Standard Interpretations - (Archived) Table of Contents|
| Standard Number:||1917.46(a)(1); 1918.74(a)(9)(viii)(D)|
April 1, 1985
Mr. Lloyd F. Schmeusser
Dear Mr. Schmeusser:
This is in response to your letter dated March 26, 1985, requesting a permanent variance from Section 1917.46(a)(1) and 1918.74(a)(9)(viii)(d), concerning the conditions which must be met before a crane can avoid the requirements for a load indicating device.
Our technical staff has determined that you can meet the requirements of the standard. Enclosed is a copy of OSHA Instruction STD 2-1.7 for your guidance. You indicated in your letter that condition 3.C. is unreasonable because the 11,200 pound test is to be made at the maximum boom length and maximum radius. Specifically, condition 3.C., of the interpretation states: 11,200 pounds is less than the rated capacity of the crane at the maximum outreach that is possible under the conditions of use at the time. Therefore, if your boom is physically blocked to meet condition 3.C. and the other conditions of the interpretation are met, your crane would be in compliance with Sections 1917.46(a)(1) and 1918.74(a)(9)(viii)(d).
Affected employees and their authorized employee representatives shall be advised of the clarification in the same manner they were advised of your request for a variance.
No further action will be taken on your request for a variance. If I can be of any assistance, please contact my office at (202) 523-7193.
James J. Concannon, Director
Office of Variance Determinations
cc: Baier, Miles, White, Concannon, Barto, RA, AD, Chron Variance Case File: 1950 DTS/OVD/JConcannon/ss/4-1-85
|Standard Interpretations - (Archived) Table of Contents|