Hatch Net fall protection and opening guards

NOTICE: This is an OSHA Archive Document, and may no longer represent OSHA Policy. It is presented here as historical content, for research and review purposes only.

May 21, 1993

MEMORANDUM FOR: MICHAEL G. CONNORS
Regional Administrator

FROM: ROY F. GURNHAM, Director
Office of Construction & Maritime Compliance Assistance

SUBJECT: Product Review - Hatch Net

This is in response to your memorandum of March 23, requesting the National Office to develop a unified response concerning the acceptability of the Hatch Net system. Attached is a copy of such a response sent to Superior Concrete Co., the distributor of this product.
April 20, 1993

Stephen J. Ray
President
Superior Concrete Co., Inc.
[Recipient address omitted]

Dear Mr. Ray:

This is in response to your March 2 letter to Mr. Gilbert Saulter, Regional Administrator for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in Dallas, Texas. Your letter was forwarded to this office for response to your request for review of the Hatch Net 120 fall protection system.

Please be advised that OSHA does not approve nor endorse products. The variable working conditions at jobsites and possible alterations or misapplication of an otherwise safe product could easily create a hazardous condition beyond the control of the manufacturer. Nevertheless, we have reviewed the product data enclosed with your letter and it appears that the Hatch Net 120 fall prevention system could reduce the hazards associated with hatch openings. However, the OSHA construction, maritime, and general industry regulations addressing such openings presently require the use of guardrail systems or covers. Your system would not offer equivalent protection. However, the general industry standards are currently being revised to allow the use of nets as fall protection when guardrails are infeasible (see proposed paragraphs 29 CFR 1910.28(a)(1) and (h) of the enclosed copy of the proposed rulemaking). Violations of the existing rules would, therefore, be considered as "de minimis" provided the proposed requirements are followed. A "de minimis" violation is one which has no direct or immediate relationship to employee safety or health.

With respect to your question concerning available data on hatch fall-through-type accidents, enclosed is a printout of information we have on file. If you have further questions on this data I suggest you contact Mr. Steve Newell in the Office of Statistics at (202) 219-6463.

Sincerely,
Roger A. Clark
Director
Directorate of Compliance Programs

Enclosures

[Requester letter reproduced on OSHA page; omitted here.]