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 <t.r...@rohntower.com> > Subject: RE: 25G Anchor Point Test > Date: June 6, 2018 at 4:42:42 PM EDT > To: David Sovereen <david.sover...@mercury.net> > > 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, <ch...@wbmfg.com> <ch...@wbmfg.com> 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 <ch...@wbmfg.com <>> 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, <ch...@wbmfg.com <>> 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 <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%0A++++Ashman+Street,+Midland,+MI+48640+989&entry=gmail&source=g> >>>> 989 >>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=2719+%0D%0A++Ashman+Street,+Midland,+MI+48640+989&entry=gmail&source=g>.837.3790 >>>> x151 office | 888.866.4638 toll free | 989 >>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=2719+%0D%0A++++Ashman+Street,+Midland,+MI+48640+989&entry=gmail&source=g>.837.3780 >>>> fax >>>> >>>> Telephone | Internet | Security Alarm Monitoring >>>> >>>> david.sover...@mercury.net <> >>>> www.mercury.net <http://www.mercury.net/> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>>
