Certifying Organizations React to OSHA’s Proposed Operator Certification Delay

February 19, 2014 - Earlier this month, OSHA issued a proposed rule to extend the compliance date for the crane operator certification requirement by three years, noting that its rationale for proposing the extension is “to provide additional time to consider the potential costs and benefits of possible adjustments…in future rulemaking.” The new compliance date would be Nov. 10, 2017.

 

The proposal would also extend the phase-in requirement for employers to ensure that their operators are qualified to operate the equipment. Comments must be submitted by March 12, 2014, either electronically at www.regulations.gov, the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal, or by facsimile or mail. See the Federal Register notice for submission details and additional information about the proposed rule.

 

The reaction from certifying organizations in the crane and rigging industry is one of disappointment, and anticipation.

 

Crane Institute Certification (CIC) issued a statement days after the announcement, encouraging industry stakeholders “to review the proposed rule and to submit comments.” If an extension takes place, according to CIC, then OSHA will likely re-open the rule to address putting greater responsibility on employers to verify an operator's qualifications for specific equipment and job site scenarios. It may also make changes to the requirement for operators to be tested by type and capacity, which are among the parameters of CIC’s certification program.

 

CIC stands by its position that a delay of the crane operator certification requirement is not necessary, stating that “the 22 annual fatalities the initial rule was intended to prevent will continue for the next three years.”

 

OSHA’s proposal outlines predicted cost savings for employers who have not previously certified their operators if a three-year extension is enacted. CIC questions some of these calculations. Debbie Dickinson, CIC executive director, believes the logic that certification costs will decline in three years is not based on reality. “Do we expect labor rates to decrease? The cost of cranes to drop?,” she poses. “Even if testing costs stay exactly the same, the larger cost factors are not likely to remain static. Based on an independent cost analysis, the longer certification is delayed, the higher the cost to employers.”

 

NCCER maintains it meets or exceeds the OSHA regulations originally proposed to begin in 2014. Steve Greene, vice president, says the organization is disappointed certification may be delayed another three years because safety is such a major issue in the crane and rigging industry. “We are concerned about the safety of moving this out,” says Greene. There’s a potential, he believes, for companies to procrastinate to 2016 to meet a 2017 deadline.

 

“It’s inherent that contractors do things for three reasons: the safety of employees; in an effort to produce positive revenue; and because an owner or regulator is telling us to do that,” continues Greene. “The fear is this delay means companies may delay seeking certification for their employees. A safety benefit and a level of professionalism are provided by a certified workforce.”

 

Terming the proposed delay “unfortunate,” Graham Brent, executive director of the National Commission for the Certification of Crane Operators (NCCCO), like Greene, believes the rule has “inherent safety benefits,” but knowing how OSHA’s rulemaking process works, he understands the delay came about as the agency’s attempt at fixing issues brought to its attention by the industry.

 

“In OSHA’s understanding of the rule, the biggest issue has been the meaning of certification. The CDAC committee had one understanding; OSHA had a different one. This understanding by OSHA was not written by the CDAC committee,” explains Brent. “It was part of the final rule and that’s why it took people by surprise when OSHA said someone who’s certified is deemed to be qualified. That was never part of CDAC’s understanding.”

 

Like CIC and NCCER, NCCCO’s concern is that crane owners will put training on the back burner because of a possible delay in certification. “What parts of the training community are saying is some people are canceling or postponing training plans,” he says. “If that’s the case, that’s troubling.”

 

All three certifiying organizations encourage the industry to move forward with the process of certification. “General contractors aren’t waiting,” states CIC. “They recognize the merits of certification and often make it mandatory as part of the bidding process.” Like Dickinson of CIC, Brent of NCCCO points out that many states have certification programs in place and it cannot be assumed that a delay at the national level will affect state rules.