|
Archives
Raising Concerns Over OSHA Proposed Confined Space Rule
In a letter sent to the Assistant Secretary of Labor Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.,
the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) said the proposed rule on Confined
Spaces in Construction recently published by the U.S. Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) is unduly complicated, introduces unnecessary
new
terminology and requirements that are burdensome, and fails to recognize current
safety practices that have proven successful in practice both in general industry
and in construction. “These comments reflect the front-line experience
of our members who strive to help protect workers on job sites across the country
in all industries, including construction,” ASSE President Michael W. Thompson,
CSP, said in a letter. “They also reflect the expertise of the members
of the ANSI Z117 Accredited Standards Committee for Confined Space Entry, for
which ASSE serves as the Secretariat.”
ASSE has more than 31,000 occupational safety, health and environmental professional
members located worldwide and is responsible for several American National
Standards Institute (ANSI) Committees including the Z117 Committee For ‘Confined
Spaces’ as well as the A10 Committee for ‘Safety Requirements for
Construction and Demolition Operations’. “This rule, if adopted without
significant changes, would provide for a significantly lower level of safety
than what is currently required throughout the construction industry by the Z117.1-2003
standard,” Thompson wrote. “Rulemaking that provides less worker
protection than that provided by a widely adopted voluntary consensus standard
like Z117.1 goes against OSHA’s duty established under the ‘National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995’.”
This Act states that all federal agencies and departments shall use technical
standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies,
using such technical standards as a means to carry out policy objectives or
activities determined by the agencies and departments.
Further, rather than adding clarity or advancing safety consistent with current
industry safety practices, Thompson wrote, the changes offered in this proposed
rule instead add a new level of complexity to the work of our members and employers
while adding little new to the approaches already successfully being used to
address confined space risks. It also fails to address important confined space
topics including harmonization of confined space classifications, hazard assessment,
assignment of responsibilities, and the continued allowance of a chest harness
as part of a vertical confined space rescue effort.
According to the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) “Confined
Space” refers to a space which by design has limited openings for entry
and exit, unfavorable natural ventilation which could contain or produce dangerous
air contaminants, and which is not intended for continuous employee occupancy.
Confined spaces include but are not limited to storage tanks, compartments
of ships, process vessels, pits, silos,
vats, degreasers, reaction vessels, boilers, ventilation and exhaust ducts,
sewers, tunnels, underground utility vaults, and pipelines.
Thompson was also concerned that this rule is not in harmony with the widely
accepted Z117.1-2003 consensus standard ‘Safety Requirements for Confined
Spaces’. A comparison of Z117.1 to the proposed rule demonstrates that
the existing General Industry regulations together with Z117.1 does have the
necessary scope, breadth and detail to help employers manage successfully confined
space safety matters within the construction industry. It is apparent that the
standards used in OSHA’s evaluations were outdated 1977 and 1989 standards
no longer affirmed by the Z117 Committee. The Committee published 1995 and
2003 editions that have been used by OSHA to support over 50 general duty clause
citations
issued by compliance officers to employees.
In the letter, Thompson included examples of how Z117.1 has been used by
OSHA with regard to the General Duty Clause and provided comments from ASSE
members
that reflect the variety of misdirected conclusions and statements found in
the proposed rule.
“
Taken as a whole, they point to rulemaking that is not complete and that has
not been undertaken with the purpose of finding a way to work with those who
are experts in confined space safety in order to advance properly this nation’s
commitment to protecting workers,” Thompson said. “ASSE is deeply
concerned that OSHA decided against using terminology and definitions in its
proposed standard that have existed for decades, are widely used in the safety
and health community and in industry when addressing confined space risks to
workers. Creating a new lexicon for
this very particular safety area can only result in confusion and add to the
potential for risk, not limit it.
“
Nevertheless, rulemaking that is not consistent with current industry practices,
especially when a widely respected voluntary consensus standard reflects those
practices, does not advance workplace safety and health in a way we know OSHA
wants its standards to do,” Thompson concluded. “We look forward
to working with you and to the revision of this proposed rule that affects
the many workers in this country.”
Archives
|
