If a contractor has work rules that require more stringent trigger heights for providing fall protection i.e.; ironworkers required to be protected after 10 feet when connecting can OSHA issue a citation if during an inspection a CSHO sees an ironworker not protected and working at 12 feet thus violating the company or jobsite policy?

I spoke with numerous OSHA representatives and the consensus was that no citation could be issued.

This brings up another question as well:

If an owner requires a company to implement 100% tie off at a height below which OSHA requires, and a worker falls at a height above that, can the owner be held negligent? I have seen most owners pass the responsibility for compliance to the jobsite general contractor or CM so would the GC/CM also be partially liable? Also, what responsibility does either the owner or GC/CM have in assuring that a sub-contractor has installed PFAS that are adequate for the exposure? I recently saw a subcontractor who was working on a site where 6ft fall protection was mandatory. The sub had installed a HLL that was totally inadequate and in full view of the GC trailer.

A.1. If the work rules for a GC are 6 ft for employees and all subcontractors including the steel erector then OSHA can enforce the more stringent rules and issue a citation if the ironworker is at 10 ft or 20 ft for example. The fact is that the OSHA CSHO can request the work rules and copy of the contract to find what the subs are operating under. The result can be a citation. BUT I hasten to add that John Newquist has told me that while this was OSHA policy with steel erection after the first Stanley memo, the second memo knocked this out for steel erection so now generally it is 25 ft inside and out that is used unless they walk round a hole 751d, or use a belt and/or could hit a lower level 95c, or are within 6 ft of an edge 105, or can impale onto rebar on a pre-poured concrete floor 701b etc. I am applying 6 ft in a case where the sub required it but the steel erector did not do it (14 ft) - result serious injury - the GC is in big trouble for not watching this 50 yards from his trailer (Michigan case "easily observed, common area, several people at risk").

A. 2. I think so, I hope so because the general must enforce through preplanning and close observation. HLL have their own set of parameters and GC's need to require Qualified Persons (structural engineers) for most temporary cases because clearances are not understood at all. Otherwise the same question - is there a hazard? If so 5a1 is set up - for OSHA tough, for a qualified expert it is easy. Does this get you anywhere?

I am the EHS director for US Primary products at Alcoa. I am in debate with some of my plant EHS managers about the directive from OSHA.

The debate centers around what heights fall control or protection is needed in general industry. Per the OSHA link (which is dated in the 80s), it is 4 foot for all applications (whether temporary or permanent platforms or walking working surfaces). I am hoping for some recent interpretations from OSHA on this so I did not have to request it from OSHA.

Trigger heights for OSHA fall protection are as follows 4 ft Gen. Industry 5 ft Longshoring 6 ft Construction with exceptions listed: 10 ft scaffolds 15 ft steel erection bolt-up 30 ft steel erection, connecting and decking In summary, if you chose 6 ft for everything, you would be close to what is reasonably possible, and if you chose 4 ft for everything that would be a challenge that would include all truck flatbeds (OSHA Act5(a)(2))and docks.The OSHA 4 ft rule was confirmed from the Chaffin Report (UMichigan) in 1978 to OSHA that 4 ft was the height where the first most damaging height for a head fall that would occur as the body rotates. The basis for correctly choosing a policy in my opinion is the nature of the hazard and degree of hazard. Falls can be extremely dangerous and severely injurious from almost any height. OSHA has always stayed away from any case where the merits of 4 ft or 6 ft trigger heights were discussed. It should be noted that where fall injuries would be aggravated such falling into acid baths or fans, then the OSHA trigger height is zero and a floor or equivalent platform is required. The interpretation for construction dated January 9th 2009 does not add any new information because the trigger height for aerial lifts use of fall arrest equipment (max. 9.5 ft plus body length lanyards, max. 5.5 feet plus body length SRL) has always been zero feet height and there is no device that prevents falling out of the work platform at ground level without hitting the ground. Now if my sketch which has been in "Introduction to Fall Protection", 2nd and 3rd edition (p116) is adopted then that may be as close to a solution as possible at this time; it would certainly prevent a head injury with the "fast fall arrester" SRL maximum total distance of fall 2 ft draft standard.