Scenario: Structural Steel Lateral Brace Fit-Up & Connection: TP (Trades Professional) was observed and addressed for standing on the top guardrails of an Arial Device for an extended period of time while connecting the piece.
Technical Opinion: This case typifies a larger, longstanding, and mainly unaddressed safety concern in construction and maintenance activities. Based upon my experience, this is neither the first nor the last time this issue will present itself. This particular case involves the use of an Aerial Device with the man-basket positioned at the connection termination and approximately 12 to 15-feet from grade.
- When collaborating with contractor EHS Teams, their responses often illustrate a “worker blame” type reaction to matters such as these. Firms (whether they like it or not) are responsible for ongoing Fall Hazard Assessments and for training their employees in the recognition of Fall Hazards encountered when working aloft from Aerial Devices, as well as in fall protection systems, installations, and safe practices. Having said that, not all training is created equally, and it wouldn’t be quite right (in most cases) to characterize TPs (Trades Professionals) as Fall Protection Subject Matter Experts. Presumably, the on-site EHS Representatives and the Corporate Safety Team would provide support as needs or gaps are encountered. ?
- An argument could be made that this operation is more a true Steel Erection activity (rather than a true Electrical Construction activity) which might be conducted by Lineman and Substation Techs as the case may be. In Steel Erection activities, outside of the Electrical Construction domain, we typically have moved beyond the use of single legged, fixed length, web-type lanyards, as these aren’t considered industry leading (or compliant with regulations) in their ability to arrest falls in the shortest possible distance (some models arrest falls within 24-inches). Typical 6-foot lanyards also require a significantly longer deployment distance (approximately 18 to 19-feet Fall Clearance Distance – depending upon product characteristics). When dealing with Electrical Construction, we almost always see TPs utilizing single leg, fixed type lanyards. Fact is, the connecting means deployed by workers in Aerial Devices is meant to restrict their ability to be thrown from the man-basket in transit, to protect them in the event of “tip-outs”, and from overextending outside of the man-basket guardrails during construction activities. Fall Arrest from an elevated work position is not typically the primary function of the Fall Protection Equipment (though it can be), as operators should have their feet planted firmly on the man-basket floor at all times.
- A Retractable Device or Personal Fall Limiter, that is integral to the Full Body Harness, which is double legged, wire type (where allowable), and is Leading Edge compliant, is viewed as more advantageous in a dynamic construction setting. These are almost never observed in Electrical Construction, unfortunately. Even when Aerial Device operators transit between locations, the Aerial Device man-basket is kept at a relatively low elevation with respect to grade. This often causes the hazard of contacting the ground if the operator is bounced out of the man-basket in transit while wearing a 6-foot, fixed lanyard.
- While impermissible (1926.453(b)(2)(iv) and dangerous, workers climbing on Aerial Device guardrails to gain a work position is quite common across industry segments. The professional expectation is that firms proactively enforce the applicable rules and regulations, be transparent concerning work access challenges, and work to devise safe and suitable resolutions on a case-by-case basis. Instead, many (including Safety Professionals and Supervisors) observe these actions in the field and choose to turn and walk away – which is what is happening at present across industry segments. The alternative default action is usually firing the violator.
Historically, we’ve been challenged to develop resolutions to this very issue from the contractor side. Those consisted of transparency and close collaboration with clients and customers, complete analysis of the hazards and residual risks, working with Aerial Device manufacturers, and developing documented processes or permits (only as applicable and allowable), and in compliance with OSHA Letter of Interpretation dated February 2, 2004, and OSHA Memorandum dated August 22, 2011. Additionally, an Aerial Device and Personal Fall Arrest Systems training needs assessment is especially pertinent in these instances.
As relates to exiting an Aerial Device and connecting Fall Protection Equipment to adjacent structures or skeletal steel prohibited by §1926.453(b)(2)(iii) – “Belting off to an adjacent pole, structure, or equipment while working from an aerial lift shall not be permitted.” ?
OSHA LOI: February 2. 2004; Russell B. Swanson, Director – OSHA Directorate of Construction, states:
“However, limited situations may exist where an adjacent structure poses no reasonably foreseeable risk of failure. For example, such an instance might arise where the adjacent structure is a completed building or a completed (i.e., fully bolted-up) skeletal steel structure. In those instances, OSHA would consider the violation of §1926.453(b)(2)(iii) to be de minimis and no citation would be issued.”
- Trades Professionals should not climb on, or stand on Aerial Device guardrails, and it’s very likely that they have been trained not to take such actions. The workers bear the ultimate responsibility for taking those actions. However, it seems to me that in most cases the worker is not receiving adequate technical support to overcome these types of challenges in the field, and the EHS Program employed by the contractors does not allow for a process of swiftly interceding to analyze the challenge, bring it to the fore, and present a safe and effective resolution.
- The primary focus of this technical opinion has dealt with the OSHA position and is largely in advocacy of the worker technical support needs. The employer, in all cases, sets the tone for its level of risk tolerance in construction and maintenance activities, and with regard to its OSHA compliance methodology. Firms establish this tolerance by way of their corporate safety policies, procedures, initiatives, and training. In many cases, the employers’ policies will exceed those promulgated by OSHA and pertinent partner consensus standards. We must be sensitive to, and respect the employers’ risk tolerance and policies, which may specifically prohibit their employees from exiting Aerial Devices and/or attaching Fall Protection connecting means to adjacent structures under any circumstances. This is the case irrespective of OSHA’s position or the opinions of external SMEs. In any case, the conversations regarding these types of construction challenges should be actioned.
Conclusion: Respectfully. Does a disciplinary intervention, up to and including termination, address these ongoing work access challenges? When professional supervisions folks willfully turn a blind eye to these types of challenges, are the workers, the contractors, and the customers protected from intensified risks posed by same? Perhaps the synergistic effect of enhanced worker Aerial Device and Fall Protection training, a robustly applied process of ongoing Fall Hazard Assessment employed by the contractors, and the arrival of improved Aerial Devices and Fall Protection Equipment could adequately address the challenges faced in these instances. But only if the phrase often uttered, “See something…say something” has real meaning. Its my belief that people want to be part of a proactive, robustly applied, and dynamic EHS Program. The most consequential part of actualizing that kind of program lies in its aspirants’ ability to boldly confront longstanding, often “silent” construction challenges in the light of day. We don’t want the default result to be something like success via good fortune as this is neither a safe nor sustainable approach. While it’s never a good idea to prescribe a particular Aerial Device or Fall Protection Equipment approach to entities (beyond compelling them to comply with OSHA regulations and their own corporate safety policies), Team collaboration and consultation sometimes becomes necessary to reduce worker exposure to risks regarding both.??
