INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS

CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
TITLE 8: GENERAL INDUSTRY SAFETY ORDERS
Chapter 4, Subchapter 7, Article 24
Section 3641(a) and (b)
Orchard Man-Lifts (Pruning Towers) – ANSI Standard Update


PROBLEM ADDRESSED BY PROPOSED ACTION

Existing Section 3641(a) and (b) contain references to an outdated American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A92.5 standard which pertains to boom-supported elevating work platforms. The 1980 edition of the ANSI A92.5 standard is out of print, therefore, it is difficult for employers to obtain a copy of this standard to determine the content of the ANSI

Sections 3 and 4, construction/stability requirements. Without a copy of this ANSI standard, the employer cannot ensure the orchard man-lift conforms to the criteria contained in the ANSI A92.5-1980, Sections 3 and 4 requirements. This creates the possibility of enforcement action by the Division of Occupational Safety and Health. To correct this problem, Board staff proposes to update Section 3641(a) and (b) to include references to the current ANSI/Scaffold Industry Association (SIA) A92.5-1992 standard for boom-supported elevating work platforms.

Board staff proposes amendments to Section 3641(a)(1) and (b) to include a reference to the current ANSI/SIA A92.5 standard requirements for construction and stability. Board staff notes that in the current ANSI A92.5 standard criteria for stability, design, construction, etc. are all consolidated in Section 4 of the 1992 ANSI/SIA document.

In concert with the proposed amendments discussed above, Board staff proposes to amend subsection (b) which pertains to the placement of markings/plates on the equipment to confirm conformance to ANSI construction/stability specifications to also reflect the current ANSI/SIA A92.5-1992 standard.

FACTUAL BASIS OF PROPOSED ACTION

Section 3641. Orchard Man-Lifts (Pruning Tower).

This section contains requirements specifying various criteria for the construction and stability via references to the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A92.5-1980 standard, Sections 3 and 4. In addition, this section addresses identification requirements (e.g., marking of the equipment) for make, model, rated platform workload, maximum platform height, etc. Section 3641 also requires orchard man-lifts to have legible plates or markings to confirm conformance to the referenced ANSI A92.5-1980, Sections 3 and 4 requirements for construction and stability, respectively. Section 3641 also contains numerous other orchard man-lift design criteria which must be complied with addressing access openings to the platform, platform design, guardrails, operating controls, etc.

Revisions are proposed for subsection (a)(1) to require orchard man-lifts manufactured after September 1, 1991 to meet either the ANSI A92.5-1980, Sections 3 and 4 requirements or the ANSI/SIA A92.5-1992, Section 4 requirements for construction and stability. Further revisions are proposed for subsection (a)(1)(A) to require orchard man-lifts manufactured after the effective date of the regulation (OAL to fill in date) to meet the 1992 version of the ANSI/SIA A92.5 requirements for construction and stability.

A separate revision is also proposed for subsection (b) to reference both the ANSI A92.5-1980 and 1992 standards with regard to providing a legible plate/marking stating conformance of the orchard man-lift with Sections 3 and/or 4 standards for construction and stability.

The proposed revisions are necessary to ensure the employer understands which ANSI A92.5 standard the orchard man-lift is to be designed to, thus ensuring employees only operate orchard man-lifts which are designed and constructed to conform to the ANSI safety standard. Thus, only equipment designed to provide the safety necessary to prevent catastrophic failure or loss of stability (tip-over) of the orchard man-lift will be used and serious injury to an employee prevented.

The proposed revisions are also necessary to ensure the employer is able to determine whether the orchard man-lift in use actually conforms to the required construction and stability criteria.

DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON

  1. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A92.5-1980, American National Standard for Boom-Supported Elevating Work Platforms, pages 6-12, ANSI, New York, New York.
  2. ANSI/SIA A92.5-1992, American National Standard for Boom-Supported Elevating Work Platforms, pages 1-23, Approved September 15, 1992, Published January 2, 1993.

These documents are available for review during normal business hours at the Standards Board Office located at 1300 I Street, Suite 920, Sacramento, California.

IDENTIFIED ALTERNATIVES THAT WOULD LESSEN ADVERSE IMPACT ON SMALL BUSINESSES

It is anticipated that no adverse impact on small businesses will occur as a result of the implementation of the proposed amendments. This is because the proposed amendments merely consist of technical, clarifying revisions to existing regulations and do not impose any new or different requirements upon the regulated public. The central issue addressed by the proposed revisions is to clearly indicate to the regulated public the applicability of the ANSI A92.5-1980 and ANSI/SIA A92.5-1992 standards to orchard man-lifts.

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 revisions to Section 3641. This is because the proposal imposes no new or added requirements and merely consists of technical clarifying revisions of existing regulations.

Impact on Housing Costs

This proposal will not significantly 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. See explanation under "Costs or Savings to State Agencies".

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. See explanation under "Costs or Savings to State Agencies".

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" and "Impact on Businesses."

Other Nondiscretionary Costs or Savings Imposed on Local Agencies

This proposal does not impose nondiscretionary costs or savings on local agencies. See explanation under "Costs or Savings to State 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 standard.

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.