causing unnecessary damage to the cage.
Condition 11(h) is a new provision that prevents the cage from
catching on the platform at the top landing or on intermediate
platforms. OSHA believes this condition will decrease stress on the
hoist rope and prevent impact injuries among employees who use the
cage.
12. Condition 12: Safety Clamps
Condition 12 (formerly Condition 11) addresses safety clamps, with
only a few revisions to the former condition. For clarity, Condition
12(a)(ii) revised the term ``when in use'' to ``when the cage is in
motion.'' Condition 12(c) added the phrase ``The employer must ensure''
to former Condition 11(c) to place the burden of proving compliance on
the employer. In addition, Condition 12(c)(i) updates the ANSI
reference in former Condition 11(c)(i) to ANSI standard A10.22-2007.
13. Condition 13: Overhead Protection
The requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of former Condition 12,
Overhead Protection, specified the requirements for constructing sloped
roofs for personnel cages. Condition 11, Personnel Cage, now covers
these requirements under subparagraph 11(a)(v). Therefore, Condition 13
contains a new requirement, in performance-based language, providing
overhead protection for workers accessing the bottom landing. OSHA
believes this provision will increase the safety of employees working
around the bottom landing during hoist operations.
14. Condition 14: Emergency Escape Devices
Condition 14 (formerly Condition 13) continues to address emergency
escape devices with minor revisions. Condition 14(a) in this variance
adds the phrase ``For workers using a personnel cage'' as a preface to
the provision to clarify the requirement. In addition, the training
provision, Condition 14(c), references Condition 6(a)(iii), which
addresses the timing of training (e.g., before initial use, and
periodically thereafter).
15. Condition 15: Personnel Platforms and Boatswain's Chairs
Condition 15 replaces and updates former Condition 14 (Personnel
Platforms) by addressing the hazards and required safeguarding methods
associated with the use of personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs.
Accordingly, when meeting the criteria specified in Condition 2(g),
employers may use personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs only when
they demonstrate that it is infeasible to use personnel cages because
of space limitations in a chimney or a chimney-related structure. In
these situations, employers must use personnel platforms unless space
limitations require the use of boatswain's chairs. When replacing a
personnel cage with a personnel platform or boatswain's chair,
employers must follow the applicable requirements of 29 CFR
1926.1431(b) through .1431(s) and 1926.452(o)(3), respectively.
16. Condition 16: Protecting Workers From Fall and Shearing Hazards
Condition 2(g) of this variance provides the option of replacing a
personnel cage with a personnel platform or a boatswain's chair when
using jump-form or slip-form construction techniques and procedures to
construct chimneys and chimney-related structures, but only when the
employer demonstrates that it is infeasible because of space
limitations to use a personnel cage to transport workers to and from
elevated worksites. Condition 16 of this variance also continues to
address shearing hazards (as did former Condition 15, Protecting
Workers from Fall and Shearing Hazards) because these hazards are
present when workers use personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs
under
[[Page 60910]]
the limitations specified by Condition 2(g). This condition also
redrafted the fall-hazard provisions of former Condition 15 to address
fall hazards associated with both the hoist areas and the cage, with
references to relevant requirements of 29 CFR part 1926. OSHA believes
these revisions cover fall hazards more thoroughly than the former
condition, thereby increasing worker protection from these hazards.
17. Condition 17: Exclusion Zone
Condition 17 (formerly Condition 16), which covers exclusion zones,
made substantial revisions to the former condition. Accordingly, the
condition specifies requirements for establishing an exclusion zone;
these requirements were not part of the former condition. OSHA believes
that these requirements will improve worker safety by ensuring that
unauthorized persons do not enter the zone, thereby reducing their risk
of injury from being struck by the hoisting equipment, falling objects,
and the personnel cage.
Condition 17(d) is a new provision that clarifies when workers can
enter the exclusion zone during operations involving a material-
transport device. This provision will reduce worker exposure to the
hazards associated with these operations, including impact and crushing
hazards from the hoisting equipment and material-transport device.
18. Condition 18: Inspections, Tests, and Accident Prevention
Paragraphs (a) and (b) of Condition 18 expand the inspection, test,
and accident-prevention requirements of former Condition 17 by
specifying that employers: (1) Conduct frequent and regular (at least
weekly) inspections of the hoist system and the area around the hoist
system; (2) inspect the hoist system prior to reuse following periods
of idleness lasting more than one week; and (3) remove hoisting
equipment from service when a competent person determines that the
equipment is unsafe. These revisions will ensure that hoist systems are
safe for worker use. Paragraph (c) adds a requirement that employers
document tests, inspections, and corrective actions. This requirement
will provide employers with information needed to schedule tests and
inspections, and to determine the actions taken to correct defects in
hoisting equipment prior to returning it to service.
19. Condition 19: Welding
Condition 19 (formerly Condition 18) revised paragraph (a) of the
former condition by defining the term ``qualified'' to mean a welder
who meets the requirements of the American Welding Society,
specifically, the qualification requirements of American Welding
Society (AWS) D1.1 Structural Welding Code--Steel, or AWS D1.2
Structural Welding Code--Aluminum, as applicable. Specifying the
qualifications for welders will improve worker safety by providing
assurance that personnel who weld components of hoist systems possess
the skills necessary to perform this work, and will do so competently
and in a manner that maintains the operational integrity and safety of
the systems.
20. Condition 20: OSHA Notification
Condition 20 (Condition 19 in the former variance) addresses the
duty of employers to notify OSHA of events and conditions associated
with their hoisting operations. Paragraphs (a) and (b) of the condition
made substantial revisions to paragraph (a) of the former condition,
including: (1) Specifying the legal test (due diligence) that OSHA must
apply to these notification requirements; (2) identifying the Office of
Technical Programs and Coordination Activities (OTPCA) at national OSHA
headquarters (not the nearest OSHA area office) or the appropriate
State-Plan office as the offices to receive notification and the
required information (i.e., the location of the operation and the date
the operation will begin); (3) providing contact information (i.e.,
telephone and facsimile numbers, and email address) for OTPCA; and (4)
requiring employers to notify OTPCA or the appropriate State-Plan
office at least 15 days prior to beginning any emergency operation or
short-notice project that uses the conditions specified by the variance
of the location and date of the operation or project or, if such an
operation will occur in less than 15 days, then as soon as possible
after the employer knows when the operation will begin.
Former paragraph (b) addressed notification requirements when the
employer ceases to do business or transfers the activities covered by
the variance to a successor company. Paragraphs (c) and (d) of
Condition 20 in this variance expand on the former requirements by: (1)
Reiterating the legal test (due diligence) that OSHA will apply to
these notification requirements; (2) specifying that employers notify
OTPCA of any changes in the location and address of the main office for
managing the activities covered by the variance; and (3) stipulating
that OSHA must approve the transfer of the variance to a successor
company.
OSHA believes that the revisions made to former Condition 19 by
Condition 20 in this variance will expedite receipt of information by
OSHA and State-Plan states regarding the initiation and location of
hoisting operations covered by the variance, and will clarify that the
notification requirements apply as well to emergency operations and
short-term projects. Accordingly, these revisions will improve worker
safety by ensuring that OSHA and State-Plan states have complete and
accurate information about the chimney-construction activities covered
by the variance so that these agencies can carefully monitor employer
compliance with the conditions specified by the variance. While
Condition 20 now clearly notifies employers of the legal test they must
meet in complying with the requirements of this condition, OSHA notes
that it will not issue a citation if an employer's violation of
Condition 20 does not immediately affect worker safety or health; in
these circumstances, OSHA may, however, issue a notice of de minimis
violation.
Requiring employers to notify OTPCA of any changes in the location
and address of their main offices will allow OSHA to communicate
effectively with employers regarding the status of the variance.
Stipulating that an employer must have OSHA's approval to transfer a
variance to a successor company provides assurance that the successor
company has the resources, and agrees, to comply with the conditions of
the variance. OSHA believes this requirement is necessary to ensure the
safety of workers involved in performing the operations covered by the
variance.
IV. Comments on the Proposed Variance Application
Two public commenters submitted comments on the proposed variance
application. Additionally, OSHA received comments on the proposed
variance application from the state of Michigan. See Section II
(``Multi-State Variance'') of this notice for a discussion of
Michigan's comment.
The first public commenter was Mr. Barry A. Cole of Cole-Preferred
Safety Consulting, Inc., who supported granting the permanent variance
(Document ID No. OSHA-2012-0015-0003). Mr. Cole also provided comments
unrelated to the published variance applications; these comments
addressed OSHA's variance and enforcement process, which is beyond the
scope of the variance application.
The National Stack and Chimney Safety and Health Advisory Committee
[[Page 60911]]
(NSCSHAC) submitted the second public comment (Document ID No. OSHA-
2012-0015-0021). This comment: (1) Compared the proposed variance
conditions to the conditions in the prior chimney variances; and (2)
addressed the scope of the variance application. NSCSHAC also requested
a hearing under 29 CFR 1905.15 if OSHA either rejected its comments or
made substantive revisions to them; OSHA adopted all of NSCSHAC's
comments without revision, so a hearing is unnecessary.
The remainder of this section describes the specific comments
submitted by NSCSHAC, and OSHA's response to them.
Comment 1: NSCSHAC stated that the second paragraph in the
Background section of the variance application contained an incorrect
statement regarding the alternative conditions described in previous
chimney variances, notably that the conditions applied only to tapered
chimneys constructed using jump-form construction techniques and
procedures. NSCSHAC requested that OSHA revise or remove the subject
sentences from the Background section, and also revise or remove all
other comparable sentences in the variance application.
OSHA's response: The Agency made the requested revisions.
Comment 2: NSCSHAC requested that OSHA modify the scope condition
(proposed Condition 1) of the variance application such that it covers
all chimney-related construction, regardless of the construction method
and configuration, when such construction involves the use of temporary
personnel hoisting systems. NSCSHAC provided the following rationale
for its comment:
(1) The language used in the Notice is not the actual language
included in the Permanent Variance Applications submitted in
November 2012 (see Variance Application Attachment A; Exhibit No.
OSHA-2012-0015-0018).
(2) [NSCSHAC] has demonstrated through it meetings with OSHA
that the chimney hoist variance is applicable for the two different
construction methods of jump-form formwork (described as ``formwork
techniques'' in the Notice) and slip-form formwork construction,
regardless of the structural configuration, i.e. tapered or straight
barreled.
(3) Chimneys constructed by the slip-form method can also be of
tapered configurations and need to be included in the variance.
Slip-form formwork for tapered chimneys has the same conditions for
use of the chimney hoist system as for slip-form formwork for
straight barreled chimneys.
(4) Chimneys constructed by the jump-form method can be tapered
and straight barrel chimneys, and of small and large diameters. The
reasons for obtaining a variance for large barreled chimneys are
similar to the reasons for a variance for small barreled chimneys,
and include the following:
I. Per the original variance dated 4/3/73, a hoist (tower) would
interfere with the design and construction of the proper
scaffolding. The inside of the chimney for the jump-form formwork
construction includes support sling cables for the work platform and
formwork support structure at multiple locations around the
perimeter of the top sections of concrete, for both large and small
diameter chimneys. These cables are positioned 360 degrees around
the circumference at this location, making it almost impossible to
get any access on the inside of the chimney adjacent to the wall.
There are also trailing scaffolds that extend down as much as 17 ft.
on the outside for finishing work and adjusting the equipment. All
access/egress for the jump-form formwork for small and large barrel,
and tapered chimneys has always been obtained at a distance away
from the walls using the chimney hoist system integrated into these
types of formworks.
II. The majority of work during the construction of the jump-
form formwork for small and large straight-barrel, and tapered
chimneys is at the perimeter wall location, with hazards of falling
concrete, tools, and equipment. This is the reason for the
designated exclusion zones and overhead protection, and for locating
the personnel cage away from the chimney wall.
III. Small barreled chimneys may have only one liner flue, and
large barreled chimneys may have multiple liner flues. Therefore,
the available room inside a large barreled chimney may be no larger
than for a small barreled chimney regardless of the construction
methods due to the multiple flues.
IV. When performing liner construction, access is also required
to the inside of the chimney liner, which limits the usefulness of
attaching a hoist tower to the interior or exterior of the chimney
walls. In addition, when a hoist system is used inside of a liner
the ability to erect and brace a hoist tower is infeasible due to
interference with, and the usually unsuitable support provided by,
the liner while being constructed.
V. The unique concrete techniques and procedures involved in
jump-form formwork, similar to slip-form construction, make it also
difficult and unsafe to attach a hoist tower to both the interior or
exterior walls of a chimney during construction. The fresh concrete
is poured into forms that are 7.5 ft. to 10.0 ft. tall on a daily
basis. As a result of this progressive construction process, the
concrete wall immediately below the platform for a distance of 15
ft. to 30 ft. is insufficiently cured to safely attach a hoist tower
to the wall.
VI. The frequent extensions of a hoist tower to keep up with the
moving work platforms involves many difficulties in erection,
bracing, and guying as was discussed in the original variance in 4/
3/73. Also discussed were the extra precautions to obtain
substantial bracing if a hoist tower is constructed, since both the
chimney and the hoist tower would be exposed to high winds.
Therefore, personnel would be exposed to greater safety hazards due
to weather elements, erection procedures, and working underneath the
work platform and installing a hoist tower to the exterior wall,
than they would be by using the personnel cage with the hoist
variance. These difficulties and increased hazards involved in use
of a hoist tower are applicable to both jump form and slip form
methods and for both tapered and straight barreled chimneys.
Therefore, according to NSCSHAC, the scope condition (Condition 1)
of the variance should include tapered chimneys constructed by slip-
form construction techniques and procedures and large-barreled chimneys
constructed by jump-form construction techniques and procedures; in
sum, the variance should apply to all chimneys regardless of
construction method or structural configuration.
OSHA's response: The Agency corrected the scope condition in the
variance (Condition 1) to include both jump-form and slip-form
construction methods and procedures, regardless of configuration (i.e.,
straight-barreled or tapered).
Comment 3: NSCSHAC stated that OSHA should delete or revise
paragraph (b) of the scope condition (proposed Condition 1) in the
variance application to apply only to structures other than chimneys,
and provided the following rationale for this comment:
(1) This paragraph is not in the actual Permanent Variance
Applications submitted in November, 2012.
(2) [NSCSHAC] has demonstrated though its meetings with OSHA and
again with the explanations above, that this variance is applicable
to small and large straight-barreled chimneys for both jump-form and
slip form formwork and there should be no further reason to
demonstrate that it is infeasible to erect a hoist tower inside or
outside of the structure for these construction methods.
(3) The condition that ``only after demonstrating that it is
infeasible to erect a hoist tower either inside or outside the
structure'' is subjective and the application of it is unclear. Is
the grantee to obtain approval from OSHA prior to use? How long will
it take for OSHA to approve the use on a particular project and will
this occur during the project bidding stage? Can the work be stopped
by OSHA until the grantee demonstrates it is infeasible? These and
other questions create undue schedule and cost concerns for the
project participants.
OSHA's response: The Agency inadvertently included paragraph (b) in
proposed Condition 1, and removed the paragraph from the permanent
variance as requested by NSCSHAC.
Comment 4: NSCSHAC noted that the last paragraph in the
Supplementary
[[Page 60912]]
Information Section (and similar paragraphs throughout the variance)
unnecessarily limited the scope of the variance application. NSCSHAC
recommended that OSHA revise this language (and similar language
elsewhere in the variance application) to include both jump-form and
slip-form construction techniques and procedures, and straight-barreled
or tapered configurations. NSCSHAC provided the following rationale for
this comment: ``NSCSHAC has explained above that the variance's scope
should be broad enough to include jump-form and slip-form formwork
construction, as well as accommodate different structural
configurations of large or small-diameter tapered and straight barreled
chimneys.''
OSHA's response: The Agency made the requested revisions.
Comment 5: NSCSHAC pointed out that the first and second
introductory sentences of paragraph (g) of proposed Condition 2
(Application) are inconsistent regarding the variance application's
coverage. The first sentence refers to covering construction of tapered
chimneys, and small-diameter, straight-barreled chimneys and chimney-
related structures, while the wording of the next (second) sentence
states that the variance application would cover only the construction
of tapered chimneys. Accordingly, NSCSHAC requested that OSHA revise
paragraph (g) to read: ``Replacing the personnel cage with a personnel
platform or a boatswain's chair.''
OSHA's response: The Agency inadvertently limited the second
introductory sentence of paragraph (g) to tapered chimneys. However,
because the conditions specified by the permanent variance cover both
jump-form and slip-form construction techniques and procedures
regardless of the configuration of the chimney or chimney-related
structure (i.e., tapered or straight-barreled chimneys and chimney-
related structures of any diameter) (see OSHA's response to NSCSHAC
comment 2 above), the Agency removed both introductory sentences from
the permanent variance.
Note: In addition to the revisions made in response to NSCSHAC's
comments, OSHA made a number of minor stylistic, technical, or
editorial corrections to the variance conditions to correct previous
errors or to improve clarity.
V. Decision
As noted previously in this preamble, from 1973 to the present the
Agency granted a number of permanent variances from the tackle
requirements provided for boatswain's chairs by 29 CFR 1926.452(o)(3)
and the requirements for hoist towers specified by paragraphs (c)(1)
through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR
1926.552. In view of the Agency's history with the variances granted
for chimney construction, OSHA determined that the alternative
conditions specified by the application will protect employees at least
as effectively as the requirements of paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR
1926.452 and paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13),
(c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552.
Under section 6(d) of the Occupational safety and Health Act of
1970 (29 U.S.C. 655), and based on the record discussed above, the
Agency finds that when the employers comply with the conditions of the
following order, the working conditions of the employers' workers will
be at least as safe and healthful as if the employers complied with the
working conditions by paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452, and
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and
(c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552. This decision is applicable in all states
under Federal OSHA enforcement authority, and in the State-Plan states
and territories when: (1) The relevant standards are the same as the
Federal OSHA standards from which the applicants are seeking the
permanent variance; and (2) the State-Plan state or territory does not
object to the terms of the variance application (see Section II, Multi-
State Variance, of this notice for a description of the applicability
of this decision in State-Plan states and territories).
VI. Order
OSHA issues this order authorizing Kiewit Power Constructors Co. et
al. (``the employers'') to comply with the following conditions instead
of complying with paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452, and paragraphs
(c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29
CFR 1926.552. This order applies in Federal OSHA enforcement
jurisdictions, and in those states with OSHA-approved State plans that
have identical standards and have agreed to the terms of the variance.
1. Scope
This permanent variance applies to chimney-related construction,
including work on chimneys, chimney linings, stacks, and chimney-
related structures such as silos, towers, and similar structures
(hereafter referred to collectively as ``chimney-related structure'' or
``structure,'') built using jump-form and slip-form construction
techniques and procedures, regardless of the structural configuration
(such as tapered or straight barreled of any diameter) when such
construction involves the use of temporary personnel hoist systems
(hereafter referred to as ``hoist system'') for the transportation of:
(a) Personnel to and from the bottom landing of a chimney or
chimney-related structure to working elevations inside or outside of
the chimney or structure using a personnel cage during construction
work subject to 29 CFR part 1926, including construction, renovation,
repair, maintenance, inspection, and demolition; or
(b) Materials, but not concurrently with hoisting of personnel,
through attachment of a hopper, material basket, concrete bucket, or
other appropriate rigging to the hoist system to raise and lower all
other materials inside or outside a chimney or chimney-related
structure. See also Condition 2(c)(ii) below.
2. Application
(a) The employer must use a hoist system equipped with a dedicated
personnel-transport device (i.e., a personnel cage) as specified by
this variance to raise or lower its workers and/or other construction-
related tools, equipment, and supplies between the bottom landing of a
chimney or chimney-related structure and an elevated work location
while performing construction inside and outside the chimney or
structure.
(b) Prior to initial use of the hoist system, the employer must
have all drawings containing designs and construction details showing
the integration of the hoist system with the construction technique and
procedures in use (such as a slip-form construction) sealed by a
professional engineer registered in the United States. A professional
engineer registered in the United States also must approve any
modifications to these drawings.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Any reference to ``design'' or ``designed'' in these
conditions means that a professional engineer registered in the
United States must approve the design.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) When using a hoist system, the employer must:
(i) Use the personnel cages raised and lowered by the hoist system
solely to transport workers with the tools and small supplies necessary
to do their work (e.g., fasteners, paint, caulk);
(ii) Attach a dedicated material-transport device directly to the
hoist rope solely to raise and lower all other materials and tools; and
(iii) Attach the material-transport device directly to the hoisting
hook and never to the personnel cage.
[[Page 60913]]
(d) Except for the requirements specified by 29 CFR 1926.552(c)(1)
through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16), the employer
must comply fully with all other applicable provisions of 29 CFR parts
1910 and 1926.
(e) When an employer demonstrates that it is infeasible to comply
with these conditions, the employer may use other devices or methods to
comply, but only when the employer clearly demonstrates that these
devices and methods provide its workers with protection that is at
least equivalent to the protection afforded to them by the conditions
of this variance.
(f) The employer must convey any communication, written or verbal,
required by this variance in a language that each worker can
understand.
(g) Replacing a personnel cage with a personnel platform or a
boatswain's chair.
The following provisions apply:
(i) Personnel platform. Before using a personnel platform, an
employer must:
(A) Demonstrate that available space makes it infeasible to use a
personnel cage for transporting employees;
(B) Limit use of a personnel platform to elevations above the last
work location that the personnel cage can reach; and
(C) Use a personnel platform in accordance with requirements
specified by 29 CFR 1926.1431(s), unless the employer can demonstrate
that the structural arrangement of the chimney precludes such use.
(ii) Boatswain's chair. Before using a boatswain's chair, an
employer must:
(A) Demonstrate that available space makes it infeasible to use a
personnel platform for transporting employees;
(B) Limit use of a boatswain's chair to elevations above the last
work location that the personnel platform can reach; and
(C) Use a boatswain's chair in accordance with block-and-tackle
requirements specified by 29 CFR 1926.452(o)(3), unless the employer
can demonstrate that the structural arrangement of the chimney
precludes such use.
3. Definitions
The following definitions apply to this permanent variance; these
definitions do not necessarily apply in other contexts.
(a) Authorized person--a person approved or assigned by the
employer to perform a specific type of duty or duties or to be at a
specific location or locations at the jobsite.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See 29 CFR 1926.32(d).
* ANSI/ASSE kindly permitted OSHA to use the definition of this
term from Section 3 of its A10.22-2007 standard, Safety Requirements
for Rope-Guided and Non-guided Workers' Hoists. In some cases, OSHA
made slight editorial revisions to the text of the definition for
clarity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Barricade--barrier used to confine or mark off limits to
access.
(c) Base-mounted drum hoist--a drum hoist fastened to, and
supported by, a designed steel frame with mounting attachments for
securing to a foundation.*
(d) Broken rope principle--the principle by which, if the main
support rope fails, the lack of tension will cause the safety clamps
attached to the personnel cage to grip the guide ropes and stop it
within 18 inches (457.2mm) (maximum) of travel from the activation
point.*
(e) Cage--an enclosed load-carrying unit or car, including its
platform, frame, enclosure, and gate, in which personnel are
transported.*
(f) Cathead--the structure directly supporting the overhead
sheaves.*
(g) Competent person--one who is capable of identifying existing
and predictable hazards in the surroundings or working conditions that
are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees, and who has
authorization to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See 29 CFR 1926.32(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(h) Deadman control--a constant pressure, hand-operated or foot-
operated control designed so that, when released, it automatically
returns to a neutral or deactivated position and stops movement of the
hoist drum.* (Referred to in this order as ``deadman control switch.'')
(i) Design factor--the ratio of the failure load to the maximum
designed working load. (Also referred to as ``Safety Factor'' or
``Factor of Safety.'')* (Referred to in this order as ``safety
factor.'')
(j) Exclusion zone--a clearly designated zone around the bottom
landing of the hoist system designed to restrict the zone to authorized
persons only.
(k) Footblock--a wire-rope block mounted at or near the bottom of a
structure for the purpose of changing the direction of the hoisting
rope from approximately horizontal to approximately vertical.*
(l) Hoist (verb)--to raise, lower, or otherwise move a load in the
air.
(m) Hoist (noun)--same as ``hoist machine.''
(n) Hoist area--the area (including, but not limited to, the area
directly beneath the load) in which it is reasonably foreseeable that
partially or completely suspended materials could fall in the event of
an accident.
(o) Hoist-way--a clearly designated walkway or path used to provide
safe access to and from personnel cages.
(p) Hoist machine--a mechanical device for lifting and lowering
loads by winding a line onto or off a drum.
(q) Hoist system--a collection of mechanical devices and support
equipment assembled and used in combination for lifting and lowering
loads, including personnel cages.
(r) Job hazard analysis--an evaluation of the tasks or operations
involving the use of hoist systems performed to identify potential
hazards and to determine the necessary controls.
(s) Lifeline--an independently suspended line used for attaching
the employee's safety harness lanyard, usually by means of a rope grab,
as part of the fall-arrest system.*
(t) Line run--a condition whereby the free end of the hoistline
(wire rope) may be overhauled by the deadweight of the downline portion
of the hoistline on the footblock side of the cathead.*
(u) Non-guided workman's hoist (worker's hoist)--a hoist involving
the transportation of a person in a boatswain's chair, or equivalent,
not attached to fixed guide ropes.* (Note: While the conditions of this
variance do not use this term directly, ANSI A10.22-2007, referenced
under Condition 11, uses the term.)
(v) Qualified person--one who, by possession of a recognized
degree, certificate, or professional standing, or who by extensive
knowledge, training, and experience, has successfully demonstrated his
ability to solve or resolve problems relating to the subject matter,
the work, or the project.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See 29 CFR 1926.32(m).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(w) Rope--wire rope, unless otherwise specified.*
(x) Rotation-resistant rope--a wire rope consisting of an inner
layer of strand laid in one direction covered by a layer of strand laid
in the opposite direction. This has the effect of counteracting torque
by reducing the tendency of the finished rope to rotate.*
(y) Safety clamp--a fall-arresting device (or rope-grab) designed
to grip the lifeline and prevent the person being transported in a
boatswain's chair, or equivalent, from falling.*
(z) Static drop test--a test performed by suspending the personnel
cage in a fixed position with a quick-release device or equivalent
method separating the cage from the hoistline. The quick-release device
is tripped allowing the cage to freefall until the safety clamps (cage)
activate and stop the cage.*
[[Page 60914]]
(aa) Total suspended load--the combined weight of any and all
objects and persons in transport, including the weight of the suspended
rope.
(bb) Weatherproof--constructed or protected so that exposure to the
weather will not interfere with successful operations.*
4. Qualified Person and Competent Person
(a) The employer must:
(i) Provide one or more competent person(s) and/or qualified
person(s), as specified in paragraphs (f) and (m) of 29 CFR 1926.32,
who is/are responsible for ensuring that the installation, maintenance,
and inspection of the hoist system comply with the conditions specified
herein, and with the applicable requirements of 29 CFR part 1926
(``Safety and Health Regulations for Construction''); and
(ii) Ensure that a competent person(s) is/are present at ground-
level to assist in an emergency whenever the hoist system is raising or
lowering workers.
(b) The employer must use a qualified person to design, and a
competent person to maintain, the cathead described under Condition 9
(``Cathead and Sheave'') below.
(c) The employer must train each competent person and each
qualified person regarding the conditions of this variance and the
requirements of 29 CFR part 1926 that are applicable to their
respective roles.
5. Hoist Machine
(a) Type of hoist. The employer must:
(i) Designate the hoist machine as a hoist system; and
(ii) Use and maintain the hoist machine in accordance with the
manufacturer's instructions. When the manufacturer's instructions are
not available, the employer must ensure that a qualified person
develops written instructions, and that these instructions are
available on-site.
(b) Raising or lowering a transport. The employer must ensure that:
(i) The hoist machine includes a base-mounted drum hoist designed
to control line-speed;
(ii) When lowering an empty or occupied transport, the drive
components are engaged continuously (i.e., ``powered down'' or not
``freewheeling'');
(iii) The drive system is interconnected, on a continuous basis,
through a torque converter, mechanical coupling, or an equivalent
coupling (e.g., electronic controller, fluid clutches, and hydraulic
drives);
(iv) The braking mechanism is applied automatically when the
transmission is in the neutral position and a forward-reverse coupling
or shifting transmission is being used; and
(v) No belts are used between the power source and the winding
drum.
(c) Power source. The employer must power the hoist machine by an
air, electric, hydraulic, or internal-combustion drive mechanism.
(d) Constant-pressure control switch. The employer must equip the
hoist machine with a hand-operated or a foot-operated constant-pressure
control switch (i.e., a ``deadman control switch'') that deactivates
the engine and stops the hoist rotation immediately upon release by the
hoist operator.
(e) Line-speed indicator. The employer must:
(i) Equip the hoist machine with a line-speed indicator maintained
in working order; and
(ii) Ensure that the line-speed indicator is in clear view of the
hoist operator during hoisting operations.
(f) Overspeed. The employer must equip the hoist machine with an
audible or visual overspeed-indicator alarm that will activate before
the line-speed exceeds 275 feet per minute (includes 10% overspeed
allowance) when transporting personnel.
(g) Braking systems. The employer must equip the hoist machine with
at least two (2) independent braking systems (i.e., one automatic and
one manual) applied on the winding side of the clutch or couplings,
with each braking system capable of stopping and holding 150 percent of
the maximum rated line load.
(h) Slack-rope protection. The employer must equip the hoist
machine with a slack-rope device to prevent rotation of the winding
drum under slack-rope conditions, or a slack-rope circuit that stops or
limits the hoist speed to a creep speed when there is no tension on the
load line.
(i) Frame. The employer must ensure that the frame of the hoist
machine is a self-supporting, rigid, steel structure, and that holding
brackets for anchor lines and legs for anchor bolts are integral
components of the frame in accordance with the applicable design
drawings.
(j) Stability. The employer must secure hoist machines in position
to prevent movement, shifting, or dislodgement in accordance with the
applicable design drawings.
(k) Location. The employer must:
(i) Locate the hoist machine far enough from the footblock to
obtain the correct fleet angle for proper winding or spooling of the
cable on the drum; and
(ii) Ensure that the fleet angle remains between one-half degree
(\1/2\[deg]) and one and one-half degrees (1\1/2\[deg]) for smooth
drums, and between one-half degree (\1/2\[deg]) and two degrees
(2[deg]) for grooved drums, with the lead sheave centered on the
drum.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ This provision adopts the definition of, and specifications
for, fleet angle from Cranes and Derricks, H. I. Shapiro, et al.
(eds.); New York: McGraw-Hill; 3rd ed., 1999, page 592. Accordingly,
the fleet angle is ``[t]he angle the rope leading onto a [winding]
drum makes with the line perpendicular to the drum rotating axis
when the lead rope is making a wrap against the flange.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(l) Drum and flange diameter. The employer must:
(i) Provide a winding drum for the hoist that is at least 30 times
the nominal diameter of the rope used for hoisting; and
(ii) Ensure that the winding drum has a flange diameter that is at
least one and one-half (1\1/2\) times the winding-drum diameter.
(m) Spooling of the rope. The employer must never spool the rope
closer than two (2) inches (5.1 cm) from the outer edge of the winding-
drum flange when the hoist is in operation.
(n) Minimum rope turns on drum. The employer must ensure that the
drum has three turns of rope when the hoist load is at the lowest point
of travel, and that the hoist end of the rope is mechanically secured
to the hoist drum in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
(o) Electrical system. The employer must ensure that all electrical
equipment is weatherproof.
(p) Grounding. The employer must ensure that the hoisting machine
is grounded at all times in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR
1926.404(f).
(q) Limit switches.
(i) When the employer uses a hoist system with a personnel cage,
the employer must equip the hoist system with limit switches and
related equipment that automatically prevent overtravel of the
transport device at the top of the supporting structure and at the
bottom of the hoist-way or lowest landing level.
(ii) When the employer uses a hoist system with a material-
transport device, the employer must equip the hoist system with limit
switches and related equipment that automatically prevents overtravel
of material-transport devices at the top of the support structure.
(r) Guarding. The employer must guard effectively all exposed
moving parts such as gears, projecting screws, setscrews, chains,
cables, belts, chain sprockets, and reciprocating or rotating parts,
that might constitute a hazard under normal operating conditions.
(Note: OSHA considers a hoist drum
[[Page 60915]]
that has access limited to authorized persons as guarded.)
(s) Overhead Protection. The employer must provide a shelter or
enclosure to protect the hoist operator, hoist machine, and associated
controls from falling or moving objects.
6. Methods of Operation
(a) Worker qualifications and training. The employer must:
(i) Ensure that each personnel hoist operator and each of their
supervisors have effective and documented training in the safe
operation of hoist machines covered by this variance.
(ii) Ensure that only a trained and authorized person operates the
hoist machine.
(iii) Provide effective and documented instruction, before initial
use, to each worker who uses a personnel cage for transportation
regarding the safe use of the personnel cage and its emergency systems.
The employer must repeat the instruction periodically and as necessary
(e.g., after making changes to the personnel cage that affect its
operation).
(b) Use of job hazard analyses (JHAs). The employer must:
(i) Complete one or more JHAs for the operation of the hoist
system; and
(ii) Review, periodically and as necessary (e.g., after making
changes to the hoist machine that affect its operation), the contents
of the JHA with affected personnel.
(c) Speed limitations. The employer must not operate the hoist at a
speed in excess of:
(i) 250 feet per minute \19\ or the design speed of the hoist
system, whichever is lower, when using a personnel cage to transport
workers, and slow the hoist appropriately at the extremes of hoist
travel. (Note: The employer may use a line-speed that is consistent
with the design limitations of the hoist system when hoisting material
(i.e., using a dedicated material-transport device) on the hoist
system); or
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ When including 10% overspeed, the maximum hoist speed must
not exceed 275 feet per minute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) 100 feet per minute when a personnel platform or boatswain's
chair is being used to transport workers.
(d) Communication. The employer must:
(i) Use an electronic voice-communication system (such as two-way
radio) at all times for communication between the hoist operator and
the workers located in a moving personnel cage, personnel platform, or
boatswain's chair;
(ii) Stop hoisting if there is (a) a failure of communication, or
(b) activation of a stop signal from the workers in the personnel cage,
personnel platform, or boatswain's chair; resume hoisting only when a
supervisor determines that it is safe to do so.
7. Hoist Rope
(a) Grade. The employer must use a wire rope for the hoist system
(i.e., ``hoist rope'') that consists of extra-improved plow steel, an
equivalent grade of non-rotating rope, or a regular lay rope with a
suitable swivel mechanism.
(b) Safety factor. For personnel hoisting, the employer must
maintain a safety factor of at least eight and nine-tenth (8.9) times
the total suspended load throughout the entire length of hoist rope
(including the weight of the suspended rope).
(c) Size. The employer must use a hoist rope that is at least one-
half (\1/2\) inch in diameter.
(d) Rope lay. Except when using rotation-resistant rope, the
employer must use preformed regular-lay rope. The direction of exterior
lay (right or left) must match the drum termination and winding
characteristics.
(e) Inspection, removal, and replacement. The employer must:
(i) Thoroughly inspect the hoist rope before the start of each job,
and on completing a new set-up;
(ii) Maintain the proper diameter-to-diameter ratios between the
hoist rope and the footblock and the sheave by inspecting the wire rope
regularly (see Conditions 8(c) and 9(d), below); and
(iii) Remove and replace the wire rope with new wire rope when any
condition specified by 29 CFR 1926.552(a)(3) occurs.
(f) Attachments. The employer must attach the rope to a personnel
cage, personnel platform, or boatswain's chair using a positive
connection such as:
(i) A screw-pin shackle with the pin secured from rotation or
loosening by mousing to the shackle body;
(ii) A bolt-type shackle, nut, and cotter pin; or
(iii) A positive-locking link.
(g) Wire-rope fastenings. When the employer uses clip fastenings
(e.g., U-bolt wire-rope clips) with wire ropes, the employer must:
(i) Use Table H-20 of 29 CFR 1926.251 to determine the number and
spacing of the clips;
(ii) Use at least three (3) drop-forged clips at each fastening;
(iii) Install the clips with the ``U'' of the clips on the dead end
of the rope and the live end resting in the clip saddle;
(iv) Space the clips so that the distance between them is a minimum
of six (6) times the diameter of the rope.
(v) Tighten the clips evenly in accordance with the manufacturer's
specification;
(vi) Following initial application of the load to the rope,
retighten the clip nuts to the specified torque to compensate for any
decrease in rope diameter caused by the load; and
(vii) Retighten the rope clip nuts periodically to compensate for
any further decrease in rope diameter during usage.
(h) Rotation-resistant ropes and swivels. The employer must not use
a swivel anywhere in the system when using rotation-resistant ropes
unless approved by the wire-rope manufacturer.
(i) Rope protection. The employer must:
(i) Barricade the hoisting rope between the hoisting machine and
the footblock;
(ii) Protect the hoisting rope from abrasive contact with the
ground; and
(iii) When the hoisting rope is subject to falling material or
debris, protect it from such hazards.
8. Footblock
(a) Type of footblock. Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this
condition, the employer must use a footblock:
(i) Consisting of construction-type rope blocks of solid single-
piece bail with a safety factor of at least five (5), or an equivalent
block with roller bearings;
(ii) Designed for the applied loading, size, and type of wire rope
used for hoisting;
(iii) Designed for returning the rope to the sheave groove after a
slack-rope condition, or equipped with a guard that contains the wire
rope within the sheave groove;
(iv) Attached to the base according to the design drawings, with
the anchorage being capable of sustaining at least eight (8) times the
resultant force of the horizontal and vertical loads transmitted by the
hoisting rope; and
(v) Designed and installed so that it turns the moving wire rope to
and from the horizontal or vertical direction as required by the
direction of rope travel.
(b) Directional change. The employer must ensure that the angle of
change in the hoist rope from the horizontal to the vertical direction
at the footblock is approximately 90[deg] (degrees).
(c) Diameter. The employer must ensure that the line diameter of
the footblock sheave is at least 24 times the diameter of the hoist
rope.
(d) Sheave substitute. The employer may substitute a properly
mounted sheave, as specified in Condition 9
[[Page 60916]]
below (``Cathead and Sheaves''), for the footblock described in this
condition.
9. Cathead and Sheaves
(a) Sheave support. The employer must use a cathead (i.e.,
``overhead support'') constructed of steel or aluminum that consists of
a wide-flange beam, or two (2) channel sections securely bolted back-
to-back, according to the design drawings, to prevent spreading.
(b) Installation. The employer must ensure that:
(i) All sheaves revolve on shafts that rotate on bearings; and
(ii) The bearings are mounted securely to maintain the proper
bearing position at all times.
(c) Rope guides. The employer must provide each sheave with
appropriate rope guides to prevent the hoist rope from leaving the
sheave grooves when the rope vibrates or swings abnormally.
(d) Diameter. The employer must use a sheave with a line diameter
that is at least 24 times the diameter of the hoist rope.
(e) Design basis. The employer must ensure that:
(i) The design of the cathead assembly conforms to the American
Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) Manual of Steel Construction or
the Aluminum Association's Aluminum Design Manual, whichever manual is
appropriate to the material used; and
(ii) The cathead has a safety factor of at least five (5) for
personnel and material hoisting.
(f) Clearance. The employer must provide:
(i) Adequate clearance so that there will be no contact between the
bottom of cathead and the cable attachment at the top of the hoist
cage; and
(ii) A path free of obstruction (clear travel) along the full
length of the guide ropes.
(g) Sheave substitute. The employer may substitute construction
blocks, of the type described in Condition 8(a)(i) above, for the top
sheaves. (Note: See also Condition 8(d) above.)
10. Guide Ropes
(a) Number and construction. The employer must:
(i) Securely affix two (2) guide ropes to the cathead or to
overhead supports designed for the purpose of accepting the guide
ropes; and
(ii) Ensure that the guide ropes:
(A) Consist of steel wire rope not less than one-half (1/2) inch
(1.3 cm) in diameter; and
(B) Be free of damage or defect at all times per 29 CFR
1926.552(c)(17)(iv).
(b) Guide rope fastening and alignment tension. During the hoisting
of personnel, the employer must ensure that one end of each guide rope
is fastened securely to the overhead support, and that appropriate
tension is applied at the foundation end of the rope.
(c) Height. The employer must install the guide ropes along the
entire height of hoist travel.
11. Personnel Cage
(a) Construction. The employer must ensure that the frame of the
personnel cage is capable of supporting a load that is eight (8) times
its rated load capacity. The employer also must ensure that the
personnel cage has:
(i) A top and sides that are permanently enclosed (except for the
entrance and exit);
(ii) A floor securely fastened in place;
(iii) Walls that consist of 14-gauge, one-half (1/2) inch expanded
metal mesh, or an equivalent material;
(iv) Walls that cover the full height of the personnel cage between
the floor and the overhead covering;
(v) A sloped roof constructed of at least three-sixteenth (3/16)
inch steel plate, or material of equivalent strength and impact
resistance, that slopes to the outside of the personnel cage;
(vi) Safe handholds (e.g., rope grips--but not rails or hard
protrusions when their presence creates an impact hazard) that
accommodate each occupant; and
(vii) Attachment points for workers to secure their personal fall-
arrest protection systems.
(b) Overhaul weight. The employer must ensure that the personnel
cage has an overhaul weight (e.g., a headache ball) to compensate for
the weight of the hoist rope between the cathead and footblock. In
addition, the employer must:
(i) Ensure that the overhaul weight is capable of preventing line
run; and
(ii) Use a means to restrain the movement of the overhaul weight so
that the weight does not interfere with safe personnel hoisting.
(c) Gate. The employer must ensure that the personnel cage has a
gate that:
(i) Guards the full height of the entrance opening; and
(ii) Has a functioning mechanical latch that prevents accidental
opening.
(d) Operating procedures. The employer must post the procedures for
operating the personnel cage conspicuously at the bottom landing.
(e) Capacity. The employer must:
(i) Ensure that the rated load capacity of the cage is at least 250
pounds for each occupant hoisted, or actual weight if the person
exceeds 250 pounds; and
(ii) Hoist at any one time no more than the number of occupants for
which the cage is designed.
(f) Worker notification. The employer must post a sign on each
personnel cage notifying workers of the following conditions:
(i) The standard rated load (in pounds), as determined by the
initial static drop-test specified by Condition 11(g) (``Static drop-
tests'');
(ii) The designated number of occupants for which the cage is
designed; and
(iii) Any reduction in rated load capacity (in pounds) if
applicable (e.g., due to a change in conditions of the specific job).
(g) Static drop-tests. The employer must:
(i) Conduct static drop tests of each personnel cage that comply
with the static drop-test procedures provided in Section 13
(``Inspections and Tests'') of American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) standard A10.22-2007 (``Safety Requirements for Rope-Guided and
Non-Guided Workers' Hoists'');
(ii) Perform the initial and subsequent static drop-tests at the
rated load of the personnel cage; and
(iii) Use a personnel cage for raising or lowering workers only
when no damage occurred to the components of the cage as a result of
the static drop-tests.
(h) Platform guides. The employer must provide:
(i) Adequate guards, beveled or cone-shaped attachments, or
equivalent devices at the underside of the working platform or on the
cage to prevent catching when the cage passes through the platform at
the top landing; and
(ii) Sufficient clearance or adequate guarding to prevent catching
or snagging when the cage passes through intermediate landings.
12. Safety Clamps
(a) Fit to the guide ropes. The employer must:
(i) Fit appropriately designed and constructed safety clamps to the
guide ropes; and
(ii) Ensure that the safety clamps do not damage the guide ropes
when the cage is in motion.
(b) Attach to the personnel cage. The employer must attach safety
clamps to each personnel cage for gripping the guide ropes.
(c) Operation. The employer must ensure that the safety clamps
attached to the personnel cage:
(i) Operate on the ``broken rope principle'';
(ii) Be capable of stopping and holding a personnel cage that is
carrying 100 percent of its maximum rated load and traveling at its
maximum allowable speed if the hoist rope breaks at the footblock; and
[[Page 60917]]
(iii) Use a pre-determined and pre-set clamping force (i.e., the
``spring compression force'') for each hoist system.
(d) Maintenance. The employer must keep the safety-clamp assemblies
clean and functional at all times.
13. Overhead Protection
The employer must provide overhead protection for workers to access
the bottom landing of the hoist system.
14. Emergency-Escape Device
(a) Location. For workers using a personnel cage, the employer must
provide an emergency-escape device, adequate to allow each worker being
hoisted to escape, in at least one of the following locations:
(i) In the personnel cage, provided that the device is long enough
to reach the bottom landing from the highest possible escape point; or
(ii) At the bottom landing, provided that a means is available in
the personnel cage for an occupant to raise the device to the highest
possible escape point.
(b) Operating instructions. The employer must ensure that written
instructions for operating the emergency-escape device are attached to
the device.
(c) Training. The employer must provide effective and documented
training, as specified by Condition 6(a)(iii) above, to each worker who
uses a personnel cage for transportation on how to operate the
emergency-escape device so as to effect a safe descent in case of an
emergency.
15. Personnel Platforms and Boatswain's Chairs
The employer must:
(a) Comply with the applicable requirements specified by paragraphs
(b) through (r) of 29 CFR 1926.1431, Hoisting personnel, when electing
to replace the personnel cage with a personnel platform in accordance
with Condition 2(g)(i);
(b) Comply with the applicable requirements specified by 29 CFR
1926.1431(s) and 1926.452(o)(3) when electing to replace the personnel
platform with a boatswain's chair in accordance with Condition
2(g)(ii).
16. Protecting Workers From Fall and Shearing Hazards
The employer must:
(a) Ensure that the hoist areas meet the requirements of 29 CFR
1926.501(b)(3) for hoist areas;
(b) Protect each worker in a hoist-way area from falling six (6)
feet or more to lower levels by using guardrail systems that meet the
requirements of 29 CFR 1926.502(b) or personal fall-arrest systems that
meet the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.502(d);
(c) Ensure that workers using personnel cages secure their fall-
arrest systems to attachment points located inside the cage if the door
of the personnel cage needs to be opened for emergency escape; and
(d) Provide safe access to and from personnel cages.
(e) Shearing hazards. The employer must:
(i) Provide workers who use personnel platforms or boatswain's
chairs with instruction on the shearing hazards posed by the hoist
system (e.g., work platforms, scaffolds), and the need to keep their
limbs or other body parts clear of these hazards during hoisting
operations;
(ii) Provide the instruction on shearing and struck-by hazards:
(A) Before a worker uses a personnel platform or boatswain's chair
at the worksite; and
(B) Periodically, and as necessary, thereafter, including whenever
a worker demonstrates a lack of knowledge about the hazards or how to
avoid the hazards, a modification occurs to an existing shearing or
struck-by hazard, or a new shearing or struck-by hazard develops at the
worksite; and
(iii) Attach a readily visible warning to each personnel platform
and boatswain's chair notifying workers in a language they understand
of potential shearing hazards they may encounter during hoisting
operations, and that uses the following (or equivalent) wording:
(A) For personnel platforms: ``Warning--To avoid serious injury,
keep your hands, arms, feet, legs, and other parts of your body inside
this platform while it is in motion''; and
(B) For boatswain's chairs: ``Warning--To avoid serious injury, do
not extend your hands, arms, feet, legs, or other parts your body from
the side or to the front of this chair while it is in motion.''
17. Exclusion Zone
The employer must:
(a) Establish a clearly designated exclusion zone around the bottom
landing of the hoist system designed to restrict the zone to authorized
persons only;
(b) The periphery of the exclusion zone must be:
(i) Designed to keep unauthorized persons out of the zone;
(ii) Well defined by visible boundary demarcation;
(iii) Established with entry and exit points; and
(iv) Posted with readily visible warning signs limiting access.
(c) During personnel hoisting, prohibit any worker from entering
the exclusion zone except authorized persons involved in accessing a
personnel cage, and then only when the device is at the bottom landing
and not in operation (i.e., when the drive components of the hoist
machine are disengaged and the braking mechanism is properly applied);
and
(d) When hoisting material with the personnel hoist system,
prohibit any worker from entering the exclusion zone except to access a
material-transport device, and then only when the device is near the
bottom landing for the purpose of loading, attaching, landing, or
tagging the load.
18. Inspections, Tests, and Accident Prevention
(a) The employer must initiate and maintain a program of frequent
and regular inspections of the hoist system and associated work areas
as required by 29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2) by:
(i) Ensuring that a competent person conducts daily visual checks
and weekly inspections of the hoist system, and an inspection before
reuse of the system following periods of idleness exceeding one week;
(ii) Ensuring that the competent person conducts tests and
inspections of the hoist system in accordance with 29 CFR
1926.552(c)(15); and
(iii) Ensuring that a competent person conducts weekly inspections
of the work areas associated with the use of the hoist system.
(b) If the competent person determines that the equipment
constitutes a safety hazard, the employer must remove the equipment
from service and not return the equipment to service until the employer
corrects the hazardous condition and has the correction approved by a
qualified person.
(c) The employer must maintain at the jobsite, for the duration of
the job, records of all tests and inspections of the hoist system, as
well as associated corrective actions and repairs.
19. Welding
(a) The employer must ensure that only welders qualified in
accordance with the requirements of the American Welding Society weld
components of the hoist system. Accordingly, these welders must meet
the qualification requirements of American Welding Society (AWS) D1.1
Structural Welding Code--Steel, or AWS D1.2 Structural Welding Code--
Aluminum, as applicable.
[[Page 60918]]
(b) The employer must ensure that these welders:
(i) Are familiar with the weld grades, types, and materials
specified in the design of the system; and
(ii) Perform the welding tasks in accordance with 29 CFR part 1926,
subpart J (``Welding and Cutting'').
20. OSHA Notification
(a) To assist OSHA in administering the conditions of this
variance, the employer must exercise due diligence in notifying the
Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities (OTPCA) at
OSHA's national headquarters, or the appropriate State-Plan Office, of:
(i) Any chimney-related construction operation using the conditions
specified herein, including the location of the operation and the date
the operation will commence, at least 15 calendar days prior to
commencing the operation;
(ii) Any emergency operation or short-notice project using the
conditions specified herein, and when 15 days are not available before
start of work, as soon as possible after the employer knows when the
operation will commence. This information must include the location and
date of the operation;
(b) The employer can notify OTPCA at OSHA's national headquarters
of pending chimney-related construction operations by:
(i) Telephone at 202 639-2110;
(ii) Facsimile at 202 693-1644; or
(iii) Email at VarianceProgram@dol.gov
(c) To assist OSHA in administering the conditions of this
variance, the employer must exercise due diligence by informing OTPCA
at OSHA's national headquarters as soon as possible after it has
knowledge that it will:
(i) Cease to do business;
(ii) Change the location and address of the main office for
managing the activities covered by this variance; or
(iii) Transfer the activities covered by this variance to a
successor company.
(d) OSHA must approve the transfer of this variance to a successor
company.
VII. Authority and Signature
David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC, authorized the preparation of
this notice. OSHA is issuing this notice under the authority specified
by 29 U.S.C. 655, Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (76 FR 3912;
Jan. 25, 2012), and 29 CFR part 1905.
Signed at Washington, DC, on September 24, 2013.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2013-23625 Filed 10-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P