Companies that test crane operators disagree with each other
on the U.S. Occupational Safety & Health Administration's proposal to push
back by three years mandatory certification for these workers. Public comments
closed on March 12 for the proposed delay, which OSHA floated earlier in the
year after industry groups had asked the safety agency to revise testing
requirements.
"We are ready to go," says Debbie Dickinson,
executive director of Crane Institute Certification (CIC), speaking of her
testing company's readiness to meet the current rule, which is due to phase in
on Nov. 10 of this year. "We are not in favor of the delay because studies
show there are 22 injuries every year because people are not certified."
According to Dickinson and others, the proposed delay comes
down to some hesitancy in the construction community to conform to the existing
OSHA certification requirements that are tied to the type and capacity of the
equipment. She says those who want the capacity requirement scrapped have
pushed OSHA to make the delay and revise the rules. Of the four crane-operator testing
agencies available to construction employers, two companies, including CIC,
test by type and capacity, while two test only by type.
Graham Brent, executive director of the National Commission
for the Certification of Crane Operators, disagrees with Dickinson's position,
noting that his group lobbied OSHA to make the delay. Many who operate
construction firms think the capacity requirement was not intended by members
of the Cranes and Derricks Rulemaking Advisory Committee (C-DAC), which OSHA
formed in 2003 to help draft the new regulation, Brent explains. The current
rules went into effect in November 2010 with a four-year phased period for
operator testing.
"No one wants a delay," says Brent. "We have
been supportive of these rules since the time that they were being
drafted." However, a delay is necessary, Brent adds, because testing based
on capacity likely will not impact safety. He cites a study in California that
revealed crane-related fatalities dropped after the state adopted NCCCO's program,
also commonly called CCO, which certifies operators based on the type of
machine and not its capacity.
Under OSHA's proposal, the new requirement would come due on
Nov. 10, 2017, to give the safety agency time to issue new rules. The current
rules say operators must take a type-and-capacity test accredited by a
recognized auditor, such as the National Commission for Certifying Agencies or
the American National Standards Institute, by Nov. 10, 2014. If the date
stands, many existing certifications would be rendered invalid.
"People say this is an urgent safety matter. That's
true," Brent says. "But again, it goes back to where we want to be
for the next 30 years."
Of the more than 65 comments that OSHA has received about
the proposal, many support the delay and recommend that future testing rules
not include capacity. Some contend the revised rules should stipulate that
employers have the final say on who is qualified to operate a crane.
"We ask that OSHA give the industry the time it takes
to make this right," noted William Smith, executive vice president of
claims and risk management for NationsBuilders Insurance Services Inc., in his
comments. "[Leaving the rules stand] would take us back in time, not
forward, in protecting lives," he added.
Another commenter suggests politics are driving the delay.
"NCCCO made no effort … to comply to OSHA," said Hans Markel,
president of Kissimmee Crane School. "Is OSHA to comply to NCCCO, or is
NCCCO to comply to OSHA?" He averred that capacity is a valid testing
criterion, citing similar tests for commercial truck drivers.
OSHA is reviewing the public comments, but if the agency
does not move to delay certification by Nov. 10, testing on type and capacity
will go into effect this year, other commenters note.
Experts involved with the NCCCO program carry influence in
the construction industry in part because some of them helped shape the current
OSHA crane and derrick rules. When the OSHA rules were being developed, NCCCO
was the only nationally accredited testing agency for crane operators, notes
Tressi Cordaro, an attorney at law firm Jackson Lewis in Washington, D.C., and
a former OSHA employee. "Everything was being modeled on CCO,"
Cordaro explains. During negotiations, she adds, C-DAC members believed that
type was more important than capacity. "I don't think [capacity] was ever
intended by C-DAC members," Cordaro says.
Source: ENR.com
No comments:
Post a Comment