Eye Protection ISA Competition rule

[Steve Connally]

In light of the conversation. The OSHA standard that references the shit I have to pay $75 dollars to understand how to keep my eyes safe (like its a secret worth $75)---money grab.

I would like to amend my stance on this issue. If it says Z87 then as far as I'm concerned go ahead and if you dont have adequate coverage and theres an injury then the Z87 people should field that. This fiasco is frustrating and not easy to solve so I quit. LOL

 

[ATH]

,,,,

Your point is well taken about the stamping on the frames. If it's stamped then it should be good? I guess. Gear check is funny. Whenever there's a question at gear check the person with the gear is requited to prove to the checker that X is ok and can be used in such a say with component Y. I guess, honestly I need to read Z87 and that osha standard. I think I may have said, in general I'll let glasses go as long as they're stamped at comps. You make a good point that if my glasses are stamped....what else could you ask of me to determine if I'm compliant? Its stamped.......
....

Got an email from ISA with the ITCC rules.
"2.3.14 Competitors, judges, technicians, and other approved individuals shall
wear approved eye protection at all times while inside the event safety
perimeter. Permission may be granted by the Event Head Judge for the
climber to stop and briefly remove approved eye protection for cleaning,
changing, etc. In such cases, the event timing will continue and not be
stopped. Approved eye protection shall be impact resistant, provide
wraparound eye protection, and be manufactured to meet or exceed the
minimum accepted industry safety standard." (emphasis added)

Why not just say Z87.1? I mean it kinda says that in the "minimum accepted industry safety standard" and Z133 3.3.6 says Z87.1 ... unless they have a different accepted industry safety standard in mind??? The ITCC rules say Z89 standard for helmets, so it seems really odd to introduce confusion here.

I think @ClimbingTN asked a fair question of the competitor about "wraparound" eye protection...but how is the competitor to know what the judge deems adequate?