What are the benefits of buying the new TIA 1019 Standard?

Discussion in 'ANSI/TIA 1019 - Tower Installation Standards' started by Towerpro1, Apr 18, 2012.

  1. Towerpro1

    Towerpro1 Friend of the Community

    A one paragraph article in this month's NATE magazine said the new TIA 1019-A-2011 Construction Standard for the tower industry has gone into effect and you can buy it at www.asse.org . Don't bother, they don't have it. You can get it at http://www.tiaonline.org/standards/buy-tia-standards .

    But you still may not want to bother. The price for the 90 pages is $168.00.

    I understand the greater portion of it is about gin pole use and engineering, but it's now labeled the "construction standard".

    What would the average contractor gain by buying it? Does it mean if we're NOT using this "standard" we can be fined by OSHA?
  2. Amera213

    Amera213 Friend of the Community

    Does OSHA require that we have to follow the 1019 standard? Although I know that OSHA cites some ANSI standards to be followed in some of their regulations, they don't require this standard to be used.

    If an OSHA inspector came on the site and you were not following this standard could you be cited?
  3. Wireless Estimator

    Wireless Estimator Administrator Staff Member

    Does your company have to follow the 1019 Standard? Regarding the design and proper operation of a gin pole, if you were to have an inspection the first thing an OSHA official is going to ask is, "Let's see your procedures and engineering data for the gin pole."

    If it's in full accordance with TIA-1019, you're probably going to fare quite well.

    If it's not, start requesting a compliance citation check from accounting.

    If it covers TIA-1019 and exceeds the standards, you'll probably get an atta boy.

    As with a lot of standards, OSHA is aware of them, but the federal agency will not include them in any of their regulatory guidance.

    Otherwise, they would have to keep abreast of every standard and every revision.

    It's just easier for them to require compliance through the General Duty Clause 5(a)(1) that requires you to be knowledgeable that this is a hazard that must be recognized and must be correctable by using acceptable safety practices.

    The 1019 standard affords the best safety practices for the care, feeding and use of a gin pole. However, if your company had its own gin pole procedures, identifying that the current 1019 standard would not cover a gin pole application for a site specific task, you're entitled to write a procedure prior to any work.

    But it should be one based upon an engineering design and plan along with calcs and other supporting evidence that identifies that your procedures meet and exceed TIA-1019 and you train to your procedures.

    If you use a gin pole, you better spend $168 and ensure that you're using it correctly.

    OSHA only plays the end game. It's up to you to make sure you're in compliance with every standard. Following 1019 is the best line of defense against OSHA, but more importantly, it will keep your employees safe.
  4. Ed Dennis

    Ed Dennis Friend of the Community

    Craig, you are correct. As stated, OSHA simply provides the employer with "end game" and not the "how to" with respect to compliance. Since OSHA is built for power and not for speed, agility is not one of its usual attributes.

    It may take a year or more for OSHA to officially recognize a newer standard. In the interim, compliance to either version of the standard would likely be acceptable, although we should verify this with the agency for their particular situation.

    ANSI standards can also be interpreted as implicit regulations through our American legal system. The standards make a wonderful reference on how a machine or work practice should be, or more likely in the case of a trial, should have been.

    Employers or manufacturers who do not comply have a potential liability exposure if an ANSI/NFPA/ASME/TIA etc... standard indicates a method of machine design, process, operation or safeguarding that may have prevented an injury.

    It would be difficult to persuade a jury that a particular document is "just a voluntary standard" while the opposing lawyer advocates it is really the Holy Grail of safeguarding.

Share This Page