Slides from Thom Kramer's Fall Protection session presented at ASSE's Virtual Symposium.

1. ENHANCING SAFETY AND REDUCING RISK:
FALL PROTECTION ON CONSTRUCTION SITES
ASSE Virtual Symposium
March 16, 2010
Thomas E. Kramer, P.E., C.S.P. Principal
TKramer@LJBinc.com and (937) 259-5120
Michael A. Shell, P.E., Qualified Person
MShell@LJBInc.com and (937) 259-5179

2. POLLING
What industry do you work?
– Commercial
– Government
– Heavy civil
y
– Institutional
– Manufacturing
– Petrochemical
– Power generation
– Other

3. TOTAL FALL FATALITIES
800 698 738 738 733
680
700 607 652 623 634
659
638 664
604
600
500
Fatalities 400
300
200
100
0
1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Year
Source: BLS Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries

4. TOTAL FALL FATALITIES
800
700 607 652 623 634
659
+28% 698
638
604
738
664
738 733
680
600
500
Fatalities 400
300
200
100
0
1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Year
Source: BLS Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries

5. FATALITIES OCCURING IN CONSTRUCTION
Falls
36.4%
429
749
Other
63.6%
O the , 8 occupational ata t es t e co st uct o
Of t e 1,178 occupat o a fatalities in the construction
industry, 36% resulted from falls.
Source: BLS Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries

6. FALL FATALITIES BY WORK ACTIVITY
200
180
160
140 Roofs
120 Ladders
100 Scaffolds
80
Non-moving
60 vehicles
StrucSteel
40
20
0
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Source: BLS Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries

7. 2009 OSHA STATISTICS
1. Scaffolding -- 9,093 violations.
2. Fall protection -- 6,771 violations.
3. Hazard communication -- 6,378 violations.
,
4. Respiratory protection -- 3,803 violations.
5. Lockout/tagout -- 3,321 violations.

8. AGENDA
Background
Relevant issues
Closing
g

9. LEARNING OBJECTIVES
Explain why specific standards and regulations are relevant to
the construction industry
y
Identify specific areas where you can evaluate and improve
y
your fall p
protection p g
program

10. POLLING
Which of the following standards or regulations are
you familiar ( h
f ili (choose all th t apply)?
ll that l )?
– OSHA 1910 (or state version)
– OSHA 1926 (or state version)
– ANSI Z359
– ANSI A10.32

11. POLLING
Which standard or regulation do you most often
reference when you deall with f ll protection?
f h d ith fall t ti ?
– OSHA 1910 (or state version)
– OSHA 1926 (or state version)
– ANSI Z359
– ANSI A10.32

12. AGENDA
Background
– OSHA 1926
– ANSI
• ANSI/ASSE A10.32
• ANSI/ASSE Z359
Relevant issues
Closing

13. HISTORY
Construction (1926)
– S bpart M – “Fall Protection”
Subpart
– Others
• Subpart L – “Scaffolds ”
p
• Subpart R – “Steel Erection”
• Subpart X – “Ladders”
– …and others

14. LIMITATIONS OF OSHA
Which do I use? Construction v. General Industry
– Use of S bpart M
Subpart
– Inspection exception

15. LIMITATIONS
Warning lines
– 6 feet
– 10 feet
– 15 feet
– Designated areas
Fall protection p
p plan
Monitor system

16. ANSI A10 32 SCOPE
A10.32
Part of ANSI A10 series
Personal protective systems for:
– Equipment requirements
– Horizontal lifelines
– Climbing
– Travel restriction (restraint)
– Work positioning
– Rescue and evacuation

17. ANSI Z359 2007 FAMILY OF STANDARDS
Z359-2007
Z359.1: Safety requirements for personal fall arrest systems…
Z359.3: Safety requirements for positioning and travel restraint
systems
Z359.4:
Z359 4: Safety requirements for assisted-rescue and self
assisted rescue self-
rescue systems…
Z359.2: Minimum requirements for a comprehensive managed
fall protection program
Z359.0: Definitions and nomenclature

18. ANSI Z359 2009 FAMILY OF STANDARDS
Z359-2009
Z359.6: Specifications and design requirements for active fall-
protection systems
Z359.12: Connecting Components for Personal Fall Arrest
Systems
Z359.13: Personal Energy Absorbers and Energy Absorbing
Lanyards
Z359.0: Definitions and nomenclature (UPDATED)
Effective on 16 Nov 2009

19. POLLING
Which is your biggest challenge when it comes to fall
protection?
t ti ?
– Identifying hazards
– Developing abatement options
– Using equipment correctly
– Training workers

20. AGENDA
Background
Relevant issues
– Anchorages
– Equipment use
– Equipment inspection
– Rescue
Closing

21. ANCHORAGE LOADS
1. Fall arrest
2. Work positioning
3. Fall restraint
4.
4 Horizontal lifeline
5. Rescue

22. PFAS COMPATIBILITY
Designed, tested d
D i d t t d and supplied as a complete system
li d l t t
29 CFR 1926.502 Appx C

23. SNAPHOOKS
Do not engage to (unless of a locking
type) and designed for the following
connections:
Webbing, rope or wire rope
Each other
D-ring to which another snaphook or
connector is attached
Horizontal lifelines
Any object incompatibly shaped or
dimensioned
29 CFR 1926.502(d)(6)

24. GATE STRENGTH HISTORY – NON LOCKING
NON-LOCKING

25. GATE STRENGTH HISTORY - LOCKING

26. GATE STRENGTH
Z359.1 – 1992
– 220 lbs. front load
– 350 lbs. side load
Z359.1 – 2007
– 3,600 lbs. side load
– 3 600 lbs. f t l d
3,600 lb front load

27. REDUCTION IN STRENGTH
Knots in rope lanyards or lifelines can
reduce their strength by 50% or more
g y
Strength of an eye-bolt is rated along
the i
th axis
Strength is greatly reduced if the force
is applied at an angle to this axis (in
)
the direction of the shear)
29 CFR 1926.502 Appx C & proposed 29 CFR 1910.129 Appx.

28. REDUCTION IN STRENGTH
Tie-off of a lanyard or lifeline
around an “H” and “I” b
d d beam or
similar support reduces its strength
as much as 75% due to the cutting
action of the beam edges
29 CFR 1926.502 Appx C & proposed 29 CFR 1910.129
Appx. A

30. EQUIPMENT MISUSE
Consequences of the Use of Personal Fall
Protection E i
P t ti Equipment in P ti
t i Practice
– by Wolfgang Schaeper

31. EQUIPMENT MISUSE

32. FIXED LADDERS
Fall-Arresting Effectiveness of Cages/Hoops
and F ll A t S t
d Fall-Arrest Systems on Fi d L dd
Fixed Ladders
– by David Riches
– HSE research report 258
– http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr258.pdf

33. FIXED LADDERS – FINDINGS

34. FIXED LADDERS – FINDINGS

35. FIXED LADDERS – FINDINGS

36. ANSI Z359 13 2009
Z359.13-2009
Key Topics
Test weight = 282 lbs. (previously 220 lbs.)
Fall factor 2 (i.e., 12 foot free fall)
( , )

37. ANSI Z359 13 2009
Z359.13-2009

38. INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS
OSHA 1926 Subpart M
– Before us g pe so a fall p o ec o sys e s, a d a e a y
e o e using personal a protection systems, and after any
component or system is changed, employees shall be
trained in the … proper methods of equipment inspection
and storage.
d t
– "Inspections " Personal fall arrest systems shall be
Inspections.
inspected prior to each use for mildew, wear, damage and
other deterioration, and defective components shall be
removed from service if their strength or function may be
adversely affected.

39. STANDARDS
ANSI Standards
– ANSI Z359 1-2007
Z359.1-2007
• Section 6.1.1. “Equipment shall be inspected by the user
before each use and, additionally, by a competent person
, y, y p p
other than the user at intervals of no more than one year.”
– ANSI A10.32-2004
• Section 6.3.2. “Formal inspections shall be made by either
a Competent or Qualified Person on at least a semi-annual
basis.”

40. BACKGROUND
Miller study – May 1, 2006
– Is Your Fall Protection Equipment a Silent Hazard?
q p
• “All fall protection equipment deteriorates with use and exposure
over time, regardless of brand and/or manufacturer.
• Equipment is not inspected often enough for wear and damage.
• Proper training is not provided--often, the wrong equipment is
selected for a particular situation, and equipment is not worn
p q p
properly.”

41. BACKGROUND
Miller study – May 1, 2006
– Over several months shock absorbing lanyards … have been
Over…several months, shock-absorbing
voluntarily removed from job sites for safety qualification

42. BACKGROUND
Miller study – May 1, 2006
– 100 % did not pass visual inspection criteria

43. BACKGROUND
Miller study – May 1, 2006
– 100% did not pass visual inspection criteria
– 6% were previously deployed but still in active service
– 9% had webbing that was knotted
– 42% had hardware with visible defects

44. BACKGROUND
Miller study – May 1, 2006
– 100% did not pass visual inspection criteria
– 6% were p
% previously deployed but still in active service
y p y
– 9% had webbing that was knotted.
– 42% had hardware with visible defects
– 6% the webbing actually broke
g y
– 9% over 1,800 pounds
– 9% had snap hooks that opened during testing
– 24% elongated over the 42-inch standard

45. BACKGROUND
Miller study – May 1, 2006
– 100% did not pass visual inspection criteria
– 6% were previously deployed but still in active service
– 9% had webbing that was knotted.
– 42% had hardware with visible defects
– 6% the webbing actually broke
– 9% over 1,800 pounds
– 9% had snap hooks that opened during testing
– 24% elongated over the 42-inch standard
42 inch
– 85% of the product samples FAILED standard safety tests (in
accordance with ANSI standards)

46. POLLING
How long do you think someone can safely suspend
iin a f ll b d h
full body harness?
?
– 15 minutes or less
– 20 minutes
– 30 minutes
– 45 minutes or more

47. RESCUE – OSHA REQUIREMENTS
“The employer shall provide for prompt rescue of
employees in the event of a fall or shall assure that
employees are able to rescue themselves.”
Letters of Interpretations
– “While an employee may be safely suspended in a body harness for a
p y y y p y
longer period than from a body belt, the word “prompt” requires that
rescue be performed quickly -- in time to prevent serious injury to the
worker.
worker ” August 14, 2000
14
Safety and Health Information Bulletin

48. AGENDA
Background
Relevant issues
Closing
g
– International Fall Protection Symposium – Baltimore MD
• June 16 & 17, 2010
• Held in conjunction with Safety 2010
– http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk7F8UJxnLU

49. ENHANCING SAFETY AND REDUCING RISK:
FALL PROTECTION ON CONSTRUCTION SITES
ASSE Virtual Symposium
March 16, 2010
Thomas E. Kramer, P.E., C.S.P. Principal
TKramer@LJBinc.com and (937) 259-5120
Michael A. Shell, P.E., Qualified Person
MShell@LJBInc.com and (937) 259-5179