osha or ansii???????

  • Thread starter Thread starter rich_h
  • Start date Start date
R

rich_h

Guest
I just returned from our winter meeting where we had a nice long chat with the local OSHA regulator. It seems that we have a BIG problem on our hand regarding crane use and OSHA regulations.

According to OSHA we ARE NOT allowed to have a climber tied into the crane ball EVER!!!!!!! TCIA and various other organizations spent a lot of time and energy to prove that having a climber ride the ball during crane removals is without a doubt the safest way to remove a tree. This and many other recommendations were put into the updated ANSII standards for the industry (z 133) and I thought that this meant that this was the standard that we would operate by.

As it turns out OSHA recognizes arborists (urban, utility, municipal) as LOGGERS, not a seperate field. Because of this we have to live by the LOGGING standards which flat out prohibit riding the crane ball at any time. When asked why there wasn't a different standard for our field which is obviously a completely different animal from logging we got no response. It seems that that is just the way it is. When asked why OSHA doesnt recognize our INDUSTRY standard that was made by our industry, is understood by our industry, and OSHA had plenty of opportunity to comment on during the process of updating the standard, the answer we got was...... check this out you will love it....

"your standards are just optional guidelines that you may or may not follow. Personally I hate that Z 133 standard more than any other one out there and we ABSOLUTELY DO NOT RECOGNIZE THIS STANDARD AS BEIGN LEGITIMATE."

Thanks for working with us tough guy!!!! All of this came about as recently there was a crane operator who was fined for haveing a climber on his crane ball. When the owner of the company pointed out the Z 133 standard the OSHA rep said " thats nice, heres your fine. IF you continue to operate with a climber on our ball we will shut you down"

Is there anyone out there who has had a similar problem? Is there a single crane or tree company that does not hook a climber to the ball? (incidentally this includes ANY attachement to the ball. Even on a welded ring or any other closed hook up on the ball, not just the ball itself)

And finally , why are we being regulated as loggers when clearly we are not loggers?
 
That's ridiculous. We set climbers on the ball all the time. Actually they ride on a rig placed above the ball. There is no way in the world this rig is going to fail, unless the wedge socket and ball fell off.
That OHSA guy needs to be a tad more open minded. How the heck are we supposed to remove critical risk trees without being attached to the ball?
The Z is a guide line, but 'safe work practices' are what keeps us alive.
 
I couldn't agree with you guys more, the problem is that it seems that we don't have much say in how we are being regulated. I know that many people on this site helped in preparing Z 133. The standards that they helped create are intended to identify and solve safety concerns and practices for our industry. I have not seen these "logging standards" that OSHA uses to regulate us, but my guess is that Z 133 will be more applicable to our situation.

Why OSHA would have representatives on the Z 133 committee and then not use the ANSII standard in regulating tree companies makes absolutely no sense to me.

We can actually take this a step further as well. BWC also has us listed under loggers, and therefore applies their accident history to making our BWC rates.

I am not saying I know a solution to this, but it seems that just about every company out there is in violation of the OSHA regulations for tree care. This makes me a little nervous about the next time one of their regulators is a little low on his penalty quota. All he has to do is look out the window and fine the first tree company he comes across.

If my understanding of this situation is incorrect, please let me know.
 
My 2 cents- RED TAPE SUCKS! We (Arborists) try to do our job in the safest mannor possible for ourselves and crew members! Short of the crane opperator swinging the climber into high voltage it is SAFEEST way to access a hazardous tree and do our job! Props to everyone in the position to fight the opposition!
 
I don't have copies of any of the regs handy just now, but maybe the guy was confused about what you were talking about or what the crane operator/climber were doing. So long as the climber isn't "on the ball" along with the load there should not be any problem.
 
Unfortunately this guy knew exactly what he was talking about. He is the guy who hands out the fines when companies are not in compliance to the rules and regulations for their industries. He works for OSHA and his office investigates all accidents and claims in our area.

His interpretation (and OSHA's) of the law is this:

Z 133 and all ANSI standards are NOT used in determining if a company is in compliance with industry practices.

The industry standards that count for us are apparantly the standards (non ANSI) used for the logging industry. I will try to get a hold of the actual standards and post them here. If anyone else has these I would love a copy of them.
 
It's been my experience that all too often the ones doing the "enforcing" don't really know or understand the regs. Trouble is that if you take them to task on it you run the high risk of becoming their pet "project" in life.

I wonder how impertinent this OSHA letter is?
 
Whoa, Rich.
Lotsa things wrong here... Glen is with PERRP, not OSHA. That is, the Public Employees Risk Reduction Program. Public Employees, not private. He can't touch, fine, regulate or say anything to you about what you do. It's not his job. I'll get you his contact information if you want clarification, or I'll get you in touch with the regulator for your portion of the state. Glen takes some pretty dry stuff and presents it well, but he's in the municipal program for a reason... The only reason OSHA is mentioned in the title of his talk is because he talked about it last year and it got left on the program. Glad to have you over in the municipal sessions, but this guy is only enforcing the rules he discussed on municipal crews. OSHA may feel exactly the same way as PEERP, but it didn't come from Glen. Heard your talks went well, by the way...
-Matt
 
Matt, sorry if I was wrong on some of that info. The incident in question actually occurred with a private company and that is why we needed some clarification. I realize that Glen may not have all the info regarding the commercial standards, but the gist of what he said still applies. As far as OSHA is concerned we are loggers and therefore must meet their standards as far as compliance with safety.

I hope no one feels that I am attacking the messenger here. It was the actual message that we need to deal with. I am sure that Glen has his hands full dealing with god knows how many issues on his plate. He answered our questions to the best of his ability and was honest about his feelings towards the z 133 standard. I will send him an email to thank him for his input and to make sure he doesnt feel that we are working against each other on this topic.

rich
 
This came from Peter Gerstenberger:

Ohio is subject to fed OSHA jurisdiction. I believe the person's statement is uninformed. It is true that OSHA once provided NAA/TCIA with an interpretation that said felling trees was logging regardless of the use of the wood. We challenged that and even testified before Congress and they withdrew their interpretation.

OSHA compliance directorate is supposed to be working on a new compliance directive - orders for their field folks - about arboriculture. We're supposed to help them. I don't have a timeframe.

Cranes - he is technically correct on load line. 30-year-old OSHA stds forbid it. OSHA will only use Z133 when it doesn't have a standard to apply. That's true in states under fed jurisdiction. Washington is an example of a state plan where Z is used as soon as someone leaves the ground. California as you may know has a tree access standard that allows riding the load line.
 
I was doing crane work for the utility and osha reps were on site. The tree was too far gone to rig or even use the crane. I tied into the crane above the ball and pieced the tree by hand. When we were done the rep said good job.
 
Todk (and anybody else) could you post a pic or two on how you tie in above the ball, with a brief description. It would definately help everyone I work with, including myself.
 
Here ya go Roger. A 17 ton screw pin shackle is placed on top of the ball. A 2' friction saver is placed over the pin. A locking carabiner is placed in the pin eye and the friction saver is placed through the biner. This keeps the pin from unscrewing. The friction saver keeps the rope from rubbing on the ball.
 

Attachments

  • 40623-RcrewZooncraneball.webp
    40623-RcrewZooncraneball.webp
    57.9 KB · Views: 184
[ QUOTE ]
A 17 ton screw pin shackle is placed on top of the ball.

[/ QUOTE ]


THAT SHACKLE SHOULD BE INVERTED!!!
 
Inverted...you mean end for end? PUt the false crotch on the curved end?

Not necessarily, I think. The biner locks the pin from turning and is clipped around the FC. How can the pin unscrew?

By setting it up that way the shackle has a chance of rotating. I'd rather have that than have the shackle jammed around the ball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom