[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 2, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60900-60918]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23625]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2012-0015]

Kiewit Power Constructors Co. et al. (Avalotis Corp., Bowen
Engineering Corporation, Commonwealth Dynamics, Inc., Gibraltar Chimney
International, LLC, Hamon Custodis, Inc., Hoffmann, Inc., International
Chimney Corporation, Karrena International Chimney, Matrix SME, Inc.,
NAES Power Contractors, Pullman Power, LLC, R and P Industrial Chimney
Co., Inc., T. E. Ibberson Company, TIC--The Industrial Company); Grant
of a Permanent Variance

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice of grant of a permanent variance.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the grant of a permanent variance to
Avalotis Corp., Bowen Engineering Corporation, Commonwealth Dynamics,
Inc., Gibraltar Chimney International, LLC, Hamon Custodis, Inc.,
Hoffmann, Inc., International Chimney Corporation, Karrena
International Chimney, Kiewit Power Constructors Co., Matrix SME, Inc.,
NAES Power Contractors, Pullman Power, LLC, R and P Industrial Chimney
Co., Inc., T. E. Ibberson Company, TIC--The Industrial Company (``the
employers''). From 1973 to the present, the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA or the Agency) granted permanent variances
to a number of chimney-construction companies from the provisions of
the OSHA standards that regulate boatswain's chairs and hoist towers,
specifically paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452 and paragraphs (c)(1)
through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR
1926.552. These variances use temporary personnel hoist systems to
transport workers to and from worksites in a personnel cage while
constructing chimneys of various configurations using jump-form
construction techniques and procedures. The Agency received
applications from 15 employers for a variance addressing chimney and
chimney-related construction that, like the previous variances, propose
to use temporary personnel hoist systems to transport workers to and
from worksites in a personnel cage. These variance applications,
however, included conditions that address construction of chimneys and
chimney-related structures using temporary hoist systems and procedures
in association with two different methods of construction (i.e., jump-
form and slip-form construction), regardless of the structures'
configurations (i.e., tapered or straight-barreled of any diameter).
OSHA consolidated these variance applications into a single application
and published the application and request for comments in the Federal
Register on March 21, 2013 (78 FR 17432).
    After considering the record as a whole, OSHA finds that these
alternative conditions protect workers at least as well as the
requirements specified by 29 CFR 1926.452(o)(3) and 29 CFR
1926.552(c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and
(c)(16). This permanent variance applies in Federal OSHA enforcement
jurisdictions and in those states and territories with OSHA-approved
State-Plans covering private-sector employers that have identical
standards and agree to the terms of the variance.

DATES: The permanent variance is effective on October 2, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    General information and press inquiries. For general information
and press inquiries about this notice, contact Frank Meilinger,
Director, OSHA Office of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3647, Washington, DC 20210; telephone:
(202) 693-1999.
    Technical information. For technical information about this notice,
contact Stefan Weisz, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination
Activities, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue
NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
(202) 693-1644.
    Copies of this Federal Register notice. Electronic copies of this
Federal Register notice are available at http://www.regulations.gov.
This Federal Register notice, as well as news releases and other
relevant information, also are available at OSHA's Web page at http://www.osha.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Fifteen companies (or applicants) submitted applications for a
permanent variance under Section 6(d) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 655) and 29 CFR 1905.11 (``Variances and
other relief under section 6(d)'') (see Document ID Nos. OSHA-2012-
0015-0002 to -0019 \1\). The applicants construct, renovate, repair,
maintain, inspect, and demolish tall chimneys and similar structures
made of concrete, brick, and steel. This work, which occurs throughout
the United States, requires the applicants to transport employees and
construction tools and materials to and from elevated worksites located
inside and outside these structures. The following list provides
specific information about each applicant, including the company name
and location:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In Docket No. OSHA-2012-0015 for this variance application.

Avalotis Corp; 400 Jones Street, Verona, PA 15147
Bowen Engineering Corporation (merged with Mid-Atlantic Boiler &
Chimney, Inc., (formerly Alberici Mid-Atlantic, LLC)), 8802 N. Meridian
St.Indianapolis, IN 46260
Commonwealth Dynamics, Inc., 95 Court Street, Portsmouth, NH 03801,
Gibraltar Chimney International, LLC, 92 Cooper Ave. Tonawanda, NY
14150

Hamon Custodis, Inc. (formerly Custodis Construction Co., Inc., then
Custodis Cuttrell, Inc.), 58 East Main Street, Somerville, NJ 08876
Hoffmann, Inc., 6001 49th Street South, Muscatine, IA 52761
International Chimney Corporation, 55 South Long Street, Williamsville,
NY 14221
Karrena International Chimney, 57 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY
14221
Kiewit Power Constructors Co., 9401 Renner Blvd., Lenexa, KS 66219
Matrix SME, Inc. (formerly Matrix Service Industrial Contractors,
Inc.), 1510 Chester Pike, Suite 500, Eddystone, PA 19022
NAES Power Contractors (formerly American Boiler and Chimney Company),
167 Anderson Rd., Cranberry Township, PA 16066
Pullman Power, LLC (formerly M. W. Kellogg Co., then Pullman Power
Products Corporation), 6501 E. Commerce Avenue, Suite 200, Kansas City,
MO 64120
R and P Industrial Chimney Co., Inc., 244 Industrial Parkway,
Nicholasville, KY 40356
T. E. Ibberson Company, 828 5th St. South, Hopkins, MN 55343
TIC--The Industrial Company, 9780 Mt. Pyramid Ct., Suite 100,
Englewood, CO 80112

    The applicants seek a permanent variance from paragraphs (o)(3) of
29 CFR 1926.452, which regulates the tackle used to rig a boatswain's
chair, as well as (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i),
and (c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552 that regulate hoist towers. These
paragraphs specify the following requirements:
     (o)(3)--Requirements for the tackle used to rig a
boatswain's chair;
     (c)(1)--Construction requirements for hoist towers outside
a structure;
     (c)(2)--Construction requirements for hoist towers inside
a structure;
     (c)(3)--Anchoring a hoist tower to a structure;
     (c)(4)--Hoistway doors or gates;
     (c)(8)--Electrically interlocking entrance doors or gates
to the hoistway and cars;
     (c)(13)--Emergency stop switch located in the car;
     (c)(14)(i)--Using a minimum of two wire ropes for drum
hoisting; and
     (c)(16)--Material and component requirements for
construction of personnel hoists.
    The applicants contend that the permanent variance would provide
their employees with a place of employment that is at least as safe and
healthful as they would receive under the existing provisions.
    The places of employment affected by this variance application are
the present and future projects where the applicants construct chimneys
and chimney-related structures using jump-form and slip-form
construction \2\ techniques and procedures, regardless of structural
configuration when such construction involves the use of temporary
personnel hoist systems. These projects would be in states under
federal authority, as well as State-Plan states that have safety and
health plans approved by OSHA under Section 18 of the Occupational
Safety and Health (OSH) Act (29 U.S.C. 667) and 29 CFR part 1952
(``Approved State Plans for Enforcement of State Standards''), and that
have plans covering private-sector employers and standards identical to
the standards that are the subject of this variance, and that agree to
the terms of the variance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Throughout this notice, OSHA uses the terms ``jump-form
construction'' and ``slip-form construction'' instead of ``jump-form
formwork construction'' and ``slip-form formwork construction,''
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The permanent variance permits the employers to operate temporary
hoist systems to raise and lower workers to and from elevated worksites
on chimneys, chimney linings, stacks, silos, and chimney-related
structures such as towers and similar structures constructed using
jump-form and slip-form construction techniques and procedures
regardless of structural configuration of the structure (such as
tapered or straight barreled of any diameter). This variance also
provides consistent conditions across the employers named in this
application. OSHA published the employers' variance applications and
request for comments in the Federal Register on March 21, 2013 (78 FR
17432).

II. Multi-State Variance

    The applicants state that they perform chimney and other related
construction work in a number of states and territories that operate
OSHA-approved safety and health programs under Section 18 of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.).
State Plans and territories have primary enforcement responsibility
over the work performed in those states and territories. Under the
provisions of 29 CFR 1952.9 (``Variance affecting multi-state
employers'') and 29 CFR 1905.14(b)(3) (``Actions on applications''), a
permanent variance granted by the Agency becomes effective in State-
Plans and territories as an authoritative interpretation of the
applicants' compliance obligation when: (1) The relevant standards are
the same as the Federal OSHA standards from which the applicants are
seeking the permanent variance; and (2) the State-Plan or territory
does not object to the terms of the variance application.
    OSHA received one comment on the variance application from the
state of Michigan (see Document ID No. OSHA-2012-0015-0022). OSHA
continues to assume that, absent additional comments received to the
contrary, the state's position regarding grant of this permanent
variance is the same as its position regarding grant of prior variances
involving chimney construction.
    As noted above and in section IV of this notice (``Comments on
Proposed Variance Application''), OSHA received just one comment on the
variance application published in the Federal Register (78 FR 17432)
from any state State-Plan or territory. However, several State Plans
and territories commented on earlier variance applications published in
the Federal Register involving the same standards and submitted by
other employers engaged in chimney construction and repair; OSHA is
relying on these previous comments to determine the position of these
State Plans and territories on the variance applications submitted by
the present employers. The remaining paragraphs in this section provide
a summary of the positions taken by the State Plans and territories on
the proposed alternative conditions.
    Twenty-seven states and territories have OSHA-approved safety and
health programs.\3\ In this regard, 17 State Plans and 1 territory have
standards identical to the Federal OSHA standards: Alaska, Arizona,
Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee,
Vermont, Virginia, and Wyoming. However, Hawaii and Iowa previously
declined to accept the terms of variances for chimney-related
construction work granted previously by Federal OSHA. Kentucky stated
that its statutory law requires affected employers to apply to the
state for a state variance. South Carolina noted that, for the South
Carolina Commissioner of Labor to accept a Federal OSHA grant of a
variance,

employers must file the grant at the Commissioner's office in Columbia,
South Carolina. Employers must comply with any special variance
procedures required by these states prior to initiating chimney-related
construction work addressing the conditions specified by this variance.
The permanent Federal OSHA variance will be effective in the following
thirteen State-Plan States and one Territory: Alaska, Arizona, Indiana,
Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Puerto
Rico, Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont, and Wyoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Four State-Plan states (Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey,
and New York) and one territory (Virgin Islands) limit their
occupational safety and health authority to public-sector employers
only. State-Plan states and territories that exercise their
occupational safety and health authority over private-sector
employers are: Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa,
Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North
Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah,
Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Four states (California, Michigan, Utah, and Washington) have
different requirements for chimney-related construction work than
Federal OSHA standards. In its comments (Document ID No. OSHA-2012-
0015-0022), Michigan noted that its standards are not identical to the
OSHA standards, and those employers electing to use a variance in that
state must comply with several provisions in the Michigan standards not
addressed in the OSHA standards. Additionally, Michigan stated that
employers who operate under the OSHA variance in Michigan also must
obtain a Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration
variance (see Michigan Rules 1065(a)(1), 1065(a)(2), and 1072(a)(15)).
    In comments on earlier variance applications, Utah also imposed
specific additional requirements in the past when Federal OSHA granted
similar variances for chimney-related construction work.\4\ California
and Washington declined to accept the terms of variances for chimney-
related construction work granted by Federal OSHA in the past.\5\
Employers, therefore, must apply separately to these states for a
variance from construction work on structures covered by this variance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 68 FR 52961 (Oak Park Chimney Corp. and American Boiler
& Chimney Co.)
    \5\ See 70 FR 72659 (International Chimney Corporation, Karrena
International, LLC, and Matrix Service Industrial Contractors,
Inc.), 71 FR 10557 (Commonwealth Dynamics, Inc., Mid-Atlantic Boiler
& Chimney, Inc., and R and P Industrial Chimney Co., Inc.), and 75
FR 22424 (Avalotis Corp.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The remaining State Plans and territories with OSHA-approved state
plans (Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, and the Virgin
Islands) cover only public-sector workers and have no authority over
the private-sector workers addressed in this variance (i.e., that
authority continues to reside with Federal OSHA).

III. Supplementary Information

A. Previous Chimney-Construction Variances

    From 1973 to the present, the Agency granted permanent variances to
a number of chimney-construction companies from the provisions of the
OSHA standards that regulate boatswains' chairs, personnel platforms,
and hoist towers, specifically, paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452 and
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and
(c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552.\6\ The National Stack and Chimney Safety
and Health Advisory Committee reports \7\ that four of its member
companies (i.e., Pullman Power, Hamon Custodis, International Chimney
Corp, and Commonwealth Constructors) using temporary personnel hoist
systems in accordance with the conditions of the present permanent
variances for chimney-related construction work had no recordable
injuries or fatalities (as reported on the OSHA 300 Forms \8\) over the
past seven years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 38 FR 8545 (April 3, 1973), 44 FR 51352 (August 31,
1979), 50 FR 20145 (May 14, 1985), 50 FR 40627 (October 4, 1985), 52
FR 22552 (June 12, 1987), 68 FR 52961 (September 8, 2003), 70 FR
72659 (December 6, 2005), 71 FR 10557 (March 1, 2006), 72 FR 6002
(February 8, 2007), 74 FR 34789 (July 17, 2009), 74 FR 41742 (August
18, 2009), and 75 FR 22424 (April 28, 2010)).
    \7\ Private communication from Mr. John Huchko, Secretary of the
National Stack and Chimney Safety and Health Advisory Committee,
January 2, 2013.
    \8\ See 29 CFR part 1904, Recording and Reporting Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OSHA generally based the alternative conditions in the variances
granted by this notice on the alternative conditions included in
previous variances. However, several of the previous variances (for
example, 38 FR 8545 granted April 3, 1973, and 71 FR 10557 granted
March 1, 2006) included conditions that did not limit the use of the
variance to the construction of tapered chimneys, and did not specify
any methods of construction. Conditions included in recently granted
chimney-construction variances limited the scope of the variance to the
construction of tapered chimneys using jump-form construction
techniques and procedures. For example, this limitation applied to the
Avalotis Corp. variance (75 FR 22424; April 28, 2010) used for
comparison purposes in this variance.
    The alternative conditions specified in the permanent variance
granted by this notice apply to chimney-related construction, including
work on chimneys, chimney linings, stacks, silos, towers, and similar
structures, built using jump-form and slip-form construction methods of
construction, regardless of the structural configuration, and that
involve the use of temporary personnel hoist systems.

B. Kiewit Variance Application

    On February 8, 2007, OSHA published a variance application
submitted by Kiewit Power Constructors Co. (Kiewit; see 72 FR 6002).
This publication included an interim order that permitted Kiewit to use
a rope-guided hoist system to transport employees to elevated worksites
when it complies with the conditions specified in the variance
application. One of the conditions specified in the publication limited
the application and interim order to tapered chimneys, which was the
basis for previous variances granted by OSHA to other chimney-
construction companies (see subsection A (Background) of this section
for a discussion of previously granted chimney variances). Kiewit
notified OSHA on February 23, 2007, that it required a permanent
variance to perform work on small-diameter, straight-barreled chimneys
built using conventional jump-form construction techniques and
procedures and straight-barreled chimneys of any diameter built using
slip-form construction techniques and procedures, as well as tapered
chimneys constructed using jump-form construction techniques and
procedures. Kiewit submitted a revised variance application addressing
the conditions included in previously granted chimney-construction
variances to OSHA on March 1, 2007 (superseded by Kiewit's variance
application of November 16, 2012; see Exhibit No. OSHA-2012-0015-0011).
    According to its March 1, 2007, variance application, Kiewit was
seeking a variance from the provisions of OSHA standards that regulate
boatswain's chairs and hoist towers for the construction of small-
diameter, straight-barreled chimneys constructed using jump-form
construction techniques and procedures, and chimneys of any diameter
constructed using slip-form construction techniques and procedures.
Regarding small-diameter, straight-barreled chimneys constructed using
jump-form construction techniques and procedures, Kiewit contended that
the extreme height and limited space inside these chimneys make it
infeasible to attach a hoist tower to the interior walls of the
chimneys during construction. In some cases, it also is infeasible to
use a personnel cage in such small-diameter, straight-barreled
chimneys. Under these conditions, Kiewit proposed to adopt alternative
measures of complying with

the relevant boatswain's-chair and personnel-platform requirements.
    With respect to straight-barreled chimneys constructed using slip-
form construction techniques and procedures, Kiewit asserted that the
unique techniques and procedures involved in slip-form construction
make it difficult and unsafe to attach a hoist tower to both the
interior and exterior walls of a chimney during construction. Slip-form
construction is an alternative to using jump-form construction
techniques and procedures to shape concrete structures, including
chimney walls. When using slip-form techniques and procedures to
construct chimney walls, Kiewit pours concrete into forms attached to a
platform that moves slowly up either climbing rods imbedded in the
previously poured concrete wall or a mast secured to the interior floor
of the structure. Kiewit's employees operate the platform, pour the
fresh concrete, inspect the formed concrete, and perform other tasks
both inside and outside the chimney from a work deck on the platform,
as well as from scaffolds hung from the platform. As a result of this
progressive construction process, the concrete wall immediately below
the platform for a distance of 20 to 30 feet is insufficiently cured to
safely attach a hoist tower to the wall. Consequently, during slip-form
construction, it is unsafe to attach a hoist tower either inside or
outside the chimney wall for the purpose of transporting employees to
elevated worksites, at least for the last 20 to 30 feet of elevation.
    Kiewit proposed to use a rope-guided hoist system to raise and
lower personnel-transport devices \9\ when constructing chimneys using
jump-form construction techniques and procedures. This system would
consist of a hoist engine, located and controlled outside the chimney,
to power the rope-guided hoist system. The system also would consist of
a wire rope that: spools off the hoist drum into the interior of the
chimney; passes to a footblock that redirects the rope from the
horizontal to the vertical plane; goes from the footblock through the
overhead sheaves above the elevated platform at the cathead; and
finally drops to the bottom landing of the chimney where it connects to
the personnel or material transport.\10\ The cathead, which is a
superstructure at the top of a derrick, supports the overhead sheaves.
The overhead sheaves (and the vertical span of the hoist system) move
upward with the derrick as chimney construction progresses. Two guide
ropes, suspended from the cathead, eliminate swaying and rotation of
the load (including a cage). If the hoist rope breaks, safety clamps
activate and grip the guide ropes to prevent the load from falling.
Kiewit would use a headache ball, located on the hoist rope directly
above the load, to counterbalance the rope's weight between the cathead
sheaves and the footblock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Throughout this document, ``rope'' refers only to wire rope.
    \10\ While Kiewit proposed to use temporary personnel hoist
systems solely to transport employees with the tools and materials
necessary to do their work (i.e., Kiewit would not use these systems
to transport only materials or tools in the absence of employees),
it would attach a hopper or concrete bucket to the empty cage to
raise or lower material to the worksite.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Kiewit proposed to implement additional conditions to improve
employee safety, including:
     Attaching the wire rope to the personnel cage using a
keyed-screwpin shackle or positive-locking link;
     Adding limit switches to the hoist system to prevent
overtravel by the personnel-transport or material-transport devices;
     Providing the safety factors and other precautions
required for personnel hoists as specified by the pertinent provisions
of 29 CFR 1926.552(c), including canopies and shields to protect
employees located in a personnel cage from material that may fall
during hoisting and other overhead activities;
     Providing falling-object protection for personnel
platforms as specified by 29 CFR 1926.451(h)(1);
     Conducting tests and inspections of the hoist system as
required by 29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2) and 1926.552(c)(15);
     Establishing an accident-prevention program that conforms
to 29 CFR 1926.20(b)(3);
     Ensuring that employees who use a personnel platform or
boatswain's chair wear full-body harnesses and lanyards, and that they
attach the lanyards to independent lifelines during the entire period
of vertical transit; and
     Securing the lifelines (used with a personnel platform or
boatswain's chair) to the rigging at the top of the chimney and to a
weight at the bottom of the chimney to provide maximum stability to the
lifelines.
    Paragraph (c) of 29 CFR 1926.552 specifies the requirements for
enclosed hoist systems used to transport personnel from one elevation
to another. This paragraph ensures that employers transport employees
safely to and from elevated work platforms by mechanical means during
the construction, alteration, repair, maintenance, or demolition of
structures such as chimneys. However, this paragraph does not provide
specific safety requirements for hoisting personnel to and from
elevated work platforms and scaffolds used in straight-barreled
chimneys constructed using jump-form or slip-form construction
techniques and procedures, which require frequent relocation of, and
adjustment to, work platforms and scaffolds. Kiewit contended in its
variance application that the great height and limited space of small-
diameter, straight-barreled chimneys built using jump-form construction
techniques and procedures make it infeasible to attach a hoist tower to
the interior walls of these chimneys during construction. With respect
to chimneys constructed using slip-form techniques and procedures,
Kiewit asserted that, because of the progressive process involved in
constructing these chimneys, the concrete wall immediately below the
work platform for a distance of 20 to 30 feet is insufficiently cured
to safely attach a hoist tower. Consequently, Kiewit cannot attach a
hoist tower securely to either the inside or outside of the chimney
wall for the purpose of transporting employees to the work platform, at
least for the last 20 to 30 feet of elevation.
    Paragraph (c)(1) of 29 CFR 1926.552 requires employers to enclose
hoist towers on the side or sides used for entrance to, and exit from,
the chimney; these enclosures must extend the full height of the hoist
tower. Paragraph (c)(2) specifies that employers must enclose all four
sides of a hoist tower. This enclosure also must extend the full height
of the tower. Again, Kiewit argued that these paragraphs are
inapplicable because constructing hoist towers inside small-diameter,
straight-barreled chimneys is infeasible, while attaching hoist towers
to either the inside or outside walls of chimneys constructed using
slip-form techniques and procedures is impossible, at least for the
last 20 or 30 feet of elevation.
    As an alternative to complying with the hoist-tower requirements of
29 CFR 1926.552(c)(1) and (c)(2), Kiewit proposed to use the rope-
guided hoist system described previously in this preamble to transport
its employees to and from elevated work platforms and scaffolds. Use of
this hoist system would eliminate the need for Kiewit to comply with
other provisions of 29 CFR 1926.552(c) that specify requirements for
hoist towers. Therefore, Kiewit requested a permanent variance from
these other provisions, as follows:
     (c)(3)--Anchoring the hoist tower to a structure;
     (c)(4)--Hoistway doors or gates;

     (c)(8)--Electrically interlocking entrance doors or gates
that prevent hoist movement when the doors or gates are open;
     (c)(13)--Emergency stop switch located in the car;
     (c)(14)(i)--Using a minimum of two wire ropes for drum-
type hoisting; and
     (c)(16)--Construction specifications for personnel hoists,
including materials, assembly, structural integrity, and safety
devices.

C. The Current Variance Application

    The conditions in the current variance differ from the conditions
included in the most recent permanent variance granted by OSHA for
chimney construction, which was to Avalotis Corp. (75 FR 22424). The
following table provides a brief summary of the differences between the
conditions in the Avalotis variance and the conditions described in the
current variance.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Conditions in the current
   Conditions in the Avalotis variance          variance application              Differences in conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Scope of the Permanent Variance......  1. Scope........................  Broadens the scope to include work
                                                                             on chimneys and chimney-related
                                                                             structures built using jump-form
                                                                             and slip-form construction
                                                                             techniques and procedures,
                                                                             regardless of structural
                                                                             configuration; does not limit the
                                                                             scope to tapered chimneys, built
                                                                             using jump-form construction
                                                                             techniques and procedures, which
                                                                             was the limitation imposed by the
                                                                             Avalotis variance.
2. Replacing a Personnel Cage With a      2. Application..................  New condition; addresses the
 Personnel Platform or a Boatswain's                                         application of the variance, and
 Chair.                                                                      specifies a number of best
                                                                             practices and other requirements
                                                                             employers must meet for the
                                                                             variance to apply. Also provides
                                                                             the option of replacing a personnel
                                                                             cage with a personnel platform or a
                                                                             boatswain's chair for the
                                                                             construction of tapered chimneys
                                                                             only.
3. Definitions..........................  3. Definitions..................  New condition; defines 29 key terms,
                                                                             usually technical terms, used in
                                                                             the variance to standardize and
                                                                             clarify the meaning of these terms.
4. Qualified Competent Person...........  4. Qualified Person and           Corrects the inadvertent use of the
                                           Competent Person.                 combined term ``qualified competent
                                                                             person'' used in the Avalotis
                                                                             variance and distinguishes between
                                                                             the terms ``qualified person'' and
                                                                             ``competent person.''
5. Hoist Machine........................  5. Hoist Machine................  Updates the requirements for the
                                                                             design and use of hoist machines
                                                                             based on guidance provided by ANSI
                                                                             A10.22-2007.
6. Methods of Operation.................  6. Methods of Operation.........  Expands and clarifies the training
                                                                             requirements for both the operators
                                                                             of the hoist machine and the
                                                                             employees who ride in the cage. The
                                                                             condition adopts several provisions
                                                                             of ANSI A10.22-2007.
7. Hoist Rope...........................  7. Hoist Rope...................  Revises the safety factor used for
                                                                             the hoist rope and updates the
                                                                             requirements for rope lay based on
                                                                             guidance provided by ANSI A10.22-
                                                                             2007.
8. Footblock............................  8. Footblock....................  Revises the safety factor for rated
                                                                             workloads and updates the
                                                                             requirements for the design and use
                                                                             of footblocks based on guidance
                                                                             provided by ANSI A10.22-2007.
9. Cathead and Sheave...................  9. Cathead and Sheaves..........  Revises the requirements for the
                                                                             design and use of catheads and
                                                                             sheaves based on guidance provided
                                                                             by ANSI A10.22-2007.
10. Guide Ropes.........................  10. Guide Ropes.................  Revises the requirements for the
                                                                             design and use of guide ropes based
                                                                             on guidance provided by ANSI A10.22-
                                                                             2007.
11. Personnel Cage......................  11. Personnel Cage..............  Revises the requirements for the
                                                                             design and use of personnel cages
                                                                             based on guidance provided by ANSI
                                                                             A10.22-2007.
12. Safety Clamps.......................  12. Safety Clamps...............  Minor revisions and clarification of
                                                                             terms.
13. Overhead Protection.................  13. Overhead Protection.........  Contains a new requirement, in
                                                                             performance-based language,
                                                                             providing overhead protection for
                                                                             workers accessing the bottom
                                                                             landing.
14. Emergency-Escape Device.............  14. Emergency-Escape Device.....  Minor revisions and clarification of
                                                                             terms.
15. Personnel Platforms.................  15. Personnel Platforms and       Contains new provisions for the use
                                           Boatswain's Chairs.               of a personnel platform or a
                                                                             boatswain's chair by requiring
                                                                             compliance with the applicable
                                                                             portions of 29 CFR 1926.1431 and
                                                                             1926.452(o)(3).
16. Protecting Workers From Fall and      16. Protecting Workers from Fall  Minor revisions.
 Shearing Hazards.                         and Shearing Hazards.
17. Exclusion Zone......................  17. Exclusion Zone..............  Specifies new requirements for
                                                                             establishing an exclusion zone.
18. Inspections, Tests, and Accident      18. Inspections, Tests, and       Expands and describe the inspection,
 Prevention.                               Accident Prevention.              test, and accident-prevention
                                                                             requirements.
19. Welding.............................  19. Welding.....................  Adds definition for ``qualified''
                                                                             welder.

20. OSHA Notification...................  20. OSHA Notification...........  Revises the requirements for, and
                                                                             description of, employers' duty to
                                                                             notify OSHA of events and
                                                                             conditions associated with their
                                                                             hoisting operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The remainder of this section provides additional detail about the
conditions in this permanent variance and distinguishes, as
appropriate, between these conditions and the conditions in the
Avalotis variance.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The discussion below will refer to the Avalotis variance
and its conditions using the terms ``former'' and ``formerly.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Condition 1: Scope
    Several important revisions occur in the first condition covering
the scope of the variance. Condition 1(a) of the variance broadens the
scope of the former variance to include work on chimneys and chimney-
related structures constructed using jump-form and slip-form
construction techniques and procedures regardless of a structure's
configuration when the work involves using temporary personnel hoist
systems. The permanent variance, therefore, does not limit the scope to
structural configurations (such as small or large diameter, and tapered
or straight-barreled, chimneys), which was the limitation imposed on
the former variance, nor does it limit the scope to chimneys. OSHA
believes that experience with the alternative conditions as specified
in previous variances demonstrates that these conditions are safe.
Therefore, employers can apply the conditions specified in the variance
safely to structures that have a configuration similar to that of
chimneys (i.e., ``chimney-related structures''), including silos,
towers, and other circular structures, because the hazards associated
with these structures (e.g., falls, impacts, falling objects) are the
same as the hazards associated with chimneys. It is not the name of the
structure, nor its diameter and structural configuration (i.e.,
straight-barreled or tapered), that determines whether it is within the
scope of the variance; rather, it is the use of jump-form and slip-form
construction techniques and procedures and the use of temporary
personnel hoist systems.
    Further, Condition 1(a) clarifies that the permanent variance
applies to ``construction,'' which includes construction, renovation,
repair, maintenance, inspection, and demolition of chimney-related
structures. The variance does not apply to work that falls under OSHA's
general industry standards at 29 CFR part 1910. The variance applies
only to work that falls under OSHA's construction standards at 29 CFR
part 1926. Various letters of interpretation and directives establish
the factors that determine whether maintenance work falls under general
industry or construction standards. Generally, work that replaces a
structure or component with an identical structure or component is
under the general industry standards, while construction standards
cover work that improves a structure or component. Additionally, scale
and complexity of the work are factors. Work involving repair, removal,
or replacement of large structures (e.g., when replacing a steel beam
in a building), or work involving complex steps, tools, or equipment
(e.g., when replacing a section of limestone cladding on a building),
is construction work. See OSHA's November 18, 2003, letter of
interpretation to Raymond V. Knobbs (available at http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=24789
for more information about how to determine if general industry or
construction standards cover specific work. Some simple maintenance
work on chimney-related structures may fall under general industry
standards and, thus, be outside the scope of this variance.
    Subparagraphs (1)(a)(i) and (1)(a)(ii) of Condition 1 expand on
former Conditions 1(b)(i) and 1(b)(ii) by clarifying what material
employers can hoist. These subparagraphs make clear that the
``temporary hoist systems'' may not transport construction materials
concurrently with personnel. Condition 2(c) under ``Application''
further clarifies this hoisting requirement.
    The permanent variance modifies former Condition 1(c), which
addressed personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs, by introducing
new Condition 2(g). The variance application did not include
requirements for personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs because
employers have alternate equipment (reflecting advances in technology)
available to accomplish tasks that previously required personnel
platforms or boatswain's chairs raised and lowered by a hoist system.
However, Condition 2(g) provides the option of replacing a personnel
cage with a personnel platform or a boatswain's chair when the employer
can demonstrate that available space makes it infeasible to use a
personnel cage for transporting employees. OSHA would still enforce the
provisions in Sec. Sec.  1926.452(o) and .1431(s), and other applicable
standards, when employers use personnel platforms and boatswain's
chairs on chimneys that have space available to accommodate the use of
a personnel cage.
    Condition 2(d) leaves intact the remainder of former Condition
1(c). Except for the requirements specified for hoist towers by 29 CFR
1926.552(c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and
(c)(16), the current and former conditions require employers to comply
fully with the applicable provisions of 29 CFR parts 1910 and 1926.
    Additionally, OSHA modified the Scope section further in response
to comments provided by the National Stack and Chimney Safety and
Health Advisory Committee (NSCSHAC). (See Section IV of this notice
(``Comments on Proposed Variance Application'') for a discussion of the
modifications included in the variance.)
2. Condition 2: Application
    Condition 2 addresses the application of the permanent variance,
and specifies a number of best practices and other requirements
employers must meet for the variance to apply. For example, Condition
2(a) states a general applicability requirement:

    The employer must use a hoist system equipped with a dedicated
personnel-transport device (i.e., a personnel cage) as specified by
this variance to raise or lower its workers and/or other
construction-related tools, equipment, and supplies between the
bottom landing of a chimney-related structure and an elevated work
location while performing construction inside and outside the
structure.

    Condition 2(b) ensures the proper design and operation of the hoist
system, while Condition 2(c) regulates the transportation of materials
and proper use of material-transport devices so as to ensure employee
safety.
    As noted above in the discussion of Condition 1, Condition 2(d)
leaves intact the remainder of former

Condition 1(c), which states that the variance conditions cover only
specific requirements for hoist towers, and that employers must comply
with all other applicable requirements of 29 CFR parts 1910 and 1926.
If an employer is not complying with a condition specified by the
variance, the Agency will implement the citation policy described in
OSHA's Field Operations Manual (Directive Number: CPL 02-00-150),
Chapter 3, Inspection Procedures (Section I: Variances). The citation
policy states:

    1. No Citation Issued. An employer granted a variance will not
be subject to citation if the observed condition is in compliance
with an existing variance issued to that employer.
    2. Citations. In the event that an employer is not in compliance
with the requirement(s) of the issued variance, a violation of the
applicable standard shall be cited with a reference in the citation
to the variance provision that has not been met.

    Regarding the second provision of this policy (i.e.,
``Citations''), if OSHA finds that an employer is not complying with a
variance condition, and the variance condition is not based directly on
one of the hoist-tower standards from which OSHA granted the variance
(e.g., the condition is based on a consensus standard or best-work
practice not specified by an OSHA standard), OSHA will cite the non-
compliance as a violation only of the variance provision. Under no
circumstances will OSHA cite non-compliance with a variance condition
as a violation of both an applicable standard and the variance
condition.
    Condition 2(e), not found in the former variance, allows the
employer flexibility in the event compliance with a variance condition
is infeasible.\12\ In such a case, the employer may use an alternative
means of compliance that provides equivalent or improved protection to
workers. The employer must demonstrate that compliance with the
variance conditions is infeasible and that the alternative means of
compliance is as equivalent to the protection afforded by the variance
condition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See OSHA's Field Operations Manuel (FOM) Chapter VIII.E,
available at http://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/Directive_pdf/CPL_02-00-150.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Condition 2(f), the final provision under ``Application,'' ensures
that workers can understand the required communications. This condition
requires that employers communicate with workers in a language the
workers understand; communications includes any training and signs
required by the variance. OSHA considers this condition, not found in
the former variance, important to employee safety and health in that it
is critical that employees understand the hazards associated with
personnel hoisting operations, and the means the employer is using to
protect them from these hazards.
    The permanent variance modified Condition 2 of the former variance,
entitled ``2. Replacing a Personnel Cage with a Personnel Platform or a
Boatswain's Chair.'' Accordingly, Condition 2(g) permits employers to
use personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs when using jump-form and
slip-form construction techniques and procedures (regardless of the
structure's configuration) to construct chimneys and chimney-related
structures, but only under specific, limited conditions. Employers may
use personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs only when they
demonstrate that it is infeasible to use personnel cages because of
space limitations. Under these circumstances, employers must use
personnel platforms unless space limitations necessitate use of
boatswain's chairs. When replacing a personnel cage with a personnel
platform or boatswain's chair, employers must follow the requirements
of 29 CFR 1926.1431(b) through .1431(s), and 1926.452 (o)(3),
respectively.
    Additionally, OSHA modified the Application section further in
response to comments provided by NSCSHAC. (See Section IV of this
notice (``Comments on Proposed Variance Application'') for a discussion
of the modifications included in the variance.)
3. Condition 3: Definitions
    Condition 3 defines 29 key terms, usually technical terms, used in
the permanent variance to standardize and clarify the meaning of these
terms. This condition was not part of the former variance, but OSHA
believes that defining these terms will enhance employer and employee
understanding of, and subsequent compliance with, the variance
conditions, thereby ensuring that employees receive the requisite level
of protection afforded to them by the variance.
4. Condition 4: Qualified Person and Competent Person
    Condition 4 addresses the requirements of a qualified person and a
competent person. In the former variance, OSHA inadvertently combined
these terms into ``qualified competent person.'' The terms ``qualified
person'' and ``competent person'' have separate definitions in OSHA's
construction standards, and this condition uses these terms consistent
with their meaning in the construction standards. Although an employee
or contract worker can be both a qualified person and competent person,
they usually are not. Indeed, Sec.  1926.32(f) defines ``competent
person'' as ``one who is capable of identifying existing and
predictable hazards in the surroundings or working conditions which are
unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees, and who has
authorization to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them.''
In contrast, Sec.  1926.32(m) defines ``qualified person'' as ``one
who, by possession of a recognized degree, certificate, or professional
standing, or who by extensive knowledge, training, and experience, has
successfully demonstrated his ability to solve or resolve problems
relating to the subject matter, the work, or the project.'' The
provisions of Condition 4 distinguish the two terms. Unlike former
Condition 3(a)(i), this condition allows for the use of more than one
competent and/or qualified person to perform the various tasks. This
condition would enable employers to distribute the workload evenly
among available personnel and not rely on having available a single
individual with expertise in the various tasks.
    Condition 4(a)(ii) emphasizes that, operationally, a competent
person (not a ``qualified competent person'' as in former Condition
3(a)(ii)) must be present. Condition 4(b) requires that a qualified
person (not a ``qualified competent person'' as in former Condition
3(b)) must design and maintain the cathead. Finally, Condition 4(c)
specifies that the employer must train the competent and qualified
persons in the applicable variance provisions. This condition, which is
not in the former variance, will ensure that competent persons and
qualified persons assigned responsibilities under the variance have the
knowledge necessary to perform their tasks effectively under the
conditions specified by the variance.
5. Condition 5: Hoist Machine
    Condition 5 (formerly Condition 4) addresses the requirements of a
hoist machine. Condition 5(a)(i) removes the distinction of ``a
portable personnel hoist'' and, instead, designates the hoist machine
as a hoist system. Moreover, Condition 5(a)(ii) adds language to ensure
the proper use and maintenance of the hoist machine.
    Conditions 5(b) through 5(e), which address raising or lowering a
transport, power source, constant-pressure control switch, and line-
speed indicator remain as before, with the exception of the former
Condition 4(d)(ii) (Constant-pressure control switch), which is

substantively addressed in Condition 5(s), Overhead Protection. Note:
Employers should consider adopting as a best practice ANSI's A10.22-
2007 (at 4.2(2)), which specifies that employers are not to use chains,
as well as belts, as drive components between the power source and the
winding drum.
    Condition 5(f), Overspeed, is a new condition adapted from ANSI
A10.22. It will alert the hoist operator in the event the personnel
cage travels at excess speed, thereby preventing speed-related
accidents and associated worker injury. The text of Condition 5(g),
Braking systems, remains the same as the text of former Condition 4(f).
Note that ANSI A10.22-2007 (at Section 4.6) provides additional
guidelines for braking systems that employers should consider
following.
    Condition 5(h), Slack-rope protection (formerly Condition 4(g),
Slack-rope switch), differs somewhat from the former condition by
requiring hoist design features that will prevent a slack-rope
condition. The condition will limit stress on the rope caused by snaps,
thereby preventing premature rope failure.
    Condition 5(i), Frame, formerly Condition 4(h), varies slightly
from the former condition by ensuring that the frame of the hoist
machine meets design specifications, thereby improving hoist machine
safety. Condition 5(j), Stability, formerly Condition 4(i), also is a
slight redraft of the former condition. The condition requires
employers to secure hoist machines in accordance with design
specifications, which will ensure the stability of the hoist machine
during operation.
    Condition 5(k), Location, formerly Condition 4(j), is a slight
variation of the former condition in that it adds the term ``winding''
for clarification. The footnote in the condition defining the term
``fleet angle'' duplicates a footnote in the former condition.
    Condition 5(l), Drum and flange diameter, formerly Condition 4(k),
remains the same as the former condition, while Condition 5(m),
Spooling of the rope, formerly Condition 4(l), differs somewhat from
the former condition by allowing employers to store the rope on the
drum closer than two inches from the flange when the hoist machine is
not in use. The two-inch gap is necessary when the hoist is in
operation to prevent the rope from leaving the drum, causing hoisting
accidents. However, employers may store the rope closer than two inches
from the flange when transporting or storing the drum, which OSHA
believes does not endanger employees.
    Condition 5(n) is a new condition that requires employers to secure
the rope firmly to the drum. This condition prevents inadvertent
unwinding of the rope in the event an operator lowers the hoist load
beyond its lowest point of travel by requiring employers to secure the
hoist end of the rope mechanically to the hoist drum.
    Condition 5(o), Electrical system, formerly Condition 4(m), retains
the text of the former condition, which reduces the risk of electric
shock. Condition 5(p), Grounding, is a new condition adopted from ANSI
A10.22. The condition also will reduce the risk of electric shock.
    Condition 5(q), Limit switches, formerly Condition 4(n), revised
the former condition by differentiating personnel hoisting from
material hoisting.
    A new condition, Condition 5(r), ensures proper guarding of the
hoist machine. A note added to the condition clarifies that when
employers limit access to the hoist drum to only authorized personnel
(usually the hoist operator), OSHA will consider the drum as guarded
under this condition. This new condition will prevent inadvertent
operation of the hoist machine, which could endanger employees involved
in the hoisting operations.
    As indicated above under the discussion of Conditions 5(b) through
5(e), Condition 5(s), Overhead protection, is an adaptation of former
Condition 4(d)(ii). The condition will protect the hoist operator and
the hoist machine from falling or moving objects.
6. Condition 6: Methods of Operation
    Condition 6 (formerly Condition 5), addresses methods of operation.
This condition expands and clarifies the training requirements for both
the operators of the hoist machine and the employees who ride in the
cage. The condition adopts several provisions of ANSI A10.22-2007.
    Condition 6(a)(i) requires employers to ensure that hoist operators
and their supervisors receive effective training in the safe operation
of hoist machines, and document the training. Conditions 6(a)(ii) and
6(a)(iii) require that only trained and authorized workers operate the
hoist; address the timing of the documented training for each worker
who uses the cage for transportation; and specify the frequency of all
required training. Conditions 6(a)(i), (ii), and (iii), based on former
Conditions 5(a)(i) and 5(a)(ii), will ensure the safe use of the hoist
machine and cage.
    Condition 6(b) is a new condition that requires employers to use a
job-hazard analyses (JHA) to provide enhanced jobsite safety by
identifying safety hazards at the worksite not covered explicitly by
the current conditions. OSHA publication 3071, entitled ``Job Hazard
Analysis'' defines JHA as follows:

    A job hazard analysis is a technique that focuses on job tasks
as a way to identify hazards before they occur. It focuses on the
relationship between the worker, the task, the tools, and the work
environment. Ideally, after uncontrolled hazards are identified,
steps will be taken to eliminate or reduce them to an acceptable
risk-level.

    Condition 6(b) requires that employers conduct one or more JHAs for
the operation of the temporary personnel hoist system. The condition
also requires employers to review these analyses with the workers
exposed to any identified hazards.
    Condition 6(c), Speed limitations, formerly Condition 5(b), differs
from the former condition in that it revises hoist speed requirements.
To prevent overtravel accidents, Condition 6(c)(i) adds a requirement
to slow the hoist speed at extremes of hoist travel, as well as an
overspeed allowance from ANSI A10.22-2007. A note in this condition
contains the requirement from former Condition 5(b)(iii) that specifies
limits on hoist speed when hoisting material only, again to prevent
accidents related to overtravel. Condition 6(c)(ii) retains the speed
limitation in former Condition 5(b)(ii) of 100 feet per minute for
personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs when used to transport
workers. The slower speed for these devices (compared to personnel
cages) is necessary because of the impact and shearing hazards present
when workers are using these devices (see discussion below for
Condition 16).
    Condition 6(d), Communication, redrafted former Condition 5(c) to
clarify the requirement for communication equipment by replacing the
term ``voice-mediated intercommunication system'' with the term
``electronic voice-communication system (such as two-way radio)'' to
allow employers flexibility in selecting this type of equipment. In
addition, as with the former condition, the current condition requires
that employers maintain at all times communication between the hoist
operator and the workers located in a moving personnel cage. OSHA notes
that a ``failure of communication'' requiring employers to stop
hoisting as specified by Condition 6(d)(ii) includes lack of clarity in
communication, as well as equipment failure. Accordingly, the condition
requires clear and unambiguous communication at all times, thereby
ensuring continuous employee

protection in the event of procedural or equipment failures.
7. Condition 7: Hoist Rope
    Condition 7 (formerly 6), addresses the hoist rope. Although
Conditions 7(a) and (c) remain the same as former Conditions 6(a) and
(c), revisions to the remaining conditions focus on making the
requirements consistent with other OSHA standards (e.g.,
1926.552(c)(14)(iii)), and adopting updated safety requirements
specified by ANSI A10.22-2007. For example, Condition 7(b), Safety
factor, increases the safety factor of the rope from 8 to 8.9 times the
total suspended load as opposed to a ``safe workload'' as specified by
former Condition 6(b). To clarify the load calculation, the current
conditions added the parenthetical phrase, ``(including the weight of
the suspended rope).'' New condition 7(d), adopted from the ANSI
standard, addresses rope lay; this new condition will prevent rope
rotation and kinking, thereby reducing stress on the rope and ensuring
smooth hoisting operations. Except for minor editorial revisions, the
text of Condition 7(e), Inspection, removal, and replacement of hoist
ropes, remains the same as the text of former Condition 6(d); this
provision will prevent the employer from using hoist ropes that could
fail during hoisting operations.
    Revisions made to former Condition 6(e) by Condition 7(f),
Attachments, provide alternative requirements similar to the
requirements in ANSI A10.22-2007. OSHA believes these alternatives will
provide safer means of positively connecting and securing the hoist
rope to the personnel cage than provided by the former condition, thus
preventing accidents involving connection failure.
    The text of provisions (i) through (iv) of Condition 7(g), Wire-
rope fastenings, remains much the same as former Condition 6(f), with
only minor editorial revisions. However, Condition 7(g) includes three
new provisions, 7(g)(v) through 7(g)(vii), that specify how and when to
tighten and retighten clip fastenings. These new provisions should
compensate for decreases in rope diameter caused by repeated
application of the load and, thus, serve to maintain proper torque on
the rope and improve rope integrity. Additionally, the permanent
variance added two new requirements: Condition 7(h), Rotation-resistant
ropes and swivels, and Condition 7(i), Rope protection. These added
conditions should increase worker safety by preventing rope damage and
improving rope integrity. The conditions also are consistent with
provisions in ANSI A10.22-2007, which requires barricading the hoisting
rope between the hoisting machine and the footblock, thereby preventing
the rope from making abrasive contact with the ground and providing
falling-object protection when appropriate.
    Since employers are free to exceed the requirements of the
conditions (with respect to worker protection), employers may use
extra-extra-improved plow steel as the rope grade. Note also that ANSI
A10.22-2007 (at Section 6) provides additional guidelines for hoist
rope that employers should consider following.
8. Condition 8: Footblock
    Condition 8 (formerly Condition 7) addresses the footblock on hoist
machines. Condition 8(a)(i) revised the safety factor found in the
former condition from 4 to 5 times the applied workload ;\13\ to be
consistent with the safety factor of the cathead (see Condition 9).
Provisions (a)(iii) and (iv) of Condition 8 vary from provisions of
former Condition 7(a)(iii) and 7(a)(iv) to be more performance oriented
and more consistent with alternatives presented in ANSI A10.22-2007.
These revisions will ensure that the moving wire rope effectively and
safely accommodates turning from the horizontal to vertical axes as
required by the direction of rope travel. While Conditions 8(b) and
8(c) remain the same as former Conditions 7(b) and 7(c), the variance
has a new condition, 8(d), that allows a properly mounted sheave as a
footblock substitute, consistent with the ANSI standard and Condition
9, Cathead and Sheave. Allowing a sheave substitute also will serve to
ensure that the moving wire rope effectively and safely accommodates
turning from horizontal to vertical axes as required by the direction
of rope travel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The applied workload is equivalent to the total suspended
load.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. Condition 9: Cathead and Sheaves
    Condition 9 (formerly Condition 8) addresses catheads and sheaves.
Condition 9(a) revises former Condition 8(a) to allow use of aluminum
for the cathead because of its light weight, provided the employer
complies with the cathead design drawings. Condition 9(b) remains the
same as former Condition 8(b). OSHA believes that following the design
drawings, along with the requirements specified by Condition 9(e) (see
below), will assure the safety of the cathead. Provisions (c) and (d)
of Condition 10 remain as in former Condition 9. However, Condition 9
also contains three new paragraphs, (e) through (g), based on the ANSI
A10.22-2007 standard. Condition 9(e), Design basis, requires that the
design of steel catheads conform to the American Institute of Steel
Construction (AISC), and that aluminum catheads follow the Aluminum
Association's design manual. Both types of catheads must have a safety
factor of 5 for the maximum intended working load (equivalent to the
total intended suspended load) for personnel and material hoisting.
This provision will ensure the structural integrity and safety of the
cathead up to workloads 5 times the maximum intended working load of
the cathead.
    Provision (f)(i) of Condition 9, Clearance, requires adequate
clearance between the bottom of cathead and the cable attachment at the
top of the hoist cage to eliminate the risk of contact between the
cathead and the cage if operation of the upper limit switch stops the
cage. The second provision of this paragraph (subparagraph (f)(ii))
specifies that the cage must travel without obstruction along the full
length of the guide ropes. Both of these provisions will improve safety
by reducing stress on the guide ropes that would occur should the cage
come into contact with the cathead or other obstruction. Finally,
Condition 9(g), Sheave substitute, allows a properly mounted
construction block as a substitute for a sheave, which serves to ensure
that the moving wire rope effectively and safely accommodates turning
from the horizontal to vertical axes as required by the direction of
rope travel; this condition also refers to Condition 8(d), which
addresses sheave substitutes.
10. Condition 10: Guide Ropes
    Condition 10 (formerly Condition 9) addresses guide ropes. This
condition contains several revisions made for clarification and
precision. For example, Condition 10(a) added the term ``securely''
before the phrase ``two guide ropes to the cathead'' and the phrase
``or to overhead supports designed for the purpose of accepting the
guide ropes'' at the end of this provision. The term ``securely''
ensures that guide ropes remain affixed to the cathead or overhead
support during hoisting operations, while the added phrase addressing
overhead supports acknowledges that hoist machines often use overhead
supports other than catheads to secure guide ropes. Also, Condition
10(a)(ii) references 29 CFR 1926.552(c)(17)(iv) to ensure that steel
wire rope is free of damage or defects at all times. In addition,
Condition 10(b) added the phrase ``During the hoisting of personnel''
to clarify when the

requirement applies to hoisting operations, while Condition 10(c)
replaced the verb ``to rig'' with the verb ``to install'' to clarify
the meaning of the term. Note that ANSI A10.22-2007 (at Section 9.2)
provides additional guidelines for alignment tension that employers
should consider following.
11. Condition 11: Personnel Cage
    Condition 11 (formerly Condition 10) addresses personnel cages.
There are several revisions to the former condition. Condition 11(a)
removes the requirement that the cage be made of steel, relying on the
performance-based language ``capable of supporting a load that is eight
(8) times its rated load capacity.'' This revision will provide
employers with flexibility with regard to the materials used to
construct personnel cages, while ensuring worker safety. The provision
also raises the safety factor from 4 to 8 to improve worker protection;
this revision is consistent with ANSI A10.22-2007.
    Former Conditions 10(a)(v) and 12(a) were inconsistent regarding
the thickness of the roof of the personnel cage: Former Condition
10(a)(v) required that the roof be constructed of one-eighth (1/8) inch
aluminum or equivalent material, while former Condition 12(a) specified
that the roof be constructed of three-sixteenth (3/16) inch steel plate
or equivalent material. Condition 11(a)(v) requires that the roof of
the personnel cage be constructed of three-sixteenths (3/16) inch steel
plate or equivalent material, the most protective of the required
thicknesses. This provision also requires that the roof slope to the
outside of the personnel cage to ensure that falling objects do not
remain on the cage and add to the weight of the load.
    The revision to Condition 11(a)(vi) clarifies that employers cannot
use rails or hard protrusions when their presence creates an impact
hazard. This clarification should increase worker safety by reducing
impact hazards should workers lose their balance because of cage
movement.
    Condition 11(b) revised the former term ``overhead weight'' to the
commonly used term ``overhaul weight'' for clarification. To improve
worker safety, Condition 11(e) added a design requirement that the
rated load capacity of the cage be at least 250 pounds for each
occupant, or the actual weight if an occupant exceeds 250 pounds. With
this added design requirement increasing the safety of the personnel
cages, the second provision of this condition revised the former phrase
``Hoist no more than four (4) occupants at any one time'' to ``Hoist at
any one time no more than the number of occupants for which the cage is
designed'' to allow flexibility in the number of employees who can
occupy a cage simultaneously during use.
    Condition 11(f) clarifies the worker-notification requirement of
former Condition 10(f). Accordingly, the condition added a new
requirement in provision 11(f)(ii) to notify workers of the number of
occupants the cage can accommodate, while provision 11(f)(iii) revised
the former phrase ``The reduced rated load for the specific job'' to
``Any reduction in rated load capacity (in pounds) if applicable (due
to change in conditions of the specific job).'' These revisions will
serve as an additional check to prevent overloading the personnel cage.
    Condition 11(g), Static drop tests, updated the reference to the
ANSI A10.22 standard to the latest, 2007, edition. Also, to be
consistent with this new edition, Condition 11(g)(ii) limited the
former test criteria (i.e., the initial test criterion included in
former Condition 10(g)(ii) of 125% of the maximum rated load of the
personnel cage, and subsequent drop tests at no less than 100% of its
maximum rated load) to the updated test criteria; these updated
criteria require employers to use the rated load of the personnel cage
during testing to avoid causing unnecessary damage to the cage.
    Condition 11(h) is a new provision that prevents the cage from
catching on the platform at the top landing or on intermediate
platforms. OSHA believes this condition will decrease stress on the
hoist rope and prevent impact injuries among employees who use the
cage.
12. Condition 12: Safety Clamps
    Condition 12 (formerly Condition 11) addresses safety clamps, with
only a few revisions to the former condition. For clarity, Condition
12(a)(ii) revised the term ``when in use'' to ``when the cage is in
motion.'' Condition 12(c) added the phrase ``The employer must ensure''
to former Condition 11(c) to place the burden of proving compliance on
the employer. In addition, Condition 12(c)(i) updates the ANSI
reference in former Condition 11(c)(i) to ANSI standard A10.22-2007.
13. Condition 13: Overhead Protection
    The requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of former Condition 12,
Overhead Protection, specified the requirements for constructing sloped
roofs for personnel cages. Condition 11, Personnel Cage, now covers
these requirements under subparagraph 11(a)(v). Therefore, Condition 13
contains a new requirement, in performance-based language, providing
overhead protection for workers accessing the bottom landing. OSHA
believes this provision will increase the safety of employees working
around the bottom landing during hoist operations.
14. Condition 14: Emergency Escape Devices
    Condition 14 (formerly Condition 13) continues to address emergency
escape devices with minor revisions. Condition 14(a) in this variance
adds the phrase ``For workers using a personnel cage'' as a preface to
the provision to clarify the requirement. In addition, the training
provision, Condition 14(c), references Condition 6(a)(iii), which
addresses the timing of training (e.g., before initial use, and
periodically thereafter).
15. Condition 15: Personnel Platforms and Boatswain's Chairs
    Condition 15 replaces and updates former Condition 14 (Personnel
Platforms) by addressing the hazards and required safeguarding methods
associated with the use of personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs.
Accordingly, when meeting the criteria specified in Condition 2(g),
employers may use personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs only when
they demonstrate that it is infeasible to use personnel cages because
of space limitations in a chimney or a chimney-related structure. In
these situations, employers must use personnel platforms unless space
limitations require the use of boatswain's chairs. When replacing a
personnel cage with a personnel platform or boatswain's chair,
employers must follow the applicable requirements of 29 CFR
1926.1431(b) through .1431(s) and 1926.452(o)(3), respectively.
16. Condition 16: Protecting Workers From Fall and Shearing Hazards
    Condition 2(g) of this variance provides the option of replacing a
personnel cage with a personnel platform or a boatswain's chair when
using jump-form or slip-form construction techniques and procedures to
construct chimneys and chimney-related structures, but only when the
employer demonstrates that it is infeasible because of space
limitations to use a personnel cage to transport workers to and from
elevated worksites. Condition 16 of this variance also continues to
address shearing hazards (as did former Condition 15, Protecting
Workers from Fall and Shearing Hazards) because these hazards are
present when workers use personnel platforms and boatswain's chairs
under

the limitations specified by Condition 2(g). This condition also
redrafted the fall-hazard provisions of former Condition 15 to address
fall hazards associated with both the hoist areas and the cage, with
references to relevant requirements of 29 CFR part 1926. OSHA believes
these revisions cover fall hazards more thoroughly than the former
condition, thereby increasing worker protection from these hazards.
17. Condition 17: Exclusion Zone
    Condition 17 (formerly Condition 16), which covers exclusion zones,
made substantial revisions to the former condition. Accordingly, the
condition specifies requirements for establishing an exclusion zone;
these requirements were not part of the former condition. OSHA believes
that these requirements will improve worker safety by ensuring that
unauthorized persons do not enter the zone, thereby reducing their risk
of injury from being struck by the hoisting equipment, falling objects,
and the personnel cage.
    Condition 17(d) is a new provision that clarifies when workers can
enter the exclusion zone during operations involving a material-
transport device. This provision will reduce worker exposure to the
hazards associated with these operations, including impact and crushing
hazards from the hoisting equipment and material-transport device.
18. Condition 18: Inspections, Tests, and Accident Prevention
    Paragraphs (a) and (b) of Condition 18 expand the inspection, test,
and accident-prevention requirements of former Condition 17 by
specifying that employers: (1) Conduct frequent and regular (at least
weekly) inspections of the hoist system and the area around the hoist
system; (2) inspect the hoist system prior to reuse following periods
of idleness lasting more than one week; and (3) remove hoisting
equipment from service when a competent person determines that the
equipment is unsafe. These revisions will ensure that hoist systems are
safe for worker use. Paragraph (c) adds a requirement that employers
document tests, inspections, and corrective actions. This requirement
will provide employers with information needed to schedule tests and
inspections, and to determine the actions taken to correct defects in
hoisting equipment prior to returning it to service.
19. Condition 19: Welding
    Condition 19 (formerly Condition 18) revised paragraph (a) of the
former condition by defining the term ``qualified'' to mean a welder
who meets the requirements of the American Welding Society,
specifically, the qualification requirements of American Welding
Society (AWS) D1.1 Structural Welding Code--Steel, or AWS D1.2
Structural Welding Code--Aluminum, as applicable. Specifying the
qualifications for welders will improve worker safety by providing
assurance that personnel who weld components of hoist systems possess
the skills necessary to perform this work, and will do so competently
and in a manner that maintains the operational integrity and safety of
the systems.
20. Condition 20: OSHA Notification
    Condition 20 (Condition 19 in the former variance) addresses the
duty of employers to notify OSHA of events and conditions associated
with their hoisting operations. Paragraphs (a) and (b) of the condition
made substantial revisions to paragraph (a) of the former condition,
including: (1) Specifying the legal test (due diligence) that OSHA must
apply to these notification requirements; (2) identifying the Office of
Technical Programs and Coordination Activities (OTPCA) at national OSHA
headquarters (not the nearest OSHA area office) or the appropriate
State-Plan office as the offices to receive notification and the
required information (i.e., the location of the operation and the date
the operation will begin); (3) providing contact information (i.e.,
telephone and facsimile numbers, and email address) for OTPCA; and (4)
requiring employers to notify OTPCA or the appropriate State-Plan
office at least 15 days prior to beginning any emergency operation or
short-notice project that uses the conditions specified by the variance
of the location and date of the operation or project or, if such an
operation will occur in less than 15 days, then as soon as possible
after the employer knows when the operation will begin.
    Former paragraph (b) addressed notification requirements when the
employer ceases to do business or transfers the activities covered by
the variance to a successor company. Paragraphs (c) and (d) of
Condition 20 in this variance expand on the former requirements by: (1)
Reiterating the legal test (due diligence) that OSHA will apply to
these notification requirements; (2) specifying that employers notify
OTPCA of any changes in the location and address of the main office for
managing the activities covered by the variance; and (3) stipulating
that OSHA must approve the transfer of the variance to a successor
company.
    OSHA believes that the revisions made to former Condition 19 by
Condition 20 in this variance will expedite receipt of information by
OSHA and State-Plan states regarding the initiation and location of
hoisting operations covered by the variance, and will clarify that the
notification requirements apply as well to emergency operations and
short-term projects. Accordingly, these revisions will improve worker
safety by ensuring that OSHA and State-Plan states have complete and
accurate information about the chimney-construction activities covered
by the variance so that these agencies can carefully monitor employer
compliance with the conditions specified by the variance. While
Condition 20 now clearly notifies employers of the legal test they must
meet in complying with the requirements of this condition, OSHA notes
that it will not issue a citation if an employer's violation of
Condition 20 does not immediately affect worker safety or health; in
these circumstances, OSHA may, however, issue a notice of de minimis
violation.
    Requiring employers to notify OTPCA of any changes in the location
and address of their main offices will allow OSHA to communicate
effectively with employers regarding the status of the variance.
Stipulating that an employer must have OSHA's approval to transfer a
variance to a successor company provides assurance that the successor
company has the resources, and agrees, to comply with the conditions of
the variance. OSHA believes this requirement is necessary to ensure the
safety of workers involved in performing the operations covered by the
variance.

IV. Comments on the Proposed Variance Application

    Two public commenters submitted comments on the proposed variance
application. Additionally, OSHA received comments on the proposed
variance application from the state of Michigan. See Section II
(``Multi-State Variance'') of this notice for a discussion of
Michigan's comment.
    The first public commenter was Mr. Barry A. Cole of Cole-Preferred
Safety Consulting, Inc., who supported granting the permanent variance
(Document ID No. OSHA-2012-0015-0003). Mr. Cole also provided comments
unrelated to the published variance applications; these comments
addressed OSHA's variance and enforcement process, which is beyond the
scope of the variance application.
    The National Stack and Chimney Safety and Health Advisory Committee

(NSCSHAC) submitted the second public comment (Document ID No. OSHA-
2012-0015-0021). This comment: (1) Compared the proposed variance
conditions to the conditions in the prior chimney variances; and (2)
addressed the scope of the variance application. NSCSHAC also requested
a hearing under 29 CFR 1905.15 if OSHA either rejected its comments or
made substantive revisions to them; OSHA adopted all of NSCSHAC's
comments without revision, so a hearing is unnecessary.
    The remainder of this section describes the specific comments
submitted by NSCSHAC, and OSHA's response to them.
    Comment 1: NSCSHAC stated that the second paragraph in the
Background section of the variance application contained an incorrect
statement regarding the alternative conditions described in previous
chimney variances, notably that the conditions applied only to tapered
chimneys constructed using jump-form construction techniques and
procedures. NSCSHAC requested that OSHA revise or remove the subject
sentences from the Background section, and also revise or remove all
other comparable sentences in the variance application.
    OSHA's response: The Agency made the requested revisions.
    Comment 2: NSCSHAC requested that OSHA modify the scope condition
(proposed Condition 1) of the variance application such that it covers
all chimney-related construction, regardless of the construction method
and configuration, when such construction involves the use of temporary
personnel hoisting systems. NSCSHAC provided the following rationale
for its comment:

    (1) The language used in the Notice is not the actual language
included in the Permanent Variance Applications submitted in
November 2012 (see Variance Application Attachment A; Exhibit No.
OSHA-2012-0015-0018).
    (2) [NSCSHAC] has demonstrated through it meetings with OSHA
that the chimney hoist variance is applicable for the two different
construction methods of jump-form formwork (described as ``formwork
techniques'' in the Notice) and slip-form formwork construction,
regardless of the structural configuration, i.e. tapered or straight
barreled.
    (3) Chimneys constructed by the slip-form method can also be of
tapered configurations and need to be included in the variance.
Slip-form formwork for tapered chimneys has the same conditions for
use of the chimney hoist system as for slip-form formwork for
straight barreled chimneys.
    (4) Chimneys constructed by the jump-form method can be tapered
and straight barrel chimneys, and of small and large diameters. The
reasons for obtaining a variance for large barreled chimneys are
similar to the reasons for a variance for small barreled chimneys,
and include the following:
    I. Per the original variance dated 4/3/73, a hoist (tower) would
interfere with the design and construction of the proper
scaffolding. The inside of the chimney for the jump-form formwork
construction includes support sling cables for the work platform and
formwork support structure at multiple locations around the
perimeter of the top sections of concrete, for both large and small
diameter chimneys. These cables are positioned 360 degrees around
the circumference at this location, making it almost impossible to
get any access on the inside of the chimney adjacent to the wall.
There are also trailing scaffolds that extend down as much as 17 ft.
on the outside for finishing work and adjusting the equipment. All
access/egress for the jump-form formwork for small and large barrel,
and tapered chimneys has always been obtained at a distance away
from the walls using the chimney hoist system integrated into these
types of formworks.
    II. The majority of work during the construction of the jump-
form formwork for small and large straight-barrel, and tapered
chimneys is at the perimeter wall location, with hazards of falling
concrete, tools, and equipment. This is the reason for the
designated exclusion zones and overhead protection, and for locating
the personnel cage away from the chimney wall.
    III. Small barreled chimneys may have only one liner flue, and
large barreled chimneys may have multiple liner flues. Therefore,
the available room inside a large barreled chimney may be no larger
than for a small barreled chimney regardless of the construction
methods due to the multiple flues.
    IV. When performing liner construction, access is also required
to the inside of the chimney liner, which limits the usefulness of
attaching a hoist tower to the interior or exterior of the chimney
walls. In addition, when a hoist system is used inside of a liner
the ability to erect and brace a hoist tower is infeasible due to
interference with, and the usually unsuitable support provided by,
the liner while being constructed.
    V. The unique concrete techniques and procedures involved in
jump-form formwork, similar to slip-form construction, make it also
difficult and unsafe to attach a hoist tower to both the interior or
exterior walls of a chimney during construction. The fresh concrete
is poured into forms that are 7.5 ft. to 10.0 ft. tall on a daily
basis. As a result of this progressive construction process, the
concrete wall immediately below the platform for a distance of 15
ft. to 30 ft. is insufficiently cured to safely attach a hoist tower
to the wall.
    VI. The frequent extensions of a hoist tower to keep up with the
moving work platforms involves many difficulties in erection,
bracing, and guying as was discussed in the original variance in 4/
3/73. Also discussed were the extra precautions to obtain
substantial bracing if a hoist tower is constructed, since both the
chimney and the hoist tower would be exposed to high winds.
Therefore, personnel would be exposed to greater safety hazards due
to weather elements, erection procedures, and working underneath the
work platform and installing a hoist tower to the exterior wall,
than they would be by using the personnel cage with the hoist
variance. These difficulties and increased hazards involved in use
of a hoist tower are applicable to both jump form and slip form
methods and for both tapered and straight barreled chimneys.

    Therefore, according to NSCSHAC, the scope condition (Condition 1)
of the variance should include tapered chimneys constructed by slip-
form construction techniques and procedures and large-barreled chimneys
constructed by jump-form construction techniques and procedures; in
sum, the variance should apply to all chimneys regardless of
construction method or structural configuration.
    OSHA's response: The Agency corrected the scope condition in the
variance (Condition 1) to include both jump-form and slip-form
construction methods and procedures, regardless of configuration (i.e.,
straight-barreled or tapered).
    Comment 3: NSCSHAC stated that OSHA should delete or revise
paragraph (b) of the scope condition (proposed Condition 1) in the
variance application to apply only to structures other than chimneys,
and provided the following rationale for this comment:

    (1) This paragraph is not in the actual Permanent Variance
Applications submitted in November, 2012.
    (2) [NSCSHAC] has demonstrated though its meetings with OSHA and
again with the explanations above, that this variance is applicable
to small and large straight-barreled chimneys for both jump-form and
slip form formwork and there should be no further reason to
demonstrate that it is infeasible to erect a hoist tower inside or
outside of the structure for these construction methods.
    (3) The condition that ``only after demonstrating that it is
infeasible to erect a hoist tower either inside or outside the
structure'' is subjective and the application of it is unclear. Is
the grantee to obtain approval from OSHA prior to use? How long will
it take for OSHA to approve the use on a particular project and will
this occur during the project bidding stage? Can the work be stopped
by OSHA until the grantee demonstrates it is infeasible? These and
other questions create undue schedule and cost concerns for the
project participants.

    OSHA's response: The Agency inadvertently included paragraph (b) in
proposed Condition 1, and removed the paragraph from the permanent
variance as requested by NSCSHAC.
    Comment 4: NSCSHAC noted that the last paragraph in the
Supplementary

Information Section (and similar paragraphs throughout the variance)
unnecessarily limited the scope of the variance application. NSCSHAC
recommended that OSHA revise this language (and similar language
elsewhere in the variance application) to include both jump-form and
slip-form construction techniques and procedures, and straight-barreled
or tapered configurations. NSCSHAC provided the following rationale for
this comment: ``NSCSHAC has explained above that the variance's scope
should be broad enough to include jump-form and slip-form formwork
construction, as well as accommodate different structural
configurations of large or small-diameter tapered and straight barreled
chimneys.''
    OSHA's response: The Agency made the requested revisions.
    Comment 5: NSCSHAC pointed out that the first and second
introductory sentences of paragraph (g) of proposed Condition 2
(Application) are inconsistent regarding the variance application's
coverage. The first sentence refers to covering construction of tapered
chimneys, and small-diameter, straight-barreled chimneys and chimney-
related structures, while the wording of the next (second) sentence
states that the variance application would cover only the construction
of tapered chimneys. Accordingly, NSCSHAC requested that OSHA revise
paragraph (g) to read: ``Replacing the personnel cage with a personnel
platform or a boatswain's chair.''
    OSHA's response: The Agency inadvertently limited the second
introductory sentence of paragraph (g) to tapered chimneys. However,
because the conditions specified by the permanent variance cover both
jump-form and slip-form construction techniques and procedures
regardless of the configuration of the chimney or chimney-related
structure (i.e., tapered or straight-barreled chimneys and chimney-
related structures of any diameter) (see OSHA's response to NSCSHAC
comment 2 above), the Agency removed both introductory sentences from
the permanent variance.

    Note: In addition to the revisions made in response to NSCSHAC's
comments, OSHA made a number of minor stylistic, technical, or
editorial corrections to the variance conditions to correct previous
errors or to improve clarity.

V. Decision

    As noted previously in this preamble, from 1973 to the present the
Agency granted a number of permanent variances from the tackle
requirements provided for boatswain's chairs by 29 CFR 1926.452(o)(3)
and the requirements for hoist towers specified by paragraphs (c)(1)
through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR
1926.552. In view of the Agency's history with the variances granted
for chimney construction, OSHA determined that the alternative
conditions specified by the application will protect employees at least
as effectively as the requirements of paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR
1926.452 and paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13),
(c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552.
    Under section 6(d) of the Occupational safety and Health Act of
1970 (29 U.S.C. 655), and based on the record discussed above, the
Agency finds that when the employers comply with the conditions of the
following order, the working conditions of the employers' workers will
be at least as safe and healthful as if the employers complied with the
working conditions by paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452, and
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and
(c)(16) of 29 CFR 1926.552. This decision is applicable in all states
under Federal OSHA enforcement authority, and in the State-Plan states
and territories when: (1) The relevant standards are the same as the
Federal OSHA standards from which the applicants are seeking the
permanent variance; and (2) the State-Plan state or territory does not
object to the terms of the variance application (see Section II, Multi-
State Variance, of this notice for a description of the applicability
of this decision in State-Plan states and territories).

VI. Order

    OSHA issues this order authorizing Kiewit Power Constructors Co. et
al. (``the employers'') to comply with the following conditions instead
of complying with paragraph (o)(3) of 29 CFR 1926.452, and paragraphs
(c)(1) through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16) of 29
CFR 1926.552. This order applies in Federal OSHA enforcement
jurisdictions, and in those states with OSHA-approved State plans that
have identical standards and have agreed to the terms of the variance.

1. Scope

    This permanent variance applies to chimney-related construction,
including work on chimneys, chimney linings, stacks, and chimney-
related structures such as silos, towers, and similar structures
(hereafter referred to collectively as ``chimney-related structure'' or
``structure,'') built using jump-form and slip-form construction
techniques and procedures, regardless of the structural configuration
(such as tapered or straight barreled of any diameter) when such
construction involves the use of temporary personnel hoist systems
(hereafter referred to as ``hoist system'') for the transportation of:
    (a) Personnel to and from the bottom landing of a chimney or
chimney-related structure to working elevations inside or outside of
the chimney or structure using a personnel cage during construction
work subject to 29 CFR part 1926, including construction, renovation,
repair, maintenance, inspection, and demolition; or
    (b) Materials, but not concurrently with hoisting of personnel,
through attachment of a hopper, material basket, concrete bucket, or
other appropriate rigging to the hoist system to raise and lower all
other materials inside or outside a chimney or chimney-related
structure. See also Condition 2(c)(ii) below.

2. Application

    (a) The employer must use a hoist system equipped with a dedicated
personnel-transport device (i.e., a personnel cage) as specified by
this variance to raise or lower its workers and/or other construction-
related tools, equipment, and supplies between the bottom landing of a
chimney or chimney-related structure and an elevated work location
while performing construction inside and outside the chimney or
structure.
    (b) Prior to initial use of the hoist system, the employer must
have all drawings containing designs and construction details showing
the integration of the hoist system with the construction technique and
procedures in use (such as a slip-form construction) sealed by a
professional engineer registered in the United States. A professional
engineer registered in the United States also must approve any
modifications to these drawings.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Any reference to ``design'' or ``designed'' in these
conditions means that a professional engineer registered in the
United States must approve the design.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) When using a hoist system, the employer must:
    (i) Use the personnel cages raised and lowered by the hoist system
solely to transport workers with the tools and small supplies necessary
to do their work (e.g., fasteners, paint, caulk);
    (ii) Attach a dedicated material-transport device directly to the
hoist rope solely to raise and lower all other materials and tools; and
    (iii) Attach the material-transport device directly to the hoisting
hook and never to the personnel cage.

    (d) Except for the requirements specified by 29 CFR 1926.552(c)(1)
through (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(13), (c)(14)(i), and (c)(16), the employer
must comply fully with all other applicable provisions of 29 CFR parts
1910 and 1926.
    (e) When an employer demonstrates that it is infeasible to comply
with these conditions, the employer may use other devices or methods to
comply, but only when the employer clearly demonstrates that these
devices and methods provide its workers with protection that is at
least equivalent to the protection afforded to them by the conditions
of this variance.
    (f) The employer must convey any communication, written or verbal,
required by this variance in a language that each worker can
understand.
    (g) Replacing a personnel cage with a personnel platform or a
boatswain's chair.
    The following provisions apply:
    (i) Personnel platform. Before using a personnel platform, an
employer must:
    (A) Demonstrate that available space makes it infeasible to use a
personnel cage for transporting employees;
    (B) Limit use of a personnel platform to elevations above the last
work location that the personnel cage can reach; and
    (C) Use a personnel platform in accordance with requirements
specified by 29 CFR 1926.1431(s), unless the employer can demonstrate
that the structural arrangement of the chimney precludes such use.
    (ii) Boatswain's chair. Before using a boatswain's chair, an
employer must:
    (A) Demonstrate that available space makes it infeasible to use a
personnel platform for transporting employees;
    (B) Limit use of a boatswain's chair to elevations above the last
work location that the personnel platform can reach; and
    (C) Use a boatswain's chair in accordance with block-and-tackle
requirements specified by 29 CFR 1926.452(o)(3), unless the employer
can demonstrate that the structural arrangement of the chimney
precludes such use.

3. Definitions

    The following definitions apply to this permanent variance; these
definitions do not necessarily apply in other contexts.
    (a) Authorized person--a person approved or assigned by the
employer to perform a specific type of duty or duties or to be at a
specific location or locations at the jobsite.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See 29 CFR 1926.32(d).
    * ANSI/ASSE kindly permitted OSHA to use the definition of this
term from Section 3 of its A10.22-2007 standard, Safety Requirements
for Rope-Guided and Non-guided Workers' Hoists. In some cases, OSHA
made slight editorial revisions to the text of the definition for
clarity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Barricade--barrier used to confine or mark off limits to
access.
    (c) Base-mounted drum hoist--a drum hoist fastened to, and
supported by, a designed steel frame with mounting attachments for
securing to a foundation.*
    (d) Broken rope principle--the principle by which, if the main
support rope fails, the lack of tension will cause the safety clamps
attached to the personnel cage to grip the guide ropes and stop it
within 18 inches (457.2mm) (maximum) of travel from the activation
point.*
    (e) Cage--an enclosed load-carrying unit or car, including its
platform, frame, enclosure, and gate, in which personnel are
transported.*
    (f) Cathead--the structure directly supporting the overhead
sheaves.*
    (g) Competent person--one who is capable of identifying existing
and predictable hazards in the surroundings or working conditions that
are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees, and who has
authorization to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See 29 CFR 1926.32(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (h) Deadman control--a constant pressure, hand-operated or foot-
operated control designed so that, when released, it automatically
returns to a neutral or deactivated position and stops movement of the
hoist drum.* (Referred to in this order as ``deadman control switch.'')
    (i) Design factor--the ratio of the failure load to the maximum
designed working load. (Also referred to as ``Safety Factor'' or
``Factor of Safety.'')* (Referred to in this order as ``safety
factor.'')
    (j) Exclusion zone--a clearly designated zone around the bottom
landing of the hoist system designed to restrict the zone to authorized
persons only.
    (k) Footblock--a wire-rope block mounted at or near the bottom of a
structure for the purpose of changing the direction of the hoisting
rope from approximately horizontal to approximately vertical.*
    (l) Hoist (verb)--to raise, lower, or otherwise move a load in the
air.
    (m) Hoist (noun)--same as ``hoist machine.''
    (n) Hoist area--the area (including, but not limited to, the area
directly beneath the load) in which it is reasonably foreseeable that
partially or completely suspended materials could fall in the event of
an accident.
    (o) Hoist-way--a clearly designated walkway or path used to provide
safe access to and from personnel cages.
    (p) Hoist machine--a mechanical device for lifting and lowering
loads by winding a line onto or off a drum.
    (q) Hoist system--a collection of mechanical devices and support
equipment assembled and used in combination for lifting and lowering
loads, including personnel cages.
    (r) Job hazard analysis--an evaluation of the tasks or operations
involving the use of hoist systems performed to identify potential
hazards and to determine the necessary controls.
    (s) Lifeline--an independently suspended line used for attaching
the employee's safety harness lanyard, usually by means of a rope grab,
as part of the fall-arrest system.*
    (t) Line run--a condition whereby the free end of the hoistline
(wire rope) may be overhauled by the deadweight of the downline portion
of the hoistline on the footblock side of the cathead.*
    (u) Non-guided workman's hoist (worker's hoist)--a hoist involving
the transportation of a person in a boatswain's chair, or equivalent,
not attached to fixed guide ropes.* (Note: While the conditions of this
variance do not use this term directly, ANSI A10.22-2007, referenced
under Condition 11, uses the term.)
    (v) Qualified person--one who, by possession of a recognized
degree, certificate, or professional standing, or who by extensive
knowledge, training, and experience, has successfully demonstrated his
ability to solve or resolve problems relating to the subject matter,
the work, or the project.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See 29 CFR 1926.32(m).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (w) Rope--wire rope, unless otherwise specified.*
    (x) Rotation-resistant rope--a wire rope consisting of an inner
layer of strand laid in one direction covered by a layer of strand laid
in the opposite direction. This has the effect of counteracting torque
by reducing the tendency of the finished rope to rotate.*
    (y) Safety clamp--a fall-arresting device (or rope-grab) designed
to grip the lifeline and prevent the person being transported in a
boatswain's chair, or equivalent, from falling.*
    (z) Static drop test--a test performed by suspending the personnel
cage in a fixed position with a quick-release device or equivalent
method separating the cage from the hoistline. The quick-release device
is tripped allowing the cage to freefall until the safety clamps (cage)
activate and stop the cage.*

    (aa) Total suspended load--the combined weight of any and all
objects and persons in transport, including the weight of the suspended
rope.
    (bb) Weatherproof--constructed or protected so that exposure to the
weather will not interfere with successful operations.*

4. Qualified Person and Competent Person

    (a) The employer must:
    (i) Provide one or more competent person(s) and/or qualified
person(s), as specified in paragraphs (f) and (m) of 29 CFR 1926.32,
who is/are responsible for ensuring that the installation, maintenance,
and inspection of the hoist system comply with the conditions specified
herein, and with the applicable requirements of 29 CFR part 1926
(``Safety and Health Regulations for Construction''); and
    (ii) Ensure that a competent person(s) is/are present at ground-
level to assist in an emergency whenever the hoist system is raising or
lowering workers.
    (b) The employer must use a qualified person to design, and a
competent person to maintain, the cathead described under Condition 9
(``Cathead and Sheave'') below.
    (c) The employer must train each competent person and each
qualified person regarding the conditions of this variance and the
requirements of 29 CFR part 1926 that are applicable to their
respective roles.

5. Hoist Machine

    (a) Type of hoist. The employer must:
    (i) Designate the hoist machine as a hoist system; and
    (ii) Use and maintain the hoist machine in accordance with the
manufacturer's instructions. When the manufacturer's instructions are
not available, the employer must ensure that a qualified person
develops written instructions, and that these instructions are
available on-site.
    (b) Raising or lowering a transport. The employer must ensure that:
    (i) The hoist machine includes a base-mounted drum hoist designed
to control line-speed;
    (ii) When lowering an empty or occupied transport, the drive
components are engaged continuously (i.e., ``powered down'' or not
``freewheeling'');
    (iii) The drive system is interconnected, on a continuous basis,
through a torque converter, mechanical coupling, or an equivalent
coupling (e.g., electronic controller, fluid clutches, and hydraulic
drives);
    (iv) The braking mechanism is applied automatically when the
transmission is in the neutral position and a forward-reverse coupling
or shifting transmission is being used; and
    (v) No belts are used between the power source and the winding
drum.
    (c) Power source. The employer must power the hoist machine by an
air, electric, hydraulic, or internal-combustion drive mechanism.
    (d) Constant-pressure control switch. The employer must equip the
hoist machine with a hand-operated or a foot-operated constant-pressure
control switch (i.e., a ``deadman control switch'') that deactivates
the engine and stops the hoist rotation immediately upon release by the
hoist operator.
    (e) Line-speed indicator. The employer must:
    (i) Equip the hoist machine with a line-speed indicator maintained
in working order; and
    (ii) Ensure that the line-speed indicator is in clear view of the
hoist operator during hoisting operations.
    (f) Overspeed. The employer must equip the hoist machine with an
audible or visual overspeed-indicator alarm that will activate before
the line-speed exceeds 275 feet per minute (includes 10% overspeed
allowance) when transporting personnel.
    (g) Braking systems. The employer must equip the hoist machine with
at least two (2) independent braking systems (i.e., one automatic and
one manual) applied on the winding side of the clutch or couplings,
with each braking system capable of stopping and holding 150 percent of
the maximum rated line load.
    (h) Slack-rope protection. The employer must equip the hoist
machine with a slack-rope device to prevent rotation of the winding
drum under slack-rope conditions, or a slack-rope circuit that stops or
limits the hoist speed to a creep speed when there is no tension on the
load line.
    (i) Frame. The employer must ensure that the frame of the hoist
machine is a self-supporting, rigid, steel structure, and that holding
brackets for anchor lines and legs for anchor bolts are integral
components of the frame in accordance with the applicable design
drawings.
    (j) Stability. The employer must secure hoist machines in position
to prevent movement, shifting, or dislodgement in accordance with the
applicable design drawings.
    (k) Location. The employer must:
    (i) Locate the hoist machine far enough from the footblock to
obtain the correct fleet angle for proper winding or spooling of the
cable on the drum; and
    (ii) Ensure that the fleet angle remains between one-half degree
(\1/2\[deg]) and one and one-half degrees (1\1/2\[deg]) for smooth
drums, and between one-half degree (\1/2\[deg]) and two degrees
(2[deg]) for grooved drums, with the lead sheave centered on the
drum.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ This provision adopts the definition of, and specifications
for, fleet angle from Cranes and Derricks, H. I. Shapiro, et al.
(eds.); New York: McGraw-Hill; 3rd ed., 1999, page 592. Accordingly,
the fleet angle is ``[t]he angle the rope leading onto a [winding]
drum makes with the line perpendicular to the drum rotating axis
when the lead rope is making a wrap against the flange.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (l) Drum and flange diameter. The employer must:
    (i) Provide a winding drum for the hoist that is at least 30 times
the nominal diameter of the rope used for hoisting; and
    (ii) Ensure that the winding drum has a flange diameter that is at
least one and one-half (1\1/2\) times the winding-drum diameter.
    (m) Spooling of the rope. The employer must never spool the rope
closer than two (2) inches (5.1 cm) from the outer edge of the winding-
drum flange when the hoist is in operation.
    (n) Minimum rope turns on drum. The employer must ensure that the
drum has three turns of rope when the hoist load is at the lowest point
of travel, and that the hoist end of the rope is mechanically secured
to the hoist drum in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
    (o) Electrical system. The employer must ensure that all electrical
equipment is weatherproof.
    (p) Grounding. The employer must ensure that the hoisting machine
is grounded at all times in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR
1926.404(f).
    (q) Limit switches.
    (i) When the employer uses a hoist system with a personnel cage,
the employer must equip the hoist system with limit switches and
related equipment that automatically prevent overtravel of the
transport device at the top of the supporting structure and at the
bottom of the hoist-way or lowest landing level.
    (ii) When the employer uses a hoist system with a material-
transport device, the employer must equip the hoist system with limit
switches and related equipment that automatically prevents overtravel
of material-transport devices at the top of the support structure.
    (r) Guarding. The employer must guard effectively all exposed
moving parts such as gears, projecting screws, setscrews, chains,
cables, belts, chain sprockets, and reciprocating or rotating parts,
that might constitute a hazard under normal operating conditions.
(Note: OSHA considers a hoist drum

that has access limited to authorized persons as guarded.)
    (s) Overhead Protection. The employer must provide a shelter or
enclosure to protect the hoist operator, hoist machine, and associated
controls from falling or moving objects.
    6. Methods of Operation
    (a) Worker qualifications and training. The employer must:
    (i) Ensure that each personnel hoist operator and each of their
supervisors have effective and documented training in the safe
operation of hoist machines covered by this variance.
    (ii) Ensure that only a trained and authorized person operates the
hoist machine.
    (iii) Provide effective and documented instruction, before initial
use, to each worker who uses a personnel cage for transportation
regarding the safe use of the personnel cage and its emergency systems.
The employer must repeat the instruction periodically and as necessary
(e.g., after making changes to the personnel cage that affect its
operation).
    (b) Use of job hazard analyses (JHAs). The employer must:
    (i) Complete one or more JHAs for the operation of the hoist
system; and
    (ii) Review, periodically and as necessary (e.g., after making
changes to the hoist machine that affect its operation), the contents
of the JHA with affected personnel.
    (c) Speed limitations. The employer must not operate the hoist at a
speed in excess of:
    (i) 250 feet per minute \19\ or the design speed of the hoist
system, whichever is lower, when using a personnel cage to transport
workers, and slow the hoist appropriately at the extremes of hoist
travel. (Note: The employer may use a line-speed that is consistent
with the design limitations of the hoist system when hoisting material
(i.e., using a dedicated material-transport device) on the hoist
system); or
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ When including 10% overspeed, the maximum hoist speed must
not exceed 275 feet per minute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (ii) 100 feet per minute when a personnel platform or boatswain's
chair is being used to transport workers.
    (d) Communication. The employer must:
    (i) Use an electronic voice-communication system (such as two-way
radio) at all times for communication between the hoist operator and
the workers located in a moving personnel cage, personnel platform, or
boatswain's chair;
    (ii) Stop hoisting if there is (a) a failure of communication, or
(b) activation of a stop signal from the workers in the personnel cage,
personnel platform, or boatswain's chair; resume hoisting only when a
supervisor determines that it is safe to do so.

7. Hoist Rope

    (a) Grade. The employer must use a wire rope for the hoist system
(i.e., ``hoist rope'') that consists of extra-improved plow steel, an
equivalent grade of non-rotating rope, or a regular lay rope with a
suitable swivel mechanism.
    (b) Safety factor. For personnel hoisting, the employer must
maintain a safety factor of at least eight and nine-tenth (8.9) times
the total suspended load throughout the entire length of hoist rope
(including the weight of the suspended rope).
    (c) Size. The employer must use a hoist rope that is at least one-
half (\1/2\) inch in diameter.
    (d) Rope lay. Except when using rotation-resistant rope, the
employer must use preformed regular-lay rope. The direction of exterior
lay (right or left) must match the drum termination and winding
characteristics.
    (e) Inspection, removal, and replacement. The employer must:
    (i) Thoroughly inspect the hoist rope before the start of each job,
and on completing a new set-up;
    (ii) Maintain the proper diameter-to-diameter ratios between the
hoist rope and the footblock and the sheave by inspecting the wire rope
regularly (see Conditions 8(c) and 9(d), below); and
    (iii) Remove and replace the wire rope with new wire rope when any
condition specified by 29 CFR 1926.552(a)(3) occurs.
    (f) Attachments. The employer must attach the rope to a personnel
cage, personnel platform, or boatswain's chair using a positive
connection such as:
    (i) A screw-pin shackle with the pin secured from rotation or
loosening by mousing to the shackle body;
    (ii) A bolt-type shackle, nut, and cotter pin; or
    (iii) A positive-locking link.
    (g) Wire-rope fastenings. When the employer uses clip fastenings
(e.g., U-bolt wire-rope clips) with wire ropes, the employer must:
    (i) Use Table H-20 of 29 CFR 1926.251 to determine the number and
spacing of the clips;
    (ii) Use at least three (3) drop-forged clips at each fastening;
    (iii) Install the clips with the ``U'' of the clips on the dead end
of the rope and the live end resting in the clip saddle;
    (iv) Space the clips so that the distance between them is a minimum
of six (6) times the diameter of the rope.
    (v) Tighten the clips evenly in accordance with the manufacturer's
specification;
    (vi) Following initial application of the load to the rope,
retighten the clip nuts to the specified torque to compensate for any
decrease in rope diameter caused by the load; and
    (vii) Retighten the rope clip nuts periodically to compensate for
any further decrease in rope diameter during usage.
    (h) Rotation-resistant ropes and swivels. The employer must not use
a swivel anywhere in the system when using rotation-resistant ropes
unless approved by the wire-rope manufacturer.
    (i) Rope protection. The employer must:
    (i) Barricade the hoisting rope between the hoisting machine and
the footblock;
    (ii) Protect the hoisting rope from abrasive contact with the
ground; and
    (iii) When the hoisting rope is subject to falling material or
debris, protect it from such hazards.

8. Footblock

    (a) Type of footblock. Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this
condition, the employer must use a footblock:
    (i) Consisting of construction-type rope blocks of solid single-
piece bail with a safety factor of at least five (5), or an equivalent
block with roller bearings;
    (ii) Designed for the applied loading, size, and type of wire rope
used for hoisting;
    (iii) Designed for returning the rope to the sheave groove after a
slack-rope condition, or equipped with a guard that contains the wire
rope within the sheave groove;
    (iv) Attached to the base according to the design drawings, with
the anchorage being capable of sustaining at least eight (8) times the
resultant force of the horizontal and vertical loads transmitted by the
hoisting rope; and
    (v) Designed and installed so that it turns the moving wire rope to
and from the horizontal or vertical direction as required by the
direction of rope travel.
    (b) Directional change. The employer must ensure that the angle of
change in the hoist rope from the horizontal to the vertical direction
at the footblock is approximately 90[deg] (degrees).
    (c) Diameter. The employer must ensure that the line diameter of
the footblock sheave is at least 24 times the diameter of the hoist
rope.
    (d) Sheave substitute. The employer may substitute a properly
mounted sheave, as specified in Condition 9

below (``Cathead and Sheaves''), for the footblock described in this
condition.

9. Cathead and Sheaves

    (a) Sheave support. The employer must use a cathead (i.e.,
``overhead support'') constructed of steel or aluminum that consists of
a wide-flange beam, or two (2) channel sections securely bolted back-
to-back, according to the design drawings, to prevent spreading.
    (b) Installation. The employer must ensure that:
    (i) All sheaves revolve on shafts that rotate on bearings; and
    (ii) The bearings are mounted securely to maintain the proper
bearing position at all times.
    (c) Rope guides. The employer must provide each sheave with
appropriate rope guides to prevent the hoist rope from leaving the
sheave grooves when the rope vibrates or swings abnormally.
    (d) Diameter. The employer must use a sheave with a line diameter
that is at least 24 times the diameter of the hoist rope.
    (e) Design basis. The employer must ensure that:
    (i) The design of the cathead assembly conforms to the American
Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) Manual of Steel Construction or
the Aluminum Association's Aluminum Design Manual, whichever manual is
appropriate to the material used; and
    (ii) The cathead has a safety factor of at least five (5) for
personnel and material hoisting.
    (f) Clearance. The employer must provide:
    (i) Adequate clearance so that there will be no contact between the
bottom of cathead and the cable attachment at the top of the hoist
cage; and
    (ii) A path free of obstruction (clear travel) along the full
length of the guide ropes.
    (g) Sheave substitute. The employer may substitute construction
blocks, of the type described in Condition 8(a)(i) above, for the top
sheaves. (Note: See also Condition 8(d) above.)

10. Guide Ropes

    (a) Number and construction. The employer must:
    (i) Securely affix two (2) guide ropes to the cathead or to
overhead supports designed for the purpose of accepting the guide
ropes; and
    (ii) Ensure that the guide ropes:
    (A) Consist of steel wire rope not less than one-half (1/2) inch
(1.3 cm) in diameter; and
    (B) Be free of damage or defect at all times per 29 CFR
1926.552(c)(17)(iv).
    (b) Guide rope fastening and alignment tension. During the hoisting
of personnel, the employer must ensure that one end of each guide rope
is fastened securely to the overhead support, and that appropriate
tension is applied at the foundation end of the rope.
    (c) Height. The employer must install the guide ropes along the
entire height of hoist travel.

11. Personnel Cage

    (a) Construction. The employer must ensure that the frame of the
personnel cage is capable of supporting a load that is eight (8) times
its rated load capacity. The employer also must ensure that the
personnel cage has:
    (i) A top and sides that are permanently enclosed (except for the
entrance and exit);
    (ii) A floor securely fastened in place;
    (iii) Walls that consist of 14-gauge, one-half (1/2) inch expanded
metal mesh, or an equivalent material;
    (iv) Walls that cover the full height of the personnel cage between
the floor and the overhead covering;
    (v) A sloped roof constructed of at least three-sixteenth (3/16)
inch steel plate, or material of equivalent strength and impact
resistance, that slopes to the outside of the personnel cage;
    (vi) Safe handholds (e.g., rope grips--but not rails or hard
protrusions when their presence creates an impact hazard) that
accommodate each occupant; and
    (vii) Attachment points for workers to secure their personal fall-
arrest protection systems.
    (b) Overhaul weight. The employer must ensure that the personnel
cage has an overhaul weight (e.g., a headache ball) to compensate for
the weight of the hoist rope between the cathead and footblock. In
addition, the employer must:
    (i) Ensure that the overhaul weight is capable of preventing line
run; and
    (ii) Use a means to restrain the movement of the overhaul weight so
that the weight does not interfere with safe personnel hoisting.
    (c) Gate. The employer must ensure that the personnel cage has a
gate that:
    (i) Guards the full height of the entrance opening; and
    (ii) Has a functioning mechanical latch that prevents accidental
opening.
    (d) Operating procedures. The employer must post the procedures for
operating the personnel cage conspicuously at the bottom landing.
    (e) Capacity. The employer must: