INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS

CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
TITLE 8: GENERAL INDUSTRY SAFETY ORDERS
METAL SHEARS
Chapter 4, Subchapter 7, Article 56,
Sections 4226 and 4227

PROBLEM ADDRESSED BY PROPOSED ACTION

This rulemaking action was initiated at the request of the Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Division) to clarify the guarding requirements for metal shears. The existing regulations define "plate shears" and "squaring shears" in General Industry Safety Orders (GISO) Section 4226. However, the existing regulations only have guarding requirements for "squaring shears" which are located in GISO Section 4227. One could incorrectly assume that "plate shears" do not require guarding.

In its request for amendments to Sections 4226 and 4227, the Division explained that an employee sustained a finger amputation injury while working on an unguarded plate. The plate shear was designed and used to accommodate metals thicker than inch, therefore, Section 4227 (Squaring Shears) could not be cited, since the definition for squaring shear means "machines capable of shearing metal of not more than inch in thickness." With no specific guarding requirements for plate shears, in Article 56, Metal Working Machines, a general point of operation guarding requirement in Section 4184(b) had to be used to cite the guarding violation. The proposal will ensure that guarding requirements for metal shearing machines such as plate shears and squaring shears will be contained in Section 4227.

SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND FACTUAL BASIS OF PROPOSED ACTION

Section 4226. Definitions.

Subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2)

Existing subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2) provide definitions for "plate shears" and "squaring shears" respectively. The existing regulations in Section 4227 contain the guarding requirements for squaring shears. However, there is no specific section in Article 56, Metal Working Machines for the guarding of plate shears as defined in existing Section 4226. It could be inferred no guarding is required for plate shears. The term "metal shears" as proposed in Section 4227 includes both plate and squaring shears, which are used for cutting or shearing metal of various thickness. Therefore, definitions of the terms plate and squaring shears are unnecessary. It is proposed that they be repealed, since the guarding requirements in the proposed Section 4227 for metal shears will include both plate shears and squaring shears.

Section 4227. Squaring Shears.

Subsections (a), (b), and (c)

Existing Section 4227 contains the guarding requirements for squaring shears. The guarding requirements in Section 4227 for squaring shears are also appropriate for plate shears. The existing regulations in Article 56, Metal Working Machines, do not contain guarding requirements for plate shears. Amendments are proposed for the title of Section 4227 as well as subsections (a), (b), and (c) to delete the term "squaring" shears and replace it with the term "metal" shears. The proposed amendments are necessary to clarify that guarding is required for metal shears such as plate shears and squaring shears.

DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON

  1. Memorandum from John Howard, Chief, Division of Occupational Safety Health to John MacLeod, Executive Officer, Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, dated
  2. March 26, 1998 requesting amendments to Sections 4226 and 4227 of the General Industry Safety Orders.

  3. Ray Rooth, Senior Safety Engineer, Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH), and Jim Brown, District Manager, DOSH, Request for New, or Change in Existing Safety Order (Cal/OSHA 9 form), dated March 24, 1998.
  4. Memorandum from Jim Brown, District Manager, Division of Occupational Safety and Health, Anaheim to Frank Ciofalo, Deputy Chief, Division of Occupational Safety and Health, dated February 23, 1998.
  5. Narrative Summary of Injury (Cal/OSHA 170A Form), Inspection No. 125909135, dated February 18, 1998.

IDENTIFIED ALTERNATIVES THAT WOULD LESSEN ADVERSE
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.

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 amendments. Also, see the heading below, "Impact on Businesses."

Impact on Housing Costs

The proposal will not affect housing costs.

Impact on Businesses

This 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. Plate shears are provided with appropriate guards by manufacturers of this equipment. Additionally, the regulations in GISO, Section 4184(b) require point of operation guarding for any machine or parts of machines not specifically covered in Group 8 regulations of the GISO which pertain to guarding points of operation and hazardous parts of machinery. The proposal merely clarifies that machinery such as plate shears used for cutting/shearing metal requires guarding as outlined in Section 4227.

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.

DETERMINATION OF MANDATE

The Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board has determined that the proposed regulations do 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 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 proposed regulations do not require local agencies to carry out the governmental function of providing services to the public. Rather, these 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.)

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.

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 overview.

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.

ALTERNATIVES THAT WOULD AFFECT PRIVATE PERSONS

No alternatives considered by 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.