|
Text from
the OSHA Logging Preamble
Section V: Summary and
Explanation of the Final Standard
Paragraph (d) General Requirements
* * *
Gloves
Paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this final rule requires that the employer provide, at no cost
to the employee, and assure that each employee handling wire rope wears cotton gloves or
other equivalent hand protection. In the proposed rule, OSHA specified that the employer
provide hand protection consisting of suitable heavy-duty puncture-resistant gloves when
employees were working with wire rope. Several State logging standards also require the
use of gloves for employees working with wire rope (Ex. 2-18, 2-19, 2-20, 2-22, 2-23,
38K).
OSHA received many comments regarding the proposed requirement (Ex. 5-7, 5-17, 5-20,
5-27, 5-29, 5-30, 5-32, 5-35, 5-39, 5-43, 5-44, 5-45, 5-51, 5-54, 5-55, 5-62, 5-74 through
5-92; Tr. OR 104). Many commenters objected to the requiring the use of puncture resistant
gloves, such as leather gloves, for logging operations. First, commenters argued that
there are no gloves that are puncture resistant in all circumstances (Ex. 5-54; Tr. OR
104). They argued that wire rope can puncture even leather gloves. Second, several
commenters indicated that cotton gloves have become the industry standard and that their
experience had shown that medium weight cotton gloves are considered safer than leather
gloves in logging operations when punctures can occur. According to these commenters,
cotton gloves give the logger a better feel of jaggers (broken wires in a wire rope) when
they penetrate so the logger is able to quickly let go of the wire rope (Ex. 5-17, 5-74
through 5-92). They added that break-away gloves are imperative when the wire rope travels
at high speed and reaction time is critical (Ex. 5-74 through 5-92). They said that cotton
gloves, but not leather gloves, will tear away from the hand when caught by a jagger
rather than forcibly pulling the hand along with the jagger, causing the employee to fall
and possibly into the path of the log (Ex. 5-7, 5-74 through 5-92). These commenters
argued that pulling of the hand and glove could make a minor hand injury more serious such
as making a small puncture wound a tear or laceration of the skin (Ex. 5-29). Third, one
commenter indicated that cotton gloves provide adequate protection because a review of
their recordable accidents since 1982 indicated that no employee wearing cotton gloves
while handling wire rope had suffered an injury requiring medical attention (Ex. 5-45).
Fourth, these commenters said leather gloves are generally considered hazardous for
logging operations because they do not have good gripping ability on cable when wet (Ex.
5-7, 5-20, 5-43, 5-46). These commenters asserted that cotton gloves provided better
gripping ability in the same circumstances.
Fifth, commenters argued that the required gloves must be applicable and efficient for
a wide range of logging activities. One commenter pointed out that employees who use saws
also work with wire rope, and very few will take the time to change gloves between each
operation (Ex. 5-35). For these reasons, OSHA has, in this final rule, changed the
requirement for the use of hand protection to specify that cotton gloves or other
equivalent hand protection must be worn when handling wire rope.
* * *
|
Back to Top 
www.osha.gov
