Last month OSHA issued a letter of interpretation clarifying the use of a stepladder as a straight (non-self-supporting) ladder even if the bottom of the ladder is footed.

Letter #200801220-8196

Re: Using a stepladder as a non-self-supporting ladder

Question: 29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(4) requires ladders to be used only for the purpose for which they were designed. Some manufacturers have indicated a concern that a self-supporting ladder might slip out and cause someone to fall if it is used as a non-self-supporting ladder.

Scenario: A stepladder (which is a type of’ self-supporting ladder) is used as a non-self-supporting ladder, but the bottom of the ladder is either “footed” (that is, another person keeps their foot on the bottom to keep the ladder from slipping) or the ladder is tied off at the bottom to prevent the bottom from slipping out.

Would the use of a stepladder as described above violate 29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(4)? If so, would such use be a de minimis violation?

Answer: In 29 CFR 1926 Subpart X, 1926.1053(b)(4) states:

Ladders shall be used only for the purpose for which they were designed. [Emphasis added]
Thus, using a stepladder as a non-self-supporting ladder would violate §1926.1053(b)(4) if the ladder were not designed for that purpose. The particular design of a stepladder varies from manufacturer to manufacturer. Therefore, whether or not the scenario you describe constitutes a violation of §1926.1053(b)(4) would depend on whether such use is consistent with the purpose intended by the manufacturer.

It is our understanding that self-supporting ladders, including stepladders, typically, are not designed to be used as non-self-supporting ladders unless otherwise indicated by the manufacturer. For example, note that paragraph 8.3.1.2 of ANSI A14.1-1982 and ANSI-ASC A14.1-2007 state that, “[s]elf-supporting ladders shall not be used as single ladders or in the partially closed position” [emphasis added].1 Note, also, that ANSI-ASC A14.1-2007 defines “single ladder” as a “non-self-supporting portable ladder, nonadjustable in length, consisting of one section.” Statements from manufacturers indicating a concern that a self-supporting ladder might slip out and cause someone to fall, if used as a non-self-supporting ladder, would be consistent with these ANSI provisions.

Typically, having a coworker hold the ladder, or using rope to attempt to restrain the ladder at its base, would not be considered substitutes for this requirement. We note that, for example, slip-out is not the only hazard that can result from using a ladder differently than in accordance with its design.

Furthermore, 1926.1053(a)(2) states:

Ladder rungs, cleats, and steps shall be . . . level . . . when the ladder is in position for use. [Emphasis added]
Stepladders are typically designed so that the rungs are level when the ladder is in the open and locked position and the ladder is placed on a stable and level surface. Consequently, it is likely that positioning a stepladder for use as a non-self-supporting ladder would result in the ladder’s rungs being out-of-level, which would violate 1926.1053(a)(2).

Sincerely,

Richard E. Fairfax, Acting Director
Directorate of Construction

Top Stories

PITTSBURGH — The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has cited Mariani & Richards Inc. for failing to protect workers from falls on a construction site following the investigation of a worker who fell 225 feet to his death.

OSHA began its investigation on Aug. 18, 2009, and found that Mariani & Richards did not provide workers with any fall protection while they were performing maintenance on The Pennsylvanian Building, a historic landmark in downtown Pittsburgh. As a result of the investigation, the company has been cited with one willful violation and a proposed penalty of $70,000.

“This company was cited for the same violation in November 2007 but never took the proper steps to ensure workers were safe at this worksite, resulting in this tragedy,” said Robert Szymanski, director of OSHA’s Pittsburgh office. “OSHA will not tolerate employers who flagrantly ignore the regulations designed to protect workers on the job.”

Top Stories

Owner pleads guilty to related criminal charge

Federal OSHA has fined the C.A. Franc construction company $539,000 following the investigation of a roofing worker who fell 40 feet to his death at a Washington worksite. The Valencia, Pa.-based roof installer – whose owner is Christopher A. Franc – was cited for 10 per instance willful citations for failing to protect workers from falls.

“Mr. Franc knowingly and willfully failed to protect his workers from falling to their death,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. “Despite repeated requests from workers that he provide fall protection, on this steep roof, Mr. Franc refused to provide readily available protection. We will not tolerate this type of blatant and egregious disregard for the health and safety of workers.”

OSHA began its investigation immediately following the worker’s death on Aug. 15, 2009, and found the C.A. Franc company had failed to provide any fall protection to its employees working on a pitched roof 40 feet off the ground. In addition, Mr. Franc failed to train a newly hired college student in hazards and the necessary safety measures for roofing work. As a result of the investigation, the company has been cited for 10 alleged per-instance willful violations, one for each employee working unprotected on the roof, with a proposed penalty of $490,000, and one additional alleged willful violation for failing to train the new employee, with a penalty of $49,000.

General contractor Hospitality Builders Inc. also has been cited with one willful violation and a proposed penalty of $70,000 for failing to ensure that C.A. Franc workers had fall protection.

“This fall fatality was one of five that occurred during a 15-day span in the Pittsburgh area,” said John M. Hermanson, OSHA’s regional administrator in Philadelphia, Pa. “Falls are the leading cause of fatalities in the construction industry. Failure to provide employees with fall protection is unconscionable. We urge construction companies to take the necessary action to ensure their workers are protected.”

OSHA Believes that they have detailed information about fall hazards and safeguards is available on it’s Web site at http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/fallprotection/construction.html.

In a related criminal charge, Christopher A. Franc today entered a guilty plea in federal court to a violation of 29 U. S. C. Section 666(e). Sentencing is scheduled for June 18.

Top Stories

Investigations reveal combustible dust, noise, lack of machine guards, and guardrails producing over $250,000 in fines

Federal OSHA is proposing 41 safety and health violations against Birdsong Corp.’s facilities in Sylvester and Blakely, Ga.

According to Robert Vazzi (OSHA Area Director) “Our inspections, and a worker fatality at the Blakely plant, show the need for management to get serious about the safety and health of its employees.”

OSHA began an inspection of Birdsong’s Sylvester plant in June 2009. Compliance officers found 21 serious safety violations and one other-than-serious safety violation, including lack of machine guards, fall hazards, electrical hazards, a lack of emergency lighting and unmarked exit doors. In July 2009, a separate inspection was opened to address possible noise hazards at the plant, resulting in three serious and one other-than-serious health violations.

In September 2009, OSHA moved on to the company’s Blakely, Ga., facility following a fatality at the site in which a worker was caught in a conveyor belt. That investigation led to the issuance of three serious safety violations and one other-than-serious safety violation, including lack of machine guarding and lack of guardrails.

During the course of the fatality investigation, the compliance officer grew concerned about possible combustible dust hazards at the plant. A separate combustible dust inspection was begun and resulted in the issuance of 11 serious violations.

The inspections resulted in proposed penalties of $137,250, $88,200 for the Sylvester plant and $49,050 for the Blakely plant.

Birdsong Corp. is headquartered in Suffolk, Va., and has facilities in Georgia, Texas and Virginia.

Top Stories

Do you think the ladder access point to this platform meets the OSHA standard for guarding?

OSHA’s general industry standard dealing with walking and working surfaces 1910.23(c) “Protection of open-sided floors, platforms, and runways.” Section (1) states the following: Every open-sided floor or platform 4 feet or more above adjacent floor or ground level shall be guarded by a standard railing (or the equivalent as specified in paragraph (e)(3) of this section) on all open sides except where there is an entrance to a ramp, stairway, or fixed ladder.

If you just read that section of the standard it would be reasonable to think you must have protection around all open sides of this platform except the entry point where there are stairs, ramps, or fixed ladders.

However, a recent memo written by Richard Fairfax, Director of OSHA Enforcement has a different take on this issue.

In his letter Mr. Fairfax states that the governing requirement for the guarding of ladderway floor openings and platforms is not in paragraph 1910.23 (c) but rather in paragraph 1910.23(a)(2): that states: “Every ladderway floor opening or platform shall be guarded by a standard railing with standard toeboard on all exposed sides (except at entrance to opening), with the passage through the railing either provided with a swinging gate or so offset that a person cannot walk directly into the opening.”

Mr. Fairfax goes on to state: “This paragraph applies to ladders that extend to another working surface, even if the ladder attaches to the edge of the working surface or the platform, since the opening at the ladder access point is also a floor opening. The ladders states the passage through the railing must be protected by a swinging gate or offset so that a person cannot walk directly into the opening.”

OSHA believes the intent of the exemption in paragraph (c) was to allow other than a standard, fixed, guardrail at the entrance to a fixed ladder.

Simply put, if you have a fixed ladder access to a floor or platform four feet or more above the adjacent floor or ground level, whether it is through an opening in the platform or along the edge, the access point to that floor or platform must be guarded by either an acceptable swing gate or a railing offset so the person cannot walk directly into that opening.

Top Stories

The U.S. CPSC, announced today a voluntary recall of EXO-Tech Safety Harnesses.

90 of the EXO-Tech Safety Harnesses sold by Gorilla Inc., of Flushing, Michigan were recalled due to Fall Hazard.  These units were sold at Cabelas, Bass Pro and at various sporting goods stores nationwide from May 2009 to August 2009 for about $200.  These harnesses were manufactured in the Philippines.

The webbing of the waist belt on the safety harness is not routed through the lineman’s loop located on the front of the harness near waist level. Since the loops are not properly anchored to the harness webbing but are attached only through stitching not intended to restrain a user during a fall, they that can pull away from the harness when force is applied, leaving the user unrestrained.  So far no incidents were reported.

This safety harness, used as a fall restraint for hunting, is comprised of two leg straps and two shoulder straps, which connect to a waist belt and padded back support. There is a long, black tether strap at the top rear of the safety harness, which has grey and red accents. The name EXO-Tech is located on the right front shoulder strap and the name Gorilla is located on the left front should strap both in white lettering. Similar to a shirt tag, there is a white manufacturing label on the inside of the back of the harness with the model number 45111 and manufacturing dates, 4/22/2009 or 6/26/2009. These are the only harnesses recalled.

Consumers should immediately stop using the harness and contact Gorilla Inc. to receive a refund.

For additional information, contact Gorilla Inc. at (877) 685-7817 between 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. ET Monday through Friday or visit the firm’s Web site at www.gorillatreestands.com. Consumers can also write to the firm at Gorilla, Inc., P.O. 378, Flushing, MI., 48433 or 3475 Eastman Drive, Flushing, MI. 48433.

CPSC is still interested in receiving incident or injury reports that are either directly related to this product recall or involve a different hazard with the same product. Please tell us about it by visiting https://www.cpsc.gov/cgibin/incident.aspx

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from thousands of types of consumer products under the agency’s jurisdiction. The CPSC is committed to protecting consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical, or mechanical hazard. The CPSC’s work to ensure the safety of consumer products - such as toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters, and household chemicals - contributed significantly to the decline in the rate of deaths and injuries associated with consumer products over the past 30 years.

To report a dangerous product or a product-related injury, call CPSC’s Hotline at (800) 638-2772 or CPSC’s teletypewriter at (301) 595-7054. To join a CPSC e-mail subscription list, please go to https://www.cpsc.gov/cpsclist.aspx. Consumers can obtain recall and general safety information by logging on to CPSC’s Web site at www.cpsc.gov.

Top Stories

New Place Carpentry faces $308,500 in US Labor Department OSHA fines for fall hazards at 2 Massachusetts work sites.

New Place Carpentry, a New Haven, Conn., contractor with a long history of fall protection violations, faces a total of $308,500 in new fines from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for willful and repeat fall hazards following the agency’s inspections at worksites in Plymouth and Methuen, Mass.

The contractor, which primarily performs residential framing work, has been cited by OSHA eight times since July 2003. Fines from earlier investigations total $171,700 for failing to provide fall protection and other required safeguards for workers at job sites in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island.

“The sizable fines proposed here reflect the gravity of these hazards and this employer’s ongoing refusal to comply with basic, commonsense and legally required protections for its workers,” said Marthe Kent, OSHA’s New England regional administrator. “Falls remain the number one killer in construction work. Employers who repeatedly fail to provide and ensure fall protection continue to place their workers’ lives at needless risk.”

Both of the latest inspections found workers engaged in residential construction work at heights greater than six feet without any form of fall protection. In addition, workers at the Plymouth site were working on unguarded, inadequately constructed and uninspected scaffolds, and were not trained to recognize scaffold hazards, while workers at the Methuen site were installing roof trusses without fall protection, lacked fall protection training and accessed an upper work surface via a ladder that did not extend above the surface for required stability.

Additional hazards identified at the job sites include gasoline-powered equipment left running while being refueled, power tools lowered to the ground by their cords, untrained fork truck operators, no fire extinguishers, debris with protruding nails in work areas, no hardhats where overhead hazards were present and no eye protection for workers using nail guns.

All told, based on the recent inspections, New Place Carpentry has been issued one willful, six repeat and 13 serious citations. OSHA defines a willful violation as one committed with plain indifference to or intentional disregard for employee safety and health, while serious citations are issued when death or serious physical harm is likely to result from hazards about which the employer knew or should have known.

The company has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and proposed penalties to comply, meet with OSHA or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. The inspections were conducted by OSHA’s Braintree and Andover, Mass., area offices.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, OSHA’s role is to promote safe and healthful working conditions for America’s men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, outreach and education. For more information, visit:

http://www.osha.gov

Top Stories

Chairs made in China and sold by Office Depot Stores have been recalled due to fall hazard by Raynor Marketing.

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with the firm named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.

150,000 of the Quantum Realspace PRO™ 9000 Series Mid-Back Multifunction Mesh Chair and Multifunction Mesh Chair with Headrest were sold through Raynor Marketing LTD, of West Hempstead, N.Y.  The manufacturer is Comfort Office Furniture, LTD, China aka Evergood Co. Ltd.

The bolts attaching the seat back on the recalled chairs can loosen and detach, posing a fall and injury hazard to consumers. Raynor has received reports of 33 seatback detachments and 14 injuries involving bumps and bruises.

This recall involves the Quantum Realspace PRO™ 9000 Series Mid-Back Multifunction Mesh Chair SKU # 510830 and the Quantum Realspace PRO™ 9000 Series Mesh Chair with Headrest SKU # 690690. The Realspace PRO™ Mesh Guest Chair is not involved in this recall.

These chairs were sold Exclusively at Office Depot stores nationwide and on the Web at www.OfficeDepot.com from May 2006 through August 2009. The mid-back chairs sold for about $300 and the chair with headrest for about $350.

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled office chairs and contact Raynor to receive a free repair kit.

Consumer Contact: For additional information and to receive a free repair kit, contact Raynor toll free at (866) 244-8180 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday or visit the firm’s Web site at www.Quantumchair.com/recall

CPSC is still interested in receiving incident or injury reports that are either directly related to this product recall or involve a different hazard with the same product. Please tell us about it by visiting: https://www.cpsc.gov/cgibin/incident.aspx

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from thousands of types of consumer products under the agency’s jurisdiction. The CPSC is committed to protecting consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical, or mechanical hazard. The CPSC’s work to ensure the safety of consumer products - such as toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters, and household chemicals - contributed significantly to the decline in the rate of deaths and injuries associated with consumer products over the past 30 years.

To report a dangerous product or a product-related injury, call CPSC’s Hotline at (800) 638-2772 or CPSC’s teletypewriter at (301) 595-7054. To join a CPSC e-mail subscription list, please go to https://www.cpsc.gov/cpsclist.aspx. Consumers can obtain recall and general safety information by logging on to CPSC’s Web site at:

www.cpsc.gov.

Top Stories

OSHA has cited Industrial Pipe Fittings LLC (IPF) for 47 alleged serious violations following an inspection at the company’s facility in Corsicana.

OSHA’s Fort Worth Area Office began its inspection on April 20 when a worker had his hand crushed in-between a rotating, unguarded drum drive wheel and pipe while performing an overwrapping operation at the drum drive wheel machine station. The serious violations include failing to provide machine guarding on lathes, drum drive wheels and saws; provide fall protective equipment, ensure workers are protected from electrical hazards, provide training for forklift operations and hazard communication.

“This company failed to provide a safe and healthful working environment for its workers,” said Zachary Barnett, OSHA’s area director in Fort Worth. “If OSHA’s standards were followed, it is possible this serious injury could have been avoided.”

The other-than-serious violations included failing to meet OSHA’s respiratory requirements by informing workers of the precautions and use of wearing a respirator and failing to provide a written personal protective equipment hazard assessment.

Top Stories

OSHA levies hefty $518,520 fine on All-Feed Processing and packaging Inc. for willfully violating OSHA standards.

GALVA, Ill. — The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has cited All-Feed Processing and Packaging Inc. in Galva, Ill., with alleged serious, repeat, willful and failure to abate citations of federal workplace safety and health standards. Proposed fines total $518,520.

OSHA began its safety and health inspections at the pet food research and packaging facility in response to a fire in April that sent three workers to a local hospital. The resulting inspection revealed nine alleged willful, four serious, two repeat and two failure to abate violations.

Hazards identified as willful violations addressed the lack of explosion prevention systems for combustible dust, inadequate housekeeping where dust could accumulate, insufficient personal protective equipment, training deficiencies, failure to lockout energy sources during maintenance and other lockout/tagout issues, and the lack of warning signs where combustible dust was being processed. OSHA defines a willful violation as one committed with plain indifference to or intentional disregard for employee safety and health.

Serious violations included fall hazards and issues pertaining to employees entering or working in confined spaces where a variety of hazards could be present. A serious citation is issued when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

The repeat violation cites the company’s failure to compile a list of hazardous chemicals used at the plant and the failure to include such a list in the hazardous communication program, and for the lack of proper employee training. The company had been previously cited for these violations and had agreed to correct the problems but had not done so. The failure to abate violations included use of flexible cords as a substitute for fixed wiring and equipment and wiring was not approved for hazardous locations.

“Recent events have shown the damage that can result from the failure to control dust and dust explosions,” said OSHA Area Director Nick Walters, Peoria, Ill. “The cost of human life and health is far too great a price to pay for anyone to ignore this hazard. All of us want to see working men and women go home safe at the end of every work shift.”

In business since 1997, the company has been inspected by OSHA on seven occasions since January 2000. These inspections have resulted in the issuance of 31 serious, nine willful, four repeat and seven other-than-serious citations.

The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an informal conference with the OSHA area director in Peoria or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, OSHA’s role is to promote safe and healthful working conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, outreach and education. For more information, visit

Top Stories