INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS
CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
TITLE 8: Chapter 4, Subchapter 4, Article 22,
Section 1644(a) of the Construction Safety Orders
End Rail Materials for Metal Scaffolds
PROBLEM ADDRESSED BY PROPOSED ACTION
The Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Division) as well as representatives in the scaffolding industry have acknowledged that wire rope and double wrapped iron wire are sometimes used for end rail sections of metal scaffolds (top rail and midrail) to provide fall protection at openings smaller than a standard end rail section (less than three feet wide). The Division and scaffold industry representatives in general agree that the use of such materials as described above, is acceptable when the gauge of wire and diameter of wire rope provide equivalent strength to that required of guardrails. However, it is unclear to the Division compliance personnel and the regulated public whether such materials, when used as described above, is acceptable. This proposal will address when the use of such materials for end rail sections of metal scaffolds is acceptable.
SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND FACTUAL BASIS OF PROPOSED ACTION
Section 1644. Metal Scaffolds.
Subsection (a)(6) states that securely attached railings as provided by the scaffold manufacturer, or other equivalent material in strength to a standard 2-by 4-inch wood railing shall be installed on open sides and ends of work platforms 7½ feet or more above grade. This proposal adds an exception No. 2 which states that for end rail openings less than 3 feet, double wrapped iron wire at least No. 12 gauge or wire rope at least ¼ inch in diameter is permitted provided such materials are securely fastened. The Construction Safety Orders, Section 1620(h), Design of Temporary Railing, states that all guardrails shall be capable of withstanding a load of 13 pounds per linear foot applied either horizontally or vertically downward at the top rail.
Board staff contacted a number of individuals in the scaffolding industry as well as a manufacturer of iron wire who indicated that No. 12 gauge double wrapped iron wire and/or ¼ inch diameter wire rope would meet the strength requirements for guardrails. The proposal is necessary to clarify when the use of such materials for end rail sections of metal scaffolds is acceptable.
DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON
IDENTIFIED ALTERNATIVES THAT WOULD LESSEN ADVERSE ECONOMIC
IMPACT ON SMALL BUSINESSES
No adverse impact on small businesses is anticipated from the implementation of the proposed amendments. Therefore, no alternatives which would lessen the impact on small businesses have been identified.
SPECIFIC TECHNOLOGY OR EQUIPMENT
This proposal will not mandate the use of specific technologies or equipment. The proposal merely provides when it is acceptable to use iron wire or wire rope for scaffold end rail sections.
COST ESTIMATES OF PROPOSED ACTION
Costs or Savings to State Agencies
No costs or savings to state agencies will result as a consequence of the proposed modifications.
Impact on Housing Costs
The proposal will not affect housing costs.
Impact on Businesses
The proposal will not result in a significant adverse economic impact on businesses, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states. Also, see the statement above under the heading, Specific Technology or Equipment.
Cost Impact on Private Persons or Entities
The proposal will not require private persons or entities to incur additional costs in complying with the proposal.
Costs or Savings in Federal Funding to the State
The proposal will not result in costs or savings in federal funding to the state.
Costs or Savings to Local Agencies or School Districts Required to be Reimbursed
No costs to local agencies or school districts are required to be reimbursed. See explanation under "Determination or Mandate".
Other Nondiscretionary Costs or Savings Imposed on Local Agencies
This proposal does not impose nondiscretionary costs or savings on local agencies or school districts.
DETERMINATION OF MANDATE
The Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board has determined that the proposed regulation does not impose a mandate requiring reimbursement by the state pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of the Government Code because the proposed amendment will not require local agencies or school districts to incur additional costs in complying with the proposal. Furthermore, this regulation does not constitute a "new program or higher level of service of an existing program with the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution."
The California Supreme Court has established that a "program" within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution is one which carries out the governmental function of providing services to the public, or which, to implement a state policy, imposes unique requirements on local governments and does not apply generally to all residents and entities in the state. (County of Los Angeles v. State of California (1987) 43 Cal.3d 46.)
The proposed regulation does not require local agencies to carry out the governmental function of providing services to the public. Rather, the regulation requires local agencies to take certain steps to ensure the safety and health of their own employees only. Moreover, the proposed regulation does not in any way require local agencies to administer the California Occupational Safety and Health program. (See City of Anaheim v. State of California (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 1478.)
The proposed regulation does not impose unique requirements on local governments. All employers - state, local and private - will be required to comply with the prescribed standards.
PLAIN ENGLISH STATEMENT
It has been determined that the proposal may affect small business. The express terms of the proposal written in plain English have been prepared by the Board pursuant to Government Code Sections 11342(e) and 11346.2(a)(1) and the informative digest for this proposal constitutes a plain English summary.
The adoption of the proposed amendments to this regulation will neither create nor eliminate jobs in the State of California nor result in the elimination of existing businesses or create or expand businesses in the State of California.
ALTERNATIVES THAT WOULD AFFECT PRIVATE PERSONS
No alternatives considered by the Board would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the regulation is proposed or would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action.