Consensus Standards

Do You Need to Follow Them?

CONSENSUS STANDARDS

Anna E. Jolly, JD, CHMM

What are they?

Standards – Whether it has been promulgated by OSHA, MSHA, a state agency or a voluntary standards group, the purpose is to prevent employees from being exposed to a hazard.

Voluntary Consensus Standard are those developed or adopted by voluntary consensus bodies through a process of logical and agreed-upon process.

June 3 & 4, 20102 Circle Safety & Health Consultants, LLC © 2010

Why are they important?

They reflect the opinions of safety and health professionals and other groups such as users and worker representatives, and academics in all levels of the public and private sector.

They are systematically reviewed to keep them current.

They are a valuable guideline or reference.


Most Common Consensus Bodies

ANSI – American National Standards Institute

ASTM- American Society of Testing and Materials

NFPA – National Fire Protection Association

NEC – National Electrical Code

ACGIH – American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists


History of Consensus Standards and OSHA

Adoption during first 2 years of OSHA.

5

Incorporation by Reference (PPE)

1910.133(b) Criteria for protective eye and face protection. 1910.133(b)(1) Protective eye and face protection devices must comply with

any of the following consensus standards:

1910.133(b)(1)(i) ANSI Z87.1-2003, "American National Standard Practice for Occupational and Educational Eye and Face Protection," which is incorporated by reference in § 1910.6;

1910.133(b)(1)(ii) ANSI Z87.1-1989 (R-1998), "American National Standard Practice for Occupational and Educational Eye and Face Protection," which is incorporated by reference in § 1910.6; or

1910.133(b)(1)(iii) ANSI Z87.1-1989, "American National Standard Practice for Occupational and Educational Eye and Face Protection," which is incorporated by reference in § 1910.6.

1910.133(b)(2) Protective eye and face protection devices that the employer demonstrates are at least as effective as protective eye and face protection devices that are constructed in accordance with one of the above consensus standards will be deemed to be in compliance with the requirements of this section.


http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owalink.query_links?src_doc_type=STANDARDS&src_unique_file=1910_0133&src_anchor_name=1910.133(b)(2)

Does OSHA use them for enforcement?

Recognize that these are voluntary standards.

But, sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t.

The OSHA Field Operations Manual (Sept. 2009)

“These private standards cannot be enforced as OSHAstandards, but they may be used to provide evidenceof industry recognition, seriousness of the hazard orfeasibility of abatement methods”.


1. Development of New Standards

Congress issued the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 USC §272

OMB Circular A – 119 (1998)

Agencies must use unless inconsistent with law or otherwise impractical

Agencies must consult with consensus standards bodies and participate in standards development.

May adopt only portions or incorporate by reference.


2. Di Minimis Conditions

Where an employer has implemented a measure different than the one specified in the standard, that has no direct of immediate relationship to safety or health.

If the employer complies with a proposed OSHA standard or amendment or a consensus standard that provides equal or greater employee protection.

Documented but no citation issued.


Example

Fixed industrial ladders

Standard 1910.27(d)(2)

Landings at 30 feet

Proposed Standard: Walking & Working Surfaces (1990, 2003, 2010)

Landings at 50 feet

ANSI – ASC A14.3 – 2008

Landings at 50 feet


3. General Duty Clause: 5(a)(1)

29 USC 654 SEC. 5. Duties (a) Each employer --

(1) shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees;


Elements of the Violation

► The employer failed to keep the workplace free of a hazard to which employees of that employer were exposed;

► The hazard was recognized;

► The hazard was causing or was likely to cause death or serious physical harm; and

► There was a feasible and useful method to correct the hazard.


Nuances of General Duty

Hazards cited must present the possibility of death or great bodily harm

Exposure of the cited employer’s own employees

Used only where no existing OSHA standard applies to the particular hazard


What is the role of the consensus standard?

Evidence that the hazard is recognized in the industry

Evidence of the seriousness of the hazard

Feasibility of the abatement methods


4. Use in Tort Cases

Frequently used to establish the “standard of care” in litigation.

OSHA’s use of the consensus standard gives it more weight.


GENERAL INDUSTRY EXAMPLES


National Fire Protection Association 70E

Has not been adopted by OSHA

When a serious shock or arc-flash incident

1910.335(a)(1)(i) for PPE

1910.132(d)(1) for PPE assessments

General duty clause


ANSI/ASSE Z244.1-2003 Control of Hazardous Energy – Lockout Tagout

1910.147

Can be used as a guide

Energy control procedures

Parts are considered not as effective

Alternative methods

Tagout use


ANSI B11.3: Safety Requirements for Power Press Brakes

Hazard: GUARDING

Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: a) Shop - The points of operation of press brakes were not protected by guards or guarding devices. As an alternative, the employer had not developed and implemented a safe distance program. On or about 03/01/2010. NOTE: One feasible abatement method would be to develop and implement a safe distance program that complies with the requirements of ANSI B11.3-1982 and OSHA Directive CPL 2-1.25.


NFPA 654 - 2006: Standard for the Prevention of Fires and Dust Explosions ….

Hazard: DUST&FUMES

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety: Employees were exposed to an explosion hazard due an accumulation of dust/powder produced during rubber processing at mixing area from dust/powder containing carbon black, sulfur and other synthetic rubber manufacturing materials, including but not limited to, HRJ-2765 (thermoplastic phenolic resin), OT TMTD (thiram), zinc oxide and Crystex HD OT 20, during the mixing process. Among other methods of abatement, one feasible method would be to follow the guidelines laid out in the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 654, Standard for the Prevention of Fires and Dust Explosions from the Manufacturing, Processing and Handling of Combustible Particulate Solids (2006 Edition.)


CONSTRUCTION EXAMPLES


ANSI B30.5-1968: Mobile and Locomotive Cranes

Hazard: STRUCK BY

Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: (a)Highway 32, Water Valley, MS - On or about March 18, 2010 the employer did not ensure that the load hook, ball assembly and load block used by an American Crawler Crane to lift a 5200 pound concrete bucket was equipped with a latch for the hook and a label with rated capacity and weight. One feasible and used abatement method for correcting this hazard, among others, is to, comply with American National Standard (ANSI/ASME B30.5b - 1985) for Mobile and Locomotive Cranes, paragraph 5-1.7.6: All hook and ball assemblies and load blocks shall be labeled with their rated capacity and weight. Hooks shall be equipped with latches.


ANSI A14.4-1992: Job Made Wooden Ladders

Hazard: FALLING

Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: New Design Construction did not ensure that employees were protected from fall hazards, in that employees used a job made wooden ladder without the filler blocks inserted between the cleats. Among other methods one feasible and acceptable abatement method to correct this hazardous condition would be to develop and implement procedures and training, in accordance with ANSI A14.4-1992, for proper job made wooden ladders.


ANSI /SAI A92.6: Self-Propelled Elevating Work Platforms

Hazard: FALLING

Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: On or about January 14, 2010, and at times thereto, at the work-site located at 611 Columbia Street in Helena, Arkansas, employees working from a self-propelled elevating work platform [Upright Model XRT 33 S/N 2810] were exposed to injuries from falls should the scissor lift malfunction causing a collapse, overturn or other adverse action because the employer/user did not ensure or cause an annual inspection to be performed on the lift prior to use. One feasible method of abatement, among others is to ensure or cause annual inspections to be performed in accordance with Section 6.7, ANNUAL INSPECTION of the American National Standard Institute, ANSI/SIA A92.6-1999.


ANSI/ASME B56.6: Safety Standard for Rough Terrain Forklift Trucks

Hazard: LIFTING

Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. On or about March 15, 2010, an employee working on a commercial building on the north side was exposed to fall hazards at a height of up to approximately 6 feet by standing on the forks of a forklift to remove a lifting strap off a beam. Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable means to abate this hazard is to use a work platform that is designed in accordance with American Society of Mechanical Engineers ANSI/ASME B56.6-6-2002, Safety Standards for Rough Terrain Forklift Trucks.


Summary

Consensus Standards are exceedingly important in Occupational Safety and Health

They can be the basis of standards, evidence of compliance, or support for citations

They are not always required, but……..

At the end of the day, are they really voluntary?


ANY QUESTIONS

June 3 & 4, 201027 Circle Safety & Health Consultants, LLC @ 2010

Documents

Consensus Standards