< Back to Previous Page
It Does Not Represent All Slip And Fall Accidents Involving Death Or Serious Injury During This 9 Year Period
It does not represent all fall accidents involving death or serious injury during this 9 year period, however. For example, the years 1981 to 1984 are represented only by IBEW data, which includes only accidents that were reported by IBEW local unions during that period.
The term "high winds" is also used in paragraph (q)(4)(iv) of final 1910.269. OSHA believes that this term is somewhat vague and that further clarification is needed. Therefore, a definition of "high winds" has been incorporated in 1910.269(x). Winds are considered to be "high" if they are of such velocity (1) that employees would be exposed to being blown from elevated locations, or (2) that an employee or material handling equipment could lose control of material being handled, or (3) that the winds would expose employees to other hazards not controlled by the provisions of the standard involved (for example, winds strong enough to move energized conductors far enough to reduce the minimum approach distance to less than that required under paragraph l). Additionally, the Agency has included a compliance guideline of 40 miles per hour (30 miles per hour if material handling is involved). Winds beyond this speed are normally considered as being hazardous unless additional precautions are taken to protect employees. At this point, the danger that a worker will be blown off a structure or that workers will lose control of parts of a structure being assembled presents a significant risk to employees. The Agency has used this guideline in enforcing similar standards in the past. (See, for example, 55 FR 13397.) It should be noted that if wind is present in combination with other conditions such as snow or ice, it could be hazardous to climb the pole or structure even if the guideline is not exceeded. The standard requires fall protection to be used in such cases.
It should be noted that the conditions listed in the rule are not the only ones warranting the use of fall protection. Other factors mentioned in the record as affecting the risk of an employee's falling include the level of competence of the employee, the condition of a pole or structure, the configuration of attachments on a pole (Ex. 3-112), and the need to have both hands free for climbing (Ex. 3-18). In fact, OSHA believes that climbing without the use of fall protection is only safe if the employee is using his or her hands to hold onto the structure while he or she is climbing. If the employee is not holding onto the structure (for example, because the employee is carrying tools or equipment in his or her hands), fall protection is required under the final rule. The video tapes entered into the record by EEI (Ex. 12-6), which they claimed represented typical, safe climbing practices in the utility industry, demonstrate employees using their hands to provide extra support and balance. Climbing in this manner will enable an employee to continue to hold onto the structure in case his or her foot slips. If the employee is not using his or her hands for additional support, he or she would be much more likely to fall as a result of a slip.
|
