Shared controls and staffing on two-point suspension scaffolds

January 25, 2006

Mr. Christer Hogne

[Via e-mail]

Re: Whether OSHA standards prohibit using two power hoists wired together to a single control; whether a minimum of two persons are required to be on board a two-point suspended scaffold.

Dear Mr. Hogne:

This is in response to your e-mail submitted January 26, 2005,[1] to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). You requested that OSHA address the use of power-operated hoists on two-point suspension scaffolds and the whether at least two persons must always be on board.

We have paraphrased your question as follows:

Question (1): Does the OSHA scaffold standard (Part 1926 Subpart L) permit an employer to wire together two electric hoist motors into a single control, so that one employee may operate both hoists simultaneously from one control?

Answer:

Title 29 CFR 1926.451(d)(13) provides:

Suspension scaffold power-operated hoists...shall be tested by a qualified testing laboratory.

To meet this standard, a qualified testing laboratory would have to test the two power-operated hoists wired to a single central control. In your scenario, the employer would be prohibited from using this configuration unless each hoist and the central control were all tested by a qualified laboratory after the motors were wired together.

Question (2): Does the OSHA scaffold standard (Part 1926 Subpart L) require a minimum of two persons on board a two-point suspended scaffold?

Answer:

No, Subpart L does not specify a minimum number of employees that must be on board for operation of a two-point suspension scaffold.

If you need any information on this matter, please contact us by fax at: U.S. Department of Labor, Directorate of Construction Office of Construction Standards and Guidance, (202) 693-2020. You may also contact us by mail at the above office, Room N3468, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20210, although there may be a delay in our receiving correspondence by mail.

Sincerely,

Russell B. Swanson, Director

Directorate of Construction

[1] There was no response to our requests for additional information; therefore, we are addressing your question based on the information contained in your January 26, 2005, e-mail. [ back to text ]