New OSHA Handrail Requirements

[SrVaro]

New OSHA handrail/guardrail requirements have come into effect on Jan 17 of this year. Quoting from the new text (note all is from the same section/page):

"The height of stair rail systems installed on or after January 17 2017 (must be) not less than 42" from the leading edger of the stair read to the top surface of the rail."

"The top rail of the stair rail system may serve as a handrail only when: The height of the stair rail system is not less the 36" and not more than 38" as measured from the leading edge..."

So for any stair rail system that is to now be installed is required to have third rail? While the second quoted section allows from the top rail to act as the handrail, the system will be too short according to the first quoted section.

Ironically OSHA Figure D-13 within the section shows a top rail at 36"-38". So even their figure is out of compliance with their own requirements?

Thoughts?

 

[3DDave]

Wait a while.

 

[BAretired]

Sounds like bafflegab to me.

BA

 

[hokie66]

Another Federal agency which needs to be reigned in.

 

[JStephen]

Do you have a link to that new regulation? I'm not seeing anything on the OSHA website.

 

[JLNJ]

The OSHA "stair rail" terminology alone is confusing, so I won't attempt to use it. I am going to use "guard" to mean 42" high and "handrail" to mean the part you grasp while on the stair.

I always thought the OSHA regs were incomplete and garbled when it came to guarding along stairs. There was a time when you needed a 42" high guard at the landings, but as soon as you stepped on to a stair stringer all you had was a 34" high handrail as a guard. This is not particularly safe and I don't know why it was ever written this way. In fact, I think it was as low as 30" at one point. Very unsafe in my book, especially in something like a tall open tower.

OSHA then issued a ruling that allowed the handrail on the stair to double as a guard if it were 36" high. This was a little better but not as logical or as safe as a 42" guard. I suppose the cost of adding a rail and the space taken by the additional rail was the justification.

The way I read the new ruling is that you need both a 42" guard and a separate, lower handrail on elevated stairs (as the IBC requires). This actually is logical and was a long time overdue in coming.

For shorter stairs, or stairs not open to a fall, or stairs installed before 1/17/17, all you need is a handrail.

Another thing to note is that the OSHA hand clearance is 2.25". This is more than the 1.50" the IBC requires for accessibility. It irks me that they are different. (This disagreement might be an offshoot of the longstanding NFPA/IBC building code feud.)

 

[SrVaro]

JStephen- Here is the link that someone provided to me (I have not fully used it). I have mainly been working from a pdf copy that was also forwarded to me.

https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/ow...ption=General+Industry+-+(Standards+-+29+CFR)

JLNJ- I do not disagree with most of what you have stated.

Since we mainly do industrial work almost everything we do is non-occupied, so about 4 years ago I removed the word "handrail" and replaced it with "guardrail" for all our details and call outs. However, the new OSHA is intermixing the two terms.

Our guardrail on stairs is 36", we have never used the lower 30" even though it was allowed for similar reasoning.

The handrail clearance of 2.25" is actually a reduction, it used to be 3". In every version of code manuals I will right that OSHA requirement to make sure none of my designers use the smaller code allowed value.

 

[canwesteng]

36" spooks me when climbing stairs, I can't imagine what 30" would be like. It would feel more like a tripping hazard than anything.

 

[cadred]

It does say you can go to 38" now from the leading edge of the tread to the top surface of the rail if combining the guardrail with handrail (dual purpose). Still would rather it be 42". And SrVaro, you are correct. It used to be 3" hand clearance. I still think that ought to stay. A person with larger hands is going to have issues even at the 2.25".