NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING/PUBLIC HEARING/BUSINESS MEETING

OF THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS BOARD

AND NOTICE OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO TITLE 8 AND TITLE 24

OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS

 

 

 

Pursuant to Government Code Section 11346.4 and the provisions of Labor Code Sections 142.1, 142.2, 142.3, 142.4, and 144.6, the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board of the State of California has set the time and place for a Public Meeting, Public Hearing, and Business Meeting:

 

 

PUBLIC MEETING: 

On October 17, 2002 at 11:00 a.m.
in the Auditorium of the State Resources Building,
1416 Ninth Street, Sacramento, California.

 

 

At the Public Meeting, the Board will make time available to receive comments or proposals from interested persons on any item concerning occupational safety and health.

 

 

PUBLIC HEARING:

On October 17, 2002 following the Public Meeting
in the Auditorium of the State Resources Building,
1416 Ninth Street, Sacramento, California.

 

 

At the Public Hearing, the Board will consider the public testimony on the proposed changes noticed below to occupational safety and health regulations in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations.

 

 

BUSINESS MEETING:

On October 17, 2002 following the Public Hearing
in the Auditorium of the State Resources Building,
1416 Ninth Street, Sacramento, California.

 

 

At the Business Meeting, the Board will conduct its monthly business.

 

The meeting facilities and restrooms are accessible to the physically disabled.  Requests for accommodations for the disabled (assistive listening device, sign language interpreters, etc.) should be made to the Board office no later than 10 working days prior to the day of the meeting.  If Paratransit services are needed, please contact the Paratransit office nearest you.

 


 

 

 

NOTICE OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO TITLE 8

OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS

BY THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS BOARD

 

 

Notice is hereby given pursuant to Government Code Section 11346.4 and Labor Code Sections 142.1, 142.4 and 144.5, that the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board pursuant to the authority granted by Labor Code Section 142.3, and to implement Labor Code Section 142.3, will consider the following proposed revisions to Title 8, Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board Administrative Regulations, Construction Safety Orders, and General Industry Safety Orders of the California Code of Regulations, as indicated below, at its Public Hearing on October 17, 2002.

 

 

1.

TITLE 8:

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS BOARD
ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS
Chapter 3.5, Subchapter 1, Articles 1 and 2
Sections 403, 404, 405.1, 407-407.3, 411, 411.1, 411.2, 412.2, 418 and 420
Variances from Occupational Safety and Health Standards 
and Appeals from Temporary Variance Decisions

             

 

 

2.

TITLE 8:

CONSTRUCTION SAFETY ORDERS
Chapter 4, Subchapter 4
Article 3, Section 1513
GENERAL INDUSTRY SAFETY ORDERS
Chapter 4, Subchapter 7
Article 4, Section 3273
Protection from Falling Objects

     

 

 


 

 

A description of the proposed changes are as follows:

 

 

1.

TITLE 8:

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS BOARD
ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS
Chapter 3.5, Subchapter 1, Articles 1 and 2
Sections 403, 404, 405.1, 407-407.3, 411, 411.1, 411.2, 412.2, 418 and 420
Variances from Occupational Safety and Health Standards 
and Appeals from Temporary Variance Decisions

                                   

 

INFORMATIVE DIGEST OF PROPOSED ACTION/POLICY
STATEMENT OVERVIEW

 

 

Pursuant to Labor Code Section 142.3, the Board has adopted a number of regulations that govern Board consideration of requests for variances from occupational safety and health standards and appeals of temporary variance decisions.  The Board has determined that some of these regulations require clarification or deletion and that additional regulatory provisions are needed.

 

The Board proposes to make the following amendments to the administrative regulations pertaining to requests for variances from occupational safety and health standards and appeals of temporary variance decisions:

 

        Revise the titles of Subchapter 1 and Article 2 to reflect the repeal of the term, and regulations governing, “Interim Variances” from a previous rulemaking action;

        Add “Conveyance Owner” to the definition of “Employer”;

        Define the term “Conveyance Owner” to ensure conveyances, such as elevators and escalator, are included in the regulatory requirements pertaining to variances;

        Add administrative provisions specifically for conveyances;

        Clarify regulations regarding how to compute deadlines for tasks required in the variance process;

        Rephrase the undefined term “panel itself” to simply “panel”;

        Revise and relocate regulations regarding notification and service requirements that arise during the variance process to a more appropriate area within the administrative regulations.

        Add service and notification requirements tailored to Conveyance Owners;

        Clarify and revise the requirements for completing a variance application;

        Clarify the process which allows parties to a variance proceeding to request that the Board take action on the matter prior to the variance hearing; and

        Clarify the requirements pertaining to pre-hearing conferences.

 

Moreover, this proposed rulemaking action contains non-substantive, editorial and grammatical revisions.  These non-substantive revisions are not all discussed in this Informative Digest, but they are clearly indicated in the regulatory text in underline and strikeout format.  In addition to these non-substantive revisions, the following actions are proposed:

 

Subchapter 1

 

The existing title of Subchapter 1 reads, “Rules of Procedure for Interim and Permanent Variances, and Appeals from Temporary Variances.”  The Board proposes to omit the reference to interim variances from the title of Subchapter 1, since the term “interim variances” and the regulations governing such variances was repealed in a prior rulemaking action.  Consequently, the proposed revision will have no effect upon the regulated public since interim variances are not a viable option.

 

Section 403

 

Section 403 provides definitions pertinent to the rules of procedure for permanent variances and appeals from temporary variances.  This section defines the term “Employer” but does not specifically include entities that own or have custody of conveyances governed by Title 8’s Elevator Safety Orders.  Conveyance owners often have cause to seek variances from the Title 8 safety orders governing their devices and the absence of any reference to “conveyance owners” in the administrative regulations sometimes proves confusing for those individuals/entities requiring a variance for such equipment.  Moreover, since the Board proposes to add administrative provisions specifically for conveyance owners, it is necessary to clarify who will be regulated by these requirements.  Accordingly, the Board proposes to define “Conveyance Owner” and include conveyance owners in the definition of “Employer”.  The proposed revision will clarify that conveyance owners are covered by the administrative regulations pertaining to variances and will clarify that they may seek variances from the Title 8 safety orders.

 

Section 404

 

Section 404 specifies how to calculate deadlines related to tasks stated in the administrative regulations.  Non-substantive changes are proposed to clarify that the reference to “days” pertains to calendar days and to clarify how weekend days and holidays are to be treated.  These proposed amendments will clarify the intent of the existing regulation.

 

Section 405

 

Section 405.1 describes the authority afforded hearing officers, the power of the Board, and the hearing “panel itself.”  While “Board itself” is a defined term in the administrative regulations, “panel itself” is not.  The Board believes that the reference to “panel itself” could cause confusion and should be amended to simply state “panel.”  This amendment is non-substantive and will eliminate the possibility of confusion on this issue.

 

Section 407-407.3

 

Sections 407, 407.1, 407.2 and 407.3 contain service and notification requirements for variance hearing participants.  Specifically, Section 407 requires that any document submitted to the Board by a hearing participant be served on all parties, and states that parties who have representatives should be served through their representatives.  The section further states the manner in which service may be affected.  Section 407.1 describes options for demonstrating proof of service.  Section 407.2 describes documents that must be posted for employees or served on an authorized employee representative, and states that all postings must be maintained until the time of hearing.  Section 407.3 states the notification obligations of an employee, or authorized employee representative, who is seeking to appeal a ruling on a temporary variance.  These sections are currently contained in Article 1 of the administrative regulations, which is entitled “General.” 

 

The Board proposes to consolidate and move these sections to Article 2, Applications for Permanent Variance, and Appeals from Temporary Variance, Sections 411.2, 411.3 and proposed new Section 412.2.  The Board believes these provisions should be placed in Article 2, because the documents to be served or posted pertain to variance applications and appeals.  It is also proposed to change the titles of Sections 411.2 and 411.3 from “Interim Variances” and “Notice of the Granting of an Interim Variance” to “Compliance with Notification and Posting Requirements Regarding Variance Proceedings and Temporary Variance Appeals” and “Employer Posting and Notification Responsibilities Regarding Variance Proceedings and Temporary Variance Appeals”, respectively.  This revision is necessary due to the repeal of the term, and regulations regarding, “interim variance(s)” from a previous rulemaking action.  The proposed amendments will have no effect other than to provide clarity to the regulations and make it easier for the regulated public to locate the posting and notification requirements pertaining to variances. 

 

Existing Section 407(a) requires that all documents pertaining to a variance that are submitted to the Board be served on all parties.  A revision is proposed to delete this provision, since the Board has assumed responsibility for ensuring that all documents reach all parties prior to the variance hearing.  The Board assumed this responsibility so that variance hearings could proceed as scheduled.  This amendment will save variance participants from unnecessarily completing a task that has been assumed and is being performed by the Board.

 

The Board also proposes to eliminate duplicative language in the administrative regulations by combining the requirements in existing Sections 407(b) and 407.2(b), both of which require that relevant documents be served on an authorized employee representative, into proposed new Section 411.2(a).  In addition, the Board proposes to combine the notification requirements of Sections 407(c) and (d) into proposed new Section 411.2(b), since both sections list first-class mail or personal delivery as the permissible means of notification for all hearing participants.  The proposed amendments will have no effect other than to provide clarity in the administrative regulations.

 

Article 2

 

The existing title of Article 2 reads, “Applications for Interim and/or Permanent Variance, and Appeals from Temporary Variance.”  The Board proposes to omit the reference to interim variances from the title of Article 2, since the term “interim variances” and the regulations governing such variances was repealed in a prior rulemaking action.  Consequently, the proposed revision will have no effect upon the regulated public since interim variances are not a viable option.

 

Section 411

 

Section 411 specifies the requirements for a completed permanent variance application. 

 

Currently, subsection (a) permits an employer or class of employers to file a variance application.  The Board proposes to remove the reference to “class of employers.”  The Labor Code does not specifically authorize the Board to entertain applications from a “class of employers” and the practice has proved problematic when used in the past.  Moreover, Section 419 permits the Board to consolidate the applications of multiple employers for hearing or decision when the applications are sufficiently similar to each other.  Because the Board may consolidate matters, where appropriate, this amendment will have no effect on the regulated public.

 

The Board further proposes to revise subsection (a) to emphasize that variances are granted from the regulations contained in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations.  Presently, employers sometimes request variances from national consensus standards or standards contained in Title 24.  This amendment will help clarify that the Board may grant variances from the Title 8 safety orders only.

 

As written, Section 411 does not require that an application for permanent variance be submitted under penalty of perjury.  Because the Board relies on the representations made in the application, it is important to ensure that they are accurate and truthful.  Accordingly, the Board proposes to add this requirement to subsection (a).  The proposed amendment will have no effect on the regulated public, since variance applicants should already be adhering to this requirement.

 

The Board further proposes to add a “note” to subsection (a) that will direct variance applicants to the definition of “Employer” contained in Section 403(n).  The previously mentioned revisions to this definition specify that “conveyance owners” are “Employers” for purposes of applying for a permanent variance.  The Board believes that the note will help conveyance owners, who are sometimes confused by the term “Employer,” know that they are included in that term.  Moreover, the Board proposes to replace the term “applicant” with the term “Employer” in this section to provide greater clarity throughout the regulations.  The proposed revisions will have no effect other than to clarify that conveyance owners and variance applicants are “Employers”.

 

In subsections (b) and (b)(10), the Board proposes to clarify that Employers must submit six copies of their variance applications (instead of one), and six copies of any photographs, blueprints or other illustrative materials (instead of three).  The Board requires this number of copies, because the application must be distributed to various individuals involved in the evaluation and review process.  In many instances, the application includes illustrative materials that the Board is unable to copy for the variance applicant, thus delaying the processing of the application.  Amending the regulation to specify that six copies are required will reduce such delays and render the regulation consistent with the Board’s current practice.

 

Existing subsection (b)(2) requires that the address of the place(s) of employment involved in the variance request be included in the application.  The Board proposes to amend subsection (b)(2) to require that variance applications provide the address “where the variance will be in effect.”  The proposed amendment recognizes that some variances are granted for locations that are “places of employment” only in the technical sense of the term.  For example, a variance granted for an escalator in a public shopping mall technically is in a place of employment, because the mall is a place of employment for the mall’s employees.  Nonetheless, it is also a commercial center and a public gathering place.  Accordingly, the Board proposes to amend this section to avoid confusion resulting from use of the term “place of employment.”  The proposed amendment will clarify the regulatory intent and will have no effect upon the regulated public.

 

The Board proposes to make similar non-substantive changes to subsections (b)(3) and (b)(4) to better clarify the intent of those sections.

 

Existing subsection (b)(5) requires variance applicants to certify that they have complied with certain employee notification responsibilities, one of which involves the posting of the variance application, or a summary of it, and specifying where a copy may be examined, at the place or places where notices to employees are normally posted.  This requirement conflicts, however, with existing Section 407.2(a) (proposed Section 411.3) which states that employers are to post the variance application, or a summary of it, after the application has been docketed.  To eliminate this conflict, the Board proposes to amend subsection (b)(5) to require certification in the variance application that the employer will comply with the notification and posting requirements contained in proposed Sections 411.2 and 411.3.  Proposed Sections 411.2 and 411.3 contain a revised version of existing Section 407.2 and outline how the notification and posting must occur.  This amendment will clarify the regulatory requirements by eliminating an inconsistency in the existing standards. 

 

Similarly, existing subsection (b)(6) requires that the variance application describe how employees have been notified of their rights in the variance process, while existing Section 407.2(a) (proposed Section 411.2(a)) requires that employees be notified of their rights after the variance has been docketed.  Because it is more meaningful to notify employees of these rights once the application is in final form and has been docketed, the Board proposes to delete subsection (b)(6) and instead state this requirement solely in Section 411.2.  As noted, subsection (b)(5) will require that employers certify under penalty of perjury that they will comply with Section 411.2’s requirements.  This amendment will clarify the regulatory requirements by eliminating an inconsistency in the existing standards. 

 

Non-substantive amendments, including renumbering, are proposed for remaining subsections (b)(7), (9) and (10) which will clarify the intent of the regulations. 

 

Section 411.2

 

The contents of existing Section 411.2, Interim Variances, were repealed in a prior rulemaking.  The Board proposes to rename this Section, “Compliance with Notification and Posting Requirements Regarding Variance Proceedings and Temporary Variance Appeals”, and add the revised contents of existing Sections 407(b) and (c), 407.1, and 407.2(b).  Those sections address the manner in which parties are to be notified of events that occur during the variance process and are proposed for repeal.  The Board proposes to move these provisions to this location because the posting and notification obligations pertain to the variance application, so it seems appropriate to address this issue in the Article that contains the application requirements. 

 

The Board proposes to combine and revise Sections 407(c) and 407.1, including replacing the term “service” with the term “notification” because “service” reflects a degree of legal formality that the Board does not observe in the variance process.  The Board also proposes to incorporate one of the provisions of existing Section 411(b)(5) which requires that both the affected employees and their authorized representative be notified of variance events.  As explained above, the Board proposes to delete Section 411(b)(5).  These amendments will better communicate variance participants’ responsibilities, will place the regulations in a more logical location, and will better reflect the regulatory intent.

 

Section 411.3

 

The contents of existing Section 411.3, Notice of the Granting of an Interim Variance, were repealed in a prior rulemaking.  The Board proposes to rename this Section, “Employer Posting and Notification Responsibilities Regarding Variance Proceedings and Temporary Variance Appeals”, and add the employer-specific posting and notification responsibilities currently outlined in existing Section 407.2, which is proposed for repeal.  The Board proposes to move these provisions to this location because the posting and notification obligations pertain to the variance application, so it seems appropriate to address this issue in the Article that contains the application requirements.  The provisions of existing Section 407.2 will also be editorially revised to provide greater clarity.

 

In addition to re-locating and revising the provisions of existing Section 407.2, the Board proposes to add notification requirements specifically for conveyance owners to Section 411.3.  The Board recognizes that the employees of a conveyance owner generally are not the employees affected by a variance.  Instead, it is the employees of the conveyance maintenance provider and the building maintenance provider that are more likely affected by a variance.  Consequently, the Board proposes to require conveyance owners to notify their conveyance maintenance provider and the building maintenance provider of a variance request.  These amendments will better communicate variance participants’ responsibilities, will place the regulations in a more logical location and will provide more meaningful notification requirements for conveyance owners.

 

The Board further recognizes that conveyance owners often apply for variances pertaining to new or vacant buildings.  In such instances, there often is no one to inform of the variance request.  In response, the Board proposes to add an exception to the notification requirements for those situations.  The exception would require the conveyance owner to attest to the lack of a conveyance maintenance or building maintenance provider in the application and would require the owner to comply with the regulation if a conveyance or building maintenance provider is hired before the variance hearing occurs.  The proposed amendment will clarify the requirements that are specific to conveyance owners and eliminate unnecessary notification practices.

 

Section 412.2

 

Proposed new Section 412.2 will contain the revised contents of existing Section 407.3, which pertains to employees’ duty to notify employers of employee-initiated temporary variance appeals.  Section 407.3 is proposed for repeal.  The Board proposes to editorially revise and relocate the provisions of existing Section 407.3 to proposed new Section 412.2 in order to place them in proximity to the other regulations that pertain to temporary variance appeals and better communicate affected employees’ and/or employee representative’s obligations in such situations.  These amendments will place the regulation in a more logical location and will clarify the regulatory intent. 

 

Section 418

 

Section 418 addresses requests in which Employers ask the Board to take a specific action on a variance matter prior to the variance hearing.  The Board proposes to revise this section to clarify that such requests must be made in writing.  The Board also proposes to replace the term “motions” with the term “requests” to clarify that the requests need not be filed in a legal format.  In addition, the Board proposes to require that these requests state the variance docket number in lieu of the “title” and “number of the case.”  These changes are needed because the Board’s record keeping system relies on docket numbers, variances do not typically have “titles”, and variances are not considered “cases.” 

 

The Board further proposes to specify that, if a hearing officer has not been assigned to a variance, such requests should be sent to the executive officer and that, if a hearing officer has been assigned, the hearing officer may handle such requests without the Board members’ involvement.  This proposed revision will conform the regulation to the Board’s current practices and will have no effect on the regulated public.

 

Section 420(a)

 

Section 420(a) allows the Board to require an information exchange or meeting between the parties to a variance prior to the variance hearing for the purpose of considering matters that will tend to simplify the issues or expedite the proceedings.  Such actions may be made either on the Board’s own initiative or at the request of a party.  The Board proposes to replace the references to “motions” in this section with other terms that do not suggest a legal format in order to clarify that pre-hearing activities need not be legal in nature.  The Board further proposes to specify that, if a hearing officer has been assigned to a variance matter, the hearing officer may resolve pre-hearing concerns without the involvement of the Board members.  The proposed revision will allow the Board more flexibility in resolving issues before a hearing by allowing the hearing officer to address these concerns with those parties who need to be included in its resolution.

 

 

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 action.

 

Impact on Housing Costs

 

The Board has made an initial determination that this proposal will not significantly affect housing costs.

 

Impact on Businesses

 

The Board has made an initial determination that this proposal will not result in a significant, statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting businesses, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states.

 

Cost Impact on Private Persons or Businesses

 

The Board is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative private person or business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action.

 

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 of Mandate.”

 

Other Nondiscretionary Costs or Savings Imposed on Local Agencies

 

This proposal does not impose non-discretionary costs or savings on local agencies.

 

 

 

DETERMINATION OF MANDATE

 

 

The Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board has determined that the proposed regulations do not impose a local mandate.  Therefore, reimbursement by the state is not required pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of the Government Code because the proposed amendments will not require local agencies or school districts to incur additional costs in complying with the proposal.  Furthermore, these regulations do not constitute a “new program or higher level of service of an existing program within 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 that 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.)

 

These proposed regulations do not require local agencies to carry out the governmental function of providing services to the public.  Moreover, these proposed regulations do 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.)

 

These proposed regulations do not impose unique requirements on local governments.  All employers - state, local and private - will be required to comply with the prescribed standards.

 

 

EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESSES

 

The Board has determined that the proposed amendments may affect small businesses.

 

 

ASSESSMENT

 

The adoption of the proposed amendments to these regulations 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.

 

 

REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

 

Our Board must determine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Board or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Board would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed or would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action.

 

 

 


 

 

2.

TITLE 8:

CONSTRUCTION SAFETY ORDERS
Chapter 4, Subchapter 4
Article 3, Section 1513
GENERAL INDUSTRY SAFETY ORDERS
Chapter 4, Subchapter 7
Article 4, Section 3273
Protection from Falling Objects

            

 

INFORMATIVE DIGEST OF PROPOSED ACTION/POLICY
STATEMENT OVERVIEW

 

 

The proposed rulemaking is the result of a request from the Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Division) for rulemaking to address hazards of falling or dropped materials in general industry.  The Division’s request was based on a proposal prepared by the Mining and Tunneling Unit (M&T) following an accident investigation where an employee working below a screen deck at a surface mine was fatally injured when he was struck on the head by a 4 foot by 5 foot screen section (weighing approximately 60 pounds) that had been replaced and was being removed from an elevated work location.  At the time of the incident, the fatally injured employee was wearing approved head protection, but still suffered a fractured skull.  During the subsequent accident investigation, M&T personnel became aware that an unregulated hazardous condition exists.  Existing regulations addressing the hazards of objects thrown from elevations are found in the Construction Safety Orders (CSO), but they do not apply to general industry. 

 

Based on the Division’s request, the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (Board) convened an advisory committee to consider proposed revisions to the General Industry Safety Orders (GISO).  Board staff incorporated the consensus recommendations of the advisory committee into this proposal.

 

This proposal will place regulatory language addressing issues such as, prevention of objects from falling onto employees from elevated locations, safe methods for lowering objects from elevated locations, etc., in the GISO where they will apply to both construction and general industry.

 

This proposed rulemaking action contains numerous nonsubstantive, editorial, reformatting of subsections, and grammatical revisions.  These nonsubstantive revisions are not all discussed in this Informative Digest.  However, these proposed revisions are clearly indicated in the regulatory text in underline and strikeout format.  In addition to these nonsubstantive revisions, the following actions are proposed:

 

CSO, Section 1513.  Housekeeping.
Subsection (g)

 

This subsection prohibits the throwing of waste, material, or tools from buildings or structures to areas where employees may be located unless the area of impact is guarded by fences, barricades, or other means and/or methods to prevent employees from entering the impact area and being struck by falling objects.  It also requires warning signs to be posted.

 

This rulemaking proposes to amend subsection (g) to redirect the regulated public to Section 3273 of the GISO for regulations addressing the prevention of objects from falling on employees and for methods of lowering objects from elevated locations in a safe manner.  The effect of the proposed modification will change a vertical standard for construction to a horizontal standard for general industry, thus providing protection from falling objects that are currently available only to those in the construction industry to employees in both construction and general industry.

 

GISO, Section 3273.  Working Area.
Subsection (e) Preventing objects from falling:

 

The existing requirement in subsection (e), which limits the size of openings in platforms and runways to prevent materials from falling through the openings, is proposed to be relocated to subsection (e)(2).  The relocation is part of a proposal to group two existing and one additional requirement for protection from falling objects under a single heading.  The relocation of subsection (e) to (e)(2) will have no effect on the regulated public.  Additionally, subsection (e) is proposed to be named “preventing objects from falling,” to assist the regulated public in locating regulations pertaining to the prevention of objects from falling from elevated work areas to areas below where employees are exposed to the hazard of falling objects.  The effect of the relocation of the existing subsection and the naming of the subsection will clearly indicate where the proposed regulations pertaining to preventing objects from falling on employees below are found.

 

Subsection (e)(1)

 

Proposed subsection (e)(1) will require that where employees are exposed to hazards of being struck by falling objects, all objects aloft shall be secured against accidental displacement when not in use, unless provisions are taken to secure the area of impact.  The effect on the regulated public will require employers to assure that care is taken to secure objects aloft, including materials, equipment and tools against accidental displacement by wind, or other foreseeable or unforeseen forces when there is a potential they could fall and cause injury to employees located below.  Such protective measures could include tethers, tie-downs, or netting in the elevated work area, or physical barriers and warning signs at the area of impact.  These measures are in addition to currently required head protection (GISO Section 3381).

 

Subsection (e)(2)

 

Existing subsection (e), which limits the size of openings in platforms and runways to prevent materials from falling through the openings, is proposed to be relocated to new subsection (e)(2).  An obsolete reference to Title 24, Part 2, Section 2-3906 will also be removed.  This proposed editorial revision will have no effect on the regulated public.

 

Subsection (e)(3)

 

Existing subsection (f) requires measures or means to prevent or protect employees below from the hazards of objects that are of such size that they could fall through platform or runway gratings used as work platforms during repair or maintenance activities.  Existing subsection (f) is proposed to be relocated to new subsection (e)(3) and grouped with other subsections pertaining to employee protection from falling objects.  The proposed editorial revision will have no effect on the regulated public.

 

Subsection (f) Lowering objects:

 

The content of existing subsection (f) is proposed to be relocated to new subsection (e)(3) [see above].  Additionally, subsection (f) is proposed to be named “lowering objects,” and to contain regulations pertaining to intentional lowering of objects.  It will also address alternative practices in the event controlled lowering is not practical or would subject employees to a greater risk of injury.  The effect of naming subsection (f), “lowering objects,” will clearly indicate to the regulated public where the proposed requirements pertaining to lowering objects may be found.

 

Subsection (f)(1)

 

This new subsection will identify controlled lowering of objects from elevations as the preferred method of removal.  This subsection lists methods such as, but not limited to the use of enclosed chutes, material handling equipment, or hand lines for controlled lowering.  This subsection will restrict removal of objects from elevations by uncontrolled lowering (i.e., throwing).  The effect on the regulated public will require employers to exercise more care in the disposal of objects from elevations; therefore, it will also prevent or reduce injuries caused by employees being struck by uncontrolled falling objects.

 

Subsection (f)(2)

 

This new subsection requires provisions to be made to prevent employees or the general public from entering the area of exposure to uncontrolled falling objects when controlled lowering is not practical, or when controlled lowering would subject employees and/or the general public to a greater risk of injury.  The effect of this subsection on the regulated public will codify what is common practice on most, though not all, construction sites.  Since this requirement is proposed to be located in the GISO, it will create a horizontal standard that will, given the structure, application and relationship of the GISO to Title 8, apply to construction as well.

 

Subsection (f)(3)

 

This new subsection requires the posting of warning signs around areas subject to the hazard of objects being lowered in a controlled or uncontrolled manner.  This new requirement makes specific a general requirement for accident prevention signs found in GISO Section 3340.  The effect on the regulated public will clarify that warning signs are required to be posted in addition to physical barriers around affected work areas when objects are being lowered in a controlled or uncontrolled manner.

 

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 action.

 

Impact on Housing Costs

 

The Board has made an initial determination that this proposal will not significantly affect housing costs.

 

Impact on Businesses

 

The Board has made an initial determination that this proposal will not result in a significant, statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting businesses, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states.

 

Cost Impact on Private Persons or Businesses

 

The Board is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative private person or business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action.

 

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 of Mandate.”

 

Other Nondiscretionary Costs or Savings Imposed on Local Agencies

 

This proposal does not impose nondiscretionary costs or savings on local agencies.

 

 

DETERMINATION OF MANDATE

 

The Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board has determined that the proposed regulations do not impose a local mandate.  Therefore, reimbursement by the state is not required pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of the Government Code because the proposed amendments will not require local agencies or school districts to incur additional costs in complying with the proposal.  Furthermore, these regulations do not constitute a "new program or higher level of service of an existing program within 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.)

 

These regulations do not require local agencies to carry out the governmental function of providing services to the public.  Rather, the regulations require local agencies to take certain steps to ensure the safety and health of their own employees only.  Moreover, these proposed regulations do 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 regulations do not impose unique requirements on local governments.  All employers - state, local and private - will be required to comply with the prescribed standards.

 

 

EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESSES

 

The Board has determined that the proposed amendments may affect small businesses.

 

 

ASSESSMENT

 

The adoption of the proposed amendments to these regulations 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.

 

 

REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

 

Our Board must determine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Board or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Board would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed or would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action.

 

 

The above proposals do not contain building standards as defined by Health and Safety Code Section 18909.

 

A copy of the proposed changes in STRIKEOUT/UNDERLINE format is available upon request made to the Occupational Safety and Health Standard Board’s Office, 2520 Venture Oaks Way, Suite 350, Sacramento, CA  95833, (916) 274-5721.  Copies will also be available at the Public Hearing.

 

An INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS containing a statement of the purpose and factual basis for the proposed actions, identification of the technical documents relied upon, and a description of any identified alternatives has been prepared and is available upon request from the Standards Board’s Office.

 

Notice is also given that any interested person may present statements or arguments orally or in writing at the hearing on the proposed changes under consideration.  It is requested, but not required, that written comments be submitted so that they are received no later than October 11, 2002.  The official record of the rulemaking proceedings will be closed at the conclusion of the public hearing and written comments received after 5:00 p.m. on October 17, 2002 will not be considered by the Board unless the Board announces an extension of time in which to submit written comments.  Written comments should be mailed to the address provided below or submitted by fax at (916) 274-5743 or e-mailed at oshsb@hq.dir.ca.gov.  The Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board may thereafter adopt the above proposal substantially as set forth without further notice. 

 

The Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board's rulemaking file on the proposed actions including all the information upon which the proposals are based are open to public inspection Monday through Friday, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at the Standards Board's Office, 2520 Venture Oaks Way, Suite 350, Sacramento, CA 95833.

 

The full text of proposed changes, including any changes or modifications that may be made as a result of the public hearing, shall be available from the Executive Officer 15 days prior to the date on which the Standards Board adopts the proposed changes.

 

Inquiries concerning either the proposed administrative action or the substance of the proposed changes may be directed to John D. MacLeod, Executive Officer, or Michael Manieri, Principal Safety Engineer, at (916) 274-5721. 

 

You can access the Board’s notice and other materials associated with this proposal on the Standards Board’s homepage/website address which is http://www.dir.ca.gov/oshsb.  Once the Final Statement of Reasons is prepared, it may be obtained by accessing the Board’s website or by calling the telephone number listed above.

 

 


 

 

 

NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF REGULATIONS
INTO TITLE 8, CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
BY THE
 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS BOARD

 

 

After proceedings held in accordance with and pursuant to the authority vested in Sections 142, 142.3 and 142.4, of the Labor Code to implement, interpret, or make specific, the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, by a majority vote, adopted additions, revisions, or deletions to the California Code of Regulations as follows:

 

 

1.         Title 8, Chapter 4, Subchapter 7, General Industry Safety Orders, Article 3, Section 3241(a), Live Loads.

 

            Heard at the March 21, 2001, Public Hearing; adopted on June 20, 2002; filed with the Secretary of State on July 11, 2002; and became effective on August 10, 2002.

 

 

A copy of these standards is available upon request from the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, 2520 Venture Oaks Way, Suite 350, Sacramento, CA  95833, (916) 274-5721.

 

If you have Internet access, visit the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board by going to: http://www.dir.ca.gov/oshsb and follow the links to the Standards Board.  This information is updated monthly.  The Standards Board’s e-mail address is:  oshsb@dir.ca.gov.