OSHA objection to Nevada's temporary-lighting interpretation

NOTICE: This is an OSHA Archive Document, and may no longer represent OSHA Policy. It is presented here as historical content, for research and review purposes only.

September 26, 1985
Mr. Michael Tyler, Administrator
Division of Occupational Safety and Health
Department of Industrial Relations
State of Nevada
[Recipient address omitted]
Dear Mike:
A Nevada standard interpretation, Standards Policy Memorandum 81-328 has been brought to Region IX's attention.
This interpretation allows the use of Romex for temporary lighting on construction sites.
The interpretation contradicts the memo sent by Mr. Gromachey to Mr. Traenkner, dated February 13, 1981 (copy attached).
Region IX requests that Nevada delete the interpretation and revert to 1926.401(j)(2) for compliance. Please submit a written response to this request by October 25, 1985.
Sincerely,
GABRIEL J. GILLOTTI
Assistant Regional Administrator
Office of Technical Support
Attachment
February 13, 1981
Mr. Alan Traenkner
Director
Department of Occupational Safety and Health
Nevada Industrial Commission
State of Nevada
[Recipient address omitted]
Dear Mr. Traenkner:
We have reviewed the request from State compliance personnel to allow "Romex" to be used for temporary lighting at construction sites.
The construction standard, 1926.401(j)(2), requires temporary lighting to be installed with heavy duty electric cords.
The Region would be revising the standard if Romex was an acceptable alternative, therefore, we cannot approve the use requested.
We appreciate your concern, although it is beyond our authority to accept it.
Sincerely,
Lawrence E. Gromachey
Assistant Regional Administrator
Technical Support

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

TO ALL DOSH PERSONNEL
FROM DONNA L. LEWIS, TECHNICAL SUPPORT COORDINATOR
SUBJECT TEMPORARY LIGHTING - CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
STANDARDS POLICY MEMORANDUM 81-328 29 CFR 1926.401(j)(2) and 1926.402
An opinion of whether use of Romex for temporary lighting on construction jobs is a citable hazard has been requested. It has been ruled that use of Romex for this purpose is not citable unless it can be clearly demonstrated that this constitutes an immediate hazard. Factors taken into consideration in making this decision are:

1. Historically use of Romex for temporary lighting has been occurring frequently without its creating an obvious hazard or frequent injury to employees.
2. Decisions to cite should be based on conditions as they exist at the time of the inspection, i.e., Romex must be used meeting the criteria set for placement, supports and fastening, absence of damage exposing wires, etc. Romex should be cited in any instance where "heavy duty electric cords" would have been cited under similar circumstances, e.g. worn and frayed cord; stapled or hung from nails, etc.
   Officially Romex cannot be recognized as a substitute for "heavy duty electric cords," however, we often have occasions when common sense decisions must be made regarding safety on the job. Therefore, in the absence of a recognized hazard in the use of Romex for temporary lighting on construction jobsites, citations and notices of violation will not be issued for its use.
   Donna L. Lewis
   Technical Support Coordinator