prevent overloading, which could result in structural failure of the
platform or equipment, and to facilitate compliance with Sec.
1926.1431(f)(1), which prohibits loading the platform in excess of its
rated capacity.
    No comments were received on paragraphs (e)(11) or (e)(12); they
are promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (f) Personnel Platform Loading
    Paragraph (f)(1) of this section prohibits loading the platform in
excess of its rated capacity.
    Paragraph (f)(2)(i) requires the platform to be used exclusively
for personnel hoisting and not for hoisting materials. However, it does
allow the necessary materials and tools for the work activity to be
hoisted along with the employees. Using a personnel platform to hoist
materials can lead to damage of the platform due to materials shifting
or excessive loading. This can subject the platform to structural
stresses that may not be visible and contribute to platform structural
failure.
    Paragraph (f)(2)(ii) provides an exception to paragraph (f)(2)(i)
to allow materials and tools on the personnel platform during the trial
lift as long as the materials/tools are properly secured and
distributed as specified in Sec.  1926.1431(f)(3).
    Paragraphs (f)(3)(i) and (ii) require that any materials and tools
that are on the platform during the hoist be secured, and evenly
distributed within the platform itself while the platform is suspended.
These precautions are designed to prevent platform tipping and injury
to employees due to movement of materials or tools during the hoist.
OSHA concludes that the combination of paragraphs (f)(2)(ii) and (f)(3)
strikes the appropriate balance by accommodating the practical
requirements of the job while reducing the potential for overloading.
    No comments were received on paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(3); they
are promulgated as proposed.
    Paragraph (f)(4) limits the number of employees on a personnel
platform to the lesser of either the number needed to perform the work
or the maximum number for which the platform was designed. The purpose
is to expose the fewest possible number of employees to the hazards
presented when hoisting personnel and to minimize the load on the
platform to the extent possible.
    One commenter stated that boom attached personnel platforms should
be limited to a maximum of 4 employees. (ID-0178.1.) Because no reason
was provided to support this requirement, OSHA has not changed the
requirement that the maximum number of employees on a platform is
limited to the lesser of the number the platform was designed to hold
or the number required to perform the work. Therefore, paragraph (f)(4)
is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (g) Attachment and Rigging
    Paragraph (g)(1) of this section establishes the requirements for
the device used to connect the personnel platform to the hoist line.
    The nature and type of connector used is critical to the overall
safety of the suspended personnel platform. Under this paragraph, a
hook used to connect the hoist line and personnel platform must be the
type that can be closed/locked and must be closed/locked when attached
to the platform. When a shackle is used in lieu of a hook, it must be
of the alloy anchor type with either: A bolt, nut and retaining pin in
place; or: The screw type with the screw pin secured against accidental
removal. Any detachable device other than a shackle or hook that is
used must be closable and lockable to the same extent a hook or shackle
would be when in compliance with this section. When used to connect the
personnel platform, such a device must be closed and locked to ensure
that the platform is secured to the hoist line.
    Paragraph (g)(2) requires that each bridle leg in a rope bridle be
connected to the master link/shackle in a manner that allows the
platform's load to be equally distributed among each bridle leg. The
purpose of this type of attachment is to avoid platform tipping.
    Paragraph (g)(3) requires that all hardware used for rigging must
be able to support five times the maximum intended load applied to or
transmitted to that component. Additionally, slings using rotation
resistant rope must have a safety factor of ten. These measurements
continue the requirements that were in former Sec.
1926.550(g)(4)(iv)(C).
    Paragraph (g)(4) requires the eyes in wire rope slings to be
fabricated with thimbles. The purpose of this requirement is to prevent
excessive wear to the eyes and possible failure of the platform's
rigging.
    No comments were received on paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4); they
are promulgated as proposed with minor grammatical clarifications.
    Paragraph (g)(5) requires that bridles and rigging used to suspend
the personnel platform be used exclusively for hoisting personnel
operations. Rigging components must be dedicated for the sole use of
personnel hoisting to help ensure that they are not damaged. Materials
hoisting can lead to damage of the rigging components due to material
shifting or excessive loading. This can make the rigging components
susceptible to structural stress that may not be visible, yet
contribute to failure. To clarify that the bridles and rigging used for
hoisting personnel may only be used if they have not ever been used for
other operations prior to being designated for the purpose of hoisting
personnel, OSHA has modified the regulatory text from the proposed rule
to state that the bridles and rigging ``must not have been used for any
purpose other than hoisting personnel.''
Paragraph (h) Trial Lift and Inspection
    Paragraph (h)(1) of this section requires a trial lift without
occupants and with the platform loaded to at least the anticipated
liftweight. The purpose of the trial lift is to confirm that: The lift
set-up works properly; the lift route is free of obstacles; the work
location is accessible; no work location will place the crane or
derrick in such a configuration where the intended load would exceed 50
percent of the equipment's rated capacity; the soil or other supporting
surface is stable; and that the lift route is suitable for the intended
lift. The path of the trial lift must begin at the point the employees
enter the platform and end at the ultimate location the platform is
being hoisted to and positioned (end point). When there are multiple
destination locations from a single set-up point, the trial lift must
be conducted in one of two ways.
    First, individual lifts may be conducted in which the platform is
moved to one of the end points from the starting point, returned to the
starting point, moved to a second end point, again returned to the
starting point, and the process repeated until each end point has been
reached. Alternatively, a single lift may be conducted from the
starting point to all of the end points in sequence, without returning
to the starting point until after the last end point has been reached.
    OSHA determined that the phrase ``a single trial lift for all
locations'' in the text of the proposed rule for Sec.  1926.1431(h)(1),
based on C-DAC consensus language, was not sufficiently clear to
describe the intended meaning of this requirement (see 73 FR 59714,
59940-59941, Oct. 9, 2008). In addition, OSHA was concerned that
allowing the trial lift to be conducted in either of these two ways,
irrespective of how the personnel will actually be hoisted, may

result in the trial lift failing to reveal problems that would be
encountered in the actual personnel lift.
    To address these concerns, OSHA suggested language in the preamble
to the proposed rule to clarify that the employer must use a lift path
and sequence of stops in the trial lift that will match the lift path
and sequence of stops when actually hoisting personnel. As noted above,
the purpose is to detect any problems that could arise before personnel
are hoisted. OSHA asked for public comment on these issues and the
suggested language (73 FR 59714, 59833, Oct. 9, 2008).
    Two commenters stated that the language in the proposed rule was
sufficient and should not be changed (ID-0205.1; -0213.1); another
commenter stated that the text suggested by OSHA in the preamble to the
proposed rule should be used in the final rule (ID-0104.1). The Agency
concludes this suggested text provides a better description of what
needs to be done to ensure safety--i.e., that the trial lift method
needs to match the actual hoist method. Therefore, the provision in the
final rule includes this suggested language.
    Paragraph (h)(2) requires the trial lift to take place immediately
prior to each shift when hoisting personnel, and each time the
equipment is moved and set up in a new location or a previously used
location. This is to ensure that the conditions for the trial lift will
be nearly identical to those of the actual personnel lift.
Additionally, a trial lift must be done each time the lift route is
changed, unless a competent person determines the new lift route does
not present new factors affecting safety.
    Paragraph (h)(3) requires a competent person to ensure that all
required safety devices and operational aids required by this section
are activated and properly functioning, that nothing interferes with
the equipment or personnel platform during the trial lift, that the
lift load does not exceed 50 percent of the equipment's rated capacity,
and that the load radius used is accurately determined. These
requirements ensure that necessary safety measures are in place and
validated by a competent person for the trial lift. It is important for
this to be the responsibility of a competent person because such a
person not only has the knowledge necessary to make the determinations,
but also has the authority to take any necessary corrective action.
    Paragraph (h)(4) establishes the duties of the competent person
immediately after the trial lift. It requires the competent person to
conduct a visual inspection of the personnel platform and equipment to
determine if there is any problem or defect resulting from the trial
lift or if it produced any adverse effect. In addition, the competent
person must ensure that the test weight used during the trial lift has
been removed prior to personnel loading.
    The purpose of these requirements is to ensure that any defects in
the equipment, base support, or ground and personnel platform, revealed
by the trial lift are seen by a competent person prior to hoisting
personnel. (Note that, under Sec.  1926.1431(h)(6), any condition found
during the trial lift that fails to meet a requirement of this standard
or otherwise constitutes a safety hazard must be corrected before
hoisting personnel.) Paragraph (h)(4) continues the requirements from
former Sec.  1926.550(g)(5)(iv) while adding the requirement that the
competent person ensure that the test weight is removed. This is needed
because overloading the personnel platform can occur if the test
weights are not removed and left on the platform when hoisting
personnel.
    No comments were received on Sec. Sec.  1926.1431(h)(2) through
(h)(4); they are promulgated as proposed.
    Under paragraph (h)(5)(i), immediately prior to each personnel
lift, the competent person must inspect the platform while it is lifted
a few inches to ensure that the platform is secure and properly
balanced.
    The purpose of this procedure is to ensure that, with the occupants
and materials/tools to be hoisted on the platform immediately before
the hoist is to take place, the platform is secure and properly
balanced. The purpose of having the occupants and materials/tools on
board during this check is twofold. First, it ensures that the check
takes place just before the personnel lift, which minimizes the chance
that damage or other problems affecting the platform's security will
occur after the check. In addition, it would be difficult to ensure
that the platform will be properly balanced when in actual use without
having the employees and materials/tools on board.
    In the proposed rule, the text did not state that personnel and
materials were to be on board during the trial lift (see 73 FR 59941,
Oct. 9, 2008). In the preamble to the proposed rule, the Agency asked
for comment on adding the phrase ``with the personnel and materials/
tools on board'' to clarify the intent of this requirement (see 73 FR
59833, Oct. 9, 2008).
    Three comments were received in response to the Agency's request
for comment on this issue. (ID-0104.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) All three
commenters agreed with the Agency's suggested revision. Therefore, the
final rule reflects this change in Sec.  1926.1431(h)(5)(i).
    Paragraph (h)(5)(ii) requires a competent person to determine that
hoist ropes are free of defects, that multiple part lines are not
twisted around each other, and that the primary attachment is centered
over the platform. If the load rope is slack, the competent person must
inspect the hoisting system to ensure the rope lines are properly
seated on drums and in sheaves. Paragraphs (i) and (ii) continue the
requirements from former Sec.  1926.550(g)(5)(iii), with the additional
clarification that hoist ropes must be free of deficiencies (that is,
not just free of ``kinks,'' as was required in former Sec.
1926.550(g)(5)(iii)(A)). The purpose of these requirements is to
mandate an additional final review by a competent person to evaluate
the personnel platform, the balance of the load, and the lifting
devices to ensure that necessary safety requirements are met.
    No comments were received on Sec.  1926.1431(h)(5) (ii); it is
promulgated as proposed.
    Paragraph (h)(6) establishes that any condition that fails to meet
the requirements of this standard or otherwise creates a safety hazard
must be corrected before personnel are hoisted. This includes
conditions found during the trial lift or in any inspection or
subsequent review of the equipment, platform or rigging. No comments
were received for this provision. However, the following reference has
been added to this provision for clarification: ``(See Sec.  1926.1417
for tag-out and related requirements.).'' This sentence has been added
to ensure the employer is aware of the applicable tag-out and related
requirements of Sec.  1926.1417, Operation.
Paragraph (i) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (j) Proof Testing
    This paragraph delineates the requirements of and method for proof
testing the personnel platform and rigging. It requires the proof test
to be done at each jobsite prior to hoisting personnel and after any
repair or modification of the platform. The proof test must be at 125
percent of the platform's rated capacity with an evenly distributed
test load. The platform must be lowered by controlled load lowering,
braked, and held in a suspended position for at least five minutes.
After this proof test, the competent person must inspect the platform
and rigging to determine if it has passed the proof test. If not, all
deficiencies that pose a safety hazard must be corrected and another
proof test performed. The competent

person must determine that the platform and rigging have successfully
passed the proof test before any personnel hoisting begins.
    The purpose of this paragraph is to determine if the structural
integrity of the personnel platform is intact or if it has been
affected by any condition, damage, repair or modification which could
result in structural failure or other safety hazards from the platform
or rigging. This ensures the load lowering and braking mechanisms are
functioning properly before personnel are lifted. In addition, Sec.
1926.1431(j)(3) clarifies that only deficiencies that present a safety
hazard need be corrected; minor deficiencies bearing no relation to
safety do not need to be corrected.
    In addition, the Agency is adding a reference to the requirements
of Sec.  1926.1417, Operation, to ensure the reader is aware of the
applicable tagout and startup requirements of Sec.  1926.1417,
Operation. Paragraph (j)(3) of this section is otherwise promulgated as
proposed.
    One commenter stated that proof testing should not be required for
boom attached personnel platforms, since there is no rigging and a
simple visual inspection of the mounting hardware would be sufficient.
(ID-0144.1.)
    OSHA disagrees with this comment. The purpose of this proof test is
to ensure the sufficiency and integrity of the system that will be
hoisted by the crane/derrick. In the case of a suspended platform, that
system consists of the platform and the rigging that attaches it to the
crane/derrick. In the case of a boom-attached platform, that system
consists of the platform with its boom-mounting hardware (in such cases
OSHA considers the boom-mounting hardware part of the platform itself).
Therefore, even when rigging is not used, the proof test still needs to
be performed to help ensure the adequacy of the platform, including its
attachment system.
    Therefore, Sec. Sec.  1926.1431(j)(1), (2) and (4) are promulgated
as proposed.
Paragraph (k) Work practices
    Paragraph (k)(1) of this section requires hoisting the personnel
platform in a slow, controlled, cautious manner, with no sudden
movements of the equipment or platform. This precaution minimizes the
likelihood of platform tipping, loss of footing, and loss of control of
the platform by the operator during hoisting.
    Paragraph (k)(2)(i) requires that all occupants of the personnel
platform keep all parts of the body inside the platform while it is
being raised, lowered or moved horizontally. This does not apply when a
platform occupant must position the platform. Additionally, this does
not apply when a platform occupant is performing the duties of a signal
person. The purpose of this requirement is to prevent an employee from
having a body part struck by or caught in between the personnel
platform and another object.
    Paragraph (k)(2)(ii) prohibits platform occupants from standing on,
sitting on, or working from any surface other than the floor of the
personnel platform during hoisting or when working from the platform.
It prohibits working from a railing or toeboard or the use of any means
or device to raise the employee's working height. The purpose is to
ensure that the occupants benefit from the protections of the guardrail
system and do not destabilize the platform.
    Paragraph (k)(2)(iii) prohibits platform occupants from pulling the
platform out of plumb in relation to the hoisting equipment. The
purpose is to prevent tipping of the platform with employees on board,
which could exacerbate the fall hazard.
    Paragraph (k)(3) requires a personnel platform that is not landed
to be secured to the structure, before employees enter or exit the
platform, to prevent dangerous movement of the platform at these times,
which could exacerbate the fall hazard or cause an employee's body part
to be struck by or caught in between the personnel platform and the
structure. Paragraph (k)(3) allows an exception when a greater hazard
is created by securing the platform to the structure.
    Paragraph (k)(4) requires the operator to receive confirmation that
the platform is no longer tied to the structure and is freely suspended
before the operator moves the platform. This requirement prevents
structural damage to the platform and/or rigging and prevents the fall
hazard that could result from pulling the platform out of plumb if
there were an attempt to move it while it is still attached.
    Paragraph (k)(5) requires the use of tag lines when necessary to
control the personnel platform. The purpose is to provide an additional
way to control platform stability to decrease the risk of injury from
loss of footing or from the platform striking an object.
    Under paragraph (k)(6), where the platform is not equipped with any
controls, the equipment operator is required to remain at the equipment
controls at all times while the personnel platform is occupied. Because
there are no controls in the personnel platform, the equipment operator
must be available to make any necessary adjustments to protect the
employees from injury from any condition arising after the platform is
placed at the working location. Paragraph (k)(6) requires the operator
to stay at the equipment controls, and on site and in view of the
equipment, at all times the platform is occupied, whether or not the
crane engine is running. Equipment controls, as discussed here and in
Sec.  1926.1431(k)(7), include remote controls that are used to control
the boom and swing functions of the equipment. This subpart does not
prohibit the use of remote controls for equipment by an operator. See
discussion of the use of remote controls at the preamble for Sec.
1926.1417(e)(1). The Agency has added the ``on site and in view of the
equipment'' requirement in the final rule to address the situation
where the operator uses a remote control to operate the equipment. The
same requirement was included in proposed Sec.  1926.1431(k)(7) to
address the same issue, and is included in final Sec.  1926.1431(k)(7),
as discussed below.
    No comments were received on paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(6); they
are promulgated as proposed with the exception of the addition noted
for (k)(6).
    Paragraph (k)(7), Platforms with controls, applies when a personnel
platform has controls. Controls on certain personnel platforms enable a
platform occupant to move both the platform and the boom. Other
platform designs enable an occupant to control only the platform/basket
itself, for example, to level the basket as it is boomed up or down.
    Paragraph (k)(7)(i) requires the platform occupant using the
platform's controls to be a qualified person with respect to their use,
including the safe limitations of the equipment and hazards associated
with its operation. Such knowledge and skill is essential for the
safety of the platform occupants and employees in the surrounding area.
    Proposed paragraph (k)(7)(ii) required the equipment operator to be
at the equipment controls, in the personnel platform, or on site and in
view of the equipment. In the proposed rule, the Agency requested
public comment on whether this paragraph should be reworded to clarify
the circumstances for selecting a location for the equipment operator
(73 FR 59835, Oct. 9, 2008). Two commenters stated that, regardless of
which option is chosen, the operator must be in a position that allows
him to control the boom and swing functions of the equipment. (ID-
0205.1; -0213.1.) However, these commenters also stated that the
proposed regulatory text did not need to

be revised. (ID-0205.1; -0213.1.)
    Upon reviewing the paragraph as proposed and considering these
comments, OSHA finds that the language used in proposed
1926.1431(k)(7)(ii) needs to be changed to clearly specify that an
operator has to be able to control the boom and swing functions,
wherever the operator is located. If the platform does not have
controls for the boom and swing functions of the equipment, then it is
essential that the operator be at the set of equipment controls which
include these functions, because they are crucial for the safety of
personnel being hoisted. These equipment controls may be on the
platform, in the cab, or on a remote control. The operator must be able
to take immediate action when necessary (such as, for example, when
there is unexpected platform or equipment movement, a sudden change in
wind conditions, or an injury to a platform occupant). In the final
rule, OSHA has modified Sec.  1926.1431(k)(7)(ii) accordingly.
    Paragraph (k)(7)(iii) requires the platform's operating manual to
be on the platform or on the equipment while the platform is occupied.
The purpose is to have ready access to manufacturer's operating
information when employees are on the platform. No comments were
received on this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
    Paragraph (k)(8)(i), Environmental conditions--Wind, requires a
qualified person to determine if it is unsafe to hoist personnel when
the wind speed (gust or sustained) exceeds 20 mph. C-DAC selected this
triggering wind speed based in part on ASME B30.23-2005, which
prohibits personnel hoisting operations when wind speed exceeds 20 mph.
High winds increase the likelihood of platform tipping, sudden
unexpected movement of the platform, or structural failure of the
equipment. While OSHA is declining to set a specific wind speed
threshold at which all hoisting operations must cease, it agrees that
20 mph is an appropriate point at which a safety determination be
required. If the qualified person determines that hoisting personnel is
unsafe, hoisting operations must not begin or, if already in progress,
must be terminated.
    One commenter questioned where and how the wind speed must be
determined. (ID-0120.) With respect to where the measurement must be
taken, the language of this provision refers to wind speed ``at the
personnel platform.'' This means that a safety determination is
required at any time at which the wind to which the platform is exposed
exceeds 20 mph, whether the platform is on the ground or suspended.
    The provision does not specify any particular type of device or
protocol for taking the measurement. The Agency does not determine that
such specificity is needed; any generally accepted method that
accurately measures wind speed would suffice. Therefore, this paragraph
is promulgated as proposed.
    Paragraph (k)(8)(ii), Environmental conditions--Other weather and
environmental conditions, requires a qualified person to determine if
it is not safe to hoist personnel when there are indications of
dangerous weather or any other impending/existing dangerous
environmental condition. Upon determination that it is unsafe,
personnel hoisting operations must not be started or must be terminated
if already in progress.
    Paragraph (k)(9) requires employees being hoisted to remain in
direct communication with either the signal person (where used) or
equipment operator at all times. In some instances the platform
occupants are in a better position to see potential problems developing
than the operator, or to recognize there is some other safety-related
need for the operator to take action. In addition, there are instances
when the operator becomes aware of a developing problem and needs to
communicate that information to the employees being hoisted. This
provision ensures that such information can be communicated quickly
between the hoisted employees and operator.
    No comments were received on paragraphs (k)(8)(ii) or (k)(9); they
are promulgated as proposed.
    Paragraphs (k)(10)(i) and (ii), Fall protection, require employees
on the personnel platform to be provided with and use a personal fall
arrest system attached to a structural member within the personnel
platform. The fall arrest system (including the attachment point) must
comply with Sec.  1926.502, Fall protection systems criteria and
practices. When hoisting personnel over water, a personal fall arrest
system would not be required since, in the event that an error or
failure occurred resulting in the employees being in the water, being
tied-off exacerbates the drowning hazard. However, the requirements of
Sec.  1926.106, Working over or near water, do apply. Upon review of
the rule, the Agency determined that it would provide greater clarity
if the note referring to the requirements of Sec.  1926.106 was
included in paragraph (k)(10)(ii), instead of at the end of this
paragraph. The regulatory text of the final rule reflects this change.
    The purpose of this requirement is to protect employees from a fall
hazard while in the personnel platform in the event of sudden movement,
tipping, or other circumstance in which a fall would not be prevented
by the platform's guardrail system.
    Paragraph (k)(11)(i), Other load lines, mandates that while
hoisting personnel no other lifts may be made with any of the
equipment's other load lines. This provision serves several purposes.
First, it prevents platform tipping due to entanglement with other load
lines or loads. Second, it reduces the chance that the equipment could
be overloaded. Third, when hoisting personnel, it is essential that the
operator's full attention be devoted to the hoisted personnel; use of
another load line necessarily diverts his/her attention. An exception
applies for pile driving operations, as the pile driver is always
suspended on a load line and at times personnel have to be hoisted on
another line to conduct work during the pile driving operation.
    In the preamble to the proposed rule, OSHA explained that the C-DAC
consensus language for this provision would have applied the
requirement only when personnel were suspended on a personnel platform.
However, the standard permits personnel to be hoisted without a
personnel platform under certain circumstances. Since the requirement
also needs to apply in those circumstances, OSHA expanded the language
so that, in proposed paragraph (k)(11)(i), it also applied in those
circumstances (see 73 FR 59836, Oct. 9, 2008). No comments were
received on this issue; the provision is promulgated as proposed.
    Paragraph (k)(11)(ii), Other load lines, allows the use of a winch
line while hoisting personnel when all of the following factors are
present: the personnel platform is a factory-produced boom-mounted
personnel platform incorporating a winch as original equipment, the
load on the winch line does not exceed 500 pounds, and the load on the
winch line itself does not exceed the rated capacity of the winch and
platform. C-DAC selected these factors based on the experience of its
members, and determined that when all of these factors are present,
there is little chance that the use of the winch line will compromise
employee safety. OSHA agrees.
    Paragraph (k)(12)(i), Traveling--equipment other than derricks,
prohibits any traveling by equipment with hoisted employees except in
two circumstances. The first is where the equipment is traveling on
fixed rails. The second is where the employer demonstrates that

there is no less hazardous way to perform the work than by traveling.
However, this second exception does not apply to rubber-tired
equipment, for which traveling is always prohibited. Traveling with
hoisted employees is also always prohibited for derricks, as set forth
under Sec.  1926.1431(k)(13). (See the discussion of these provisions
in the preamble to the proposed rule, 73 FR at 59836-59837, Oct. 9,
2008.)
    No comments were received on paragraphs (k)(10), (k)(11)(ii) or
(k)(12)(i); they are promulgated as proposed. However, the note that
appeared at the end of (k)(10) has been added to (k)(10)(i) as
described above.
    Paragraph (k)(12)(ii) (A)-(E), Traveling--equipment other than
derricks, establishes certain criteria that must be met when traveling
with employees in the situations permitted under paragraph (k)(12)(i).
    One commenter stated the requirement to limit travel to the boom
length was unclear. (ID-0053.1.) This commenter believed it could be
interpreted to limit the length of the boom itself and not the distance
the equipment can travel. The Agency concludes the requirement as
written in the proposed rule, ``Travel shall be limited to boom
length,'' is clear. However, in the interest of providing additional
clarity, the Agency is adding the word ``equipment'' to the text of the
final rule so that it will read, ``Equipment travel must be limited to
boom length.'' The addition of this word makes it clear the focus of
the requirement is the distance of travel for the equipment.
    Paragraph (k)(13), Traveling--derricks, prohibits a derrick from
traveling while it is hoisting personnel. In C-DAC's experience,
hoisting employees on a traveling derrick is dangerous because derricks
are not sufficiently stable when traveling. No comment was received on
this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (l) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (m) Pre-Lift Meeting
    This paragraph requires a meeting prior to the trial lift at each
new work location to review the requirements of this section and the
procedures to be followed when hoisting personnel. The pre-lift meeting
would be attended by the equipment operator, signal person (when one is
used for the lift), employees to be hoisted, and the person responsible
for the task to be performed.
    Also, this paragraph requires this meeting to be repeated when an
employee is newly assigned to the operation. The purpose of this
requirement is to make all employees involved in the personnel hoisting
operation aware of the requirements of this section and the plan for
the personnel lift. This provides an opportunity for all employees
involved to have a common and complete understanding of the hoisting
operation and to give uniform information and instructions immediately
prior to the lift. This addresses hazards which result from
misunderstanding of the requirements, particular lift conditions or
procedures. no comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (n) Hoisting Personnel Near Power Lines
    This paragraph prohibits hoisting personnel within 20 feet of a
power line 350 kV and below or within 50 feet of a power line over 350
kV, except for work that is covered by 29 CFR part 1926, subpart V,
Power Transmission and Distribution.
    The purpose of this requirement is to establish a safe clearance
distance from power lines to protect employees from an electrocution
hazard that could result if the personnel, a personnel platform, or
equipment makes electrical contact with a power line. The clearance
distances are similar to those in Sec. Sec.  1926.1407 and 1926.1408
for equipment operating near power lines. However, under Sec. Sec.
1926.1407 and 1926.1408, clearances less than 20 and 50 feet are
permitted for certain voltage ranges. However, C-DAC determined that
when personnel are hoisted near a power line it is necessary to require
the minimum distances of 20 feet for lines 350 kV or less and 50 feet
for lines over 350kV. Note that all other requirements in subpart CC
regarding power line safety must also be met, including Sec. Sec.
1926.1406-1409. No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (o) Hoisting Personnel in Drill Shafts
    This paragraph provides requirements when hoisting personnel in
drill shafts that are 8 feet and smaller in diameter. Drill shafts of
this size may be either too small to use a personnel platform, or use
of a personnel platform might not allow the room needed to perform the
necessary work. Therefore, due to the limitations of a drill shaft of
this size, use of a personnel platform would typically be infeasible
and a boatswain's chair may be the only practical means of hoisting
personnel and performing the necessary work.
    One commenter stated that personnel should not be hoisted into a
drill shaft unless the employer determined that use of a video camera
was both impractical and infeasible. (ID-0120.0.) However, this
commenter did not provide any explanation or supporting documentation
of how this would improve safety beyond what the proposed rule
required. As discussed at paragraph (a) of this section, equipment may
be used to hoist personnel only when all other means of reaching the
work area presents a greater hazard or is not possible because of the
project's structural design or worksite conditions.
    Because no information was provided to justify an additional
restriction on an employer, OSHA is promulgating this provision as
proposed.
    Section 1926.1431(o)(1) allows the employer to use either a
personnel platform or a boatswain's chair for hoisting personnel.\126\
When an employer elects to use a boatswain's chair instead of a
personnel platform, particular supplementary requirements in paragraph
(o)(3) must be met. Those requirements address the heightened danger
that the employee may fall from the chair or contact the wall of the
drill shaft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \126\ Note that, under Sec.  1926.1431(a), an employer may only
use equipment to hoist personnel when other means of reaching the
work area would present a greater hazard or would not be possible
because of the project's structural design or worksite conditions.
Therefore, before using either means to hoist personnel in drill
shafts, the employer would need to determine and demonstrate that
hoisting personnel instead of using other means of access to the
work area is the least hazardous, or the only, means to gain access
to the work area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph (o)(2) requires the employer to follow requirements (a)
through (n) of Sec.  1926.1431 when using a personnel platform to hoist
employees.
    Section 1926.1431(o)(3) sets out additional requirements that must
be met when the employer elects to use a boatswain's chair instead of a
personnel platform for hoisting personnel.
    Paragraph (o)(3)(i) identifies which of the provisions in Sec.
1926.1431 (a)-(n) apply when using a boatswain's chair. For the
applicable provisions, the phrase ``boatswain's chair'' is substituted
for either ``personnel platform'' or ``platform.''
    The Sec.  1926.1431 paragraphs not listed in Sec.
1926.1431(o)(3)(i) do not apply when a boatswain's chair is used. This
is because those requirements are either specifically applicable to
personnel platform design and use, or are otherwise not relevant when
hoisting personnel in a drill shaft.
    Paragraph (o)(3)(ii) requires a signal person to be stationed at
the opening of

the shaft during personnel hoisting. The purpose is to ensure that a
signal person is used and stationed at the best position to watch the
employee being hoisted, since the hoisted employee is out of the view
of the operator.
    Paragraph (o)(3)(iii) requires the employee to be hoisted in a
slow, controlled descent and ascent. This is to limit swinging or
sudden movement of the boatswain's chair to prevent a fall from the
chair or impact with the walls of the drill shaft.
    Paragraph (o)(3)(iv) requires the employee in the boatswain's chair
to use personal fall arrest equipment, including a full body harness,
that is attached independent of the crane/derrick. The purpose of
requiring a tie off point independent of the equipment is to protect
the employee from a sudden drop or fall due to equipment failure or
other problem associated with the operation of the crane/derrick, and
to protect the employee from falls when accessing and egressing the
boatswain's chair.
    Paragraph (o)(3)(v) requires fall protection equipment to comply
with Sec.  1926.502, Fall protection systems criteria and practices.
    Paragraph (o)(3)(vi) requires the boatswain's chair (excluding the
personal fall arrest anchorages) to be capable of supporting, without
failure, its own weight plus a minimum of five times the maximum
intended load. This is similar to the requirement for personnel
platforms at Sec.  1926.1431(e)(4). The strength requirement applicable
to personal fall arrest anchorages is in Sec.  1926.502(d)(15).
    Paragraph (o)(3)(vii) mandates that only one person can be hoisted
at a time when using a boatswain's chair. No comments were received on
paragraphs (o)(1)--(o)(3); they are promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (p) Hoisting Personnel for Pile Driving Operations
    This paragraph provides requirements for hoisting personnel in pile
driving operations. Section 1926.1431(p)(1) requires the employer to
use either a personnel platform or boatswain's chair when hoisting
personnel in pile driving operations. As with drill shafts, use of a
personnel platform will often be infeasible in this type of operation,
and Sec.  1926.1431(p)(1) gives the employer the option of choosing
which method to use. No comments were received on this provision; it is
promulgated as proposed.
    Section 1926.1431(p)(2) delineates the alternatives to using an
anti two-blocking device during pile driving operations, since the
heavy vibrations of the pile driver typically damage this device. (See
Sec.  1926.1431(d)(45)(v), Anti two-block). The language C-DAC
developed for this provision did not distinguish between lattice boom
cranes and telescopic boom cranes. Its language would have required,
for either type of equipment, that the cable used to hoist personnel be
clearly marked so that they equipment operator would have sufficient
time to stop hoisting to prevent two-blocking, or to use a spotter to
warn the operator in time to prevent two-blocking. However, in
reviewing the C-DAC language, OSHA realized that marking the cable is
not a sufficient means of preventing two-blocking in telescopic boom
cranes when extending the boom because extending the boom while the
load hoist remains stationary can cause two-blocking. Instead, a
spotter is always needed to warn against two-blocking for telescopic
boom cranes.
    Consequently, for the proposed rule, OSHA modified the language
used by C-DAC and addressed lattice boom cranes and telescopic boom
cranes separately. Proposed Sec.  1926.1431(p)(2) requires employers,
when using lattice boom cranes, to clearly mark the cable used to hoist
personnel at the point on the cable that allows the equipment operator
to stop hoisting in time to prevent two-blocking, or to use a spotter
to warn the operator in time to prevent two-blocking. When using
lattice boom cranes, in addition to marking the cable as above, a
spotter must also be used. (See the discussion of the proposed
provision at 73 FR 59838, Oct. 9, 2008.)
    In the preamble to the proposed rule, OSHA asked for public comment
on this change to the C-DAC language, but no comments were received on
this issue. Therefore, the provision is promulgated as proposed.
    Section 1926.1431(p)(3) requires the employer to follow Sec. Sec.
1926.1431(b) through (n) when using a personnel platform to hoist
employees. Section 1926.1431(a) does not apply because the employer is
not required to demonstrate that the other means of access listed in
Sec.  1926.1431(a) are infeasible before being permitted to hoist
personnel during pile driving operations. Demonstrating infeasibility
prior to using a personnel platform is not required because in most
instances another means of access is not feasible for this operation.
No comments were received on this provision; it is promulgated as
proposed.
    Section 1926.1431(p)(4) establishes the requirements for use of a
boatswain's chair instead of a personnel platform for hoisting
personnel.
    Section 1926.1431(p)(4)(i) identifies which of the provisions in
Sec. Sec.  1926.1431(a)-(o) apply when using a boatswain's chair in a
pile driving operation. For the applicable provisions, the phrase
``boatswain's chair'' is substituted for either ``personnel platform''
or ``platform.''
    The Sec.  1926.1431 paragraphs not listed in Sec.
1926.1431(p)(4)(i) do not apply when a boatswain's chair is used. This
is because those requirements are either specifically applicable to
personnel platform design and use, or are otherwise not relevant when
hoisting personnel in a pile driving operation.
    Section 1926.1431(p)(4)(ii) requires the employee to be hoisted in
a slow, controlled descent and ascent. This is to limit swinging or
sudden movement of the boatswain's chair to prevent a fall from the
chair or impact with equipment or other structures.
    Section 1926.1431(p)(4)(iii) specifies that the employee in the
boatswain's chair use personal fall arrest equipment, including a full
body harness. The fall arrest system must be attached to either the
lower load block or the overhaul ball. The purpose of having the fall
protection equipment and tie off point independent of the boatswain's
chair and rigging used to hoist the employee is twofold: it protects
the employee from a sudden drop or fall due to failure of that
equipment and protects the employee when accessing and egressing the
boatswain's chair.
    Section 1926.1431(p)(4)(iv) requires fall protection equipment to
comply with Sec.  1926.502, Fall protection systems criteria and
practices. This ensures that the fall protection equipment is
sufficient to safely arrest the employee's fall.
    No comments were received on paragraphs (p)(4)(i)--(p)(4)(iv); they
are promulgated as proposed.
    The C-DAC consensus document did not include provisions to require
a minimum strength for the boatswain's chair and to require that only
one person be hoisted at a time, when using a boatswain's chair in pile
driving operations. As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule,
the Agency determined these were unintended omissions by the Committee.
OSHA stated that it planned on including such provisions in the final
rule, and asked for comment. No comments were received on this issue.
Therefore, the final rule includes Sec.  1926.1431(p)(4)(v), which
requires the boatswain's chair to be capable of supporting its own
weight and at least five times the maximum intended load, and Sec.
1926.1431(p)(4)(vi), which states

that only one person may be hoisted at a time.
Paragraph (q) [Reserved.]
Paragraph (r) Hoisting Personnel for Marine Transfer
    This paragraph addresses the particular hazards related to hoisting
personnel for transfer to or from a marine construction worksite. This
paragraph applies when hoisting employees solely for such transfer.
    Section 1926.1431(r)(1) requires the employer to use either a
traditional personnel platform or a marine-hoisted personnel transfer
device. This paragraph allows an employer to use a marine-hoisted
personnel transfer device instead of a personnel platform for several
reasons. Transferring personnel to or from a marine construction site
poses special problems due to the effects of waves and gusting wind.
These effects, which can be unpredictable, can result in a situation
where the equipment operator will not be able to adequately control the
equipment. In such a situation, the device used to transfer the
employees may suddenly wind up in the water. Another situation is when
employees may need to jump into the water to avoid a collision with the
ship or an object on the construction site. A third situation is when
the operator is unable to control the equipment while the employees are
attempting to board or disembark. The longer it takes to get on or off,
the greater this risk becomes. In all of these scenarios the employees
need to be able to enter and exit the device being used to transfer
them quickly and easily.
    A personnel platform, which is designed, in part, to keep the
employees inside, would, in most marine situations, compound the hazard
faced by the employees, since they can be difficult to enter and exit
quickly. In contrast, a marine-hoisted personnel transfer device is
designed specifically to facilitate the employees' rapid entry and
exit. The employer has the option of using such a device so that it may
be used when the conditions are such that the risk of being prevented
from entering or exiting quickly is greater than the risk of
unintentionally falling.
    In the proposed rule, OSHA requested public comment on whether
paragraph (r)(1) should require the employer to first establish that
use of a marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device was not less safe
than a personnel platform. No comments were received on this issue.
    Paragraph (r)(2) requires the employer to follow the requirements
of paragraphs (a) through (n) of Sec.  1926.1431 when using a personnel
platform to hoist employees. As discussed previously, these provisions
are designed to ensure that hoisting personnel is the safest means of
the employees gaining access to the work and that the personnel
platform's design and use are adequate from a safety standpoint.
    Paragraph (r)(3) establishes the requirements when the employer
elects to use a marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device instead of a
personnel platform for hoisting personnel.
    Paragraph (r)(3)(i) identifies which of the provisions in
Sec. Sec.  1926.1431 (a) through (q) apply when using a marine-hoisted
personnel-transfer device. For the applicable provisions, the phrase
``marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device'' is substituted for either
``personnel platform'' or ``platform.''
    The Sec.  1926.1431 paragraphs not listed in Sec.  1926.1431
(r)(3)(i) do not apply when a marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device
is used. This is because those requirements are either specifically
applicable to personnel platform design and use, or are otherwise not
relevant when hoisting personnel at a marine worksite.
    Paragraph (r)(3)(ii) requires the marine-hoisted personnel-transfer
device to be used exclusively for transferring employees. One purpose
of this provision is to prevent the device from being used as a work
platform. The device's design, which specifically facilitates easy and
rapid entry and exit, is ill suited to providing a safe work platform.
In particular, it is not designed to prevent a fall when an employee is
using his or her hands for working rather than holding on to the
device. Also, it is ill suited as a material transfer device because it
is not designed to prevent materials from falling from it, and could be
damaged by such use.
    Paragraph(r)(3)(iii) limits the number of employees on the marine-
hoisted personnel-transfer device to the maximum number the device is
designed to hold. This prevents overloading, which can result in
structural failure of the device. It also prevents overcrowding, which
can cause an unintended fall or preclude a worker from entering or
exiting as rapidly as when used properly.
    Paragraph (r)(3)(iv) requires each employee being transferred on a
marine-hoisted personnel-transfer device to wear a U.S. Coast Guard
personal flotation device that is approved for industrial use. The
purpose is to protect the employee from drowning if the device enters
the water, or if the employee falls or needs to jump into the water.
    No comments were received on paragraphs (r)(1)--(r)(3); they are
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (s) Hoisting Personnel for Storage-Tank (Steel or Concrete),
Shaft and Chimney Operations
    This paragraph establishes requirements when hoisting personnel in
storage-tanks (steel or concrete), shaft operations and chimney
operations. Use of a personnel platform, while usually feasible, is
infeasible in some circumstances involving these operations due to the
nature of the work activity. Consequently, boatswain's chairs are
allowed instead of a personnel platform in such instances, but only
when the employer can demonstrate that use of a personnel platform is
infeasible. For these reasons, Sec.  1926.1431(s)(1) allows the
employer to use a boatswain's chair only when the employer has
determined that use of a personnel platform is infeasible.
    Section 1926.1431(s)(2) requires the employer to follow the
requirements of paragraphs (a) through (n) of Sec.  1926.1431 when
using a personnel platform to hoist employees. Under Sec.
1926.1431(a), an employer may only use equipment to hoist personnel
when other means of reaching the work area presents a greater hazard or
is not possible because of the project's structural design or worksite
conditions. Therefore, before using a personnel platform to hoist
personnel in storage tanks (steel or concrete), shaft operations and
chimney operations, the employer must determine that hoisting personnel
instead of using other means of access to the work area is the least
hazardous, or the only, means to gain access to the work area.
    Section 1926.1431(s)(3) establishes the requirements when the
employer uses a boatswain's chair instead of a personnel platform for
hoisting personnel.
    Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(i) identifies which of the provisions in
Sec. Sec.  1926.1431(a) through (r) apply when using a boatswain's
chair. For the applicable provisions, the phrase ``boatswain's chair''
is substituted for either ``personnel platform'' or ``platform.''
    The Sec.  1926.1431 paragraphs not listed in Sec.
1926.1431(s)(3)(i) do not apply when a boatswain's chair is used. This
is because those requirements are either specifically applicable to
personnel platform design and use, or are otherwise not relevant when
hoisting personnel on a boatswain's chair in storage tanks (steel or
concrete), shaft operations and chimney operations.

    Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(ii) requires the employee to be hoisted in
a slow, controlled descent and ascent. This is to limit swinging or
sudden movement of the boatswain's chair to prevent a fall from the
chair or impact with the walls or other areas or structures involved in
these operations.
    No comments were received on paragraphs (s)(1) through (s)(3)(ii);
they are promulgated as proposed.
    Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(iii) requires the employee in the
boatswain's chair to use personal fall arrest equipment, including a
full body harness, that is attached independent of the crane/derrick.
Having the tie off point independent of the equipment protects the
employee from a sudden drop or fall due to equipment failure or other
problems associated with the operation of the crane/derrick, and to
protect the employee from falls when accessing and egressing the
boatswain's chair.
    One commenter noted that in certain construction projects there is
no structure in place for independent attachment of personal fall
arrest equipment. (ID-0130.l; -0343.1.) This commenter further
requested that for activities related to construction of storage tanks,
concrete shafts and chimneys, the requirement be changed to allow
attachment to the lower load block or overhaul ball. The Agency found
the information provided persuasive and has revised the regulatory
language for the final rule. The Agency is limiting the change to those
situations in which there is no adequate structure available for
independent attachment. While there may be no available tie-off point
during new construction, construction activities sometimes take place
in storage tanks, concrete shafts and chimneys after the structure is
in place. Therefore, the requirement has been changed to add a sentence
specifying that when there is no adequate structure for attachment of
personal fall arrest equipment as required in Sec.  1926.502(d)(15),
the personal fall arrest equipment should be attached to the lower load
block or to the overhaul ball.
    Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(iv) requires fall protection equipment to
comply with Sec.  1926.502, Fall protection systems criteria and
practices. This ensures that the fall equipment is sufficient to safely
arrest the employee's fall.
    Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(v) requires the boatswain's chair to be
capable of supporting, without failure, its own weight plus a minimum
of five times the maximum intended load. This is consistent with the
requirement for personnel platforms at Sec.  1926.1431(e)(4).
    Section 1926.1431(s)(3)(vi) mandates that only one person be
hoisted at a time when using a boatswain's chair. No comments were
received on paragraphs (s)(3)(iv) through (s)(3)(vi); they are
promulgated as proposed.
Section 1926.1432 Multiple-Crane/Derrick Lifts
    Final Sec.  1926.1432 lists additional requirements for operations
involving multiple cranes and derricks. As discussed in the proposed
rule preamble, this section addresses hazards arising from operations
that use more than one crane/derrick to lift a load (see 73 FR 59840-
59841, Oct. 9, 2008). After reviewing comments on the proposed rule,
the Agency is promulgating Sec. Sec.  1926.1432(a) and 1926.1432(b)(1)
as proposed. Section 1926.1432(b)(2) is nearly identical to the
proposed text, but includes the following changes: the use of the terms
``directed'' and ``lift director'' instead of ``supervised'' and
``supervisor,'' respectively, and language to clarify that the lift
director must review the multiple crane/derrick lift plan with all
workers ``in a meeting.''
    Several commenters expressed the view that OSHA should add specific
requirements and procedures for the protection of employees engaged in
``critical lifts,'' which were not addressed separately in the proposed
rules. (ID-0182.1; -0207.1.) One of these commenters requested that
OSHA add ``critical lifts'' to the title of Sec.  1926.1432, and define
``critical lift'' to include any lift that exceeds 75 percent of the
rated capacity of the crane or derrick, requires the use of more than
one crane or derrick, involves hoisting personnel, or is otherwise
determined by a qualified person to involve an exceptional level of
risk. (ID-0182.1.) OSHA disagrees with these commenters for the reasons
discussed below.
    C-DAC specifically considered whether to use the term ``critical
lift'' for triggering additional requirements, such as planning and
oversight. (OSHA-S030-2006-0663-0485.) There are a variety of differing
views as to what ought to be considered a critical lift in this regard.
For example, the Army Corps of Engineers, in its 2008 U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Safety and Health Requirements Manual, defines ``critical
lift'' as ``a non-routine crane lift requiring detailed planning and
additional or unusual safety precautions.'' This manual describes
critical lifts, in part, as lifts: (1) In which the load weighs 75% of
the rated capacity of the crane; in which the load is out of the
operator's view; involving more than one crane; involving non-routine
or technically difficult rigging arrangement; hoisting personnel with a
crane or derrick; or that the crane operator believes should be
considered critical. EM 385-1-1, pg. 293. The National Aeronautics and
Space Administration's definition is different:

    Critical lifts are lifts where failure/loss of control could
result in loss of life, loss of or damage to flight hardware, or a
lift involving special high dollar items, such as spacecraft, one-
of-a-kind articles, or major facility components, whose loss would
have serious programmatic or institutional impact. Critical lifts
also include the lifting of personnel with a crane, lifts where
personnel are required to work under a suspended load, and
operations with special personnel and equipment safety concerns
beyond normal lifting hazards.

NASA Standard for Lifting Devices and Equipment, NASA STD-8719.9, pg.
5.\127\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \127\ In OSHA's steel erection standard, 29 CFR 1926 subpart R,
critical lift is defined as ``a lift that (1) exceeds 75 percent of
the rated capacity of the crane or derrick, or (2) requires the use
of more than one crane or derrick'' (See Sec.  1926.751). However,
the steel erection standard does not require planning or other
additional precautions whenever there is a critical lift. A critical
lift plan is only required in subpart R when the employer elects to
do a site-specific erection plan as an alternative to the
requirements of Sec. Sec.  1926.753(c)(5), 1926.757(a)(4), or
1926.757(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    C-DAC identified and addressed the particular situations that
necessitate special planning and procedures rather than using a more
generalized ``critical lift'' approach based on a percent of rated
capacity. For example, the Committee developed specific requirements
for hoisting personnel, operating equipment when power lines are
present, and in Sec. Sec.  1926.1417(o)(3)(ii) and 1926.1417(s), for
hoisting loads that exceed 75 percent of rated capacity or are 90
percent or more of rated capacity. This enabled the Committee to
separately address the specific hazards associated with each type of
operation. The advantage of this approach is that the standard's
requirements could be specifically tailored to each type of situation,
promoting both effectiveness and clarity. Therefore, OSHA defers to the
expertise of C-DAC and declines to adopt the commenters' suggestions.
Paragraph (a) Plan Development
    Section 1926.1432(a) requires an employer to develop a plan before
beginning a crane/derrick operation in which more than one crane/
derrick will be supporting the load, the operation must be planned. The
planning must meet the criteria set forth in Sec. Sec.  1926.1432(a)(1)
through (3). The purpose of the requirement for a plan is to help
ensure that the hazards involved

with a multiple lift are identified and eliminated. The Committee
determined that a plan-based requirement would be the most appropriate
and effective means of reducing the risks associated with these
operations.
    Section 1926.1432(a) does not, however, require the multiple crane/
derrick lift plan to be documented. One commenter suggested that the
final rule require the plan to be in writing to ensure that the plan
would be well designed and could be clearly communicated to all
affected personnel. (ID-0182.1.) C-DAC carefully considered where to
recommend including documentation requirements throughout the standard,
and did not recommend including one for this provision. The commenter
did not provide any explanation of how a documentation requirement
would enhance the review of the plan or the communication of the plan
to the parties involved, and OSHA has decided to defer to the expertise
of the Committee and declines to include a documentation requirement
for Sec.  1926.1432.
Paragraph (a)(3)
    Section 1926.1432(a)(3) requires engineering expertise to be
provided by the employer whenever the qualified person determines that
it is necessary. One commenter believed that all multiple-crane/derrick
lifts should be planned by a licensed professional engineer due to the
technical complexity of such lifts. (ID-0156.1.) As discussed in the
preamble to the proposed rule, in the view of the Committee, some, but
not all, multiple-crane/derrick lifts need to be planned with
engineering expertise so that the lift can be performed safely (73 FR
59841, Oct. 9, 2008). Similarly, the Committee determined that it is
not practical to set criteria in the rule for identifying which lifts
need such expertise. OSHA defers to the expertise of the Committee on
this issue and has decided not to adopt the commenter's suggestion.
Paragraph (b) Plan Implementation
    Under this paragraph, the employer is required to take specific
steps designed to ensure that the decisions and precautions built into
the plan are effectively implemented.
    Section 1926.1432(b)(1) requires direction of plan implementation
by competent and qualified persons, or by one person who meets the
definitions of both. OSHA has decided to replace the word
``supervised'' in this paragraph with the word ``directed.'' (For a
detailed explanation of competent and qualified persons and the reason
for replacing ``supervised,'' refer to the preamble discussion of Sec.
1926.1404(a), Supervision--competent-qualified person).
    One commenter suggested that the final rule require a ``lift
director'' for each multiple-crane/derrick lift and that the ``lift
director must be present for each critical lift.'' (ID-0178.1.) OSHA
agrees and, to also be consistent with the identification of the A/D
director in Sec.  1926.1404(a), has denoted the person directing the
multiple-crane/derrick lift as the ``lift director.''
Paragraph (b)(2)
    OSHA has decided to replace the term ``supervisor'' in Sec.
1926.1432(b)(2) with the term ``lift director.'' This decision was made
to be consistent with the similar change from ``A/D supervisor'' to
``A/D director'' in Sec.  1926.1404(a) and the change from ``lift
supervisor'' to ``lift director'' in Sec. Sec.  1926.1419(c)(2),
1926.1421(a), and 1926.1421(c). (For a detailed explanation of this
change, refer to the preamble discussion of Sec.  1926.1404(a),
Supervision--competent-qualified person).
    Section 1926.1432(b)(2) mandates that the director review the plan
with all employees who will be involved with the operation before lift
operations begin. The Committee determined that it is important for
employees to know how the plan will work, including their
responsibilities and the responsibilities of others, to help ensure
that the diverse aspects of the operation will be coordinated (see the
more complete discussion of this provision in the proposed rule
preamble at 73 FR 59841, Oct. 9, 2008).
    One commenter suggested adding an additional provision to proposed
Sec.  1926.1432(b) to enable the person directing the lift, or the
operator, to halt operations if at any time the lift director
determined the lift could not be safely executed pursuant to the lift
plan. (ID-0182.1; -0357.1.) If such a halt to operations occurred, the
suggested provision would require the lift director to modify the lift
plan and review any such modifications with all workers involved with
the operation. (ID-0182.1.)
    Adding such a provision is unnecessary because Sec.  1926.1432 and
other provisions in subpart CC already incorporate the commenter's
suggestions. As discussed above, Sec.  1926.1432(b) requires the lift
director to be a competent person. As defined in Sec.  1926.1401, a
competent person ``is a person who is capable of identifying * * *
hazards * * * and who has authorization to take prompt corrective
measures to eliminate them.'' This ensures that the lift director has
the authority to both halt operations and modify the plan if he or she
determined the lift could not be executed safely according to the lift
plan. Also, under Sec.  1926.1418, the equipment operator has the
authority to stop operations whenever there is a concern as to safety.
Thus, both the lift director and equipment operator have the authority
to halt a multiple-crane/derrick lift if either determines the lift
cannot be executed safely pursuant to the lift plan.
    Furthermore, if the lift director modified the plan, a review of
the modified plan with the workers is required under Sec.
1926.1432(b)(2) because it is a different plan from the one that had
been used initially.
    OSHA also received a comment suggesting that the plan-review
requirement in proposed Sec.  1926.1432(b)(2) did not make clear the
intention that the review take place in a meeting so that the plan
could be reviewed collectively with the workers as a group. (ID-
0182.1.) Because a collective review is more likely to be effective
than separate, individual reviews, OSHA agrees with the commenter's
clarification and has inserted the phrase ``in a meeting'' into final
Sec.  1926.1432(b)(2).
    Other than this additional language, the replacement of
``supervised'' with ``directed,'' and the inclusion of the term ``lift
director,'' the Agency is promulgating this provision as proposed.
Section 1926.1433 Design, Construction and Testing
    Previously, subpart N included design, construction, and testing
requirements for specific types of equipment that either incorporate
pre-1970 consensus standards or that require equipment to conform to
manufacturer's specifications. The former category includes: crawler,
locomotive, and truck cranes (ANSI B30.5-1968, incorporated by former
Sec.  1926.550(b)(2)); overhead and gantry cranes (ANSI B30.2.0-1967,
incorporated by former Sec.  1926.550(d)(4)); and derricks (ANSI B30.6-
1969, incorporated by former Sec.  1926.550(e)). The latter includes
hammerhead tower cranes (former Sec.  1926.550(c)(5)) and floating
cranes and derricks (former Sec.  1926.550(f)(2)(iii)). Except for
crawler, locomotive, and truck cranes, design, construction and/or
testing requirements for each of these categories of equipment is
addressed in a section of this standard that is dedicated to that type
of equipment. This section contains certain

requirements applicable only to crawler, locomotive, and truck cranes
and, in addition, contains requirements that apply to all of the
equipment covered by this subpart.
Paragraph (a)
    Paragraph (a) of this section requires that crawler, truck and
locomotive cranes manufactured prior to the effective date of this
standard meet the applicable requirements for design, construction, and
testing prescribed in ANSI B30.5-1968, safety code for ``Crawler,
Locomotive, and Truck Cranes,'' PCSA \128\ Std. No. 2 (1968), the
requirements in paragraph (b), or the applicable DIN (Deutsches
Institut f[uuml]r Normung e.V., or German Institute for
Standardization) standards that were in effect at the time of
manufacture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \128\ ``PCSA'' is the acronym for the Power Crane Shovel
Association.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This provision allows employers to continue to use equipment that
complies with former Sec.  1926.550(b)(2) of subpart N and also gives
them the flexibility to use equipment that was built to conform to
applicable DIN standards.
    One commenter objected to the inclusion of DIN standards, stating
that those standards are less stringent than the ANSI standard. (ID-
0178.1.) The commenter did not elaborate on this objection, and OSHA
does not find merit in it. Many cranes currently in use in the United
States were manufactured in Europe to DIN standards, and OSHA has no
reason to conclude that these cranes are any less safe than those
manufactured domestically. Accordingly, paragraph (a) is promulgated
without substantive change. OSHA has clarified the paragraph by
splitting the options for compliance into separate paragraphs (1)
through (4), but has not changed any of the requirements.
Paragraph (b)
    Paragraph (b) of this section uses the phrase ``mobile and
locomotive cranes'' to reflect the current terminology used in ASME
B30.5-2004. It specifies that such cranes must meet certain provisions
of ASME B30.5-2004.
    As drafted by C-DAC, paragraph (b) required that mobile (including
crawler and truck) and locomotive cranes manufactured on or after the
effective date of this standard meet certain provisions of ASME B30.5-
2000 with addenda ASME B30.5a-2002, ``Safety Code for Mobile and
Locomotive Cranes.'' Here, as elsewhere in the proposal, OSHA updated
the provision to refer to the 2004 version of ASME B30.5, which was
published after C-DAC completed its draft and was the most current ASME
standard available at the time OSHA prepared the proposed rule for
publication. For the proposed rule, OSHA compared the 2004 and earlier
version and, as discussed below, requested public comment on whether
certain changes in the 2004 version should be adopted. Two commenters
objected to the revisions to incorporate the 2004 standards. (ID-
0205.1; -0213.1.) Neither of these commenters provided specific
reasoning or analysis for their positions beyond saying that the 2004
standard was not available at the time the consensus document was
created. OSHA concludes that in the absence of any reason for not
referring to the updated ASME standard, the most recent version of the
standard available prior to the publication of the proposed rule should
be used in this provision. Therefore, this provision is promulgated as
proposed.
    The incorporation by reference of the listed provisions of ASME
B30.5-2004 in paragraph (b) of this section does not mean that other
provisions found in ASME B30.5-2004 do not apply to equipment under
this subpart. Some other provisions of ASME B30.5-2004 are not
incorporated into this section because they deal with issues addressed
elsewhere in this standard. For example, two-block protection, which is
required by sec. 5-<IP_ADDRESS> of the ASME standard, is addressed in Sec.
1926.1416 of this proposed standard. In addition, the issues addressed
in paragraph (e) below are addressed in ASME B30.5-2004 but, instead of
making those provisions applicable solely to mobile and locomotive
cranes, C-DAC drafted corresponding provisions that would be applied to
all of the equipment subject to this proposed standard.
    The sections of ASME B30.5 referenced in Sec. Sec.  1926.1433(b)(1)
and (b)(13) contain requirements for equipment with outriggers
partially extended that are not found in the earlier version of the
ASME standard. In the discussion of Sec.  1926.1433(b) of the proposed
rule, OSHA noted that Sec.  1926.1404(q)(1) permits partial deployment
of outriggers when manufacturer procedures permit, and expressed its
conclusion that incorporating the provisions on partially deployed
outriggers in the 2004 version of ASME B30.5 would be consistent with
Sec.  1926.1404(q)(1). OSHA requested public comment on this issue. In
response, one commenter recommended requiring a system or device that
would sense the positions of the outriggers and interact with the
crane's onboard computer system (LMI, RCL, etc.) to automatically
reduce the crane's capacity based on the outrigger positions. (ID-
0131.1.) Although this might well be a desirable addition, OSHA cannot
find evidence in this rulemaking record to indicate that such a system/
device is currently available and feasible. The Agency therefore
declines to add such a requirement.
Paragraph (c)
    Proposed paragraph (c) of this section, Prototype testing, required
that mobile (including crawler and truck) and locomotive cranes
manufactured on or after the effective date of this standard meet the
prototype testing requirements in Sec.  1926.1433(c)(1), Test Option A
or Sec.  1926.1433(c)(2), Test Option B of this section. Test Option A
continues the prototype testing methodology that was previously
required under subpart N for crawler, locomotive, and truck cranes
through the incorporation of ANSI B30.5-1968. Test Option B permits, as
an alternative, the use of computer modeling technology for prototype
evaluation. C-DAC agreed to allow computer modeling testing under the
European CEN standard only on the condition that the requirements of
proposed Sec.  1926.1433(c)(2), discussed below, are met to ensure the
reliability of the computer modeling. OSHA is incorporating this option
into the final rule with the same condition. OSHA has updated the
reference to the CEN standard to BS EN 13000:2004. This change was made
because for purposes of incorporation by reference OSHA must point to a
specific document and OSHA has selected the English language version of
EN 13000. In addition, for clarity, a note to paragraph (c) states that
prototype testing of crawler, locomotive and truck cranes manufactured
prior to the effective date of the standard must conform to paragraph
(a). No comments were received on the provisions of paragraph (c) that
apply to mobile cranes.
    OSHA noted in the proposal that neither proposed Sec.  1926.1433(c)
nor any other proposed provisions would apply prototype testing
requirements to tower cranes. It appeared to the Agency that this was
an oversight on the part of C-DAC. OSHA requested public comment on
whether there should be prototype testing requirements for tower
cranes, and, if so, what requirements should apply. All four commenters
on this issue recommended inclusion of computer modeling and/or
verification for tower crane prototypes in accordance with BS EN
14439:2006. (ID-0156.1; -0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) OSHA agrees with
these comments and

has added these requirements to the final version of Sec.
1926.1433(c).
    Another commenter suggested that the standard require equipment
manufacturers to obtain independent verification that the prototype
testing was performed. (ID-0156.1.) C-DAC addressed the prototype
issues directly and did not recommend this approach. Based on the
evidence in the record, the Agency is not convinced that placing this
burden on the manufacturer is warranted.
Paragraph (d)
    Paragraph (d) of this section mandates that all equipment covered
by this subpart meet the requirements listed in Sec. Sec.
1926.1433(d)(1) through (d)(13) of this section. The issues listed in
paragraph (d) are addressed by ASME B30.5-2004. However, as explained
in the proposed rule, C-DAC determined that these requirements were
also appropriate for other equipment, and the proposed rule applied
them to all equipment (see 73 FR 59843-59845, Oct. 9, 2008). The Agency
did not receive any comments opposing this approach. Therefore, instead
of applying these requirements solely to mobile and locomotive cranes,
paragraph (d) applies them to all equipment covered by this subpart.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(1), Load capacity/ratings and related
information, requires the employer to ensure that the information
available in the cab (see Sec.  1926.1417(c)) regarding load capacity/
ratings and related information include the data listed in Sec. Sec.
1926.1433(d)(1)(i) through (d)(1)(xvi). These equipment specifications
need to be made available for the operator to reference in the cab so
that the operator has immediate access to information needed to ensure
safe operation.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(2) requires that load hooks (including latched
and unlatched types), ball assemblies and load blocks be of sufficient
weight to overhaul the line from the highest hook position for boom, or
boom and jib lengths, and the number of parts of the line in use. This
requirement is necessary to prevent any incidents that could occur when
ball assemblies, load blocks, and load hooks are of insufficient weight
to keep the load line from being unintentionally pulled up the boom due
to the weight of the load line itself.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(3) requires that hook and ball assemblies and
load blocks be marked with their rated capacity and weight. Marking
this equipment with their rated capacities and weights is needed to
help ensure that they are not overloaded and is necessary to help
enable employers to comply with proposed Sec.  1926.1433(d)(2).
    Section 1926.1433(d)(4), Latching hooks, requires that hooks meet
the requirements in Sec. Sec.  1926.1433(d)(4)(i)-(ii) of this
section.\129\ Section 1926.1433(d)(4)(i) requires that hooks be
equipped with latches, except where the requirements of Sec.
1926.1433(d)(4)(ii) are met. It also requires that latches close the
throat openings of hooks and that they be designed to retain slings or
other lifting devices/accessories in the hooks when the rigging
apparatus is slack. This requirement is included to ensure that the
rigging will not be unintentionally dislodged from the hook when the
rigging apparatus is slack.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \129\ Pursuant to a commenter's suggestion on the structure of
this section as proposed (ID-0172.1), this section was reorganized
in the final rule for clarity but was not changed substantively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 1926.1433(d)(4)(ii) prohibits hooks without latches, or
with latches removed or disabled, from being used unless two criteria
are met. First, to ensure that the hazards are weighed appropriately, a
qualified person must determine that it is safer to hoist and place the
load without latches (or with the latches removed/tied-back). Second,
routes for the loads must be pre-planned to ensure that no employee is
required to work in the fall zone except for employees necessary for
the hooking or unhooking of the load. The reason for generally
requiring hooks to be equipped with latches is to prevent the load from
accidentally disengaging from the hook. C-DAC determined that the use
of hooks with latches is an industry recognized practice, but also
recognized that there are some circumstances where the use of a hook
with a latch presents a greater hazard. The exceptions in Sec.
1926.1433(d)(4)(ii) are included to address the latter circumstances.
For example, if an employee would have to climb up or out onto an
unsecured, elevated member to unhook the load after its placement, the
employee would be exposed to a fall hazard. The criteria in Sec.
1926.1433(d)(4)(ii) for permitting a hook to be used without a latch
are designed to ensure that the operation can still be conducted
safely.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(5), Posted warnings, states that posted
warnings required by this subpart, as well as those originally supplied
with the equipment by the manufacturer,\130\ must be maintained in
legible condition. Compliance with this requirement will increase the
likelihood that employees will recognize the hazard identified on the
posted warning and avoid or protect themselves from that hazard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \130\ Two commenters stated that posted warnings originally
supplied with the equipment by the manufacturer should not be
included in this provision and were not agreed to by C-DAC; they
believed that C-DAC required only original posted warnings related
to electrical hazards. (ID-0205.1; -0222.1.) These commenters are
mistaken; the proposed language is unchanged from the C-DAC
consensus document. In any event, OSHA believes that maintenance of
manufacturers' original posted warnings is critical to safe
operation of equipment and is promulgating this provision as
proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 1926.1433(d)(6) requires that an accessible fire
extinguisher be on the equipment to eliminate small fires quickly. This
provision continues a similar requirement that was in the former Sec.
1926.550(a)(14)(i).
    Section 1926.1433(d)(7), Cabs, states that equipment with cabs must
meet the requirements listed in Sec.  1926.1433(d)(7)(i) through (v) of
this section. These provisions ensure that the crane operator is
provided with a safe work station that has adequate ventilation, safe
means of access and egress, good visibility, protection against window
breakage, and sufficient roof strength. Most of these requirements
continue the protections provided under OSHA's prior rules for crawler,
locomotive, and truck cranes, which incorporated by reference various
sections of ANSI B30.5-1968.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(i) requires that cabs be designed with a
form of adjustable ventilation and method for clearing the windshield
for maintaining visibility and air circulation. Examples of means for
adjustable ventilation include an air conditioner or window that can be
opened (for ventilation and air circulation); examples of means for
maintaining visibility include heater (for preventing windshield
icing), defroster, fan, and windshield wiper. This provision ensures
adequate air circulation, both for the operator's health and for good
visibility.
    Under Sec.  1926.1433(d)(7)(ii), cab doors (whether swinging or
sliding) must be designed to prevent inadvertent opening or closing
while traveling or operating the machine. Swinging doors adjacent to
the operator must open outward. Sliding operator doors must open
rearward. Standardization of the direction for opening doors helps
ensure that an operator will be able to exit the cab quickly in an
emergency.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(iii), Windows, requires that cab windows
meet the requirements listed in Sec. Sec.  1926.1433(d)(7)(iii)(A)
through (C).
    Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(iii)(A) requires that the cab have windows
in front and on both sides of the operator. Forward vertical visibility
must be sufficient to give the operator a view of the boom point at all
times.

    Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(iii)(B) allows windows to have sections
designed to be opened or readily removed. Windows with sections
designed to be opened must be designed so that they can be secured to
prevent inadvertent closure. Compliance with this provision ensures
that the operator can adequately ventilate the cab should conditions
within the cab affect the safe operation of the crane.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(iii)(C) specifies that windows be
constructed of safety glass, or material with similar optical and
safety properties, that introduces no visible distortion or otherwise
obscures visibility. In the final rule, OSHA has deleted the phrase
``that interferes with the safe operation of the crane'' from the end
of this paragraph as proposed to eliminate an ambiguity that might
arise in interpreting this provision.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(iv) requires that a clear passageway be
provided from the operator's station to an exit door on the operator's
side. This provision will enable the operator to enter and exit the
equipment safely and will enable the operator to escape from the cab
quickly in the event of an emergency.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(7)(v) states that areas of the cab roof that
serve as a workstation for rigging, maintenance or other crane-related
tasks must be capable of supporting 250 pounds without permanent
distortion.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(8) requires that belts, gears, shafts,
pulleys, sprockets, spindles, drums, fly wheels, chains, and other
parts or components that reciprocate, rotate or otherwise move be
guarded where contact by employees (except for maintenance and repair
workers) is possible in the performance of normal duties. The exception
permits maintenance and repair workers to remove the guards when their
work requires access to the parts being guarded.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(9) requires that all exhaust pipes,
turbochargers, and charge air coolers be insulated or guarded where
contact by employees is possible in the performance of normal duties.
As with Sec.  1926.1433(d)(8), an exception is provided when
maintenance and repair workers need to remove the guards to perform
their work. This provision is included to protect workers against
injuries that can occur if they contact components that are hot enough
to cause burns.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(10) requires that hydraulic and pneumatic
lines be protected from damage to the extent feasible. For example,
where hydraulic or pneumatic lines are subject to chafing from
vibration or movement of the equipment, they must be secured, protected
with anti-chafing gear, or otherwise protected from chafing damage.
Denting, crushing, puncturing, or nicking a hydraulic or pneumatic line
could adversely affect the structural integrity of the line and
compromise the safe operation of the affected systems and the crane as
a whole.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(11) requires that equipment be designed so
that exhaust fumes are not discharged in the cab and are discharged in
a direction away from the operator. This provision ensures that exhaust
gases that are likely to adversely affect or incapacitate the operator
will not accumulate in the cab because of the design of the equipment.
For the same reason, OSHA is amending the final rule to clarify that
the exhaust fumes must also be discharged away from any air intake
source for the cab.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(12), Friction mechanisms, states that where
friction mechanisms (such as brakes and clutches) are used to control
the boom hoist or load line hoist, they must be: of a size and thermal
capacity sufficient to control all rated loads with the minimum
recommended reeving; and adjustable to permit compensation for lining
wear to maintain proper operation. The words ``all rated'' have been
added back into paragraph (d)(12)(i) of this section in response to
several comments who correctly pointed out that the phrase was included
in the C-DAC consensus document. (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) This
phrase was inadvertently deleted from the proposal and is needed to
clarify the requirement.
    Section 1926.1433(d)(13), Hydraulic load hoists, specifies that
hydraulic drums have an integrally mounted holding device or internal
static brake to prevent load hoist movement in the event of hydraulic
failure. This requirement will protect employees against unintended
movement of the load hoist caused by a hydraulic failure.
    As noted above, Sec. Sec.  1926.1433(d)(7)(iii)(C) and
1926.1433(d)(11) were amended to clarify those provisions, and Sec.
1926.1433(d)(12)(i) was amended to address comments received. All other
provisions of paragraph (d) are promulgated as proposed with minor
grammatical corrections and changes in numbering.
Paragraph (e)
    Section 1926.1433(e) permits employers to rely on documentation
from manufacturers to show that they are in compliance with Sec. Sec.
1926.1433(a)-(c) and 1926.1433(d)(7)-(d)(13) where the equipment has
not been modified \131\ since it was manufactured, except in accordance
with Sec.  1926.1434, Equipment modifications. Sections
1926.1433(d)(1)-(d)(6) are excluded from this provision because the
employer can easily verify compliance with them without recourse to
documentation provided by the manufacturer. An employer's failure to
have such documentation in its possession would not, in itself,
constitute a violation of these provisions. Rather, Sec.  1926.1433(e)
is intended to make clear that crane users need not independently
determine whether their equipment meets certain provisions of this
section but may rely on manufacturer documentation for that purpose. No
comments were received on this paragraph, and it is promulgated as
proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \131\ For clarification, the phrase in the final standard:
``where the equipment has not been modified'' replaces the phrase in
the proposed standard: ``where the equipment has not changed.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 1926.1434 Equipment modifications
    This section addresses the procedures an employer must follow when
equipment is modified in a way that affects its capacity or safe
operation. Its purpose is to safeguard against unsafe modifications and
to ensure that the equipment's instructions and specifications are
updated to reflect the modifications so that the equipment may be used
safely.
    This section uses the term ``modification/addition'' to refer to
``modification or addition'' to clarify that an addition to the
equipment is a type of modification and needs to be subject to the same
approval procedures as other types of modifications. For example, the
addition of a generator to the back of the cab of a crane needs to be
subject to the approval procedures because it will alter the crane's
backward stability.
Paragraph (a)
    Paragraph (a) of this section prohibits modifications or additions
to equipment which affect the capacity or safe operation of the
equipment except where any of five options set out in Sec. Sec.
1926.1434(a)(1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) are met. Options outlined in
(a)(4) and (a)(5) were not in the proposed rule; see discussion below.
Option (1)--Manufacturer Review and Approval
    Under paragraph (a)(1)(i), the employer must get the manufacturer
of the equipment to approve the modifications/additions in writing.

Paragraph (a)(1)(ii) requires that load charts, procedures, instruction
manuals, and instruction plates/tags/decals be modified in accordance
with the modification/addition. Under (a)(1)(iii), the original safety
factor of the equipment must not be reduced. Meeting the requirements
of this paragraph ensures that the original safety factor is not
reduced and that all affiliated materials related to safe operation of
the equipment (instructions, charts) are updated to reflect the changes
made. Paragraph (a)(1) is promulgated as proposed.
Option (2)--Manufacturer Refusal To Review Request
    Under paragraph (a)(2), the employer must provide a detailed
description of the proposed modification to the manufacturer and ask it
to approve the modification/addition. If the manufacturer declines to
review the technical merits of the proposal or fails, within 30 days,
to acknowledge the request or initiate the review, the employer may
proceed with the modification/addition if it complies with the other
requirements in paragraph (a)(2). In these conditions, the employer may
utilize a registered professional engineer who is a qualified person
with respect to the equipment to approve the modification/addition in
lieu of the manufacturer. See Sec.  1926.1401 for the definition of
qualified person. C-DAC found it important to clarify that this
individual needs to be a qualified person ``with respect to the
equipment involved,'' since specialized knowledge beyond that of a
general registered professional engineer is needed to make the required
assessments regarding the particular equipment that is being modified.
    The Committee recommended this option because it determined that
the refusal of a manufacturer to review a request, or a manufacturer's
failure to act on the request within a reasonable time, would not
preclude an employer from making a modification if adequate precautions
are followed. The Committee concluded that 30 days would give the
manufacturer a reasonable amount of time to decide whether to simply
decline to review the request or to proceed with evaluating it. Also,
the Committee concluded that a failure to respond at all in this period
would fairly reflect an intention not to act on the request in a timely
manner.
    Under paragraph (a)(2)(i)(A) OSHA requires that the approval by the
registered professional engineer specify the equipment configurations
to which it applies. Cranes typically can be configured in a variety of
ways. Modifications may have different effects depending on the
configuration. C-DAC determined that it was essential for purposes of
ensuring safe operation that the approval specify the configurations to
which it applies. An example of an approval satisfying this would be
the following: ``This is an approval to add an additional boom section
of the above-described design for a brand K lattice boom crane, model
1. This approval applies only when the crane is configured without a
jib.''
    Paragraph (a)(2)(i)(B) requires that the registered professional
engineer modify load charts, procedures, instruction manuals, and
instruction plates/tags/decals as necessary to accord with the
modification/addition. Under paragraph (a)(2)(ii), the original safety
factor of the equipment must not be reduced.
    One local jurisdiction commented that local governments should have
the option of reviewing and approving cranes that are not modified in
conjunction with the manufacturer. (ID-0156.1.) The commenter did not
explain how such a requirement would work in practice or how it would
enhance employee safety. OSHA defers to C-DAC's judgment that having a
registered professional engineer (who is a qualified person with
respect to the equipment involved) approve the modification in
accordance with the requirements of paragraph (a)(2) will provide
adequate protection. See, e.g., Building & Constr. Trades Dep't, AFL-
CIO v. Brock, 838 F.2d 1258, 1271 (DC Cir. 1988) (``[A] party
challenging an OSHA standard must bear the burden of demonstrating that
the variations it advocates will * * * provide more than a de minimis
benefit. * * *''). Paragraph (a)(2) is adopted without change from the
proposal.
Option (3)--Unavailable Manufacturer
    Paragraph (a)(3) addresses a scenario in which the manufacturer of
equipment is unavailable to review proposed modifications/additions
because, for example, it has gone out of business (and has not been
taken over by a successor company). In this situation, if the employer
wishes to modify its equipment in a way that affects its capacity or
safe operation, it can get approval from a registered professional
engineer in accordance with the requirements of (a)(2)(i) and (ii)
above. This paragraph is adopted as proposed.
Option (4)--Manufacturer Does Not Complete the Review Within 120 Days
of the Request
    Paragraph (a)(4) has been added to this section of the final rule
based on a particular scenario raised by a commenter where a
manufacturer agrees to review a proposed modification/addition, but
fails to complete that review within 120 days of the date on which it
was provided with a detailed description of the proposed modification/
addition. (ID-0187.1.) OSHA agrees with the commenter that in that
scenario the employer should have the option of seeking approval from a
registered professional engineer in accordance with the requirements of
(a)(2)(i) and (ii) above. OSHA concludes that 120 days will generally
be sufficient for manufacturers to complete reviews; for proposed
modifications/additions that are particularly extensive or complex,
OSHA assumes that the length of time needed to review the proposal will
be longer and will be addressed as a contractual matter between the
parties.
Option (5)--Multiple Manufacturers of Equipment Designed for Use on
Marine Work Sites
    Paragraph (a)(5) has been added to this final rule in response to a
comment regarding equipment used on marine work sites. (ID-0187.1.)
According to this commenter, in the marine construction industry,
contractors routinely hire shipyards to build specialized barges or
modify existing barges used as floating platforms for hoisting
equipment. Custom-made hoisting equipment for such operations is
frequently assembled using component parts manufactured by multiple
manufacturers and then installed on the floating platform. In such
cases, it is impossible to identify a single ``manufacturer'' from
which to seek approval for a modification/addition; therefore OSHA
concludes that it was reasonable to provide employers in these
instances with the ability to seek approval for a proposed
modification/addition from a registered professional engineer in
accordance with paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii) above. The term marine
worksite is defined in Sec.  1926.1401 as ``a construction worksite
located in, on, or above the water.''
Paragraph (b)
    Paragraph (b) of this section prohibits modifications or additions
which affect the capacity or safe operation of the equipment where the
manufacturer, after a review of the technical safety merits of the
proposed modification/addition, rejects the proposal and explains the
reasons for the rejection in a written response.
    OSHA concludes, as did C-DAC, that it was important to expressly
state the need for the manufacturer to explain why it rejected the
employer's proposed modification. Such an explanation both

demonstrates that the manufacturer reviewed the technical safety merits
of the request and gives the employer the opportunity to modify the
proposal to address the manufacturer's objections. If the manufacturer
does not provide the reasons for its rejection in writing, the employer
may consider this a refusal to review a request under paragraph (a)(2)
above.
    No comments were received for this paragraph; it is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraph (c)
    Paragraph (c) of this section states that the provisions in
Sec. Sec.  1926.1434(a) and (b) do not apply to modifications made or
approved by the U.S. military. During C-DAC negotiations, a
representative of the U.S. Navy indicated to C-DAC that such an
exception is needed in the event of military exigencies. OSHA defers to
the Committee's expertise on this issue. No comments were received for
this paragraph; it is promulgated as proposed.
Section 1926.1435 Tower Cranes
Definition of Tower Crane
    OSHA's proposed definition reflected three changes from the
Committee draft. First, a characteristic of tower cranes that was
missing from the C-DAC definition was that the working boom is in an
elevated position above the ground. Second, the working boom on some
tower cranes, even of the non-luffing type, may not be at a 90 degree
angle to the tower, and so the term ``fixed horizontally'' may not
always be appropriate for a non-luffing jib. Third, tower cranes do not
always rotate about the tower center to swing loads. There are ``top
slewing'' tower cranes--those in which the working boom rotates on the
top of a fixed tower, and ``bottom slewing'' tower cranes--those in
which the tower itself (with the working boom fixed to it) rotates on
its base, and for the latter, the boom does not rotate about the tower
center. OSHA requested public comment on the changes it made to the
Committee draft definition.
    One commenter agreed with the proposed definition of ``tower
crane,'' saying that OSHA's changes removed any ambiguity in the
definition. (ID-0187.1.) Three commenters suggested adding the words
``or near vertical'' to the first sentence of the definition so that it
would say, ``a type of lifting structure which utilizes a vertical, or
near vertical, mast or tower. * * *'' (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.)
These commenters were evidently concerned that a tower crane could,
under Sec.  1926.1435(b)(5), Plumb tolerance, permissibly deviate from
being perfectly vertical by a slight amount. As explained below in the
discussion of Sec.  1926.1435(b)(5), the crane's tower must be plumb to
the manufacturer's tolerance or, where the manufacturer does not
specify the plumb tolerance, plumbed to a tolerance of at least 1:500.
    OSHA concludes that adding the words ``or near vertical'' to the
definition of tower crane is not necessary. Although a tower crane may
deviate from being perfectly vertical by the amount of the
manufacturer's tolerance or, where the manufacturer does not specify a
tolerance, at least 1:500, the tower crane would still be ``vertical''
within the ordinary meaning of that word. Adding the words ``or near
vertical'' could create additional ambiguity and is not necessary to
avoid misleading tower crane users into thinking that their equipment
does not fall within OSHA's definition if the tower deviates from
perfect vertical by the amount permitted by the rule.
    Two commenters suggested adding the following sentence at the end
of the definition:

    Mobile cranes that are configured with luffing jib and/or tower
attachments are not considered tower cranes under this section.

(ID-0205.1; -0213.1.)
    The provisions in this section for tower cranes are not appropriate
for application to a mobile crane configured with a luffing jib. This
conclusion is equally applicable to mobile cranes used with tower
attachments. Such attachments typically consist of devices that fix the
mobile crane's main boom at a near-vertical position and use of a
luffing jib. OSHA therefore agrees that a mobile crane configured in
either manner should not be treated as a tower crane, since the
supplemental provision for tower cranes in this section are not
designed for such applications.\132\ Therefore, the Agency has added
the language suggested by the commenters to the definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \132\ Note, however, that some tower cranes are mobile, i.e.,
truck-mounted (such as truck-mounted self-erecting tower cranes).
These are considered tower cranes under this standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paragraph (a)
    Section 1926.1435(a) states that Sec.  1926.1435 contains
supplemental requirements for tower cranes and that all other sections
of this standard apply to tower cranes unless specified otherwise. This
paragraph makes clear that all provisions of this subpart apply to
tower cranes unless a specific provision states that they are
inapplicable. As discussed below, two sections of this standard that do
not apply to tower cranes are Sec. Sec.  1926.1415 (safety devices) and
1926.1416 (operational aids). Instead, this section lists the safety
devices and operational aids that are required for tower cranes. In
addition, this section contains additional requirements for erecting,
climbing, dismantling, and inspections that are specific to tower
cranes. No comments were received on this paragraph, and it is
promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (b) Erecting, Climbing and Dismantling
    Section 1926.1435(b)(1) requires the employer to comply with the
assembly and disassembly requirements set out in Sec. Sec.  1926.1403-
1926.1406, except as otherwise specified in this section. Section
1926.1435(b)(1) notes that the industry generally refers to the
assembly and disassembly of tower cranes as erecting, climbing and
dismantling. Therefore, when the term ``assembly'' is used in
Sec. Sec.  1926.1403 through Sec.  1926.1405, it is replaced with
``erecting and climbing'' when referring to tower cranes. Similarly,
where the term ``disassembly'' is used, it is replaced with
``dismantling'' when referring to tower cranes.
    Section 1926.1435(b)(2), Dangerous areas (self-erecting tower
cranes), addresses the hazards associated with crew members located in
certain areas. Employees must not be in or under the tower, jib, or
rotating portion of the crane during erecting, climbing and dismantling
operations until the crane is secured in a locked position and the
competent person indicates it is safe to enter these areas. The only
exception to this is where the manufacturer's instructions direct
otherwise and the employer limits access to necessary employees only.
    These areas are hazardous because, in the event of unintended
movement of components, there is a heightened chance that an employee
could be struck or crushed. The exception accounts for those situations
in which, due to the design of the equipment, it is infeasible for all
employees to be out of these areas during erecting, climbing and
dismantling operations. No commenters addressed Sec.  1926.1435(b)(2).
It is promulgated without change.
    Proposed paragraph (b)(3), Foundations and structural supports,
provided: ``Tower crane foundations and structural supports shall be
designed by the manufacturer or a registered professional engineer.''
    When a tower crane is mounted to portions of a structure, it is
vital for safe operation that the structure be able to

withstand the forces imposed by both the crane and the loads the crane
will handle throughout the job. Accordingly, when portions of a
structure are used to support a tower crane, the manufacturer or
registered professional engineer who designs the crane's structural
supports must ensure not only that the structure is adequate to support
the crane when it is mounted but that it will continue to support the
crane under all anticipated conditions of use.
    In the proposal, OSHA noted that it interpreted ``structural
supports'' in this provision to include both the portions of the
structure used for support and the means of attaching the tower to the
structure, and requested public comment on whether proposed Sec.
1926.1435(b)(3) stated this intent with sufficient clarity.
    Five commenters recommended that OSHA clarify that ``structural
supports'' means both the portions of the structure used for support
and the means of attachment. (ID-0120.0; -0156.1; -0180.1; -0205.1; -
0213.1.) OSHA has modified paragraph (b)(3) of this section of the
final rule accordingly.
    Section 1926.1435(b)(4), Addressing specific hazards, requires the
employer to comply with Sec. Sec.  1926.1404(h)(1) through (9), which
pertain to erecting, climbing and dismantling. In particular, Sec.
1926.1404(h) requires that the A/D Director address certain hazards,
which are discussed above in the discussion of Sec.  1926.1404. Section
1926.1435(b)(4) lists additional hazards, specific to tower cranes,
that the A/D Director also must address. These additional hazards are
those associated with (i) the foundations and structural supports for
tower cranes, (ii) the loss of backward stability, and (iii) wind
speed.
    Proposed Sec.  1926.1435(b)(4)(i) required the A/D Director to
``verify'' that the foundation and structural supports are installed in
accordance with their design. This paragraph is designed to ensure that
the design of these components by the manufacturer or registered
professional engineer is followed when they are installed.
    Three commenters stated that the A/D Director is not qualified to
perform this function and that the registered professional engineer who
designed the support should verify that the foundation and structural
supports are properly installed. (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.)
    OSHA determines that the commenters are assuming that, by the use
of the term ``verify,'' the proposed provision meant that the A/D
Director would have to independently assess the foundation and supports
to determine if they were installed in accordance with their design.
OSHA is not, however, requiring the A/D Director to make such an
independent assessment. For example, the intent of the provision is met
when the A/D Director determines from the engineer of record that the
installation was done correctly. To make this clear, OSHA has, in the
final rule, changed the word ``verify'' to ``determine.''
    Paragraph (b)(4)(ii) requires that the A/D Director address the
backward stability of the crane before self erecting tower cranes or
cranes on traveling or stationary undercarriages are swung. OSHA has
removed the words ``must be considered'' that were in the proposed
paragraph to avoid ambiguity. Paragraph (b)(4) requires the A/D
Director to ``address'' certain issues, including the stability issue
in paragraph (b)(4)(ii), and the words ``must be considered'' could be
read as limiting or modifying that duty. This provision is similar to
the assembly/disassembly requirement in Sec.  1926.1404(h)(11) except
that it applies only to self erecting tower cranes and cranes that are
on traveling or static (stationary) undercarriages. It applies to these
types of tower cranes to highlight the fact that, because they do not
have a base that is fixed to the ground, the backwards stability safety
issue needs to be addressed. No comments were received on this
provision, and it is promulgated with only the one revision.
    Proposed Sec.  1926.1435(b)(4)(iii) provided that erecting,
climbing, and dismantling not take place when the wind speed
recommended by the manufacturer is exceeded. Where the manufacturer
does not recommend a maximum wind speed, a qualified person is required
to establish the maximum wind speed that must not be exceeded. This
provision was included because the horizontal force caused by wind
during erecting and dismantling can have a substantial effect on the
stability of a tower crane.
    One commenter suggested that climbing should not be allowed if the
wind speed perpendicular to the jib is in excess of 20 miles per hour.
(ID-0137.1.) This commenter stated that most manufacturers will allow
climbing in winds up to 40 miles per hour but are not specific on winds
that are perpendicular to the jib. OSHA concludes that any manufacturer
who specifies wind speed will assume that the wind might be blowing in
any direction, including perpendicular to the jib, and take that into
account in the recommendation. OSHA further concludes that
manufacturers (and qualified persons) are well qualified to determine
the maximum wind speed and finds no basis in the record to set a
maximum wind speed during erection of 20 miles per hour. Accordingly,
OSHA is promulgating Sec.  1926.1435(b)(4)(iii) as proposed.
    Paragraph (b)(5) of this section, Plumb tolerance, requires that
the crane's tower be plumb to the manufacturer's tolerance and verified
by a qualified person. Where the manufacturer does not specify the
plumb tolerance, this provision requires that the tower be plumb to a
tolerance of at least 1:500. The tower needs to be plumb within the
manufacturer's tolerance to ensure the crane's stability and prevent it
from collapsing. The Committee noted that a tolerance of at least 1:500
is generally what manufacturers specify and that for any type of
vertical structure this generally is the accepted plumb tolerance in
the engineering and construction industries. No comments were received
on this provision; it is promulgated as proposed.
    Paragraph (b)(6), Multiple tower crane jobsites, requires
construction jobsites with more than one fixed jib (hammerhead) tower
crane installed to be located so that no crane can contact the
structure of another crane. However, the jibs of multiple hammerhead
tower cranes are permitted to pass over/under one another. This
provision is designed to ensure that multiple tower cranes on a
construction site do not collide with each other. No comments were
received on this paragraph. OSHA has replaced the word ``may'' with
``can'' in the final rule to clarify that it must be physically
impossible for the structure of one crane to contact the structure of
another. The text is otherwise unchanged in the final rule.
    Paragraph (b)(7), Climbing procedures, contains special
requirements that have to be followed during the climbing process.
Climbing is defined in Sec.  1926.1401. Paragraph (b)(7) requires that
prior to, and during, all climbing procedures the employer (i) Comply
with all manufacturer prohibitions; (ii) have a registered professional
engineer verify that the host structure is strong enough to sustain the
forces imposed through the braces, brace anchorages and supporting
floors; and (iii) ensure that no part of the climbing procedure takes
place when wind exceeds the speed recommended by the manufacturer or,
where the manufacture does not specify the wind speed, the speed
determined by a qualified person. No comments were received on this
paragraph; it is unchanged in the final rule. The Agency notes that
several commenters did object generally to the mandatory compliance
with manufacturer

requirements. These arguments are addressed in the discussion of Sec.
1926.1417.
    Paragraph (b)(7)(ii) requires the employer to have a registered
professional engineer verify that the host structure is strong enough
to sustain the forces imposed through the braces, brace anchorages and
supporting floors. Examples of typical host structures include a
building, parking garage, bridge or pier. If the host structure is not
strong enough, the host structure could collapse and cause the tower
crane to collapse as well. No comments were received on this paragraph;
it is unchanged in the final rule.
    Proposed paragraph (b)(7)(iii) required the employer to ensure that
no part of the climbing procedure takes place when wind exceeds the
speed recommended by the manufacturer or by a qualified person if the
manufacturer does not specify this information. The Agency noted that
Sec.  1926.1435(b)(4)(iii) requires wind speed to be addressed during
erecting, climbing and dismantling in the same manner as Sec.
1926.1435(b)(7)(iii) and requested public comment on whether Sec.
1926.1435(b)(7)(iii) should be omitted as redundant. Three commenters
agreed that Sec.  1926.1435(b)(7)(iii) was redundant and should be
deleted. (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -0213.1.) OSHA agrees and has deleted
Sec.  1926.1435(b)(7)(iii) from the final rule.
    One commenter suggested that all rigging used during the climbing
process should follow the rules provided in Sec.  1926.1431 (Hoisting
personnel), and in particular the requirement that the lift not exceed
50% of the equipment's rated capacity. (ID-0137.1.) This commenter said
that such a requirement is appropriate because climbing frames are
often hoisted or lowered by the crane while workers are on them. OSHA
is aware of no reason why workers need to be on a climbing frame while
it is being hoisted and it notes that such a practice would violate a
number of provisions of Sec.  1926.1431. As discussed in Sec.
1926.1431, cranes are designed to hoist material, not personnel, and
may only be used to hoist personnel when stringent requirements to
ensure safety are followed, including the requirement that the lift not
exceed 50% of the equipment's rated capacity. OSHA is not requiring
that all rigging used in climbing a tower crane meet this requirement
because it does not determine that workers should be, or commonly are,
hoisted while on the climbing frame.
    The same commenter stated that the swing should be disabled during
climbing and that a pre-test of the hydraulic system should be
performed when the upper structure is initially raised. This commenter
did not offer any rationale in support of these suggestions, and OSHA
does not conclude they are needed to ensure the safety of the climbing
process.
    Section 1926.1435(b)(8), Counterweight/ballast, addresses the
hazard of instability that can result from improper installation or
removal of counterweight/ballast, which can cause a collapse. Sections
1926.1435(b)(8)(i) and (ii) require that tower cranes not be erected,
dismantled or operated without the amount and position of counterweight
or ballast in place as specified by the manufacturer or a registered
professional engineer familiar with the equipment and that the maximum
amount of counterweight or ballast not be exceeded. No comments
addressed this paragraph, and it is promulgated as proposed.
Paragraph (c) Signs
    Section 1926.1435(c) requires employers to comply with the
manufacturer's specifications regarding the size and location of signs.
This requirement addresses the hazards that can result from attaching
signs (such as signs with the company's name) to tower cranes. The
force of the wind bearing against a large sign can significantly
increase the horizontal force the wind exerts on the crane. According
to the Committee, most manufacturers specify the maximum size and
permissible location of signs so that the stability of the tower crane
is not compromised. Where the manufacturer does not specify this
information or where such information is unavailable, this provision
requires a registered professional engineer who is familiar with the
specific type of tower crane involved to give written approval of the
size and location of any signs. The provision applies irrespective of
whether the sign was installed during or after erecting/climbing. No
comments were received on this provision, and it is promulgated as
proposed.
Paragraphs (d) Safety Devices and (e) Operational Aids
    These paragraphs set out the safety devices and operational aids
that are required on tower cranes. Sections 1926.1415 and 1926.1416,
which require safety devices and operational aids on other types of
cranes, are not applicable to tower cranes. Instead, Sec. Sec.
1926.1435(d) and (e) apply. Although some of the safety devices and
operational aids for tower cranes are the same as those that Sec. Sec.
1926.1415 and 1926.1416 require for other equipment, others are unique
to tower cranes. C-DAC determined it would promote clarity to list all
the devices and aids for tower cranes in this section.
    Safety devices must be in proper working order. Where a safety
device is not in proper working order, the crane must be taken out of
service until it is again functioning properly. The Committee
determined that the protection offered by safety devices is critical to
safe operation and that there is no alternative way to achieve the same
level of safety that the safety devices provide. By contrast, if an
operational aid is malfunctioning, operations may continue where the
employer implements specified temporary alternative measures. Where the
tower crane manufacturer specifies more protective alternative measures
than those specified in this section, the employer is required to
follow those more protective alternative measures.
    Safety Devices: Paragraph (d)(2) requires the safety devices on
tower cranes discussed below.
    Boom stops on luffing boom type tower cranes (Sec.
1926.1435(d)(2)(i)) and jib stops on luffing boom type tower cranes if
equipped with a jib attachment (Sec.  1926.1435(d)(2)(ii)) are
required. These are comparable to the boom and jib stops required for
other cranes under Sec.  1926.1415 (discussed above) and are intended
to prevent the boom and jib from being raised to too high an angle and
toppling over backwards.
    Paragraph (d)(2)(iii) requires travel end rail stops at both ends
of the travel rail. These are comparable to the rail stops required for
equipment on rails under Sec.  1926.1415 and are designed to keep the
crane from overshooting the boundaries on the rail within which it is
supposed to operate, which could cause the crane to collapse.
    Paragraph (d)(2)(iv) requires travel rail clamps on all travel
bogies. A ``travel bogie (tower cranes)'' is defined in Sec.  1926.1401
as ``an assembly of two or more axles arranged to permit vertical wheel
displacement and equalize the loading on the wheels.'' When tower
cranes travel on rails, they are mounted on travel bogies. The rail
clamps that are required by this paragraph enable the bogies to be
clamped to the rail to prevent the crane from lifting off the rail.
    Paragraph (d)(2)(v) requires integrally mounted check valves on all
load supporting hydraulic cylinders. A check valve permits fluid to
flow in one direction only. When installed on load supporting hydraulic
cylinders, such as

the cylinders used to climb the crane, they protect against the loss of
load support in the event of a hydraulic pressure failure by preventing
the reverse flow of the hydraulic fluid supporting the cylinder.
    Paragraph (d)(2)(vi) requires a hydraulic system pressure limiting
device.
    A pressure limiting device, such as a relief valve, would prevent
the pressure in a hydraulic system from exceeding its design limit,
which can cause the system to fail.
    Paragraph (d)(2)(vii) requires the following brakes, which must
automatically set in the event of pressure loss or power failure: A
hoist brake on all hoists; a swing brake; a trolley brake; and a rail
travel brake. These types of brakes are needed to enable the motion of
the crane and load to be controlled safely. Under this paragraph, they
must set automatically to avoid uncontrolled movement of the crane or
load in the event of pressure loss or power failure that prevents their
operation.
    Paragraph (d)(2)(viii) requires a ``deadman'' control or forced
neutral return control (hand) levers. These devices ensure that the
crane does not move unless the movement is being controlled by the
operator. In the case of a deadman control, the motion being
controlled, such as hoisting or trolleying, ceases when the operator
releases the control. Forced neutral return control levers
automatically return to the neutral position when they are released.
    Paragraph (d)(2)(ix) requires an emergency stop switch at the
operator's station. This safety device is needed to enable the operator
to immediately stop all crane functions in the event of an emergency.
    Paragraph (d)(2)(x) requires trolley end stops as safety devices
because trolley travel limiting devices, which are required by Sec.
1926.1435(e)(5)(i), will not work without trolley end stops.
    Paragraph (d)(3) requires that all of the safety devices listed in
Sec.  1926.1435(d)(2) be in proper working order for the crane to be
operated. Where a device stops working properly during operations, the
operator would have to safely stop operations, and operations are
prohibited from resuming until the device is once again in proper
working order. In the final rule, OSHA is adding text and a cross-
reference to Sec.  1926.1417 to make it clear that the equipment must
be taken out of service, and tagged as such, when a safety device is
not operational.
    Three commenters stated that several of the proposed safety
devices--the hydraulic system pressure limiting device required by
Sec.  1926.1435(d)(2)(vi), the brakes required by Sec.
1926.1435(d)(2)(vii), and the deadman control required by Sec.
1926.1435(d)(2)(viii), should be listed as design features rather than
safety devices because they cannot be checked every shift, as safety
devices must under Sec.  1926.1412(d)(1)(xiv). (ID-0180.1; -0205.1; -
0213.1.) OSHA declines to adopt this suggestion because it agrees with
C-DAC's determination that these devices must be working properly for
the crane to operate safely, and they therefore need to be listed as
safety devices under the standard. Moreover, the commenters who said
these devices cannot be checked every shift did not explain why they
believed this was so, and C-DAC's inclusion of them as safety devices
shows that C-DAC determined that checking these devices for proper
operation, as Sec.  1926.1412(d)(1)(xiv) requires, is feasible.\133\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \133\ The three commenters included one C-DAC member and two
organizations that nominated members who served on C-DAC. As
discussed above, OSHA gives reduces weight to comments offered by C-
DAC members and organizations that nominated C-DAC members when
those comments oppose the position those members took in C-DAC
deliberations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Operational aids: Like Sec.  1926.1416 for other equipment, Sec.
1926.1435(e) divides operational aids for tower cranes into Category I
aids and Category II aids, with the two categories differing in the
amount of time that temporary alternative measures can be used until
the aids are repaired. For Category I aids that period is seven days,
and for Category II it is 30 days. Also like Sec.  1926.1416, if a
required part is ordered within seven days of the occurrence of the
deficiency and not received in time to complete the repair in seven and
thirty days, respectively, the employer would have seven days from
receiving the part to complete the repair. The rationale for these time
periods is discussed under Sec.  1926.1416. For purposes of
clarification, the Agency has added a reference to Sec.
1926.1435(e)(3) noting that the requirements of Sec.  1926.1417(j) are
applicable. See further discussion at Sec.  1926.1417(j).
    Section 1926.1435(e)(4) specifies that operational aids must work
properly during operations and, if an aid stops working, the operator
is required to safely stop operations until the aid is working properly
again or until the temporary alternative measures specified in this
section are implemented. Where a replacement part for an operational
aid is not available, the substitution of a device that performs the
same function would not be considered a modification subject to Sec.
1926.1434, i.e., it would not need to be approved by the manufacturer