Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[Chuck McCown]

I have found that the more you start a sentence with “can you help me” the 
better it is.  

From: David Sovereen 
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2018 12:00 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

I agree that those are the items to focus on with OSHA.


  Item 1:
  "The employer did not require a competent person to inspect."

Except that is incorrect.  The person who fell WAS a competent person.  He held 
a “Competent Climber” certification card from CITCA.  A significant portion of 
that training includes assessing if a tower is safe to climb in accordance with 
OSHAs rules.  A competent person is not a structural engineer.  A competent 
person is someone who has been trained on assessing if a tower is safe to climb 
in accordance with OSHAs rules.

  Item 2:
  "...the employer did not ensure complete personal fall arrest systems were 
properly used".

A policy was in place.  The person knew how to use it properly and was required 
by company policy to follow it.  Our Employee Handbook states under “Guidelines 
for Conduct” that “The following kinds of conduct are absolutely prohibited: … 
Violation of any and all safety rules.”  At some point, there needs to be 
personal accountability.

I agree that being humble and asking for help and guidance is the best 
approach, so I’ll show them what we’ve done up til now and see what they 
suggest for improvement.

David Sovereen
 
Mercury Network Corporation
2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
989.837.3790 x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989.837.3780 fax
 
Telephone |  Internet  |  Security Alarm Monitoring

david.sover...@mercury.net
www.mercury.net


 


  On Jun 6, 2018, at 8:43 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
 wrote:



  In reading this citation there are two phrases which I think get to the meat 
of what the person writing the citation intended:

  Item 1:
  "The employer did not require a competent person to inspect."
  Item 2:
  "...the employer did not ensure complete personal fall arrest systems were 
properly used".

  I've bolded what I consider the two most relevant words.   The question I'd 
be asking is what policies were actually in place at the time of the accident, 
and what was the ramifications to the employee if they didn't follow them.
Evidently providing safety gear isn't enough, the employer is responsible to 
make sure that employees actually use them.   If you had policies in place that 
required the use of the gear, and took affirmative action when an employee was 
caught violating the policies, and have now re-verified that the gear met the 
requirements, I'd go back to OSHA and ask them, what you could have done 
differently considering you've done everything correctly.

  Go into it with the mindset that if you screwed up you're going to have to 
pay these fines (or at least what you can negotiate them down to), and that you 
really want to learn what you did to screw up.   If the answer is that you did 
everything right, it will be hard for them to continue with the fines.   If 
they find you did something wrong then talk to them about how to fix it.   I've 
heard story after story like this (fortunately never had to deal with it 
myself), and it seems that a learning/compliant attitude goes a long way toward 
them being willing to drop or decrease the fines.   I'm not saying to not 
correct incorrect information (such as the rohn 25 load rating), but instead to 
take what they say and try to understand whether or not you needed to make a 
correction.

  Be mindful that the people who work for OSHA have the job to make the 
workplace safer, and I'm sure that after a workplace death they feel like there 
should be something that could have been done differently.  Hopefully they'll 
come to the realization that you were doing everything you should have been 
doing, and that you've also learned a couple things which you can do above and 
beyond that, and as a result, the fine is dropped or reduced significantly.

  On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:10 AM, David Sovereen  
wrote:

Hi All,

A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a 
Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall 
protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall 
protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put his 
harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it anyway.  He 
slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead about an hour 
later at the hospital.

We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them. 




I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He 
tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support 
5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing oneself.  
He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think they are just 
trying to come up w

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[David Sovereen]

I agree that those are the items to focus on with OSHA.

> Item 1:
> "The employer did not require a competent person to inspect."

Except that is incorrect.  The person who fell WAS a competent person.  He held 
a “Competent Climber” certification card from CITCA.  A significant portion of 
that training includes assessing if a tower is safe to climb in accordance with 
OSHAs rules.  A competent person is not a structural engineer.  A competent 
person is someone who has been trained on assessing if a tower is safe to climb 
in accordance with OSHAs rules.

> Item 2:
> "...the employer did not ensure complete personal fall arrest systems were 
> properly used".

A policy was in place.  The person knew how to use it properly and was required 
by company policy to follow it.  Our Employee Handbook states under “Guidelines 
for Conduct” that “The following kinds of conduct are absolutely prohibited: … 
Violation of any and all safety rules.”  At some point, there needs to be 
personal accountability.

I agree that being humble and asking for help and guidance is the best 
approach, so I’ll show them what we’ve done up til now and see what they 
suggest for improvement.

David Sovereen
 
Mercury Network Corporation
2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
989.837.3790 x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989.837.3780 fax
 
Telephone  |  Internet  |  Security Alarm Monitoring
 
david.sover...@mercury.net 
www.mercury.net 



> On Jun 6, 2018, at 8:43 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> In reading this citation there are two phrases which I think get to the meat 
> of what the person writing the citation intended:
> 
> Item 1:
> "The employer did not require a competent person to inspect."
> Item 2:
> "...the employer did not ensure complete personal fall arrest systems were 
> properly used".
> 
> I've bolded what I consider the two most relevant words.   The question I'd 
> be asking is what policies were actually in place at the time of the 
> accident, and what was the ramifications to the employee if they didn't 
> follow them.Evidently providing safety gear isn't enough, the employer is 
> responsible to make sure that employees actually use them.   If you had 
> policies in place that required the use of the gear, and took affirmative 
> action when an employee was caught violating the policies, and have now 
> re-verified that the gear met the requirements, I'd go back to OSHA and ask 
> them, what you could have done differently considering you've done everything 
> correctly.
> 
> Go into it with the mindset that if you screwed up you're going to have to 
> pay these fines (or at least what you can negotiate them down to), and that 
> you really want to learn what you did to screw up.   If the answer is that 
> you did everything right, it will be hard for them to continue with the 
> fines.   If they find you did something wrong then talk to them about how to 
> fix it.   I've heard story after story like this (fortunately never had to 
> deal with it myself), and it seems that a learning/compliant attitude goes a 
> long way toward them being willing to drop or decrease the fines.   I'm not 
> saying to not correct incorrect information (such as the rohn 25 load 
> rating), but instead to take what they say and try to understand whether or 
> not you needed to make a correction.
> 
> Be mindful that the people who work for OSHA have the job to make the 
> workplace safer, and I'm sure that after a workplace death they feel like 
> there should be something that could have been done differently.  Hopefully 
> they'll come to the realization that you were doing everything you should 
> have been doing, and that you've also learned a couple things which you can 
> do above and beyond that, and as a result, the fine is dropped or reduced 
> significantly.
> 
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:10 AM, David Sovereen  > wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a 
> Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall 
> protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall 
> protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put 
> his harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it 
> anyway.  He slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead 
> about an hour later at the hospital.
> 
> We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He tells 
> me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support 5,000 
> lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing oneself.  He 
> says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think they are just 
> trying to come up with reasons to fine us.
> 
> When I went through safe 

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

In reading this citation there are two phrases which I think get to the
meat of what the person writing the citation intended:

Item 1:
"The employer did not *require* a competent person to inspect."
Item 2:
"...the employer did not *ensure* complete personal fall arrest systems
were properly used".

I've bolded what I consider the two most relevant words.   The question I'd
be asking is what policies were actually in place at the time of the
accident, and what was the ramifications to the employee if they didn't
follow them.Evidently providing safety gear isn't enough, the employer
is responsible to make sure that employees actually use them.   If you had
policies in place that required the use of the gear, and took affirmative
action when an employee was caught violating the policies, and have now
re-verified that the gear met the requirements, I'd go back to OSHA and ask
them, what you could have done differently considering you've done
everything correctly.

Go into it with the mindset that if you screwed up you're going to have to
pay these fines (or at least what you can negotiate them down to), and that
you really want to learn what you did to screw up.   If the answer is that
you did everything right, it will be hard for them to continue with the
fines.   If they find you did something wrong then talk to them about how
to fix it.   I've heard story after story like this (fortunately never had
to deal with it myself), and it seems that a learning/compliant attitude
goes a long way toward them being willing to drop or decrease the fines.
 I'm not saying to not correct incorrect information (such as the rohn 25
load rating), but instead to take what they say and try to understand
whether or not you needed to make a correction.

Be mindful that the people who work for OSHA have the job to make the
workplace safer, and I'm sure that after a workplace death they feel like
there should be something that could have been done differently.  Hopefully
they'll come to the realization that you were doing everything you should
have been doing, and that you've also learned a couple things which you can
do above and beyond that, and as a result, the fine is dropped or reduced
significantly.

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:10 AM, David Sovereen 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a
> Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall
> protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall
> protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put
> his harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it
> anyway.  He slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead
> about an hour later at the hospital.
>
> We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them.
>
>
>
>
> I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He
> tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support
> 5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing
> oneself.  He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think
> they are just trying to come up with reasons to fine us.
>
> When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person
> to identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation,
> were.  When my employees go through the training, they become competent in
> determining where suitable anchor points are, do they not?
>
> If an employee is given instruction on the use of fall protection gear,
> told to always use it, and exercises bad judgement and refuses to use it,
> am I responsible?  One of my employees was there and told him to put his
> harness on and he refused.  Consequently, that employee has gone through a
> lot of turmoil putting himself through “what if” scenarios.
>
> Just looking for thoughts on this.  Fight it, and if so what approach?
> Pay it and make it go away?  Something else?
>
> Thanks,
>
> *David Sovereen*
>
> Mercury Network Corporation
> 2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
> 989.837.3790 x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989.837.3780 fax
>
> Telephone * |  *Internet*  |  *Security Alarm Monitoring
>
> david.sover...@mercury.net
> www.mercury.net
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
*Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
  

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[chuck]

Yeah, just like school "cooperate and graduate"  never paid to correct the 
error of the teacher.


-Original Message- 
From: Seth Mattinen

Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 4:58 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

On 6/6/18 9:10 AM, David Sovereen wrote:
I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He 
tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support 
5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing 
oneself.  He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think 
they are just trying to come up with reasons to fine us.




So now that Rohn has proven this is a totally false statement, have you
passed that along to OSHA or has Rohn indicated they would be interested
in talking to OSHA?

I don't think the OSHA guys are going to like being told they are wrong.

~Seth 

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[Robert Andrews]

I just looked it up on Wikipedia, right in the definition of "right" 
there is a cross reference to OSHA


On 06/06/2018 03:58 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:

On 6/6/18 9:10 AM, David Sovereen wrote:
I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday. 
 He tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to 
support 5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for 
securing oneself.  He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a 
lift.  I think they are just trying to come up with reasons to fine us.




So now that Rohn has proven this is a totally false statement, have you 
passed that along to OSHA or has Rohn indicated they would be interested 
in talking to OSHA?


I don't think the OSHA guys are going to like being told they are wrong.

~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[Seth Mattinen]

On 6/6/18 9:10 AM, David Sovereen wrote:
I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He 
tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to 
support 5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for 
securing oneself.  He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a 
lift.  I think they are just trying to come up with reasons to fine us.




So now that Rohn has proven this is a totally false statement, have you 
passed that along to OSHA or has Rohn indicated they would be interested 
in talking to OSHA?


I don't think the OSHA guys are going to like being told they are wrong.

~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[David Sovereen]

I emailed Rohn back again because I wanted to get clarification of what the 
anchor point was that was being tested, as the picture was very hard to see.  
He replied with this:

> From: Tim Rohn 
> Subject: RE: 25G Anchor Point Test
> Date: June 6, 2018 at 4:42:42 PM EDT
> To: David Sovereen 
> 
> David,
>  
> The connection is at the point where the brace connects to the leg.  They 
> should tie off around the leg and brace together.  Picture below shows the 
> location I  am referencing.  
>  
> The Tuf-Tug we sell a kit they supply similar to the attached.  Part number 
> TT05025 would be the 50’ option, sold in 50’ height increments.
>  
> 
>  
> Thanks,
> Tim Rohn
> 309.566.3037

So it would seem to me that Rohn 25s can be climbed with the same Y-lanyards we 
climb all our towers with.

David Sovereen
 
Mercury Network Corporation
2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
989.837.3790 x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989.837.3780 fax
 
Telephone  |  Internet  |  Security Alarm Monitoring
 
david.sover...@mercury.net <mailto:david.sover...@mercury.net>
www.mercury.net <http://www.mercury.net/>



> On Jun 6, 2018, at 3:40 PM,   wrote:
> 
> +1000
>  
> From: Lewis Bergman <>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 1:36 PM
> To: af@afmug.com <>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25
>  
> First, I would think Rohn would have a legitimate "3rd party" interest in 
> your citation. I would definitely see if they would like to be involved.
> I think you can still be contrite and interested in correcting your 
> procedures while searching for the truth and the right way to do things. 
> Probably how you communicate the information might be as important, in this 
> case, as what you communicate. Maybe Rohn would be interested in taking up 
> the main role to educate the OSHA guy so you can be unscathed by it.
> 
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, 9:01 AM > wrote:
>> Oh, yeah, position lanyard, not the shock arrest lanyard. 
>>  
>> From: Mathew Howard <>
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 12:45 PM
>> To: af <>
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25
>> I'm assuming he means you need to have a shorter lanyard than normal 
>> well, a position lanyard shouldn't be stretching anyway, should it?
>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:39 PM, > wrote:
>>> Aren’t most lanyards designed to stretch out to the 6 foot mark when 
>>> falling?  In other words, even if you had it positioned right in front of 
>>> your face, you will still drop 6 feet, right?
>>>  
>>> From: Sean Heskett <>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 12:24 PM
>>> To: af@afmug.com <>
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25
>>>  
>>> I'm so sorry to hear about your loss.
>>>  
>>> ROHN 25 is **not** compliant for the 5,000lb drop from 6' but it is from 3' 
>>> so you always have to have a 3' position lanyard holding you, even while 
>>> you climb.  
>>>  
>>> I would contact CITCA (or we use https://www.safetyoneinc.com 
>>> <https://www.safetyoneinc.com/> ) or any other trainer to give you 
>>> documentation about the ROHN 25.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> -Sean
>>>  
>>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:10 AM, David Sovereen >> <>> wrote:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>  
>>>> A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a 
>>>> Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall 
>>>> protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall 
>>>> protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put 
>>>> his harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it 
>>>> anyway.  He slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead 
>>>> about an hour later at the hospital.
>>>>  
>>>> We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them.
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He 
>>>> tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support 
>>>> 5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing 
>>>> oneself.  He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think 
>>>> they are just trying to come up with reasons to fine us.
>>>>  
>>>> When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person 
>>>> to identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation, 
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[chuck]

+1000

From: Lewis Bergman 
Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 1:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

First, I would think Rohn would have a legitimate "3rd party" interest in your 
citation. I would definitely see if they would like to be involved. 
I think you can still be contrite and interested in correcting your procedures 
while searching for the truth and the right way to do things. Probably how you 
communicate the information might be as important, in this case, as what you 
communicate. Maybe Rohn would be interested in taking up the main role to 
educate the OSHA guy so you can be unscathed by it.


On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, 9:01 AM  wrote:

  Oh, yeah, position lanyard, not the shock arrest lanyard.  

  From: Mathew Howard 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 12:45 PM
  To: af 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25
  I'm assuming he means you need to have a shorter lanyard than normal 
well, a position lanyard shouldn't be stretching anyway, should it?

  On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:39 PM,  wrote:

Aren’t most lanyards designed to stretch out to the 6 foot mark when 
falling?  In other words, even if you had it positioned right in front of your 
face, you will still drop 6 feet, right?

From: Sean Heskett 
Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 12:24 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

I'm so sorry to hear about your loss.

ROHN 25 is **not** compliant for the 5,000lb drop from 6' but it is from 3' 
so you always have to have a 3' position lanyard holding you, even while you 
climb.   

I would contact CITCA (or we use https://www.safetyoneinc.com ) or any 
other trainer to give you documentation about the ROHN 25.


-Sean

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:10 AM, David Sovereen 
 wrote:

  Hi All,

  A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a 
Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall 
protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall 
protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put his 
harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it anyway.  He 
slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead about an hour 
later at the hospital.

  We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them. 




  I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He 
tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support 
5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing oneself.  
He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think they are just 
trying to come up with reasons to fine us.

  When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person 
to identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation, were.  
When my employees go through the training, they become competent in determining 
where suitable anchor points are, do they not?

  If an employee is given instruction on the use of fall protection gear, 
told to always use it, and exercises bad judgement and refuses to use it, am I 
responsible?  One of my employees was there and told him to put his harness on 
and he refused.  Consequently, that employee has gone through a lot of turmoil 
putting himself through “what if” scenarios.

  Just looking for thoughts on this.  Fight it, and if so what approach?  
Pay it and make it go away?  Something else?

  Thanks,

  David Sovereen

  Mercury Network Corporation
  2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
  989.837.3790 x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989.837.3780 fax

  Telephone |  Internet  |  Security Alarm Monitoring

  david.sover...@mercury.net
  www.mercury.net

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[Lewis Bergman]

First, I would think Rohn would have a legitimate "3rd party" interest in
your citation. I would definitely see if they would like to be involved.
I think you can still be contrite and interested in correcting your
procedures while searching for the truth and the right way to do things.
Probably how you communicate the information might be as important, in this
case, as what you communicate. Maybe Rohn would be interested in taking up
the main role to educate the OSHA guy so you can be unscathed by it.

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, 9:01 AM  wrote:

> Oh, yeah, position lanyard, not the shock arrest lanyard.
>
> *From:* Mathew Howard
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 6, 2018 12:45 PM
> *To:* af
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25
> I'm assuming he means you need to have a shorter lanyard than normal
> well, a position lanyard shouldn't be stretching anyway, should it?
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:39 PM,  wrote:
>
>> Aren’t most lanyards designed to stretch out to the 6 foot mark when
>> falling?  In other words, even if you had it positioned right in front of
>> your face, you will still drop 6 feet, right?
>>
>> *From:* Sean Heskett
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 6, 2018 12:24 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25
>>
>> I'm so sorry to hear about your loss.
>>
>> ROHN 25 is **not** compliant for the 5,000lb drop from 6' but it is from
>> 3' so you always have to have a 3' position lanyard holding you, even while
>> you climb.
>>
>> I would contact CITCA (or we use https://www.safetyoneinc.com ) or any
>> other trainer to give you documentation about the ROHN 25.
>>
>>
>> -Sean
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:10 AM, David Sovereen <
>> david.sover...@mercury.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed
>>> a Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall
>>> protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall
>>> protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put
>>> his harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it
>>> anyway.  He slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead
>>> about an hour later at the hospital.
>>>
>>> We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He
>>> tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support
>>> 5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing
>>> oneself.  He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think
>>> they are just trying to come up with reasons to fine us.
>>>
>>> When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person
>>> to identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation,
>>> were.  When my employees go through the training, they become competent in
>>> determining where suitable anchor points are, do they not?
>>>
>>> If an employee is given instruction on the use of fall protection gear,
>>> told to always use it, and exercises bad judgement and refuses to use it,
>>> am I responsible?  One of my employees was there and told him to put his
>>> harness on and he refused.  Consequently, that employee has gone through a
>>> lot of turmoil putting himself through “what if” scenarios.
>>>
>>> Just looking for thoughts on this.  Fight it, and if so what approach?
>>> Pay it and make it go away?  Something else?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> *David Sovereen*
>>>
>>> Mercury Network Corporation
>>> 2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=2719+%0D%0AAshman+Street,+Midland,+MI+48640+989=gmail=g>
>>> 989
>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=2719+%0D%0A++Ashman+Street,+Midland,+MI+48640+989=gmail=g>.837.3790
>>> x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989
>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=2719+%0D%0AAshman+Street,+Midland,+MI+48640+989=gmail=g>
>>> .837.3780 fax
>>>
>>> Telephone *|  *Internet*  |  *Security Alarm Monitoring
>>>
>>> david.sover...@mercury.net
>>> www.mercury.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[chuck]

Oh, yeah, position lanyard, not the shock arrest lanyard.  

From: Mathew Howard 
Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 12:45 PM
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

I'm assuming he means you need to have a shorter lanyard than normal well, 
a position lanyard shouldn't be stretching anyway, should it?


On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:39 PM,  wrote:

  Aren’t most lanyards designed to stretch out to the 6 foot mark when falling? 
 In other words, even if you had it positioned right in front of your face, you 
will still drop 6 feet, right?

  From: Sean Heskett 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 12:24 PM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

  I'm so sorry to hear about your loss.

  ROHN 25 is **not** compliant for the 5,000lb drop from 6' but it is from 3' 
so you always have to have a 3' position lanyard holding you, even while you 
climb.   

  I would contact CITCA (or we use https://www.safetyoneinc.com ) or any other 
trainer to give you documentation about the ROHN 25.


  -Sean

  On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:10 AM, David Sovereen  
wrote:

Hi All,

A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a 
Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall 
protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall 
protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put his 
harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it anyway.  He 
slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead about an hour 
later at the hospital.

We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them. 




I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He 
tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support 
5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing oneself.  
He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think they are just 
trying to come up with reasons to fine us.

When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person to 
identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation, were.  
When my employees go through the training, they become competent in determining 
where suitable anchor points are, do they not?

If an employee is given instruction on the use of fall protection gear, 
told to always use it, and exercises bad judgement and refuses to use it, am I 
responsible?  One of my employees was there and told him to put his harness on 
and he refused.  Consequently, that employee has gone through a lot of turmoil 
putting himself through “what if” scenarios.

Just looking for thoughts on this.  Fight it, and if so what approach?  Pay 
it and make it go away?  Something else?

Thanks,

David Sovereen

Mercury Network Corporation
2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
989.837.3790 x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989.837.3780 fax

Telephone |  Internet  |  Security Alarm Monitoring

david.sover...@mercury.net
www.mercury.net

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[Robert Andrews]

Sorry to hear about your son..  True tragic..

I sure hope OSHA doesn't read this list...

On 06/06/2018 09:49 AM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
First, let me say that I am so sorry that your employee caused so much 
grief for all involved.
I am rabid about seat belt use.  I lost a son, who was wearing a 
seatbelt in a wreck.  My wife was driving.  She was saved by her seat 
belt so I am thankful for that.  I was an EMT for a while and have seen 
people walk away from horrific accidents because they simply buckled up. 
Same car dead people came out of the windshield.
There is only so much you can do.  If the other employee did not have 
the authority to fire the guy, he did everything he could do.  He 
shouldn’t beat himself up because someone else chose to be stupid.
Seconds, astounding about the Rohn anchor point strength.  Have you told 
Rohn.
I got an OSHA citation once.  I went in with the whole company, set 
through a session where they chewed my ass for about an hour.  Then 
another hour of training, then we were on probation for a while with 
periodic visits.  They reduced my $25K find to $2500.
The main take-away from the experience is that you need to show a “ 
compliant attitude”.  Fall all over yourself showing them that you need 
to learn how to do things better and you need their help to learn better 
methods etc.  Kiss their ass, treat them as gods, and in the process you 
may actually learn valuable things.  But that whole showing a “broken 
heart and contrite spirit” thing is key to getting the fine reduced.
Just lay on the floor and say “beat me master, I have sinned, please 
show me a better way” type of thing.

*From:* David Sovereen
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 6, 2018 10:10 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* [AFMUG] Rohn 25
Hi All,
A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed 
a Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his 
fall protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his 
fall protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him 
to put his harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed 
without it anyway.  He slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was 
pronounced dead about an hour later at the hospital.

We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them.


I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday. He 
tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to 
support 5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for 
securing oneself.  He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a 
lift.  I think they are just trying to come up with reasons to fine us.
When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person 
to identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation, 
were.  When my employees go through the training, they become competent 
in determining where suitable anchor points are, do they not?
If an employee is given instruction on the use of fall protection gear, 
told to always use it, and exercises bad judgement and refuses to use 
it, am I responsible?  One of my employees was there and told him to put 
his harness on and he refused.  Consequently, that employee has gone 
through a lot of turmoil putting himself through “what if” scenarios.
Just looking for thoughts on this.  Fight it, and if so what approach?  
Pay it and make it go away?  Something else?

Thanks,
*David Sovereen*
**
Mercury Network Corporation
2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
989.837.3790 x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free | 989.837.3780 fax
Telephone *| *Internet*  | *Security Alarm Monitoring
david.sover...@mercury.net
www.mercury.net <http://www.mercury.net/>




Hi All,

A little background: We had an employee die late last year. He climbed a 
Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his 
fall protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his 
fall protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him 
to put his harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed 
without it anyway.  He slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was 
pronounced dead about an hour later at the hospital.


We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them.



I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He 
tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to 
support 5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for 
securing oneself.  He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a 
lift.  I think they are just trying to come up with reasons to fine us.


When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person 
to identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation,

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[Mathew Howard]

I'm assuming he means you need to have a shorter lanyard than normal
well, a position lanyard shouldn't be stretching anyway, should it?

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:39 PM,  wrote:

> Aren’t most lanyards designed to stretch out to the 6 foot mark when
> falling?  In other words, even if you had it positioned right in front of
> your face, you will still drop 6 feet, right?
>
> *From:* Sean Heskett
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 6, 2018 12:24 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25
>
> I'm so sorry to hear about your loss.
>
> ROHN 25 is **not** compliant for the 5,000lb drop from 6' but it is from
> 3' so you always have to have a 3' position lanyard holding you, even while
> you climb.
>
> I would contact CITCA (or we use https://www.safetyoneinc.com ) or any
> other trainer to give you documentation about the ROHN 25.
>
>
> -Sean
>
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:10 AM, David Sovereen <
> david.sover...@mercury.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a
>> Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall
>> protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall
>> protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put
>> his harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it
>> anyway.  He slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead
>> about an hour later at the hospital.
>>
>> We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He
>> tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support
>> 5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing
>> oneself.  He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think
>> they are just trying to come up with reasons to fine us.
>>
>> When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person
>> to identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation,
>> were.  When my employees go through the training, they become competent in
>> determining where suitable anchor points are, do they not?
>>
>> If an employee is given instruction on the use of fall protection gear,
>> told to always use it, and exercises bad judgement and refuses to use it,
>> am I responsible?  One of my employees was there and told him to put his
>> harness on and he refused.  Consequently, that employee has gone through a
>> lot of turmoil putting himself through “what if” scenarios.
>>
>> Just looking for thoughts on this.  Fight it, and if so what approach?
>> Pay it and make it go away?  Something else?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> *David Sovereen*
>>
>> Mercury Network Corporation
>> 2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
>> 989
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=2719+%0D%0A++Ashman+Street,+Midland,+MI+48640+989=gmail=g>.837.3790
>> x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989.837.3780 fax
>>
>> Telephone *|  *Internet*  |  *Security Alarm Monitoring
>>
>> david.sover...@mercury.net
>> www.mercury.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[chuck]

Aren’t most lanyards designed to stretch out to the 6 foot mark when falling?  
In other words, even if you had it positioned right in front of your face, you 
will still drop 6 feet, right?

From: Sean Heskett 
Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 12:24 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

I'm so sorry to hear about your loss.

ROHN 25 is **not** compliant for the 5,000lb drop from 6' but it is from 3' so 
you always have to have a 3' position lanyard holding you, even while you 
climb.   

I would contact CITCA (or we use https://www.safetyoneinc.com ) or any other 
trainer to give you documentation about the ROHN 25.


-Sean

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:10 AM, David Sovereen  
wrote:

  Hi All,

  A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a 
Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall 
protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall 
protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put his 
harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it anyway.  He 
slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead about an hour 
later at the hospital.

  We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them. 




  I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He tells 
me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support 5,000 lbs 
and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing oneself.  He says 
all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think they are just trying to 
come up with reasons to fine us.

  When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person to 
identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation, were.  
When my employees go through the training, they become competent in determining 
where suitable anchor points are, do they not?

  If an employee is given instruction on the use of fall protection gear, told 
to always use it, and exercises bad judgement and refuses to use it, am I 
responsible?  One of my employees was there and told him to put his harness on 
and he refused.  Consequently, that employee has gone through a lot of turmoil 
putting himself through “what if” scenarios.

  Just looking for thoughts on this.  Fight it, and if so what approach?  Pay 
it and make it go away?  Something else?

  Thanks,

  David Sovereen

  Mercury Network Corporation
  2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
  989.837.3790 x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989.837.3780 fax

  Telephone |  Internet  |  Security Alarm Monitoring

  david.sover...@mercury.net
  www.mercury.net

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[Jaime Solorza]

Sorry to both of you for your loss.  I have physically stopped guys from
climbing without gear.  But if someone is hell bent to be stupid not much
you can do.

Jaime Solorza

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, 10:49 AM  wrote:

> First, let me say that I am so sorry that your employee caused so much
> grief for all involved.
> I am rabid about seat belt use.  I lost a son, who was wearing a seatbelt
> in a wreck.  My wife was driving.  She was saved by her seat belt so I am
> thankful for that.  I was an EMT for a while and have seen people walk away
> from horrific accidents because they simply buckled up.  Same car dead
> people came out of the windshield.
>
> There is only so much you can do.  If the other employee did not have the
> authority to fire the guy, he did everything he could do.  He shouldn’t
> beat himself up because someone else chose to be stupid.
>
> Seconds, astounding about the Rohn anchor point strength.  Have you told
> Rohn.
>
> I got an OSHA citation once.  I went in with the whole company, set
> through a session where they chewed my ass for about an hour.  Then another
> hour of training, then we were on probation for a while with periodic
> visits.  They reduced my $25K find to $2500.
>
> The main take-away from the experience is that you need to show a “
> compliant attitude”.  Fall all over yourself showing them that you need to
> learn how to do things better and you need their help to learn better
> methods etc.  Kiss their ass, treat them as gods, and in the process you
> may actually learn valuable things.  But that whole showing a “broken heart
> and contrite spirit” thing is key to getting the fine reduced.
>
> Just lay on the floor and say “beat me master, I have sinned, please show
> me a better way” type of thing.
>
> *From:* David Sovereen
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 6, 2018 10:10 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Rohn 25
>
> Hi All,
>
> A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a
> Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall
> protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall
> protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put
> his harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it
> anyway.  He slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead
> about an hour later at the hospital.
>
> We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them.
>
>
> --
>
>
> I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He
> tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support
> 5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing
> oneself.  He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think
> they are just trying to come up with reasons to fine us.
>
> When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person
> to identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation,
> were.  When my employees go through the training, they become competent in
> determining where suitable anchor points are, do they not?
>
> If an employee is given instruction on the use of fall protection gear,
> told to always use it, and exercises bad judgement and refuses to use it,
> am I responsible?  One of my employees was there and told him to put his
> harness on and he refused.  Consequently, that employee has gone through a
> lot of turmoil putting himself through “what if” scenarios.
>
> Just looking for thoughts on this.  Fight it, and if so what approach?
> Pay it and make it go away?  Something else?
>
> Thanks,
>
> *David Sovereen*
>
> Mercury Network Corporation
> 2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
> 989.837.3790 x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989.837.3780 fax
>
> Telephone *|  *Internet*  |  *Security Alarm Monitoring
>
> david.sover...@mercury.net
> www.mercury.net
>
> --
>
>
> --
> Hi All,
>
> A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a
> Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall
> protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall
> protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put
> his harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it
> anyway.  He slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead
> about an hour later at the hospital.
>
> We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them.
>
>
>
> I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He
> tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested b

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[Sean Heskett]

I'm so sorry to hear about your loss.

ROHN 25 is **not** compliant for the 5,000lb drop from 6' but it is from 3'
so you always have to have a 3' position lanyard holding you, even while
you climb.

I would contact CITCA (or we use https://www.safetyoneinc.com ) or any
other trainer to give you documentation about the ROHN 25.


-Sean

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:10 AM, David Sovereen 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a
> Rohn 25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall
> protection gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall
> protection gear was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put
> his harness on, but he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it
> anyway.  He slipped, fell approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead
> about an hour later at the hospital.
>
> We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them.
>
>
>
>
> I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He
> tells me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support
> 5,000 lbs and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing
> oneself.  He says all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think
> they are just trying to come up with reasons to fine us.
>
> When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person
> to identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation,
> were.  When my employees go through the training, they become competent in
> determining where suitable anchor points are, do they not?
>
> If an employee is given instruction on the use of fall protection gear,
> told to always use it, and exercises bad judgement and refuses to use it,
> am I responsible?  One of my employees was there and told him to put his
> harness on and he refused.  Consequently, that employee has gone through a
> lot of turmoil putting himself through “what if” scenarios.
>
> Just looking for thoughts on this.  Fight it, and if so what approach?
> Pay it and make it go away?  Something else?
>
> Thanks,
>
> *David Sovereen*
>
> Mercury Network Corporation
> 2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
> 989.837.3790 x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989.837.3780 fax
>
> Telephone * |  *Internet*  |  *Security Alarm Monitoring
>
> david.sover...@mercury.net
> www.mercury.net
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

[chuck]

First, let me say that I am so sorry that your employee caused so much grief 
for all involved.
I am rabid about seat belt use.  I lost a son, who was wearing a seatbelt in a 
wreck.  My wife was driving.  She was saved by her seat belt so I am thankful 
for that.  I was an EMT for a while and have seen people walk away from 
horrific accidents because they simply buckled up.  Same car dead people came 
out of the windshield.

There is only so much you can do.  If the other employee did not have the 
authority to fire the guy, he did everything he could do.  He shouldn’t beat 
himself up because someone else chose to be stupid.  

Seconds, astounding about the Rohn anchor point strength.  Have you told Rohn.

I got an OSHA citation once.  I went in with the whole company, set through a 
session where they chewed my ass for about an hour.  Then another hour of 
training, then we were on probation for a while with periodic visits.  They 
reduced my $25K find to $2500.

The main take-away from the experience is that you need to show a “ compliant 
attitude”.  Fall all over yourself showing them that you need to learn how to 
do things better and you need their help to learn better methods etc.  Kiss 
their ass, treat them as gods, and in the process you may actually learn 
valuable things.  But that whole showing a “broken heart and contrite spirit” 
thing is key to getting the fine reduced.  

Just lay on the floor and say “beat me master, I have sinned, please show me a 
better way” type of thing.  

From: David Sovereen 
Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 10:10 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] Rohn 25

Hi All,

A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a Rohn 
25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall protection 
gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall protection gear 
was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put his harness on, but 
he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it anyway.  He slipped, fell 
approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead about an hour later at the 
hospital.

We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them. 







I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He tells 
me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support 5,000 lbs 
and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing oneself.  He says 
all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think they are just trying to 
come up with reasons to fine us.

When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person to 
identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation, were.  
When my employees go through the training, they become competent in determining 
where suitable anchor points are, do they not?

If an employee is given instruction on the use of fall protection gear, told to 
always use it, and exercises bad judgement and refuses to use it, am I 
responsible?  One of my employees was there and told him to put his harness on 
and he refused.  Consequently, that employee has gone through a lot of turmoil 
putting himself through “what if” scenarios.

Just looking for thoughts on this.  Fight it, and if so what approach?  Pay it 
and make it go away?  Something else?

Thanks,

David Sovereen
 
Mercury Network Corporation
2719 Ashman Street, Midland, MI 48640
989.837.3790 x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free |  989.837.3780 fax
 
Telephone |  Internet  |  Security Alarm Monitoring

david.sover...@mercury.net
www.mercury.net










Hi All,

A little background: We had an employee die late last year.  He climbed a Rohn 
25 tower at a residential customer location and did not use his fall protection 
gear.  He went through safe climb training at CITCA, his fall protection gear 
was in his truck, and a co-worker with him told him to put his harness on, but 
he exercised poor judgement and climbed without it anyway.  He slipped, fell 
approximately 30 feet, and was pronounced dead about an hour later at the 
hospital.

We received two OSHA Citations today.  I’ve attached them.



I spoke with the OSHA representative handling our matter on Friday.  He tells 
me that Rohn 25s have not been tested by the manufacturer to support 5,000 lbs 
and therefore are not a suitable anchor point for securing oneself.  He says 
all work on Rohn 25s must be done from a lift.  I think they are just trying to 
come up with reasons to fine us.

When I went through safe tower climbing, *I* became the competent person to 
identify where suitable anchor points, using the 5,000 lb estimation, were.  
When my employees go through the training, they become competent in determining 
where suitable anchor points are, do

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25 on metal building

[Lewis Bergman]

The standard is 80%. You have to be careful that you don't exceed the
compression specs of the tower and those bolts that resist down force. As
you move guy anchors in you have to go up in guy size and tension. If you
buy the sections new Rohn will engineer it for you free. You need to fill
out their web form.

I would be worried about putting your load on a RG25 that close to a
building. That makes it a class 1 which means it will damage people or
property if it fails.

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018, 11:52 PM Steve Jones  wrote:

> imho, 120 foot of 25g may be cost effective today but full of regret down
> the road, unless youre meticulous about inspecting and building to rohn
> spec. theyre super easy to twist, very prone to the bolt holes wallowing
> out, and if your drainage isnt right, they love to have blowouts. dont
> skimp on the guy brackets and just loop the leg, thats effectively
> installing a saw. im personally terrified of 25g over 50 foot, its so cheap
> people skimp on both upfront build and maintenance. I know this, i put in
> enough of them incorrectly before i knew better. there are margins in the
> spec, but thats for your safety.
> calculate out the value of the farmland you lose over the anticipated life
> of the tower, you might find you have alot more budget for an appropriate
> self supporter
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 10:53 PM, Chuck Hogg  wrote:
>
>> I've always done 80% of the height for the farthest distance of the guy
>> wires.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Chuck
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 9:55 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:
>>
>>> So you guys convinced me to build on the dirt, much easier. Now what is
>>> the smallest span of guys I can get away with? I want to do 12 sections of
>>> 25G and I can guy it 3 or 4 times, I'm assuming 4 is better. I really want
>>> to keep the guys in as close as possible to save the valuable farming space
>>> I have, so what is the guy span from the tower base that would be
>>> recommended ? "how low can i go?" (without making any safety issues, this
>>> tower will only have 4 sectors and a 2ft dish at 40ft).
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> TJ
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 3:32 AM, Lewis Bergman 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I would tell you that you are waisting money. 2 sections are going to
 cost you a lot less and be a better long term solution than mounting a
 tower on a building. You can use a house bracket near the top depending on
 your building design and start your guy calculations from that point.


 On Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 9:22 PM TJ Trout  wrote:

> I'm building a 40x40 or possibly 50x60 steel building. I would like to
> install a guyed 25g on the peak (about 20ft peak from ground level with
> 16ft walls)
>
> If I guy off 4 times how high can I go?
>
> Any way to do 100ft or ten sections ? I'm assuming my guy span isn't
> far out enough.
>
> I know what's on the drawings but I am looking for some real world
> feedback
>
> Thank you very much
>
> TJ
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25 on metal building

[Steve Jones]

imho, 120 foot of 25g may be cost effective today but full of regret down
the road, unless youre meticulous about inspecting and building to rohn
spec. theyre super easy to twist, very prone to the bolt holes wallowing
out, and if your drainage isnt right, they love to have blowouts. dont
skimp on the guy brackets and just loop the leg, thats effectively
installing a saw. im personally terrified of 25g over 50 foot, its so cheap
people skimp on both upfront build and maintenance. I know this, i put in
enough of them incorrectly before i knew better. there are margins in the
spec, but thats for your safety.
calculate out the value of the farmland you lose over the anticipated life
of the tower, you might find you have alot more budget for an appropriate
self supporter

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 10:53 PM, Chuck Hogg  wrote:

> I've always done 80% of the height for the farthest distance of the guy
> wires.
>
> Regards,
> Chuck
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 9:55 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:
>
>> So you guys convinced me to build on the dirt, much easier. Now what is
>> the smallest span of guys I can get away with? I want to do 12 sections of
>> 25G and I can guy it 3 or 4 times, I'm assuming 4 is better. I really want
>> to keep the guys in as close as possible to save the valuable farming space
>> I have, so what is the guy span from the tower base that would be
>> recommended ? "how low can i go?" (without making any safety issues, this
>> tower will only have 4 sectors and a 2ft dish at 40ft).
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> TJ
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 3:32 AM, Lewis Bergman 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I would tell you that you are waisting money. 2 sections are going to
>>> cost you a lot less and be a better long term solution than mounting a
>>> tower on a building. You can use a house bracket near the top depending on
>>> your building design and start your guy calculations from that point.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 9:22 PM TJ Trout  wrote:
>>>
 I'm building a 40x40 or possibly 50x60 steel building. I would like to
 install a guyed 25g on the peak (about 20ft peak from ground level with
 16ft walls)

 If I guy off 4 times how high can I go?

 Any way to do 100ft or ten sections ? I'm assuming my guy span isn't
 far out enough.

 I know what's on the drawings but I am looking for some real world
 feedback

 Thank you very much

 TJ

>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25 on metal building

[Chuck Hogg]

I've always done 80% of the height for the farthest distance of the guy
wires.

Regards,
Chuck

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 9:55 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:

> So you guys convinced me to build on the dirt, much easier. Now what is
> the smallest span of guys I can get away with? I want to do 12 sections of
> 25G and I can guy it 3 or 4 times, I'm assuming 4 is better. I really want
> to keep the guys in as close as possible to save the valuable farming space
> I have, so what is the guy span from the tower base that would be
> recommended ? "how low can i go?" (without making any safety issues, this
> tower will only have 4 sectors and a 2ft dish at 40ft).
>
> Thanks,
>
> TJ
>
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 3:32 AM, Lewis Bergman 
> wrote:
>
>> I would tell you that you are waisting money. 2 sections are going to
>> cost you a lot less and be a better long term solution than mounting a
>> tower on a building. You can use a house bracket near the top depending on
>> your building design and start your guy calculations from that point.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 9:22 PM TJ Trout  wrote:
>>
>>> I'm building a 40x40 or possibly 50x60 steel building. I would like to
>>> install a guyed 25g on the peak (about 20ft peak from ground level with
>>> 16ft walls)
>>>
>>> If I guy off 4 times how high can I go?
>>>
>>> Any way to do 100ft or ten sections ? I'm assuming my guy span isn't far
>>> out enough.
>>>
>>> I know what's on the drawings but I am looking for some real world
>>> feedback
>>>
>>> Thank you very much
>>>
>>> TJ
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25 on metal building

[TJ Trout]

So you guys convinced me to build on the dirt, much easier. Now what is the
smallest span of guys I can get away with? I want to do 12 sections of 25G
and I can guy it 3 or 4 times, I'm assuming 4 is better. I really want to
keep the guys in as close as possible to save the valuable farming space I
have, so what is the guy span from the tower base that would be recommended
? "how low can i go?" (without making any safety issues, this tower will
only have 4 sectors and a 2ft dish at 40ft).

Thanks,

TJ

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 3:32 AM, Lewis Bergman 
wrote:

> I would tell you that you are waisting money. 2 sections are going to cost
> you a lot less and be a better long term solution than mounting a tower on
> a building. You can use a house bracket near the top depending on your
> building design and start your guy calculations from that point.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 9:22 PM TJ Trout  wrote:
>
>> I'm building a 40x40 or possibly 50x60 steel building. I would like to
>> install a guyed 25g on the peak (about 20ft peak from ground level with
>> 16ft walls)
>>
>> If I guy off 4 times how high can I go?
>>
>> Any way to do 100ft or ten sections ? I'm assuming my guy span isn't far
>> out enough.
>>
>> I know what's on the drawings but I am looking for some real world
>> feedback
>>
>> Thank you very much
>>
>> TJ
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25 on metal building

[Lewis Bergman]

I would tell you that you are waisting money. 2 sections are going to cost
you a lot less and be a better long term solution than mounting a tower on
a building. You can use a house bracket near the top depending on your
building design and start your guy calculations from that point.

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 9:22 PM TJ Trout  wrote:

> I'm building a 40x40 or possibly 50x60 steel building. I would like to
> install a guyed 25g on the peak (about 20ft peak from ground level with
> 16ft walls)
>
> If I guy off 4 times how high can I go?
>
> Any way to do 100ft or ten sections ? I'm assuming my guy span isn't far
> out enough.
>
> I know what's on the drawings but I am looking for some real world
> feedback
>
> Thank you very much
>
> TJ
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25 on metal building

[Chris Fabien]

If you intent to guy to the building and not to the ground, maybe 30or 40ft
above the peak. That is also significant additional loading on the
structure, be mindful of that. Can you just put it next to the building and
guy into the ground?

On Mar 20, 2018 10:22 PM, "TJ Trout"  wrote:

> I'm building a 40x40 or possibly 50x60 steel building. I would like to
> install a guyed 25g on the peak (about 20ft peak from ground level with
> 16ft walls)
>
> If I guy off 4 times how high can I go?
>
> Any way to do 100ft or ten sections ? I'm assuming my guy span isn't far
> out enough.
>
> I know what's on the drawings but I am looking for some real world
> feedback
>
> Thank you very much
>
> TJ
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25 on metal building

[Jaime Solorza]

At 100 ft .  You usually need to be at three 120 degree points 80 ft. from
tower.

Jaime Solorza

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 8:31 PM Jaime Solorza 
wrote:

> Do you mean 4 guyed wires to the tower or 4 sets of 3 guyed wires at 120
> degrees points?
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 8:22 PM TJ Trout  wrote:
>
>> I'm building a 40x40 or possibly 50x60 steel building. I would like to
>> install a guyed 25g on the peak (about 20ft peak from ground level with
>> 16ft walls)
>>
>> If I guy off 4 times how high can I go?
>>
>> Any way to do 100ft or ten sections ? I'm assuming my guy span isn't far
>> out enough.
>>
>> I know what's on the drawings but I am looking for some real world
>> feedback
>>
>> Thank you very much
>>
>> TJ
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Rohn 25 on metal building

[Jaime Solorza]

Do you mean 4 guyed wires to the tower or 4 sets of 3 guyed wires at 120
degrees points?

Jaime Solorza

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018, 8:22 PM TJ Trout  wrote:

> I'm building a 40x40 or possibly 50x60 steel building. I would like to
> install a guyed 25g on the peak (about 20ft peak from ground level with
> 16ft walls)
>
> If I guy off 4 times how high can I go?
>
> Any way to do 100ft or ten sections ? I'm assuming my guy span isn't far
> out enough.
>
> I know what's on the drawings but I am looking for some real world
> feedback
>
> Thank you very much
>
> TJ
>

[AFMUG] Rohn 25 on metal building

[TJ Trout]

I'm building a 40x40 or possibly 50x60 steel building. I would like to
install a guyed 25g on the peak (about 20ft peak from ground level with
16ft walls)

If I guy off 4 times how high can I go?

Any way to do 100ft or ten sections ? I'm assuming my guy span isn't far
out enough.

I know what's on the drawings but I am looking for some real world
feedback

Thank you very much

TJ