or a registered professional engineer. (See the discussion above
regarding Sec.  1926.1416 for an explanation of the Committee's
rationale for this approach to operational aids.)
    Three of the operational aids discussed below are required on tower
cranes manufactured more than one year after the effective date of the
standard. The remainder are required on all cranes. It was C-DAC's
understanding that the three aids not required on existing cranes
represent technology only recently available to the industry, while the
aids that are required on all cranes have routinely been used in the
industry for some time.
    Paragraph (e)(5) requires the Category I operational aids discussed
below and specifies the alternative measures that would have to be
followed if they are not working properly. If these operational aids
are not working properly, they must be repaired no later than 7 days
after the deficiency occurs. However, if the employer documents that it
has ordered the necessary parts within 7 days of the occurrence of the
deficiency, the repair must be completed within 7 days of receipt of
the parts.
    OSHA noted in the proposed rule preamble that the term ``days''
could mean either business days or calendar days. For the reasons
outlined in the discussion of Sec.  1926.1416 above, in the final rule
OSHA has changed ``days'' to ``calendar days'' to reflect the
Committee's intent.
    Paragraph (e)(5)(i) requires trolley travel limiting devices. These
devices are required at both ends of the jib to prevent the trolley
from running into the end stops. If the trolley were to run into an end
stop, injuries or fatalities could result in a variety of ways. For
example, the sudden stopping of the trolley at the outward end stop
could cause the load to swing significantly past the crane's maximum
working radius, causing a collapse. Another example is where the load
swing from the sudden stopping of the trolley could cause the load to
fall and strike employees.
    If this operational aid were not working properly, the employer
would have to use one of two temporary alternative measures: (A) Mark
the trolley rope so it can be seen by the operator at a point that will
give the operator sufficient time to stop the trolley prior to the end
stops, or (B) use a spotter who is in direct communication with the
operator when

operations are conducted within 10 feet of either end of the travel
rail end stops; the spotter must inform the operator of the distance of
the travel bogies from the end stops or buffers.
    Proposed Sec.  1926.1435(e)(5)(i)(B) did not explicitly require the
spotter to be in direct communication with the operator. The Agency
proposed adding this language as necessary to make the provision work
effectively and as the Committee intended and requested public comment
on whether to add specific language to that effect. Five commenters
supported the addition of an explicit requirement that the spotter be
in direct communication with the operator; no commenters opposed the
change. (ID-0069.1; -0156.1; -0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) OSHA has
amended Sec.  1926.1435(e)(5)(i)(B) accordingly.
    A similar change has been made to Sec. Sec.  1926.1435(e)(5)(ii),
(e)(5)(iii), (e)(5)(iv), and (e)(5)(vii) discussed below, which also
provide for the use of a spotter as a temporary alternative measure
when certain operational aids are not functioning.
    In addition, one commenter suggested there should be visual acuity
requirements for spotters. (ID-0069.1.) For the reasons discussed
earlier under Sec.  1926.1408(b)(4)(ii), OSHA is not specifying such a
requirement in this rule.
    Paragraph (e)(5)(ii) requires a boom hoist limiting device. As
defined in Sec.  1926.1401, the word ``boom'' used in reference to
tower cranes refers to a luffing boom. Therefore, under this paragraph,
a boom hoist limiting device would only be required on cranes with
luffing booms. A boom hoist limiting device automatically prevents the
boom hoist from pulling the boom past the minimum allowable radius
(maximum boom angle), which can result in boom failure (see the
discussion above of boom hoist limiting device with respect to Sec.
1926.1416(d)(1)). The temporary alternative measures for this
operational aid are similar to the ones for the trolley travel limiting
device and the boom hoist limiting device in Sec.  1926.1416(d)(1): the
employer has the option of clearly marking the cable at a point that
would give the operator sufficient time to stop the boom hoist within
the minimum and maximum boom radius or use a spotter who is in direct
communication with the operator to inform the operator when this point
is reached.
    Paragraph (e)(5)(iii) requires an anti two-blocking device. This is
comparable to the requirement for anti two-blocking devices for other
cranes required by Sec.  1926.1416. This operational aid is required on
tower cranes to prevent damage from contact between the load block,
overhaul ball, or similar component, and the boom tip (or fixed upper
block or similar component). Where the operational aid is not working
properly, the employer has the option of clearly marking the cable at a
point that would give the operator sufficient time to stop the hoist to
prevent two-blocking, or use a spotter who is in direct communication
with the operator to inform the operator when this point is reached.
(See the discussion of the need for this type of device, and rationale
for including it as an operational aid, above with respect to Sec.
1926.1416(d)(3)).
    Paragraph (e)(5)(iv) requires a hoist drum lower limiting device.
This paragraph requires that tower cranes manufactured more than one
year after the effective date of this standard be equipped with a
device that prevents the last two wraps of hoist cable from being
spooled off the drum. Such a device prevents the entire rope from being
spooled off the drum, which can cause the rope to separate (and the
load to fall) from the drum due to the shock from the load suddenly
stopping.
    Paragraph (e)(5)(v) requires a load moment limiting device. ``Load
moment (or rated capacity) limiter'' is defined in Sec.  1926.1401.
This type of device detects and prevents a potential overload condition
which could cause the load to fall, the crane to collapse or other
failure of the crane.
    Where the load moment limiting device is not in proper working
condition, two types of measures are required. The first type of
measure is designed to ensure that the operator determines the radius.
If the crane is equipped with a radius indicating device, it is
required to be used. If the crane is not so equipped, the radius is
required to be measured (such as with a tape measure) to ensure that
the load is within the rated capacity of the crane.
    The second type of measure is designed to ensure that the operator
accurately determines the weight of the load. The load weight is
required to be determined from a source recognized by the industry
(such as the load's manufacturer), or by a calculation method
recognized by the industry (such as calculating a steel beam from
measured dimensions and a known per foot weight). This information must
be provided to the operator prior to the lift. The proposed rule had
provided for calculations based on a ``reliable'' source or calculation
method, or ``by other equally reliable means.'' To avoid potentially
subjective interpretations of ``reliable,'' OSHA is instead requiring
that the measurements be from a source typically relied on in the
industry.
    Paragraph (e)(5)(vi) requires a hoist line pull limiting device so
that the load applied to the hoist drum will not exceed the hoist's
capacity. If the hoist is equipped with a multiple speed hoist
transmission, the device would have to limit the hoist's lifting
capacity in each individual gear ratio. If the hoist line pull were to
exceed the hoist's capacity, the hoist could fail and unspool the line,
causing the load to drop suddenly.
    The temporary alternative measure for this operational aid is that
the operator ensure that the weight of the load does not exceed the
capacity of the hoist, taking into account each individual gear ratio
if the crane is equipped with a multiple speed hoist transmission. For
example, this could be done by the operator checking the hoist capacity
in the equipment manual and verifying that the load will not exceed
that capacity.
    Paragraph (e)(5)(vii) requires a rail travel limiting device in
each direction to prevent the travel bogies from running into the end
stops or buffers. As noted above, rail stops that keep the crane from
overshooting the section of rail within which it is supposed to operate
is one of the safety devices required for tower cranes that travel on
rails. A rail travel limiting device is a device that limits the
crane's travel to keep a travel bogie from running into a rail stop. C-
DAC determined that rail stops should not be the exclusive means of
ensuring that the crane stays within its intended limits because the
travel bogie could jump the tracks if it were to strike the rail stops
at a high enough speed. The temporary alternative to a rail travel
limiting device that is not in proper working order is to use a spotter
who is in direct communication with the operator when operations are
conducted within 10 feet of either end of the travel rail end stops;
the spotter must inform the operator of the distance of the travel
bogies from the end stops or buffers.
    Proposed paragraph (e)(5)(viii) required the boom hoist drum to be
equipped with a device that would positively lock the boom hoist drum.
One example of such a device is a ratchet and pawl mechanism. The
purpose of the device is to prevent the boom hoist (and therefore the
load as well) from inadvertently lowering. The temporary alternative
measure that was proposed was to require the device to be set manually
if an electric, hydraulic, or automatic device is not working.
    In the proposed rule, OSHA noted that the temporary alternative
proposed in paragraph (e)(5)(viii) addressed the

situation where the mechanism to automatically set the locking device
was malfunctioning but did not address the situation where the locking
device itself was not working properly. The Agency requested public
comment on whether this provision should include a temporary measure
that would be required if the positive locking device is not working
properly (regardless of whether it is attempted to be set automatically
or manually) and, if so, what temporary measure is available in such a
situation.
    Several commenters responded that boom hoist drum should have
either a positive locking device, an integrally mounted holding device,
a secondary braking device, or an internal static brake to prevent boom
hoist movement in the event of hydraulic or main brake failure. (ID -
0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) According to these commenters, any of these
devices would prevent the boom hoist drum from spinning freely and
allowing the boom to free fall in the event the main boom hoist brake
(required by Sec.  1926.1435(d)(vii)(A)) fails.
    OSHA concludes that any of the devices mentioned by these
commenters, if working properly, would comply with this provision.
However, the commenters did not address the question posed in the
proposal as to whether there is a temporary measure that should be
required if the device is not working properly. If the drum was, for
example, equipped with a ratchet and pawl locking device, the record
does not show that it would be practical to install another type of
device in the event the ratchet and pawl device is not working
properly.
    Upon further reviewing proposed paragraph (e)(5)(viii), OSHA
determines it was C-DAC's intent to require a positive locking
mechanism that could be set from a control at the operator's station
and to require, as a temporary alternative measure if the control is
not working, that the device be set manually. Moreover, OSHA concludes
that such an alternative would provide an adequate temporary
alternative. Such a device would be analogous to the parking brake of a
car, which can normally be actuated from the driver's seat but, in the
event that control fails, the car can be kept from moving by chocking
the wheels. To express this intent more clearly, OSHA is modifying
paragraph (e)(5)(viii) accordingly.
    Paragraph (e)(6) requires the category II operational aids
discussed below and specifies the alternative measures that would have
to be followed if they are not working properly. If these operational
aids are not working properly, they must be repaired no later than 30
days after the deficiency occurs. However, if the employer documents
that it has ordered the necessary parts within 7 days of the occurrence
of the deficiency, and the part is not received in time to complete the
repair in 30 days, the repair must be completed within 7 days of
receipt of the parts. As noted above, the word ``days'' in the proposed
rule has been changed to ``calendar days'' in the final rule.
    Paragraph (e)(6)(i) requires a boom angle or hook radius indicator
as specified in Sec. Sec.  1926.1435(e)(6)(i)(A) and (B). Under these
provisions, luffing boom tower cranes are required to have a boom angle
indicator readable from the operator's station. Hammerhead tower cranes
manufactured more than one year after the effective date of this
standard are required to have a hook radius indicator readable from the
operator's station. These devices are needed because the information
they provide is necessary for the operator to determine the crane's
capacity under its load chart. As with the similar devices required
under Sec.  1926.1416, the temporary alternative is to measure the boom
angle or hook radius with a measuring device (Sec.
1926.1435(e)(6)(i)(C)).
    Section 1926.1435(e)(6)(ii) requires tower cranes to have a trolley
travel deceleration device that would automatically reduce the trolley
speed before the trolley reaches the end limit in both directions.
Section 1926.1435(e)(6)(iii) requires tower cranes to have a boom hoist
deceleration device, which would automatically reduce the boom speed
before a luffing boom reaches the minimum or maximum radius limit.
Section 1926.1435(e)(6)(iv) requires tower cranes to have a load hoist
deceleration device, which would automatically limit the load speed
before the load hoist reaches the upper limit. In the proposed rule,
the temporary alternative measure for each of these operational aids
was for the operator to reduce the speed when approaching the limits.
    In specifying temporary alternative measures generally for
operational aids, C-DAC sought to identify some measure in each
instance that would assist the operator in performing the necessary
task (in this case, slowing the action of a crane component before it
reaches a limiting point). However, in the case of these deceleration
devices, the Committee was unable to identify or develop that type of
alternative measure. The temporary alternatives listed in the proposed
rule instruct the operator to do manually what the operational aids are
supposed to do automatically but do not assist the operator in carrying
out this function. Because the temporary alternatives specified in the
proposed rule did not meet the usual criteria for temporary alternative
measures, the Agency requested public comment on whether there are any
alternative measures that could be used to assist the operators if
these deceleration devices malfunction.
    Four commenters stated there are no temporary alternative measures
for these devices. (ID-0172.1; -0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) No
commenters suggested that there are available measures.
    As neither C-DAC nor public commenters have been able to identify
appropriate temporary alternative measures, OSHA has considered whether
to continue to characterize these devices as operational aids or to
treat them as safety devices and prohibit operation of the equipment
unless they are working properly. OSHA has also considered whether to
retain them as Category II operational aids, which must be repaired
within 30 days, or to change them to Category I operational aids, which
must be repaired within 7 days. OSHA has decided to retain them as
Category II operational aids but to modify the temporary alternative
from that in the proposed rule to ensure that the operator is able to
operate the crane safely even if a deceleration device is not working.
    As noted above, the proposed rule specified as a ``temporary
alternative measure'' that the operator reduce speed when approaching a
limit (such as a trolley's end limit) if a deceleration device is not
working properly. In fact, reducing the speed near a limit is a work
practice that crane operators generally follow even if the deceleration
devices are working properly because serious damage, such as the load
falling, can result if a deceleration device should fail suddenly while
the component is moving too fast at the end of its travel. The
deceleration devices serve as backup devices that slow down the
components in the event the operator fails to do so properly, but
operator control is the primary means of slowing the trolley, boom
hoist, and load hoist before they reach the end of their travel.
    As noted above, OSHA is retaining C-DAC's characterization of these
deceleration devices as Category II operational aids. C-DAC determined
that the crane could be operated safely if the deceleration devices
were malfunctioning as long as the operator follows the normal practice
of manually slowing the trolley, boom hoist, and load hoist when they
are near the end of their travel. No commenter or witness

suggested that a different characterization was proper.
    To address operations when the deceleration device is
malfunctioning, OSHA is requiring the employer to make sure that the
operator is aware of the malfunctioning deceleration device and of the
need to take extra care when the component is near the end of its
travel, instead of requiring the temporary alternative measures listed
in the proposed rule. OSHA is therefore specifying, in the final rule,
that as a temporary alternative measure for each deceleration device,
the employer must post a notice in the cab of the crane notifying the
operator that the device in question is malfunctioning and instructing
the operator to reduce speed when approaching a limit corresponding to
the malfunctioning device. OSHA concludes that an operator who knows
that the deceleration device is not working properly will take the
extra care needed to ensure that the component is moving at a safe
speed. OSHA modified paragraphs (e)(6)(ii)--(iv) in the final rule
accordingly.
    Paragraph (e)(6)(v) requires tower cranes to have a device that
displays the wind speed, mounted above the upper rotating structure. On
self erecting tower cranes, which typically rotate at the tower base
and do not have an ``upper rotating superstructure,'' it would have to
be mounted at or above the jib level to be in a position to give a
useful reading. The temporary alternative measure is for the wind speed
to be obtained from a properly functioning device on another tower
crane on the same site or to be estimated by a qualified person.
    One commenter suggested that paragraph (e)(6)(v) be modified to
make it clear that the qualified person performing the estimate of the
wind speed must be located at the same height as the operator of the
crane. (ID-0199.1.) OSHA does not determine such a change is needed.
First, the operator's station is not always at the level of the jib; in
some cranes the operator cab is well below the jib, and in others the
operator may even be at ground level. Second, a qualified person is
expected to use his or her judgment and expertise to perform numerous
functions throughout this rule, and OSHA concludes that the qualified
person at the site is best able to determine how best to estimate the
wind speed if called upon to do so under this paragraph.
    Section 1926.1435(e)(6)(vi) requires tower cranes manufactured more
than one year after the effective date of this standard to have a
device that displays the magnitude of the load on the hook. This could
be either a separate device or one that is part of the load moment
limiting device (discussed above) that displays magnitude of the load
on the hook. By informing the operator of the weight of the load, this
device helps the operator ensure that the crane is operated within its
rated capacity. The temporary alternative is for the weight of the load
to be determined from a source recognized by the industry (such as the
load's manufacturer), by a calculation method recognized by the
industry (such as calculating the weight a steel beam from measured
dimensions and a known per foot weight), or by other equally reliable
means. This information must be provided to the operator prior to the
lift. The proposed rule had provided that the weight of the load and
calculations be based on a ``reliable source.'' To avoid the
potentially subjective interpretations of ``reliable,'' OSHA is instead
requiring in the final rule that these be from a source typically
relied on in the industry.
    One commenter believed that most of the operational aids listed in
this section are so vital to safe operation that the crane should not
be operated if they are not functioning properly. (ID-0172.1.) In
effect, this commenter would convert these devices from operational
aids to safety devices. This commenter also believed the time period
for other operational aids to be repaired should be shortened.
    It was C-DAC's considered judgment that safety would not be
compromised if the employer follows the temporary alternative measures
specified for the various operational aids and that the time periods
for getting malfunctioning devices repaired was reasonable. This
commenter has offered no basis for OSHA to override C-DAC's judgment on
these issues.
Paragraph (f) Inspections
    Proposed paragraph (f)(1) of this section did not state that Sec.
1926.1413 (Wire rope--inspection) applies to tower cranes. OSHA notes
that the wire rope inspections required under Sec.  1926.1413 must also
be conducted for tower cranes and determines it is useful to reference
all tower crane inspection requirements in Sec.  1926.1435(f).
Therefore, OSHA modified Sec.  1926.1435(f)(1) of the final rule to
specify that 1926.1413 applies to tower cranes.
    Under paragraph (f)(1), the post-erection, shift, monthly, and
annual inspections required under Sec. Sec.  1926.1412 and 1926.1413
must be conducted for tower cranes.
    Proposed paragraphs (f)(2) and (f)(3) specified additional
requirements for the post-erection and monthly inspections for tower
cranes beyond those required under Sec.  1926.1412. OSHA received no
comments objecting to those requirements but did receive comments
suggesting that a pre-erection inspection should be required and
recommending that additional items be included in the monthly
inspection. OSHA will first address the pre-erection inspection issue.
    Two commenters and witnesses at the hearing urged OSHA to add a
requirement for a pre-erection inspection of the crane's component
parts. (ID-0182.1; -0199.1.) One of the commenters reasoned that a
thorough inspection of a tower crane's component parts is more
difficult once the crane is erected because the inspector would have to
be jacked or hoisted into place and access to the parts would be more
restricted. (ID-0199.1.) A witness testified that shift inspections are
not adequate to detect damage from previous use, dismantling, handling,
or shipping, and such damage could remain undetected until the next
comprehensive inspection unless a pre-erection inspection is conducted.
(ID-0341.)
    Several witnesses who use tower cranes also testified in favor of
pre-erection inspections and said that they routinely conduct such
inspections. (ID-0344.) For example, a representative from a steel
erection contractor and crane vendor was asked by a public participant
if there is a benefit to require a pre-erection inspection of all
component parts by a qualified person. In response, he testified that a
pre-erection inspection is done routinely anyway because his company is
required to inspect the crane components before erection to make sure
the components were not damaged during shipping. (ID-0344.)
    In addition, one commenter noted that ASME B30.3 (2003),
Construction Tower Cranes, includes a provision on pre-erection
inspections, which suggests that such inspections are routinely
conducted in the industry. (ID-0405.1.) The ASME B30.3 provision reads:

    3-1.1.2(g). Before crane components are erected, they shall be
visually inspected for damage from shipping and handling. Dented,
bent, torn, gouged, or otherwise damaged structural members shall
not be erected until repaired in accordance with the manufacturer's
or a qualified person's instructions, or replaced.

Although the record contains substantial support for pre-erection
inspections, it also reflects different views regarding the appropriate
scope of such an inspection. One commenter recommended an inspection of
``the

tower crane's component parts.'' (ID-0182.1.) As noted above, the ASME
B30.3 standard similarly refers to ``crane components.'' Another
commenter listed the turntable, jib, and boom as items to be inspected.
(ID-0199.1.) One witness at the hearing stated that the pre-erection
inspection should include the tower, turntable, jib, counterjib,
machinery, masts, boom, and pendants. (ID-0341.) However, the
organization represented by that witness submitted a considerably
longer list of items it believed should be inspected. (ID-0333.)
Another witness favored pre-erection inspections of ``major
components'' but could not offer a more specific definition than
``components that, if they failed, would have a catastrophic result.''
(ID-0344.)
    In light of the record, OSHA concludes that pre-erection
inspections should be required for tower cranes, with such inspections
focused on discovering defects that would be difficult to detect during
the shift inspections that will be conducted regularly after the crane
is put in service. By focusing the inspection on such components, the
pre-erection inspection will address the concern expressed by
commenters that some defects will be difficult to detect during shift
inspections after the crane is erected.
    OSHA is requiring the pre-erection inspection to be conducted by a
``qualified person.'' The final rule requires that certain other
inspections be conducted by a qualified person, including the post-
erection inspection required by Sec.  1926.1412(c) and the annual/
comprehensive inspection required by Sec.  1926.1412(f). As discussed
below, under the pre-erection inspection required by this final rule,
the individual conducting the inspection must make decisions similar to
those that must be made during the annual/comprehensive inspection,
i.e., deciding whether a deficiency would be an immediate safety hazard
or whether it requires scrutiny during the monthly inspections. Since
the pre-erection inspection requires the same degree of expertise as
the annual/comprehensive inspections, paragraph (f)(2) is similarly
requiring the pre-erection inspection to be conducted by a qualified
person.
    Paragraph (f)(2)(i) requires the qualified person to pay particular
attention to components that will be difficult to inspect thoroughly
during shift inspections. As noted above, inspection of such components
was a special concern of commenters who believed that pre-erection
inspections should be required.
    The shift, monthly, and annual inspections required under Sec.
1926.1412 leave it up to the individual conducting the inspection to
determine if a deficiency revealed by an inspection constitutes a
safety hazard that requires either immediate correction or further
scrutiny. In particular, Sec. Sec.  1926.1412(f)(4)-(6) on annual
inspections require the qualified person who conducts the inspection to
determine whether a deficiency is a safety hazard that requires
immediate correction or whether it is not yet a safety hazard but is of
sufficient concern to be monitored in the monthly inspections.
    OSHA determines that a similar approach is appropriate here because
a deficiency revealed in a pre-erection inspection may be sufficiently
serious that a component should not be used at all, or it may not
presently be a safety hazard but may be a matter of concern to the
inspector so as to require periodic scrutiny. Accordingly, paragraph
(f)(2)(ii) requires the qualified person who conducts the inspection to
determine, before a component is erected, whether the component would
create a safety hazard if used on the crane. If so, the component
cannot be used unless it is repaired and upon re-inspection is found
not to constitute a safety hazard.
    Paragraph (f)(2)(iii) specifies that, if the qualified person
determines that, though not presently a safety hazard, the component
needs to be monitored, the employer must ensure that the component is
checked in the monthly inspections. To ensure that any individual who
conducts a monthly inspection knows that the component must be
monitored during that inspection, paragraph (f)(2)(iii) requires that
any such determination be documented and the documentation made
available to any person who conducts a monthly inspection.
    Proposed paragraph (f)(2) specified two additional post-erection
inspection requirements in addition to those required under Sec.
1926.1412(c). It required a load test using certified weights, or
scaled weights using a certified scale with a current certificate of
calibration, after each erection. It also specified that the load test
be conducted in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, or if
no instructions are available, in accordance with written load test
procedures developed by a registered professional engineer. No adverse
comment was received on these provisions, and proposed paragraph (f)(2)
is promulgated as proposed but renumbered as paragraph (f)(3).
    Proposed paragraph (f)(3) required that additional items be
included in the monthly inspections of tower cranes. These include
tower (mast) bolts and other structural bolts (for loose or dislodged
condition) from the base of the tower up or, if the crane is tied to or
braced by the structure, those above the upper-most brace support
(Sec.  1926.1435(f)(3)(i)). The monthly inspection must also include
the upper-most tie-in, braces, floor supports, and floor wedges where
the tower crane is supported by the structure (Sec.
1926.1435(f)(3)(i)), for loose or dislodged components.
    One commenter's suggestion addressed the suitability of the bolts
used to erect the tower and to support the turntable. (ID-0172.1.)
Although OSHA agrees with the commenter that these bolts serve an
important safety function, the commenter did not provide any supporting
information that would enable OSHA to evaluate whether the detailed
requirements proposed by the commenter are needed to improve tower
crane safety. However, OSHA does determine that the bolts should be
included as components to be inspected and is adding paragraph (f)(5)
requiring them to be inspected for proper condition and torque as part
of the annual inspection.\134\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \134\ Accordingly, OSHA is promulgating proposed paragraph
(f)(3) but renumbering it as paragraph (f)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A commenter suggested that the upper rotation structure should
undergo a special, thorough inspection before climbing. (ID-0137.1.)
This commenter did not state why it believed such an inspection was
needed. Accordingly, OSHA has no basis in the record to conclude that
the additional inspection requested by this commenter would improve the
safety of the climbing operation.
Proposal for Tower Crane Tracking System
    A witness at the hearing suggested that OSHA adopt a tracking
system whereby any major part of a tower crane that suffered a
structural failure would be able to be identified even if that part was
moved to another jurisdiction. (ID-0342.) The witness explained that
the proposed system would require the serial number of parts that
failed to be reported to the manufacturer so that localities such as
New York City could contact the manufacturer to determine whether a
particular crane was safe to operate within that jurisdiction.\135\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \135\ This commenter also called for prototype testing of tower
cranes. (ID-0156.1.) As explained in Sec.  1926.1433, OSHA has added
such a requirement to Sec.  1926.1433(c).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OSHA is not promulgating requirements to implement the system
proposed by this witness. Such a scheme is complex, and appears to
require the development of new tracking systems and required reporting
to manufacturers that might be beyond the scope of OSHA's authority. It
also goes far beyond any provisions of the proposed standard, and its
adoption would require OSHA to reopen the rulemaking record to allow
other interested persons to comment on it. OSHA does not conclude that
such a reopening is justified on the basis of the witness's testimony.
The Agency notes, however, that it is not preempting a locality's
authority to establish such a scheme within its jurisdiction. (See
discussion of preemption under federalism in section V.D of this
preamble.)
Section 1926.1436 Derricks
    This section contains requirements for derricks that supplement the
other requirements of this standard. Subpart N, at former Sec.
1926.550(e), required derricks to comply with applicable provisions for
design, construction, installation, inspection, testing, maintenance,
and operation in ANSI B30.6-1969, safety code for ``Derricks,'' as well
as the general provisions of subpart N that applied to all equipment.
    C-DAC's experience, and its review of injury and fatality
statistics, did not indicate a need to deviate significantly from the
requirements of subpart N. For the most part, the most recent version
of the ANSI standard, ASME B30.6-2003, does not differ substantively
from the 1969 version, so the requirements of this new section differ
substantively in only limited respects from previous subpart N. Where
substantive differences exist, they are discussed in the context of
that requirement.
Paragraph (a)
    Section 1926.1436 contains supplemental requirements for derricks,
whether temporarily or permanently mounted; all sections of this
subpart apply to derricks unless specified otherwise. Section
1926.1436(a) defines a derrick as powered equipment consisting of a
mast or equivalent member that is held at or near the end by guys or
braces, with or without a boom, and its hoisting mechanism. The mast/
equivalent member and/or the load is moved by the hoisting mechanism
(typically base-mounted) and operating ropes. Derricks include: A-
frame, basket, breast, Chicago boom, gin pole (except gin poles used
for erection of communication towers), guy, shearleg, stiffleg, and
variations of such equipment.
    Paragraph (a) excludes the gin poles when used for the erection of
communication towers. This mirrors the exclusion of such equipment from
the scope of the standard under Sec.  1926.1400(c)(12). See discussion
of this exclusion in Sec.  1926.1400(c)(12). No comments were received;
therefore this provision is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b) Operation--Procedures
    Paragraph (b)(1) of this section states that Sec.  1926.1417
(Operation) of this standard applies to derricks except for Sec.
1926.1417(c) (Accessibility of procedures). C-DAC concluded and OSHA
agreed that it was appropriate to keep the operation requirements for
derricks consistent with those of cranes as much as possible because
they both present many of the same hazards and operational issues.
However, Sec.  1926.1417(c) requires the operating procedures,
including load charts, to be located in ``the cab'' of the equipment
and derricks often do not have a cab. Therefore, it was not appropriate
to require that Sec.  1926.1417(c) apply to derricks. The discussion of
Sec.  1926.1436(b)(3) sets forth the requirements for the accessibility
of the load chart for derricks.
    Paragraph (b)(2) of this section, Load chart contents, lists the
information that must be included on load charts. Subpart N
incorporated similar load chart requirements via sec. 6-1.1.2 in ANSI
B30.6-1969, which remains the same in the 2003 version of the consensus
standard.
    Paragraph (b)(2)(i) requires the load chart contain the rated
capacity at corresponding ranges of boom angle or operating radii. This
information is necessary to prevent overloading of the derrick.
    Paragraph (b)(2)(ii) requires the load chart to list the specific
lengths of components to which the rated capacities apply. This
information is necessary because the derrick's load capacity varies
with different component lengths.
    Paragraph (b)(2)(iii) requires the load chart to list required
parts for hoist reeving. By listing the reeving parts considered during
the tabulation of available load charts, the derrick operator can
determine if available load charts are applicable to the configuration
of the derrick at the work site. As with paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (ii),
meeting the requirement of paragraph (b)(2)(iii) will help prevent
accidents that could occur as a result of errors in determining the
equipment's rated capacity.
    Paragraph (b)(2)(iv) requires the size and construction of rope to
be included on the load chart or in the operating manual. This
requirement prevents hoisting accidents that might occur if a rope
fails because it was the wrong size or construction for the load being
lifted.
    Paragraph (b)(3) of this section, Load chart location, sets forth
the requirement for the location of load charts. Section
1926.1436(b)(3)(i), Permanent installations, requires permanently
installed derricks with fixed lengths of boom, guy, and mast, to have a
load chart posted where it is visible to personnel responsible for the
operation of the equipment. Section 1926.1436(b)(3)(ii), Non-permanent
installations, requires derricks that are not permanently installed to
have the load chart readily available at the job site to personnel
responsible for the operation of the equipment. These requirements
ensure the critical information contained on these charts is readily
available on the worksite enabling the calculation of the parameters
for a safe lift. No comments were received for Sec.  1926.1436(b); it
is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c)--Construction
    Paragraph (c) of this section contains supplemental engineering and
fabrication requirements that address hazards specific to derricks.
Paragraph (c)(1), General requirements, lists general construction
requirements that apply to the use of all types of derricks. These
requirements are similar to sec. 6-1.2.1 of ANSI B30.6-1969 and ASME
B30.6-2003 and would help the employer prevent accidents caused by
inadequate structural design and fabrication.
    Paragraph (c)(1)(i) states that derricks must be constructed to
meet all stresses imposed on members and components when installed and
operated in accordance with the manufacturer's/builder's procedures and
within its rated capacity. ``Builder'' is defined in Sec.  1926.1401 as
``the builder/constructor of equipment.'' This definition distinguishes
a ``builder'' of equipment (a derrick that is erected at the worksite
by an employer) from a manufacturer, who sells products that may be
used at any worksite. Section 1926.1436(c)(1)(i) uses the word
``builder'' in addition to ``manufacturer'' because it will often be
the builder's procedures, rather than the manufacturer's, that must be
followed to ensure that derricks are constructed properly. In the
proposed rule, the definition of builder included the word employer.
Upon review of the definition proposed, OSHA determines that the word
employer did not enhance the

definition and could possibly lead to confusion. Therefore, OSHA has
modified the definition in the final rule.
    Paragraph (c)(1)(ii) specifies that the welding of load sustaining
members must conform to recommended practices in ANSI/AWS D14.3-94 or
AWS D1.1/D1.1M:2002. This is similar to sec. 6-1.2.1(b) of ASME B30.6-
2003 which relies on newer welding standards than ANSI B30.6-1969.
Paragraph (c)(1)(ii) will prevent structural failures when the derrick
is used within its rated capacity.
    One commenter wanted the referenced consensus standards to be
included as an appendix for ease of compliance. (ID-0214.1.) Including
all the consensus standards relevant to this final rule would make the
regulatory text or an appendix cumbersome. Moreover, OSHA determines
that employers using this equipment are likely to have ready access to
the pertinent standards referenced in paragraph (c)(1)(ii). For these
reasons, OSHA is not adding the full text of referenced consensus
standards to the regulatory text or an appendix. This paragraph is
promulgated as proposed.
    Paragraph (c)(2) of this section, Guy derricks, lists the
additional requirements applicable to the construction of guy derricks.
(See the preamble to the proposed rule for a short description of guy
derricks, 73 FR 59853, Oct. 9, 2008.)
    Paragraph (c)(2)(i) specifies the minimum number of guys to be six,
with equal spacing, except where a qualified person or derrick
manufacturer approves variations from these requirements and revises
the rated capacity to compensate for such variations. This requirement
is comparable to sec. 6-1.2.2 of ANSI B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003.
This paragraph is adopted as proposed.
    Paragraph (c)(2)(ii) states that guy derricks must not be used
unless the employer has the following guy information from a
manufacturer or from a qualified person when not available from the
manufacturer: (A) The number of guys; (B) the spacing around the mast;
and (C) the size, grade, and construction of rope to be used for each
guy. Paragraph (c)(2)(iii) requires that for guy derricks manufactured
after December 18, 1970, in addition to the information required by
Sec.  1926.1436(c)(2)(ii), the employer must have the following guy
information from a manufacturer or from a qualified person when not
available from the manufacturer: (A) The amount of initial sag or
tension; and (B) the amount of tension in guy line rope at anchor.
    These provisions are substantially different from requirements in
the relevant ANSI/ASME standards. The corresponding ANSI/ASME
provisions are sec. 6-1.2.2 of ANSI B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003. The
ANSI/ASME standards require the derrick manufacturer to furnish
complete information recommending the guy specifications listed in
Sec. Sec.  1926.1436(c)(2)(ii) and (c)(2)(iii).\136\ The OSHA standard,
by contrast, imposes an obligation on derrick users to possess the
necessary information. No comments were received on this deviation from
the consensus standard and OSHA has deferred to C-DAC's judgment that
it is better to place this responsibility on the derrick user rather
than the manufacturer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \136\ The 1969 version of the ANSI standard does not include the
pieces of information described in Sec.  1926.1436(c)(2)(iii), but
later versions of the B30.6 standard, including the 2003 version,
list those items.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraphs (c)(2)(ii) and (c)(2)(iii) have been revised from the
proposal. As proposed, these paragraphs simply required the employer to
have the listed pieces of information before using the guy derrick.
OSHA requested comments on whether the standard should require guy
specifications to be developed by a qualified person if they are not
available from the manufacturer. Several comments were received
supporting the proposed revision. (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) No
comments were received that opposed this proposed revision. In the
final rule the regulatory text in both paragraphs has been updated to
clarify that the required information must come from the manufacturer
or from a qualified person when that information is not available from
a manufacturer.
    Paragraph (c)(2)(iv) states that the mast base must permit the mast
to rotate freely with allowance for slight tilting of the mast caused
by guy slack. No comments were received for this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
    Paragraph (c)(2)(v) requires that the mast cap must: (A) permit the
mast to rotate freely; (B) withstand tilting and cramping caused by the
guy loads; (C) be secured to the mast to prevent disengagement during
erection; and (D) be provided with means for attaching guy ropes.
Paragraphs (c)(2)(iv) and (v) track similar provisions in secs. 6-
1.2.2(c) and (d) of ANSI B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003. No comments
were received on (c)(2)(v); it is promulgated as proposed
    Additional installation requirements for guy derricks that are
specific to the anchoring of its guys are addressed in Sec.
1926.1436(d).
    In the proposed rule, Sec. Sec.  1926.1436(c) and 1926.1436(d) both
contained requirements related to guy derricks. OSHA asked for public
comment as to whether having specifications for guy derricks in both
paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section could lead to confusion or
impede compliance with its provisions. Several commenters believed that
the two sets of proposed requirements for guy derricks should be
combined. (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) However, the commenters did
not offer an explanation for how this would prevent confusion or
enhance compliance. Upon consideration, OSHA disagrees with the
commenters and therefore, requirements for guy derricks will be found
in both paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, just as in the proposed
rule.
    Paragraph (c)(3), Stiffleg derricks, provides additional
requirements specific to stiffleg derricks to help ensure their safe
use. These requirements which have not been changed from the proposal
are similar to those in secs. 6-1.2.2(c) and (d) of ANSI B30.6-1969 and
ASME B30.6-2003.
    Paragraph (c)(3)(i) requires the mast to be supported in the
vertical position by at least two stifflegs; one end of each must be
connected to the top of the mast and the other end securely anchored.
    Paragraph (c)(3)(ii) specifies that stifflegs must be capable of
withstanding the loads imposed at any point of operation within the
rated load chart range.
    Paragraph (c)(3)(iii) specifies that the mast base must: (A) permit
the mast to rotate freely (when necessary); and (B) permit deflection
of the mast without binding.
    Paragraph (c)(3)(iv) states that the mast must be prevented from
lifting out of its socket when the mast is in tension.
    Paragraph (c)(3)(v) requires the stiffleg connecting member at the
top of the mast to: (A) permit the mast to rotate freely (when
necessary); (B) withstand the loads imposed by the action of the
stifflegs; and (C) be secured so as to oppose separating forces.
    OSHA requested public comment on whether the provisions in
paragraphs (c)(3) and (d)(3), which both contained requirements for
stiffleg derricks, needed to be changed or modified to avoid potential
confusion. As discussed above, with respect to the requirements for guy
derricks in both paragraphs (c) and (d), OSHA has decided to adhere to
the proposal; requirements for stiffleg derricks will be found in both
paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section.
    Paragraph (c)(4) of this section, Gin pole derricks, contains
additional requirements specific to gin pole

derricks to help ensure their safe use. Similar requirements are found
in sec. 6-1.2.4 of ASME B30.6-2003. No comments were received for
paragraph (c)(4); it is promulgated as proposed.
    Under paragraph (c)(4)(i), guy lines must be sized and spaced so as
to make the gin pole stable in both boomed and vertical positions. If
the size and/or spacing of guy lines does not result in the gin pole
being stable in both boomed and vertical positions, the employer must
ensure that the derrick is not used in an unstable position.
    Paragraph (c)(4)(ii) requires that the base of the gin pole permit
movement of the pole (when necessary).
    Under paragraph (c)(4)(iii), the gin pole must be anchored at the
base against horizontal forces (when such forces are present).
    Paragraph (c)(5) of this section, Chicago boom derricks, states
that the fittings for stepping the boom and for attaching the topping
lift must be arranged to: (i) Permit the derrick to swing at all
permitted operating radii and mounting heights between fittings; (ii)
accommodate attachment to the upright member of the host structure;
(iii) withstand the forces applied when configured and operated in
accordance with the manufacturer's/builder's procedures and within its
rated capacity; and (iv) prevent the boom or topping lift from lifting
out under tensile forces. Similar requirements, which will help ensure
that such derricks are used safely, are found in sec. 6-1.2.5 of ASME
B30.6-2003. No comments were received for paragraph (c)(5); it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (d) Anchoring and Guying
    Paragraph (d) of this section lists requirements for anchoring and
guying derricks to the surfaces that support them.
    Paragraph (d)(1) requires the use of load anchoring data developed
by the manufacturer or a qualified person. Subpart N, via sec. 6-1.4.3
of ANSI B30.6-1969, required load anchoring data for non-permanent
installations, which include most derricks used for construction work,
to be determined by the user. The 2003 version of ASME B30.6 requires
the data to be determined by a qualified person. C-DAC concluded that,
to better ensure safety, a qualified person (as defined in Sec.
1926.1401) is needed to develop such data. The final rule affords the
employer the additional flexibility of relying on data provided by the
derrick manufacturer rather than relying exclusively on a qualified
person to develop such data.\137\ No comments were received for this
provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \137\ C-DAC believed that derrick users should be able to rely
on data developed by the manufacturer or a qualified person for any
type of installation and therefore did not distinguish between fixed
and temporary installations for this purpose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph (d)(2) of this section, Guy derricks, lists additional
requirements, for anchoring and guying, that are specific to the use of
guy derricks. These provisions are similar to sec. 6-1.4.1 of ANSI
B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003. Under paragraph (d)(2)(i) the mast
based must be anchored. Paragraph (d)(2)(ii) provides that the guys
must be secured to the ground or another firm anchorage. And under
paragraph (d)(2)(iii) the anchorage and guying must be designed to
withstand maximum horizontal and vertical forces encountered when
operating within rated capacity with the particular guy slope and
spacing specified for the application. No comments were received for
paragraph (d)(2); it is promulgated as proposed.
    Paragraph (d)(3) of this section, Stiffleg derricks, lists
anchoring and guying requirements that are specific to the use of
stiffleg derricks. This paragraph is similar to sec. 6-1.4.2 in ANSI
B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003.
    Under paragraph (d)(3)(i) the mast base and stifflegs must be
anchored. Additionally, (d)(3)(ii) provides that the mast base and
stifflegs must be designed to withstand maximum horizontal and vertical
forces encountered when operating within rated capacity with the
particular stiffleg spacing and slope specified for the application.
Paragraph (d)(3) had no comments and is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (e) Swingers and Hoists
    Paragraph (e) of this section lists requirements for swinger
mechanisms and hoists that are used as part of a derrick. Paragraph
(e)(1) requires that the boom, swinger mechanisms, and hoists be
suitable for the derrick work intended and be anchored to prevent
displacement from the imposed loads. This provision is similar to sec.
6-1.5.1 of ANSI B30.6-1969 and sec. 6-1.5 of ASME B30.6-2003. No
comments were received for paragraph (e)(1); it is promulgated as
proposed.
    Paragraph (e)(2) of this section, Hoists, specifies the minimum
requirements for hoists used for derricks. This paragraph of the
proposed rule was originally titled and related to base-mounted drum
hoists. However, a tank building institute whose members use derricks
routinely commented that confusion will result in their industry from
the use of the term ``Base-Mounted Drum Hoists,'' in this context. (ID-
0130.1.) Hoists used are not limited to the base-mounted type. The
commenter requested that the regulatory text of Sec.  1926.1436(e)(2)
be revised to replace the words ``base mounted drum hoists'' with the
word ``hoist'' to eliminate ambiguity.
    OSHA determines that it is appropriate to revise Sec.
1926.1436(e)(2) to replace the reference to ``base-mounted drum hoist''
with the term ``hoist.'' This revision recognizes that there may be
designs of hoists, other than base-mounted drum, that are used with
derricks.
    Additionally, the commenter suggested that Sec.  1926.553 be
revised in conjunction with this final rule. (ID-0130.1.) See
discussion in the preamble explanation of the amendment to subpart M.
    Paragraphs (e)(2)(i)(A) through (D) require base-mounted drum
hoists to meet requirements in specified sections of ASME B30.7-2001.
Paragraph (e)(2)(i) does not apply to other types of hoists. No
comments were received on these provisions and the provisions are
adopted as proposed.
    Paragraph (e)(2)(ii), Load tests for new hoists, outlines the
requirements for load testing new hoists used with a derrick. The
employer must ensure that new hoists are load tested to a minimum of
110% of rated capacity, but not more than 125% of rated capacity,
unless otherwise recommended by the manufacturer. This requirement is
met where the manufacturer has conducted this testing. ASME B30.7-2001,
in section 7-2.2.2(a), requires similar testing but requires the test
to be conducted by the manufacturer. OSHA recognizes that the
manufacturer will usually be the party who conducts the test and allows
the manufacturer to do so, but paragraph (e)(2)(ii) permits the test to
be conducted by any party as long as it is performed correctly. This
paragraph received no comments and it is adopted as proposed.
    Paragraph (e)(2)(iii), Repaired or modified hoists, outlines the
requirements for use of a hoist that has been repaired or modified. If
a hoist has had repairs, modifications or additions that affect its
capacity or safe operation it must be evaluated by a qualified person
to determine if a load test is necessary If a load test is necessary,
load testing must be conducted in accordance with paragraphs (e)(2)(ii)
and (iv). This requirement parallels section 7-2.2.2(b)(1) of ASME
B30.7-2001. OSHA received no comments on

this provision and it is adopted as proposed.
    Paragraph (e)(2)(iv), Load test procedure, outlines how tests
required by paragraphs (e)(2)(ii) or (iii) must be conducted. Under
paragraph (e)(2)(iv)(A) the test load must be hoisted a vertical
distance to assure the load is supported by the hoist and held by the
hoist brakes. Paragraph (e)(2)(iv)(B) requires the test load to be
lowered, stopped and held with the brake(s). These provisions are
comparable to section 7-2.2.2(b)(2) of ASME B30.7-2001.
    Paragraph (e)(2)(iv)(C) states that the hoist must not be used
unless a competent person determines that the test has been passed.
ASME B30.7-2001 does not specify who must determine if a hoist passes
its load test. C-DAC concluded, however, that to ensure the load test
is properly assessed, this determination needs to be made by a
competent person. The requirement that a competent person determine
whether the hoist has passed a load test is consistent with the
requirement, discussed below under Sec.  1926.1436(g), that a competent
person determine whether a derrick has passed a load test.
    A commenter recommended that Sec.  1926.1436(e)(2)(iv) be revised
to add a paragraph requiring derrick users to simulate test/trial lifts
in similar working cycle durations for actual field work cycles. (ID-
0120.1.) The commenter provided no explanation for this suggestion nor
any information on how the practice would improve safety beyond the
requirements proposed. OSHA defers to C-DAC's judgment that the load
test procedures specified in paragraph (e)(2)(iv) of this section will
provide the necessary level of safety to employees.
    For these reasons, OSHA did not modify the proposed text of Sec.
1926.1436(e)(2)(iv) to add a paragraph (D). No other comments were
received on paragraph (e)(2)(iv); it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (f) Operational Aids
    Paragraph (f) of this section specifies the types of operational
aids that must be used on derricks during construction activities.
    Paragraph (f)(1) is adopted as proposed and states that Sec.
1926.1416 (Operational aids) applies, except for Sec. Sec.
1926.1416(d)(1), (e)(1) and (e)(4). Under Sec.  1926.1436(f)(1), two
operational aids--an anti two-block device and a hoist drum rotation
indicator (if the drum is not visible from the operator's station)--are
required on a derrick manufactured more than one year after the
effective date of this subpart. See discussion of Sec.  1926.1416 for
information about the safety functions served by these operational
aids.
    Proposed paragraph (f)(2) of this section, Boom angle aid, provided
that the employer had to ensure that either: (i) the boom hoist cable
is marked with caution and stop marks, corresponding to maximum and
minimum allowable boom angles, that are within view of the operator or
a spotter who is in direct communication with the operator, or (ii) an
electronic or other device that signals the operator in time to prevent
the boom from moving past its maximum and minimum angles, or
automatically prevents such movement, is used.
    C-DAC intended these precautions to be taken in lieu of requiring
boom angle indicators and that they are unnecessary if the derrick has
such a device. Therefore, OSHA requested public comment on whether
proposed Sec.  1926.1436(f)(2) should be modified by adding the words,
``If the derrick is not equipped with a functioning boom angle
indicator.''
    Several commenters supported OSHA's recommended revision of Sec.
1926.1436(f)(2) but noted that the language should be more explicit in
stating that a boom angle indicator is not required. (ID-0180.1; -
0213.1; -0205.1.) They also asked OSHA to clarify that the options
provided in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section are not
required when boom angle indicators are used. To address these
concerns, OSHA has modified the language of Sec.  1926.1436(f)(2) to
clarify that while a boom angle indicator is not required, if the
derrick has a boom angle indicator, the employer need not use the
options provided in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) and (ii) unless the boom angle
indicator is not functioning.
    Paragraph (f)(3) of this section, Load weight/capacity devices,
requires that derricks manufactured more than November 8, 2011 with a
maximum rated capacity over 6,000 pounds have at least one of the
following: load weighing device, load moment indicator, rated capacity
indicator, or rated capacity limiter. This paragraph adopts, for
derricks, a requirement comparable to that required for cranes under
Sec.  1926.1416(e)(4). Because this paragraph imposes a requirement not
previously applied to derricks by an industry standard, OSHA concludes,
as did C-DAC, that it is appropriate to allow one year after this
standard becomes effective for new derricks to be equipped with such
devices.
    Paragraph (f)(3) sets temporary alternative measures that must be
used when the load weight/capacity device is not working properly. In
that case the weight of the load must be determined from a source
recognized by the industry (e.g., the load's manufacturer), or by a
calculation method recognized by the industry (e.g., calculating a
steel beam from measured dimensions and a known per foot weight). This
information must be provided to the operator before the lift. These
temporary alternatives are the same as those required by Sec.
1926.1416(e)(5) for equipment generally and under Sec.
1926.1435(e)(6)(vi) for tower cranes specifically. For purposes of
clarification, the Agency has added a reference to Sec.
1926.1436(f)(3)(i) noting that the requirements of Sec.  1926.1417(j)
are applicable. (See further discussion at Sec.  1926.1417(j).)
    Under Sec. Sec.  1926.1416(e) and 1926.1435(e)(6), a load weight/
capacity device is a category II operational aid and, as such, it must
be repaired within 30 days if it is not working properly.
    OSHA requested comment on whether to apply that same 30-day
requirement, along with the exception for a situation in which a part
is ordered within 7 days of the malfunction but is not received in time
to complete the repair within 30 days.
    Several commenters supported a revision of paragraph (f)(3) of this
section to include the recommended time limits. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1; -
0343.) OSHA concludes it is reasonable to make this revision for
consistency with alternatives that are available to crane users during
the repair of similar operational aids. Section 1926.1436(f)(3) has
been revised to reflect this modification.
Paragraph (g) Post-Assembly Approval and Testing--New or Reinstalled
Derricks
    Paragraph (g) of this section lists the minimum testing and
approval requirements that an employer must meet to assure that its
derrick will be structurally and functionally able to perform within
the manufacturer's specifications and recommendations. C-DAC determined
that by meeting these minimum requirements, the employer would provide
its workers with a safe derrick that will not endanger the workers
during hoisting operations.
    Paragraph (g)(1), Anchorages, lists minimum requirements for an
anchor used to support a derrick. Section 1926.1436(g)(1)(i) requires
that the anchorages, including the structure to which the derrick is
attached (if applicable), be approved by a qualified person.
    A commenter recommended that Sec.  1926.1436(g)(1)(i) be revised to
require design inspection by a registered

professional engineer instead of a qualified person as proposed. (ID-
0120.1.) However, the commenter submitted no explanation for the
recommendation nor any information as to why the use of a registered
professional engineer would result in a higher level of safety than the
use of a qualified person. Since no information supporting this
position was presented, OSHA finds no reason to modify the provision
based on this comment; it is promulgated as proposed.
    Paragraph (g)(1)(ii) requires the qualified person to determine
whether any special testing of the anchorage is needed when rock or
hairpin anchorages are used. If so, it must be tested accordingly.
    The provisions of paragraph (g)(1) are similar to what was required
by subpart N through its incorporation of section 6-2.2.1b in ANSI
B30.6-1969 and also what is currently in section 6-2.2.1(b) in its
newest revision, ASME B30.6-2003.\138\ These requirements will help the
employer ensure that the derrick does not collapse due to insufficient
anchoring and injure or kill workers who must use or be in the vicinity
of the derrick. Paragraph (g)(1) is adopted without change from the
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \138\ The OSHA standard differs from ASME B30.6-2003 in the
following respect: The ASME section states that rock or hairpin
anchorages ``may require'' special testing. C-DAC believed that it
is necessary to explicitly require that a qualified person determine
whether such testing is needed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OSHA received no comments on paragraph (g)(2), Functional test, and
it is adopted as proposed. The provision requires that, prior to
initial use, new or reinstalled derricks must be tested by a competent
person with no hook load to verify proper operation as outlined in
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) through (v). The test must include (i) lifting and
lowering the hook(s) through the full range of hook travel; (ii)
raising and lowering the boom through the full range of boom travel;
(iii) swinging in each direction through the full range of swing; (iv)
actuating the anti two-block and boom hoist limit devices (if
provided); and (v) actuating locking, limiting and indicating devices
(if provided). These provisions are similar to section 6-2.2.1 of ASME
B30.6-2003.
    OSHA received no comments on paragraph (g)(3), Load test, and it is
adopted as proposed. The provision requires that, prior to initial use,
new or reinstalled derricks must be load tested by a competent person.
Subpart N required operational tests prior to initial use of all new
and altered derricks through the incorporation of section 6-2.2.1 of
ANSI B30.6-1969, but a load test was not explicitly required. C-DAC
recommended that OSHA adopt the revised guidance provided in section 6-
2.2.2 of ASME B30.6-2003, which includes a requirement to load test all
new and reinstalled derricks prior to initial use and specifies the
elements such a test should include. OSHA determines, as did C-DAC,
that compliance with the load test requirements listed in paragraph
(g)(3) will help the employer identify defects in the derrick prior to
its actual use. The requirements for the load test are outlined in
paragraphs (g)(3)(i) through (g)(3)(iii).
    Under paragraph (g)(3)(i) test loads must be at least 100% and no
more than 110% of the rated capacity, unless otherwise recommended by
the manufacturer or qualified person, but in no event must the test
load be less than the maximum anticipated load. Under paragraph
(g)(3)(ii) the test must consist of (A) hoisting the test load a few
inches and holding to verify that the load is supported by the derrick
and held by the hoist brake(s); (B) swinging the derrick, if
applicable, the full range of its swing, at the maximum allowable
working radius for the test load; (C) booming the derrick up and down
within the allowable working radius for the test load; and (D)
lowering, stopping and holding the load with the brake(s). Paragraph
(g)(3)(iii) provides that the derrick must not be used unless the
competent person determines that the test has been passed.
    Paragraph (g)(4), Documentation, requires that tests conducted
under this paragraph must be documented. The document must contain the
date, test results, and the name of the tester. The document must be
retained until the derrick is re-tested or dismantled, whichever occurs
first. Because a load test meeting the criteria listed in the standard
is so important to the safe use of the derrick, C-DAC determined that
documentation of the test was needed to show that the test had been
conducted properly. Section 6-2.2.2(a)(1) of ASME B30.6-2003 similarly
requires that a written report of the load test be prepared and
maintained. OSHA received no comments on this paragraph. OSHA is adding
language to clarify that all inspection documentation must be available
to inspectors in accordance with Sec.  1926.1412(k).
Paragraph (h) Load Testing Repaired or Modified Derricks
    Paragraph (h) of this section requires that derricks that have had
repairs, modifications, or additions affecting the derrick's capacity
or safe operation be evaluated by a qualified person to determine if a
load test is necessary. If so, load testing must be conducted and
documented in accordance with Sec.  1926.1436(g). Subpart N, through
incorporation of section 6-2.3.3 of ANSI B30.6-1969, required all
replaced and repaired parts to have at least the original safety
factor. However, there was no explicit requirement to load test the
derricks after parts were repaired or replaced. ASME B30.6-2003 does
address load testing of repaired, altered or modified derricks in
section 6-2.2.2(b), specifying that the need for such a test be
determined by a qualified person. Paragraph (h) is consistent with the
ASME requirement. Such testing will help the employer identify safety
defects in a repaired or modified derrick prior to its actual use. No
comments were received for (h); it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (i) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (j) Power Failure Procedures
    Paragraph (j) of this section requires the derrick operator to
safely stop operation if the power fails during operations and lists
additional steps that must be taken. Section 1926.1436(j)(1) requires
setting all brakes or locking devices. Section 1926.1436(j)(2) requires
moving all clutch and other power controls to the off position. These
steps will prevent inadvertent movement of the load during the power
outage or upon restoration of power. These precautions are found in
section 6-3.2.3(h) of ANSI B30.6-1969 and are reiterated in ASME B30.6-
2003. No comments were received for (j); it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (k) Use of Winch Heads
    Paragraph (k) of this section specifies minimum requirements for
the safe use of a winch during hoisting operations. Paragraph (k)(1)
requires that ropes not be handled on a winch head without the
knowledge of the operator. Section 1926.1436(k)(2) requires the
operator to be within reach of the power unit control while a winch
head is being used. These requirements are in sec. 6-3.3.5 of ANSI
B30.6-1969 and are continued in sec. 6-3.3.6 of ASME B30.6-2003. No
comments were received for (k); it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (l) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (m) Securing the Boom
    Paragraph (m) of this section lists minimum requirements for
ensuring the stability of a derrick's boom when at rest to prevent
injuries and deaths that could occur if it inadvertently shifted or
fell.

    Paragraph (m)(1) requires that when the boom is being held in a
fixed position, dogs, pawls, or other positive holding mechanisms on
the boom hoist be engaged. Section 1926.1436(m)(2) requires that when
taken out of service for 30 days or more, the boom be secured by one of
the following methods: (i) By laying down the boom; (ii) by securing
the boom to a stationary member, as nearly under the head as possible,
by attachment of a sling to the load block; (iii) for guy derricks, by
lifting the boom to a vertical position and securing it to the mast; or
(iv) for stiffleg derricks, by securing the boom against the stiffleg.
    The comparable ASME B30.6-2003 provision (sec. 6-3.3.7) would
require the boom to be secured when the derrick is ``not in use.'' C-
DAC concluded the intent of the ANSI provision was to require the boom
to be secured when the derrick was not in service but concluded that
the ASME wording could be misconstrued to mean that the boom had to be
secured whenever the derrick was not in the process of lifting a load.
To avoid misunderstanding and establish an objective requirement for
when the boom had to be secured, C-DAC proposed that the boom be
secured whenever the derrick is taken out of service for 30 days or
more. No comments were received for paragraph (m); it is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (n)
    ``Jumping the derrick'' is the practice of moving structural
components of the derrick to different locations, such as to the upper
floors as a building is constructed, and is essential to some
construction activities. Section 1926.1436(n) requires that the process
of jumping the derrick be supervised by the A/D (assembly/disassembly)
director. As defined in Sec.  1926.1401, the A/D director must either
be a person who meets the criteria for both a competent person and a
qualified person, or a competent person who is assisted by one or more
qualified persons.
    As discussed above, paragraph (g) of this section requires a
derrick to be load tested to confirm that the derrick and its support
can withstand rated loads. C-DAC discussed whether load testing should
be required when a derrick is jumped, but ultimately concluded that a
jumped derrick need not be load tested and determined that the A/D
director could be relied upon to see that the jumped derrick is
properly erected and anchored and complies with the applicable
requirements of this standard. OSHA is satisfied with C-DAC's rationale
and agrees that giving the A/D director the responsibility for
supervising the jumping of a derrick will ensure that the jumped
derrick is safe to use.
    Several labor representatives objected to the use of the word
``supervisor'' in the term ``A/D supervisor'' used in proposed Sec.
1926.1404(a). (ID-0182.1; -0199.1; -0172.1.) As explained in the
discussion of assembly/disassembly, OSHA has decided to replace the
term A/D supervisor with ``A/D director'' in Sec.  1926.1404(a).
Accordingly, OSHA has revised this paragraph to replace the term A/D
supervisor with the term A/D director.
    A commenter recommended that Sec.  1926.1436(n) be revised to add a
requirement to include a ``site-specific jumping plan approved by a
registered professional engineer.'' (ID-0120.1.) However, the commenter
provided no explanation for this recommendation, nor did the commenter
provide any information to establish how this would be an improvement
over the rule's requirement to have the jumping process directed by an
A/D director. Since no information supporting this revision was
presented, OSHA finds no persuasive reason to modify the provision
based on this comment; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (o)
    Paragraph (o) of this section requires that derrick operations be
supervised by a competent person. No comments were received for this
provision; it is promulgated as proposed. Subpart N incorporated sec.
<IP_ADDRESS> of ANSI B30.6-1969, which requires derrick operations to be
directed by a designated individual. ASME B30.6-2003 contains a similar
requirement, and both consensus standards specify the requirements and
practices of that designated individual. OSHA concludes, as did C-DAC,
that the definition of competent person meets the objectives of the
ANSI/ASME designated individual requirements to competently perform the
specific duties involved in supervising derrick operations. The
experience and knowledge possessed by the competent person and his/her
ability to recognize and correct potential hazardous conditions will
help ensure the safety of derrick operations.
Paragraph (p) Inspections
    Under paragraph (p) of this section, the inspection requirements of
Sec.  1926.1412 apply to derricks. In addition to the items that must
be inspected under Sec.  1926.1412, this paragraph requires certain
additional items to be inspected. These additional items, when combined
with the items that must be inspected under Sec.  1926.1412, are
consistent with ANSI B30.6-1969 and ASME B30.6-2003.
    Paragraph (p)(1), Daily, requires the inspection of guys for proper
tension. Guy wires are critical elements of the support system for
derricks.
    Paragraph (p)(2), Annual, contains two requirements. Paragraph
(p)(2)(i) requires inspection of the gudgeon pin for cracks, wear, and
distortion. Paragraph (p)(2)(ii) requires inspection of the foundation
supports for continued ability to sustain the imposed loads. Since a
derrick is more likely to remain stationary and supported by the same
foundation throughout the duration of its use than the majority of the
equipment covered by this standard, C-DAC determined it was necessary
to require the foundation to be inspected annually in addition to the
items specified in Sec.  1926.1412. No comments were received for this
paragraph; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (q) Operator Qualification and Training
    Paragraph (q) of this section, Qualification and Training, requires
that derrick operators be trained in the safe operation of the specific
type of equipment that operator will be using. Section 1926.1427 does
not apply.
    C-DAC discussed whether there should be a certification requirement
for derrick operators, but decided against recommending such a
provision. The Committee noted that there are no accredited testing
criteria to use for testing derrick operators. Nor are there nationally
recognized accredited testing facilities readily available. C-DAC
questioned whether testing providers would find it cost-effective to
establish accredited testing programs for derrick operators, noting
that most training for derricks must be site specific because the types
of derricks used, their support structures, and the hazards associated
with specific projects vary from company to company. Moreover, the
accident investigation data reviewed by C-DAC did not indicate that
there was a need to require derrick operators to meet certification
requirements similar to those proposed for crane operators.
    One commenter opposed excluding derrick operators from the
certification requirements of Sec.  1926.1427 of this subpart because
derrick operations require similar skills to make a safe pick as those
required for cranes. (ID-0172.1.) Testimony from hearing participants
confirmed that the industry was unable to accommodate a need for
accredited testing facilities or applicable

testing criteria for derrick operators. (ID-0343.) A commenter asserted
there were no organizations that provided accredited testing for
derrick operators in the industry. (ID-0130.1.) Overall OSHA did not
find sufficient evidence in the record to support a requirement for
derrick operators to meet the certification requirements of Sec.
1926.1427. More general discussion of this topic is provided in Sec.
1926.1427.
    In reviewing the C-DAC language of Sec. Sec.  1926.1430 and
1926.1436, OSHA realized that the Committee did not specify any
training requirements for derrick operators, which OSHA concludes was
an inadvertent omission.
    The Agency noted in the preamble to the proposed rule that it was
planning to add a training requirement to Sec.  1926.1436 and requested
public comment on the addition of such a provision.
    Commenters supported OSHA's recommended addition, so this section
now includes a requirement that derrick operators be trained on the
specific type of equipment being used. (ID-0130.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.)
This provision has been modified from the proposed rule to specifically
address the training that is required for derrick operators.
    A commenter asked that employers be allowed to train and qualify
their operators and that the qualification be valid for a limit of five
years. (ID-0130.1.) Since this final rule does not require
qualification for derrick operators beyond that of the training
requirement, OSHA disagrees with this proposition. For additional
information on comments received about training to particular types of
equipment, see the discussion at Sec.  1926.1427(j)(1)(i).
Section 1926.1437 Floating Cranes/Derricks and Land Cranes/Derricks on
Barges
    Section 1926.1437 covers two types of equipment in a marine
environment. The first type is referred to as ``floating cranes/
derricks,'' defined in Sec.  1926.1401, Definitions, as ``equipment
designed by the manufacturer (or employer) for marine use by permanent
attachment to a barge, pontoons, vessel, or other means of flotation.''
The second type, ``Land cranes/derrick'' is defined in Sec.  1926.1401
as ``equipment not originally designed by the manufacturer for marine
use by permanent attachment to barges, pontoons, vessels, or other
means of flotation. Section 1926.1437(m) applies only to floating
cranes/derricks, and Sec.  1926.1437(n) applies only to land cranes/
derricks used on barges, pontoons, vessels or other means of flotation.
Paragraph (a)
    Paragraph (a) of this section specifies that the requirements of
Sec.  1926.1437 are supplemental requirements; therefore, all other
requirements of this subpart apply unless specifically noted otherwise.
Section 1926.1437(a) exempts equipment operating on jacked barges from
the requirements of Sec.  1926.1437 when the jacks are deployed to the
river, lake, or sea bed and the barge is fully supported by the jacks.
    A jacked barge deployed in this manner has four ``spuds'' on its
corners that are grounded into the sea-bottom, providing a level and
stable platform on which employees work. This configuration results in
work conditions similar to a crane working on land, unlike the work
conditions pertinent to equipment covered by this section. Therefore,
equipment used on a jacked barge deployed in this manner is subject to
all other applicable requirements of this proposed subpart but not to
the requirements of this section.
    One commenter raised a question as to whether the exclusion of
jacked barges would apply when the barge is supported by jacks anchored
to the river, lake, or sea bed, but not fully supported ``in a more
permanent condition.'' (ID-0172.1.) However, the commenter does not
explain what is meant by ``a more permanent condition.'' The test for
whether the jacks, on deployment in the river, lake, or sea bed, fully
support the barge.
    OSHA received no substantive comments or information indicating
that the exception for jacked barges is unsafe for employees.
Therefore, OSHA is retaining the exception in the final rule because it
determines that employees on jacked barges will be protected by the
other provisions of this subpart. OSHA also is retaining the language
explaining the application of the section because it provides useful
explanatory information to the regulated community regarding compliance
obligations.
Paragraph (b) General Requirements
    Paragraph (b) of this section specifies that paragraphs (c)-(k) of
this section apply to both floating cranes/derricks and land cranes/
derricks. As noted above and discussed below, Sec.  1926.1437(m)
applies only to floating cranes/derricks, and Sec.  1926.1437(n)
applies only to land cranes/derricks mounted on vessels/flotation
devices. OSHA received no comments on the proposed paragraph. OSHA is
retaining the paragraph as proposed because it provides useful
explanatory information to the regulated community regarding compliance
obligations.
Paragraph (c) Work Area Control
    Paragraph (c) of this section provides that the requirements of
Sec.  1926.1424, Work area control, apply to equipment covered by this
section, except for the requirements of Sec.  1926.1424(a)(2)(ii).
Paragraph (c)(2) of this section closely parallels Sec.
1926.1424(a)(2)(ii) but omits the requirement that employers
demonstrate infeasibility before using a combination of warning signs
and high visibility markings in place of erecting and maintaining
control lines, warning lines, railings, or similar boundaries of hazard
areas. Because equipment covered by this section typically operates
within a very limited physical work space, employers often need
increased flexibility in determining which work area control method is
most appropriate in light of special site-specific circumstances. To
help ensure that employees are adequately protected if the employer
uses high visibility markings to supplement warning signs, this
paragraph requires the employer to train employees to understand the
meaning of the markings.
    OSHA received no comments on this provision as proposed. Upon
review of this provision, the Agency determined the two examples
provided in the regulatory text were redundant. Therefore, except for
the removal of one of the examples, OSHA is retaining the provision as
proposed, because it will ensure maximum worker safety under the
limited space available on many of these vessels.
Paragraph (d) Keeping Clear of the Load
    Paragraph (d) of this section states that the requirements of Sec.
1926.1425, Keeping clear of the load, do not apply to the equipment
covered by Sec.  1926.1437. Due to the limited space available for
equipment on worksites covered by this section (i.e., the decks of
barges and other vessels), the requirements of Sec.  1926.1425 are
infeasible under these worksite conditions, in the experience of C-DAC.
OSHA received no comments on this provision, and, therefore, is
promulgating it in the final rule as proposed because it strikes a
balance between the practicalities of the worksite and safety for
employees. Other provisions within this section provide other means of
protecting employees in the unique worksites covered by this section.

Paragraph (e) Additional Safety Devices
    Paragraph (e) of this section lists additional safety devices
required for equipment covered by this section. Equipment covered by
Sec.  1926.1437 is required to have the safety devices listed in Sec.
1926.1415, Safety devices, unless otherwise noted in Sec.  1926.1415.
The additional safety devices required by Sec.  1926.1437(e) address
the special conditions of a marine worksite, especially with respect to
vessel stability, inadvertent movement due to water conditions, and the
greater effect of wind and other environmental conditions on equipment
operating at these sites. However, note that Sec.  1926.1415 excepts
floating cranes/derricks and land cranes/derricks on barges, pontoons,
vessels, or other means of flotation from having crane level indicators
and floating cranes from having foot pedal brake locks. (See the
discussion above under Sec. Sec.  1926.1415(a)(1)(iii) and
1926.1415(a)(4) for an explanation of these exceptions.)
    Paragraph (e)(1) requires equipment covered by this section to have
a list and trim device. It is necessary to have this device since the
degrees of list and trim are directly related to the stability of the
vessel/flotation device and therefore to the stability of the equipment
and its safe operation.
    Proposed paragraph (e)(2) required equipment covered in this
section to have a horn. In the experience of C-DAC, the sounding of the
equipment's horn is commonly understood in the marine industry as a way
to warn employees about the presence of or movement of the equipment or
its load. In the final rule, OSHA has added the requirement of a horn
to the general list of safety devices required in Sec.  1926.1415. See
Sec.  1926.1415(a)(7). As noted above, the requirements of Sec.
1926.1415 apply to floating cranes/derricks, so restating the
requirement in Sec.  1926.1437(e)(2) would be redundant. OSHA is
therefore removing the horn requirement from this section and
renumbering the remainder of Sec.  1926.1437(e).
    Paragraph (e)(2), as renumbered in the final rule, now requires
that all equipment with a rotating superstructure have a positive crane
house lock. This device is necessary for equipment covered within this
section because it positively locks the rotating superstructure. The
lock provides additional protection from the superstructure's
accidental movement that can result due to the action of wind, waves,
or current.
    Because the speed and direction of the wind can directly affect
equipment operations, such as by diminishing equipment capacity and
inducing unintended movement of the load, Sec.  1926.1437(e)(3)
requires equipment covered by this section to have and use a wind speed
and direction indicator when a competent person determines that wind is
a factor that needs to be considered during operations.
    OSHA received no comments on proposed paragraphs (e)(1)-(e)(4), and
is retaining all of these provisions in the final rule, except for the
requirement of a horn and with renumbering, because they improve the
safety of the vessels, and, therefore, the safety of the employee
involved in crane/derrick operations onboard the vessel.
Paragraph (f) Operational Aids
    Paragraph (f) of this section modifies the application of some of
the requirements in proposed Sec.  1926.1416, Operational aids, for
equipment covered by this section. Apart from these differences, Sec.
1926.1416 applies to equipment covered by this section.
    Paragraph (f)(1) requires that equipment covered by this section to
be equipped with an anti-two-block device when hoisting personnel or
when hoisting over an occupied cofferdam or shaft. As discussed at
Sec.  1926.1416(d)(3), two-blocking can result in a sudden drop of the
load on the line. Anti-two-block devices protect against this danger.
However, anti-two-blocking devices have a high rate of failure in a
marine environment due to wind and other environmental factors. Also,
the equipment covered by this section is often performing live boom/
fast-moving functions, causing an anti-two-block device to consistently
malfunction. Therefore, an anti-two-block device is only required when
hoisting personnel or hoisting over an occupied cofferdam or shaft due
to the additional risk to employees during these operations.
    Paragraph (f)(2) specifies that employers using equipment to
perform dragline, clamshell (grapple), magnet, drop ball, container
handling, concrete bucket, and pile driving work covered by this
section, are exempt from the requirements of Sec.  1926.1416(e)(4),
Load weighing and similar devices. These operations add heavy loads and
repetitive motion to the marine characteristics described above. As a
result, load weighing devices used during these operations consistently
malfunction. Additionally, the listing and tilting that is typical in
marine worksites often prevents these devices from providing accurate
load readings.
    OSHA received no comments on these provisions as proposed. However,
OSHA is retaining these provisions in the final rule because the
provisions afford protection to workers involved in personnel lifting
operations or exposed to a load failure while working in cofferdams or
shafts. The provisions also prevent employers from relying on
malfunctioning equipment to the detriment of employees using or exposed
to the equipment.
Paragraph (g) Accessibility of Procedures Applicable to Equipment
Operation
    Paragraph (g) of this section sets forth requirements regarding
accessibility of equipment operation procedures. The provision requires
equipment with a cab to comply with the requirements of Sec.
1926.1417(c), Operation--accessibility of procedures. If the equipment
does not have a cab then the requirements of this paragraph apply.
    The Agency determined that it is necessary to have the load chart
located where the operator is stationed. Under Sec.  1926.1437(g)(1),
if the operator's station is movable, such as with pendant-controlled
equipment, the load chart must be posted on the equipment. Under Sec.
1926.1437(g)(2), the remaining procedures (other than load charts) must
be readily available on board the vessel/flotation device. Where there
is no cab for the equipment, it is impractical to require these other
procedures to be next to the operator; however, it is still necessary
for the operator to have easy access to these procedures for reference
during operations.
    While OSHA received no comments on the proposed provisions, it is
retaining the provisions in the final rule because, as explained
elsewhere in this preamble, having this procedural information as
readily available as possible is critical to operating cranes/derricks
safely, thereby ensuring the protection of the workers involved in the
crane/derrick operations.
Paragraph (h) Inspections
    Paragraph (h) of this section sets forth additional inspection
requirements applicable to equipment covered by this section. The
introductory sentence to this paragraph states that Sec.  1926.1412,
Inspections, applies to the inspection of the crane/derrick, and that
the additional inspection requirements in this paragraph apply to the
vessel/flotation device that supports the crane/derrick.
    In the proposed rule, the Agency modified the language of the C-DAC
consensus document for this introductory sentence by including

coverage for floating cranes/derricks and requested comment on this
modification. Two commenters responded and both agreed with the
modified language as used in the proposed rule. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.)
OSHA is retaining this language in the final rule because the increased
coverage enhances employee protection, and the introductory language
provides useful explanatory information to the regulated community
regarding compliance obligations.
    With respect to the requirements of Sec.  1926.1437(h)(2)(ii), a
commenter expressed concern that the Agency expected an employer to
physically open the hatch on a barge to inspect for ``taking on
water.'' (ID-0345.26.) The commenter further explained that hatch
covers are usually sealed, and generally are removed only if there is
suspected damage to the hull. (ID-0345.26.) Another commenter confirmed
that most non-freshwater vessels have permanently sealed hatches. (ID-
0344.1.)
    Under this provision, as proposed, a competent person must inspect
the vessel for ``taking on water'' and does not specify any particular
method for making this determination. As one commenter suggested,
measuring freeboards is a way to determine if a vessel is listing more
than a couple of degrees and, therefore, possibly taking on water. (ID-
0344.1.) The requirement here is for the competent person to use an
effective means of determining if the vessel is taking on water, which
can vary depending on the type of vessel.
    With respect to Sec.  1926.1437(h)(2)(iv), a commenter was
concerned that the requirement to check the ``fuel compartments * * *
for serviceability as a water-tight appliance'' included an expectation
that the hatch cover would be removed to inspect the fuel compartment.
(ID-0345.26.) The commenter further stated the usual means of checking
for water in a fuel tank is by using a plumb bob and clear coat that
changes color if water is present. The proposed provision requires a
competent person to inspect the fuel compartments, among other areas,
for ``serviceability as a water-tight appliance.'' The provision does
not specify any particular method for making this determination,
provided the competent person uses an effective method for doing so.
    Based on the need to ensure the integrity of the vessel/flotation
device for employee safety, and the availability of nonintrusive means
of determining this integrity, OSHA is retaining Sec. Sec.
1926.1437(h)(2)(ii) and 1926.1437(h)(2)(iv) in the final rule. OSHA
received no comments on the remaining provisions proposed for
paragraphs (h)(2) and (h)(3) and OSHA is retaining these provisions to
ensure that vessels/flotation devices used for crane/derrick operations
remain safe for employees, and that the employer corrects deficiencies
in the vessels/flotation devices that are hazardous to employees.
    Under Sec.  1926.1437(h), inspections are required at four distinct
times: Each shift, each month, annually, and every four years. As
specified in paragraph (h)(3), a competent person must conduct the
shift and monthly inspections. If the competent person identifies a
deficiency, an immediate determination by a qualified person is then
required to ascertain if the deficiency constitutes a hazard. If the
deficiency constitutes a hazard, the vessel must be removed from
service until the deficiency is corrected.
    These requirements differ from the shift and monthly general
inspection requirements of Sec.  1926.1412, in which the competent
person who identifies a deficiency then determines whether the
deficiency is a safety hazard requiring immediate correction. The
reason for this difference is that the equipment covered under this
section is highly specialized and therefore requires a high level of
knowledge.
    With respect to the annual inspections, Sec.  1926.1437(h)(4)
requires the equipment and vessel/flotation device to be inspected by a
qualified person with expertise with respect to vessels/flotation
devices. The Agency concludes it is important to state explicitly that
the qualified person conducting these inspections must have the
necessary expertise for the items listed for the annual inspection with
respect to barges, pontoons, vessels or other means of flotation.
Accordingly, OSHA is retaining the provision in the final rule.
    The qualified person required for the shift and monthly inspections
must have expertise with respect to the work conditions, the crane/
derrick, and the vessel/flotation device. However, the annual
inspection is more extensive than the shift or monthly inspections. The
qualified person for the annual inspection must have a greater level of
expertise than the qualified person required for determining whether
deficiencies identified in shift and monthly inspections constitute
hazards. The qualified person for the annual inspection must have
expertise in all the areas covered by the annual inspection, in
addition to general expertise regarding the equipment and vessel/
flotation device. This expertise will ensure that the operational
conditions are safe for employees, and, therefore, OSHA is retaining
these requirements in the final rule.
    Section 1926.1437(h)(4)(i)(C) requires an inspection of various
component parts of the vessel to determine if there is significant
corrosion, wear, deterioration or deformation. The use of the word
significant is to indicate that the functionality of these components
is not impaired in any way due to exposure to the elements or use. The
Committee determined, and OSHA agrees, that these components are
essential to safe operation of the vessel and therefore critical to
employee safety.
    A commenter indicated that the requirement to check for ``external
evidence of leaks and structural damage'' in Sec.
1926.1437(h)(4)(i)(C) should not apply below the waterline of the hull.
(ID-0345.26.) That commenter suggested that applying the requirement
below the waterline would be unduly burdensome because it would require
dry-docking the vessel. Another commenter, indicated that dry-docking a
vessel is expensive--between $20,000 and $60,000 per dry-docking,
depending on the type of vessel. (ID-0344.1.) This cost estimate was
supported by another commenter, who noted the average cost for its
fleet was $50,000 to dry-dock a vessel. (ID-0383.1.) A commenter
indicated that industry practice is to conduct the routine annual
inspection from the waterline up, and that inspecting below the
waterline would not enhance safety. (ID-0344.1.)
    The Agency agrees that it is not necessary to require dry-docking
on an annual basis. Instead, OSHA modified the language used in the
proposed rule to allow employers to check for leaks and damage below
the waterline inside the vessel/flotation device, by, for example,
opening hatches and access/inspection ports, but not by opening sealed
compartments or cutting openings.
    Paragraph (h)(4)(iii)(A) requires the removal from service of any
vessel/flotation device when a qualified person determines a deficiency
in the equipment constitutes a immediate hazard. As with other removal
from service requirements, OSHA is including a cross-reference to the
tag-out requirement in Sec.  1926.1417(f), which is triggered when
equipment is removed from service.
    Paragraph (h)(5) requires an inspection every four years of the
internal portion of the barge, pontoons, vessel, or other means of
flotation by a marine engineer, marine architect, licensed surveyor, or
other qualified

person who has expertise with respect to vessels/flotation devices. A
higher level of expertise is necessary for performing the four-year
inspection than the annual inspection. By listing ``other qualified
person'' together with ``marine engineer,'' ``marine architect,'' and
``licensed surveyor,'' the Agency clarifies that the expertise of the
``other qualified person'' must be equivalent to that of a marine
engineer, marine architect, or licensed surveyor. In this regard, the
proposal did not list inspection items for the four-year inspection.
Instead, OSHA determines (based on C-DAC's recommendation) that a
better approach is to rely on the expert knowledge of the marine
engineer, marine architect, licensed surveyor, or other qualified
person who has expertise with respect to vessels/flotation devices.
    OSHA received two comments regarding the use of the term
``quadrennial'' in the proposed rule. (ID-0343; -0344.1.) Both
recommended using the term ``four-year'' because it is consistent with
current terminology used by the marine industry. In light of this
information OSHA revised the term ``quadrennial'' to ``four-year'' in
the final rule in paragraphs (h)(5) and (h)(6) of Sec.  1926.1437.
    Paragraph (h)(6) sets forth the documentation requirements for the
monthly, annual, and four-year inspections, which follow those in Sec.
1926.1412, Inspections, at Sec. Sec.  1926.1412(e)(3) and
1926.1412(f)(7). However, with respect to four-year inspections the
written documentation of the inspection must be maintained for four
years. This provision enables the employer to track changes in the
condition of the vessel from the previous inspection, thereby
correcting hazards in a timely manner. Therefore, OSHA is retaining
this provision in the final rule. The Agency is adding language to
paragraph (h)(6) to clarify that all of the inspection documentation
(including the four year inspection documentation) must be made
available, for the duration of the document retention period, to
persons performing inspections, in accordance with Sec.  1926.1412(k).
Paragraph (i) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (j) Working With a Diver
    Paragraph (j) of this section sets forth supplemental requirements
designed to ensure that a diver is hoisted safely from the vessel and
back onto the vessel when equipment covered by this section is used for
this purpose. Extra precautions and measures are needed when engaged in
this activity due to the drowning, struck-by, crushed-by, and other
hazards involved.
    Marine environments and the condition of a diver can change quickly
and unexpectedly; the crane/derrick operator must be constantly aware
of the diving operation and in position to take immediate action when
necessary. Therefore, under proposed Sec.  1926.1437(j)(1), when one or
more divers are being hoisted into and out of the water, the employer
is prohibited from using the equipment for any other purpose until all
divers have returned back on board. This requirement ensures the
operator's attention is not diverted from the welfare of the divers.
Paragraph (j)(2) of this section requires the equipment operator to
remain at the equipment controls during the entire diving operation.
This provision ensures that the operator is able to respond when
necessary.
    Paragraph (j)(3) requires that, in addition to the signal
requirements in Sec. Sec.  1926.1419-1926.1422, the diver tender must
be in direct communication with the equipment operator. This
communication must be done either through maintaining a clear line of
sight between the operator and tender or by electronic transmission
between the operator and tender. The tender is the individual
responsible for monitoring and communicating with the diver. In this
section, the diver tender is required to maintain effective
communication with the equipment operator when the equipment is used to
get the diver in and out of the water. The tender is the member of the
dive team who closely monitors the diver's condition during the dive
and checks the equipment prior to the dive. Therefore, the tender is
able to let the operator know when a diver needs to be lifted out of
the water or when other action by the equipment operator is needed.
    Paragraph (j)(4) specifies that when using a crane/derrick to hoist
a diver, the crane/derrick must be secured in such a way that there is
no amount of shifting in any direction. A small shift of a crane/
derrick on a barge can result in movement that can injure the diver.
    OSHA notes that Sec.  1926.1431, Hoisting personnel, applies when a
crane/derrick is used to hoist personnel. In most instances when
personnel are hoisted, they must be located in a personnel platform
that meets criteria specified in Sec.  1926.1431. However, Sec.
1926.1431(b)(2) contains exceptions to the use a personnel platform and
one such exception, specified by Sec.  1926.1431(b)(2)(iii), applies
when an employer transfers an employee to or from a marine worksite in
a marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device. Under the definition in
Sec.  1926.1401, ``marine worksite'' includes a worksite in the water;
therefore, the exception specified by Sec.  1926.1431(b)(2)(iii) to the
requirement to use a personnel platform applies when a diver is hoisted
into or out of the water in a marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device.
    OSHA received no comments on any of the provisions in proposed
paragraph (j). Accordingly, OSHA is retaining these provisions in the
final rule because, in the Committee's view, use of a personnel
platform could be infeasible or more hazardous to employees than an
alternative means of hoisting personnel such as marine-hoisted
personnel-transfer devices (see the discussion above in this preamble
for Sec.  1926.1431(b)(2)(iii)).
Paragraph (k)
    Paragraph (k) of this section requires the employer to adhere to
the specifications and limitations established by the manufacturer of
the barge, pontoon, vessel, or other means of flotation with respect to
imposed environmental, operational, and in-transit loads. The purpose
of this provision is to ensure that the equipment can operate safely
under the forces imposed on it. In its deliberations, the Committee
noted that the manufacturer is in the best position to determine the
maximum external loads the vessel/flotation device can withstand while
maintaining necessary stability and buoyancy, and that requiring
employers to adhere to the manufacturer's specifications and
limitations would provide employees with the requisite level of
protection.
    The language of the proposed rule varied from the text in the C-DAC
consensus document. OSHA made this revision to clarify that it was an
employer's responsibility to follow the manufacturer's specifications
and limitations. OSHA requested public comment on this revision. OSHA
received two comments in response to this request. (ID-0205.1; -
0213.1.) Both commenters stated the C-DAC language showed the
Committee's ``original intent of this paragraph was a design
specification,'' and further stated that the revision as proposed by
OSHA did not consider the Committee's language was addressing design
specifications.
    On reviewing these comments, the C-DAC consensus document, and
OSHA's proposed text, OSHA determines that paragraph (k) needs to
address both the commenters' position that there is a need for a design
specification, and OSHA's position in the proposed rule that employers
must comply to the manufacturer's

specifications and limitations. OSHA revised proposed paragraph (k)
accordingly.
    In addition, another commenter raised the issue that, for many
vessels covered by this section, the manufacturer no longer exists, or
that the vessel has been modified and an expert has established the
appropriate specifications and limitations for the vessel. (ID-
0345.26.) One commenter noted the company's fleet had vessels that were
60 years old and the manufacturers of some of these vessels were no
longer in business. (ID-0344.1.) OSHA finds these comments persuasive,
and is adding a provision to paragraph (k) to require the employer to
follow specifications and limitations established by a qualified person
in such instances.
Paragraph (l) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (m) Floating Cranes/Derricks
    Paragraph (m) of this section sets forth requirements with respect
to load charts, rated capacity, allowable list, allowable trim, wind
speed and related measures for floating cranes/derricks. The
requirements in Sec. Sec.  1926.1437(m)(1) through (5) address the
various hazards that contribute to instability of the vessel/flotation
device and the effect of marine conditions that can lead to boom/
equipment failure.
    As defined in Sec.  1926.1401, a floating crane/derrick includes
equipment built either by a manufacturer or by the employer using the
equipment. Both types must meet the criteria in Sec. Sec.
1926.1437(m)(1) through (m)(3). These provisions are designed to
prevent the crane/derrick portion of the equipment from failure due to
overloading, thereby, preventing the vessel/flotation device from
capsizing.
    Paragraph (m)(1) requires that load charts applicable to operations
on water not be exceeded. Paragraph (m)(2) establishes criteria (in
Table M1) for maximum allowable list and trim relative to the rated
capacity of the equipment. Section 1926.1437(m)(3) provides two charts
that set the stability criteria for specific conditions. The first of
these charts (Table M2) contains the minimum requirements to maintain
stability with respect to wind speed and freeboard distance of the
vessel/flotation device. The second chart (Table M3) addresses the
backward stability of the boom.
    The Agency requested public comment on a definition of freeboard as
it is used in Table M2. In response, a commenter offered this
definition: ``Freeboard is the vertical distance between the water line
and the main deck of the vessel.'' (ID-0383.1.) This definition is
consistent with OSHA's review of the definition of freeboard;
therefore, OSHA is adding this definition to the regulatory text of
Sec.  1926.1437(m)(2) in the final rule and is including it in Sec.
1926.1401, Definitions.
    Under paragraph (m)(4), employer-made equipment must meet the same
criteria specified by Sec. Sec.  1926.1437(m)(1)-(m)(3) for
manufacturer-made equipment. In addition, an employer using equipment
it builds is required to have documents demonstrating that these
criteria have been met. Such documents must be signed by a registered
professional engineer who is a qualified person with respect to the
design of the type of equipment involved.
    Manufacturers have sufficient expertise with respect to the
development of load charts, rated capacities, and related operational
limitations, so there is no need for a documentation requirement for
manufacturer-built floating cranes/derricks. However, given the variety
of employer-made equipment, the Agency included this documentation
requirement to ensure that employer-made equipment has the same level
of safety as manufactured equipment.
    Paragraph (m)(5) addresses structural and access requirements for
the barge, pontoon, vessel, or other means of flotation. These
requirements are related to the stability of the vessel, including
minimizing movement while operating equipment, thereby increasing
employee safety by reducing the likelihood of capsizing.
    Paragraph (m)(5)(i) requires the vessel to be structurally
sufficient to withstand the stress of both static and dynamic loads of
the crane/derrick when operating at the crane/derrick's maximum rated
capacity with all planned deck loads and ballasted compartments. This
provision is necessary to minimize the likelihood of the vessel's
structure failing, which would expose employees to a drowning hazard,
or endanger them because of inadvertent movement during equipment
operations.
    Paragraph (m)(5)(ii) requires a subdivided hull with at least one
longitudinal watertight bulkhead to reduce the free surface effect on
the vessel. Subdividing the hull limits the effects of liquid movement
on vessel stability, thereby, reducing the risk of the vessel
capsizing.
    Paragraph (m)(5)(iii) requires void compartments to be accessible
for inspection and pumping. This requirement ensures that the employer
evaluates the amount of water in the compartments to determine the
potential free surface effect on vessel stability, and then to initiate
pumping when necessary to avoid capsizing.
    OSHA received no comments were received on paragraphs (m)(3)
through (m)(5). OSHA is retaining these provisions in the final rule to
ensure the stability of vessels/flotation devices during crane/derrick
operations, thereby preventing employee exposure to drowning, impact,
and other hazards associated with crane/derrick operations onboard
vessels/flotation devices.
Paragraph (n) Land Cranes/Derricks
    Paragraph (n) of this section sets forth the requirements for land
cranes/derricks when used on a barge, pontoons, vessel or other means
of flotation. As noted above, land cranes/derricks are not originally
designed for marine use but are covered by this section when they are
mounted on a vessel/flotation device and used on water. The Agency
determined that special requirements are needed to address the
distinctive safety issues presented when using such equipment.
    The stability of the vessel/flotation device is affected by the use
of a land crane/derrick on board. Implementing a system that keeps the
equipment properly located on the vessel is essential for maintaining
stability. In addition, land cranes/derricks have less capacity when on
a vessel/flotation device than when on land, due to the fact that the
crane/derrick is not originally designed for the special conditions on
a vessel/flotation device. Consequently, the employer must adjust the
rated capacity of the crane/derrick when used on the vessel/flotation
device. If not properly determined, the land crane/derrick may be
overloaded, which can cause loss of stability (including tip-over) and
boom/equipment failure, thereby endangering employees.
    Paragraph (n)(1) sets forth the requirements for determining the
rated capacity for land cranes/derricks used on a vessel/flotation
device. Load charts for this equipment developed for use on land do not
address the use of the equipment on a flotation device or the
environmental conditions of a marine worksite. Therefore, under Sec.
1926.1437(n)(1)(i), the rated capacity (as depicted in the load charts)
must be reduced for list, trim, wave action, and wind.
    In establishing the rated capacity for use on the vessel/flotation
device, the capacity of the vessel/flotation device also must be
considered. Since some locations on the vessel/flotation device will
have less ability to support the

crane/derrick than others, under Sec.  1926.1437(n)(1)(ii), the rated
capacity must be applicable to a specified location(s) on the vessel/
flotation device. This assessment must be made considering the expected
and encountered environmental conditions.
    Paragraph (n)(2) specifies that the modification to rated capacity
required by Sec.  1926.1437(n)(1) of this section must be performed
either by the manufacturer of the equipment or by a qualified person
with expertise in both land crane/derrick capacity and the stability of
vessels/flotation devices. Performance by a qualified person will
achieve equivalent operational safety conditions as for the modified
floating cranes/derricks. In the proposed rule, OSHA (at the request of
the SBREFA Panel) requested public comment as to whether qualified
persons are available in the industry with expertise in both land
crane/derrick capacity and the stability of vessels/flotation devices
with respect to equipment performing duty-cycle work (73 FR 59864, Oct.
9, 2008). Two commenters responded to this inquiry by stating that
qualified persons are available in the industry with expertise in both
land crane/derrick capacity and stability of vessels with respect to
equipment performing duty-cycle work. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.)
    OSHA also requested comment from the public on whether the
requirements of (n)(2) are necessary for the safety of employees when
equipment is engaged in duty cycle work. Two commenters found that
these requirements are necessary for safety when equipment is engaged
in duty cycle work. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.) Another commenter supported
this position by noting instances when the input of a qualified person
is needed since the list and trim of the vessel can affect the rated
capacity of the equipment. (ID-0345.26.) Based on these comments, and
the employee protection afforded by the requirements of paragraph
(n)(2), OSHA is including these requirements in the final rule as
proposed.
    Paragraph (n)(3) sets parameters for the maximum allowable list and
trim for the vessel/flotation device and the land crane/derrick to
ensure vessel and crane/derrick stability and to prevent the crane/
derrick from exceeding its rated capacity. Under paragraph (n)(4), when
a land crane/derrick is used on a flotation device, all deck surfaces
must be above water and the entire bottom area must be submerged. This
provision is necessary to ensure a stable platform when operating the
land crane/derrick, to protect against loads that would cause the
system used to secure the land crane/derrick (see Sec.
1926.1437(n)(5)) to fail, and to protect against overloading the
vessel/flotation device land/crane derrick.
    Even though OSHA received no comments on these two paragraphs, it
is retaining the paragraphs in the final rule because maintaining
proper list and trim, as well as buoyancy, is critical to the stability
of the vessel/flotation device, which will prevent the vessel/flotation
device from capsizing and endangering employees.
    Paragraph (n)(5) sets forth four options for securing \139\ the
land crane/derrick on the vessel/flotation device. Providing several
options to employers addresses the various of work scenarios found in
the industry. Each option is effective in preventing the land crane/
derrick from rolling, sliding, or in any way shifting away from its
proper location. These horizontal movements can cause the vessel/
flotation device to become unstable, or the land crane/derrick to slide
or fall into the water. Additionally, OSHA determines that an exception
is appropriate for use of mobile auxiliary cranes on a vessel. The
requirements for this type of equipment are specified by Sec.
1926.1437(n)(5)(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \139\ In this preamble the Agency uses the term ``securing'' and
``secured'' to refer collectively to the systems described in
Options (1)-(4) in Sec. Sec.  1926.1437(n)(5)(i) through (iv). The
Agency notes that this definition differs from the term ``positively
secured'' in subpart N in former Sec.  1926.550(f)(1)(iv), which
required that ``mobile cranes on barges shall be positively
secured.'' As OSHA stated in a letter of interpretation, the term
``positively secured'' in the subpart N means ``physically
attached''--similar to the type of system described in Option (1) of
paragraph (n)(5)(i). (See OSHA's interpretation letter to Mr. Gary
C. Hay, October 12, 2004 (ID-0014).)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraphs (n)(5)(i) through (iv) provide the four options for
securing the land crane/derrick to the vessel/flotation device. The
options for preventing equipment shifting include direct physical
attachment, corralling, a rail system or a centerline cable system.
These options serve to prevent inadvertent movement of the equipment
away from its proper location on the vessel/flotation device, which can
harm employees working nearby, or such movement can endanger employees
by capsizing the vessel. However, it is not the purpose of these
options to prevent any portion of the land crane/derrick from pulling
vertically up from the deck when handling loads beyond the land crane/
derrick's rated capacity. Rather, these options will prevent horizontal
rolling or shifting away from the land crane/derrick's proper location.
    Paragraph (n)(5)(v) requires that the option selected for securing
the equipment on the vessel be designed by a marine engineer, a
registered professional engineer familiar with floating crane/derrick
design, or a qualified person familiar with floating crane/derrick
design. The Agency determined that expertise in floating crane/derrick
design is necessary to design a securing system that meets the selected
option's requirements and to prevent inadvertent movement of the
equipment on the vessel/flotation device.
    OSHA received no comments on any of the requirements in proposed
paragraph (n)(5). Consequently, OSHA is retaining this paragraph in the
final rule because properly securing land crane/derrick on the vessel/
flotation device will maintain the stability of the vessel/flotation
device, thereby preventing the vessel/flotation device from capsizing
and endangering employees.
    Paragraph (n)(6) \140\ provides an exception stating that an
employer does not have to secure mobile auxiliary cranes as required by
paragraph (n)(5) when the employer demonstrates that specific
conditions have been met. Typically, the movement of the mobile crane
on these vessels does not adversely affect the stability of the
floating crane/derrick because of the large size, displacement and
design of the floating crane/derrick. The size and design of the
floating crane/derrick also makes it less susceptible than other
vessels to the effects of wind, waves, and other environmental
conditions. OSHA finds that when the employer demonstrates meeting the
criteria specified by Sec. Sec.  1926.1437(n)(6)(v) and (vi), employees
will receive adequate protection from inadvertent horizontal movement
of a mobile crane located on the deck of a floating crane/derrick.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \140\ Formerly paragraph (n)(5)(vi) in the proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under paragraph (n)(6)(i), a written plan that is developed and
signed by a marine engineer, or a registered professional engineer
familiar with floating crane/derrick design, is required. OSHA finds
that developing a written plan for the use of these cranes requires
specialized knowledge and skill because of the catastrophic
consequences to employees that could result if the task is not
performed correctly.
    Paragraph (n)(6)(ii), requires that the written plan be developed
so that the applicable requirements of Sec.  1926.1437 are met despite
the position, travel, operation, and lack of physical attachment,
corralling, use of rails, or use of cable system of the mobile
auxiliary crane. For example, a section of the plan could address a
vessel's

stability while it is operating within specified dynamic and
environmental conditions (see Sec. Sec.  1926.1437(n)(6)(v) and (vi)),
i.e., that the movement of the vessel under these conditions does not
cause the mobile crane to shift horizontally, or that the maximum list
and trim specified for vessel and mobile crane are not exceeded.
    Under paragraph (n)(6)(iii), the plan must specify the areas of the
deck where the mobile auxiliary crane is permitted to be positioned,
travel, and operate. It must also specify the parameters (that is,
limitations) of such movements and operation. For example, a section of
the plan could limit movement of the mobile crane to a specified area
without a load, and to another specified area while handling a load.
    Under paragraph (n)(6)(iv), the employer must mark the deck to
identify the permitted areas for positioning, traveling, and operating
the mobile crane. This provision is necessary so that the operator
maneuvers and operates the crane within the permitted areas specified
by the plan, thereby ensuring the stability of the vessel/flotation
device and the safety of employees.
    Under paragraph (n)(6)(v), the plan must specify the dynamic and
environmental conditions that have to be present for the mobile
auxiliary crane to move and operate on the vessel. Under Sec.
1926.1437(n)(6)(v), if the specific dynamic and environmental
conditions are not present, the mobile auxiliary crane must be secured
according to one of the four options outlined in Sec. Sec.
1926.1437(n)(5)(i) through (iv). For example, the plan must address
environmental conditions, such as the maximum amount of wind and wave
action permitted; if these conditions are exceeded, the mobile crane
must be secured using one of the four options specified by Sec.
1926.1437(n)(5). While OSHA received no comments on the requirements of
this paragraph in the proposal, it is retaining this paragraph in the
final standard as proposed because a properly prepared plan will ensure
the structural integrity and stability of the vessel/flotation device,
thereby protecting employees from drowning, impact, and other hazards.
    Paragraph (n)(7) \141\ contains requirements regarding the barge,
pontoon, vessel or other means of flotation on which the land crane/
derrick is located. The requirements Sec.  1926.1437(n)(7) are
identical to those listed at paragraph (m)(5) of this section. These
requirements ensure the structural capacity of the vessel/flotation
device to support the land crane/derrick and the loads handled by this
equipment, as well as the stability of the vessel/flotation device.
These provisions are designed to help prevent unintended movement while
operating equipment and to prevent capsizing. OSHA finds these
requirements necessary to provide a safe, stable work environment. OSHA
received no comments on this paragraph in the proposed rule. However,
as with paragraph (m)(5), OSHA is retaining this paragraph in the final
rule to ensure the stability of vessels/flotation devices during crane/
derrick operations, thereby preventing employee exposure to drowning,
impact, and other hazards associated with crane/derrick operations
onboard vessels/flotation devices.