Legislative Memorandum Re: Amended Construction Safety Act Bills

LEGISLATIVE MEMORANDUM

RE: CONSTRUCTION SAFETY ACT BILLS

INT. NOS. 443-A, 1433-A, 1435-A, 1446-A, and 1448-A

 

Intro. 443-A: OPPOSE AS WRITTEN

REBNY agrees with the intent of this proposal, however, more specificity is needed.  How a crane is maintained is a more important safety consideration than the manufacture dates for the crane and its components.  An expertly maintained 35 year old crane may be safer to operate than a poorly maintained 10 year old crane.  A complete inspection of the crane is the only way to determine its useful life.

Moreover, the proposed use of load counters would not reflect the cycles performed prior to installation; would not capture the manufacturer recommendations factored into crane stress cycles; and would not help DOB establish standards.  Additionally, load counters can be costly to install, and 9 months may not provide the market sufficient time to comply with this proposal.  REBNY recommends exploring the use of crane inspections in lieu of load counters. 

 

Intro. 1433-A: OPPOSE AS WRITTEN

REBNY thanks the Council for accommodating our previous comments on additional data points to include, such as the project’s associated building permits and total square footage.  However, we believe the bill should be amended to include only data points with a direct bearing to enhancing safety research such as an analysis of worker responsibility to the accident, and exclude extraneous and possibly politically-driven data such as whether the worker is a member of a union.  

 

Intro. 1435-A: OPPOSE

As REBNY noted in our Legislative Memo, the technology necessary to comply with 3319.11 is not readily available.  Event recorders are not separate devices from a crane’s limiter and indicator systems, and thus cannot be retrofitted onto older cranes without such systems.  Moreover, the proposal would need to define the events that would trigger data collection given the finite ability to record events.  There are privacy concerns surrounding how the collected information would be used, accessed, and stored as well.  Finally, it is unlikely the data recorded could be interpreted without a comprehensive understanding of the environmental and jobsite conditions during the full data collection period.

 

Intro. 1446-A: NO POSITION

REBNY appreciates the Council’s attempt to classify license holders of certain cranes according to the depth and complexity of training and experience.  It seems to be an attempt to upgrade skills to ensure that only the most qualified operators are licensed.  However, REBNY reiterates its long-standing position that in order to recruit and retain the most qualified operators, the applicant pool must be expanded to include operators with relevant, out-of-city experience. 

 

Intro. 1448-A: GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE

REBNY appreciates the Council’s responsiveness to our previous comments, such as only requiring site safety plans on non-major projects to be created, as opposed to created and approved, to avoid DOB delays, and recognizing the shortage of licensed site safety personnel able to implement such plans.  However, the proposal should allow for these plans to be implemented by a Competent Person for Site Safety as approved by the Construction Superintendent, similar to façade project site safety plans.  Additionally, Section 3301.13.17 should be amended to allow Site Safety Managers and Coordinators to obtain a Construction Superintendent's license.