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

Federal OSHA issued three Mueller Industries Inc. subsidiaries in Fulton Mississippi 128 citations for allegedly exposing workers to safety and health hazards. The privately-held corporation headquartered in Memphis, Tenn., owns and operates 20 facilities located in eight states and two foreign countries.

OSHA began its investigation in July 2009 after a maintenance worker employed by Mueller Copper Tube Co. Inc., a subsidiary of Mueller Industries, was killed, and two other workers were injured when naphtha, a flammable liquid of hydrocarbon mixtures, leaked from an electric pump and ignited.

“Mueller Industries subsidiaries’ dangerous practices exposed workers at their facilities to a variety of hazards that ultimately took one worker’s life,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. “The significant fines of $683,000 cannot replace this worker’s life or bring peace to the family, but they will go a long way in letting this employer know disregarding worker safety and health will not be tolerated.”

Mueller Copper Tube has been issued willful, repeat and serious citations. A willful citation with a penalty of $40,000 alleges the failure to repair a corroded live electrical disconnect, which exposed workers to electrical shock. Ten repeat citations with penalties of $150,000 allege failure to guard machinery; unsafe electrical equipment and practices; and failure to label hazardous chemicals. Sixty-nine serious citations, with proposed penalties of $223,500, allege unsafe cranes; fall hazards; unsafe ladders; blocked and inadequate exits; unsafe flammable liquid and compressed gas use and storage; locking out hazardous energy sources during maintenance and service; a lack of machine guards; unsafe electrical equipment and practices; and failure to establish a respiratory protection program.

The initial safety inspection at Mueller Cooper Tube was expanded to include Mueller Fittings LLC and Mueller Packaging LLC, two additional subsidiaries of Mueller Industries. Mueller Fittings has been issued 22 serious citations, with penalties of $64,000, alleging the failure to lock out energy sources, unsafe propane storage and handling, overexposure to noise, unsafe material storage, and the likelihood of exposure to bloodborne pathogens. Eight repeat citations also have been issued, with penalties of $102,500, alleging a lack of machine guarding, electrical hazards and the inadequate labeling of hazardous chemicals.

Mueller Packaging has been issued 12 serious citations, with penalties of $28,000, alleging unsafe crane operation, failing to lock out sources of hazardous energy, hazardous chemical exposures, and overexposure to noise; five repeat citations, with penalties of $75,000, alleging an unsafe forklift modification, electrical hazards and inadequate labeling under the hazard communication standard; and one other-than-serious violation, with no penalty, for an electrical deficiency.

Top Stories

OSHA has cited International Masonry Inc. in Columbus Ohio with proposed penalties totaling $140,800 for alleged serious and willful violations of federal workplace safety standards after investigating the death of a worker.

International Masonry Inc. has been cited with three willful violations. The proposed penalties of $112,000 are for allegedly modifying the manufacturer’s designed outrigger brackets on scaffolding, not ensuring scaffolding was properly secured to prevent tipping and not ensuring bracing was installed according to manufacturer’s recommendations.The company also has received citations for seven serious violations, with proposed fines of $28,000. Some of the violations address the company’s failure to ensure that power industrial-truck operators were properly trained; failure to repair or replace damaged scaffolding components; guardrail not properly installed; and ladders not used as required, according to safety standards. The company also received an other-than-serious violation with a fine of $800 for not maintaining proper recordkeeping logs.

“Fatalities and injuries of workers due to falls from scaffolding are very much preventable if proper safety procedures are adhered to,” said Deborah Zubaty, OSHA’s area director in Columbus. “OSHA will use all legal measures to ensure that employers that willfully ignore OSHA safety regulations come into compliance. We want workers to return home, safe and healthy, at the end of every shift.”

OSHA conducted their inspection in July 2009 following the fatality of a worker who fell approximately 37 feet after the scaffolding he and two other workers were on collapsed. The family owned company, which employs approximately 100 people, specializes in masonry and stonework construction and has had 59 previous OSHA inspections resulting in 41 violations since 1973, including a fatality inspection in 2002.

Top Stories