Opinion ID: 464793
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Applicability of The OSHA Regulations

Text: 18 We first consider the district court's ruling that the OSHA safety regulations pertaining to jacks, 29 C.F.R. Secs. 1910.241(d)(1) & 1910.244(a), were not applicable to the lever device used by the plaintiff at the time of the accident. The OSHA regulations pertaining to jacks are as follows: 19 Sec. 1910.241 Definitions. 20 .... 21 (d) Jack terms --(1) Jack. A jack is an appliance for lifting and lowering or moving horizontally a load by application of a pushing force. 22 Note: Jacks may be of the following types: Lever and ratchet, screw and hydraulic. 23 (2) Rating. The rating of a jack is the maximum working load for which it is designed to lift safely that load throughout its specified amount of travel. 24 Note: To raise the rated load of a jack, the point of application of the load, the applied force, and the length of lever arm should be those designated by the manufacturer for the particular jack considered. 25 .... 26 Sec. 1910.244. Other portable tools and equipment. 27 (a) Jacks --(1) Loading and marking. 28 (i) The operator shall make sure that the jack used has a rating sufficient to lift and sustain the load. 29 (ii) The rated load shall be legibly and permanently marked in a prominent location on the jack by casting, stamping, or other suitable means. 30 (2) Operation and maintenance. 31 (i) In the absence of a firm foundation, the base of the jack shall be blocked. If there is a possibility of slippage of the cap, a block shall be placed in between the cap and the load. 32 (ii) The operator shall watch the stop indicator, which shall be kept clean, in order to determine the limit of travel. The indicated limit shall not be overrun. 33 (iii) After the load has been raised, it shall be cribbed, blocked, or otherwise secured at once. 34 (iv) Hydraulic jacks exposed to freezing temperatures shall be supplied with an adequate antifreeze liquid. 35 (v) All jacks shall be properly lubricated at regular intervals. 36 (vi) Each jack shall be thoroughly inspected at times which depend upon the service conditions. Inspections shall be not less frequent than the following: 37 (a) For constant or intermittent use at one locality, once every 6 months, 38 (b) For jacks sent out of shop for special work, when sent out and when returned. 39 (c) For a jack subjected to abnormal load or shock, immediately before and immediately thereafter. 40 (vii) Repair or replacement parts shall be examined for possible defects. 41 (viii) Jacks which are out of order shall be tagged accordingly, and shall not be used until repairs are made. 42 While the district court found that the definition of a jack set out in Sec. 1910.241(d)(1) was broad enough to include the lever device, it focused upon the Note which followed as a possible limitation of the scope of the definition: Jacks may be of the following types: Lever and ratchet, screw and hydraulic. 43 Three interpretations of this Note were put before the court: a nonexclusive exemplar list of some types of jacks; a regulatory limit on the kinds of jacks which are permitted; or a definitional limit on what will be considered a jack. The court ruled that the Note was to be read as a definitional limitation. This ruling appears to have been based upon two factors. First, it had already determined that the lever device was not covered by the 1981 American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Safety Code for Jacks, B30.1, and refused to admit the Code into evidence. Although the 1981 ANSI Code definition of a jack was broad enough to cover the lever device, 1 the scope of the Code's coverage was specifically limited to general purpose, portable jacks of the following categories: hand- or power-operated hydraulic jacks, mechanical ratchet jacks, and hand- or power-operated mechanical screw jacks. Second, the court noted that some of the safety rules found in Sec. 1910:244(a) could not apply to the lever device, such as the requirement that the operator watch the stop indicator so that the limit is not overrun, Sec. 1910.244(a)(2)(iii), and the requirement that all jacks be properly lubricated at regular intervals, Sec. 1910.244(a)(2)(v). Recognizing the ambiguity of the Note, the district court cut the Gordian knot (its words) and decided that it was to be read as a definitional limitation. The court then ruled that since the lever device did not have a ratchet, it was not a jack under the OSHA definition and the safety regulations did not apply to its use. 44 It is admittedly difficult to discern the scope of this OSHA regulations on jacks from the ambiguous language of the Note. 2 We begin with what appears to be common ground, that the lever device, an appliance designed and used to lift and lower a load by the application of a pushing force, fits very nicely under the definition found in Sec. 1910.241(d)(1). Furthermore, it is not as absurd to consider a lever and fulcrum device a jack as was suggested by defense counsel. The Oxford English Dictionary offers as one definition of the word jack: 10. A machine, usually portable, for lifting heavy weights by force acting from below; in the commonest form, having a rack and a pinion wheel or screw and a handle turned by hand. Under this definition, however, we find the following quotation illustrating, among others, the usage of the word: 1886 ELWORTHY W. Somerset Word-bk., Jack, a contrivance consisting of a lever and fulcrum, used in washing carriages, to lift one side so that the wheel ... may run round freely; sometimes called a 'carriage-jack.'  The lever and fulcrum device may not be the most common form of a jack, but it does appear to be a kind of jack nonetheless. 45 Regardless of common usage, however, we must determine whether the framers of this regulation meant to include this kind of device under the safety regulations governing the use of jacks. Certainly it would appear to be within the protective purpose of the regulation to require that a lever and fulcrum device, when used in place of a more common type of jack and subjecting workers to the same kind of dangers encountered when using any other jack, be subject to the same safety regulations, in particular the one requiring that the load be blocked or cribbed once it is raised. 46 While we cannot turn to any official legislative history to aid us in determining the specific intent of those who framed this regulation, we do have available some helpful material. The OSHA regulations were derived from a Safety Code for Jacks promulgated by the American National Standards Institute. ANSI first published this Code in 1943, substantially revised it in 1975 and made further minor revisions in 1981. The OSHA jack regulations were promulgated prior to the 1975 revision 3 and are based upon the 1943 ANSI Code. 4 In fact, every provision found in the OSHA regulations is a word-for-word copy of provisions in the 1943 ANSI Code, although not everything found in the 1943 ANSI Code was incorporated into the OSHA regulations. The 1943 ANSI Code, therefore, provides a context for the ambiguous Note which it is our job to interpret. 47 Preceding the definition of a jack and the Note incorporated into the OSHA regulations as Sec. 1910.241(d), the 1943 ANSI Code contained the following provisions: 101 Scope 48 This code applies to the construction and use of all portable manually operated jacks except those which are supplied with automobiles as part of their standard tool equipment. 102 Purpose, Interpretation, and Exceptions 49 The purpose of this code is to provide reasonable safety for persons and property. It is intended to serve as a guide to manufacturers, users, insurance carriers, and regulatory authorities, and to be suitable for adoption by the latter. 50 The requirements of this code are the minimum compatible with reasonable safety and are not intended to constitute a design specification. Exceptions to the literal requirements may be granted by the enforcing authority, or alternatives permitted if it is clearly evident that reasonable safety is thus secured. 51 The scope of the 1943 ANSI Code includes all portable manually operated jacks except consumer automobile jacks. Putting this together with the broad definition of a jack as an appliance for lifting and lowering or moving horizontally a load by application of a pushing force, the lever device appears to fall within the scope of the Code if the Note is not read as a limit on the definition but as a nonexclusive illustration of possible types of jacks. 52 A comparison of the 1943 ANSI Code with the 1975 and 1981 versions suggests that the Note was meant only as an illustration. There are no drawings in the 1943 version. On the other hand, neither the 1975 nor the 1981 versions contain the Note but, instead, contain a set of figures illustrating typical Jacks covered by this Standard. They are not intended to be all inclusive. The illustrations are of manual and power screw jacks, ratchet jacks and hydraulic jacks. When the authors of the 1975 and 1981 versions of the ANSI Code decided to make specific limitations upon the kinds of jacks to be covered by the safety code, they put a limit in the scope section: B30.1 applies to general purpose, portable jacks of the following categories: hand- or power-operated hydraulic jacks, mechanical ratchet jacks, and hand- or power-operated mechanical screw jacks. 1981 ANSI Safety Code on Jacks, B30.1 Sec. 1-0.1. It, therefore, appears to us that from its broad scope the 1943 version of the ANSI Code was not intended to be as limited in its coverage as the 1975 and 1981 versions. 53 We also note that section 102 of the 1943 version on the interpretation of the requirements indicates that the code requirements are not design specifications. Thus we think the district court erred in placing so much significance on the fact that some of the regulations refer to design features, such as a stop indicator, which the lever device does not have. 54 OSHA is a remedial statute, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 651, and remedial statutes are to be liberally construed in favor of their beneficiaries. Irvington Moore v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Comm'n, 556 F.2d 431, 435 (9th Cir.1977). It would be anomalous to allow the railroad to evade the strictures of OSHA by the use of a primitive lifting device with no safety features whatsoever while enforcing the OSHA regulations when more sophisticated and safer devices are used. We conclude, therefore, that both the spirit and the letter of the OSHA regulations are followed by viewing the lever device used by the Portland Terminal Company as a jack subject to OSHA's safety requirements.