Published on: May 18, 2026
Author: Michael Bailey, P.E.
True leadership in fall protection belongs to those who actively shape the standards and regulations. Following the ANSI/ASSP Z359 Committee Meeting in Schaumburg, Illinois, our engineering team helped drive critical updates to North American safety standards. By contributing empirical data and technical expertise, we helped break decade-long industry deadlocks and advance foundational safety codes. For facility managers and employers, this direct involvement eliminates engineering guesswork, streamlines compliance, and translates complex regulatory theory into practical, cost-effective site solutions.
Takeaways
- Direct involvement in the ANSI consensus process ensures that high-level safety standards remain realistic, feasible, and optimized for real-world facility application.
- The passage of ANSI Z359.6 will establish strict verification protocols and specific dynamic loading safety factors, raising the benchmark for active, engineered fall protection systems.
- Thirty years of hands-on data from our team helped progress the long-stalled ANSI Z359.19 standard, establishing clear language for multi-user rigid rail testing and rating.
A Behind-the-Scenes Look Into the ANSI/ASSP Committee Meeting
True leadership belongs to those who sit at the table where the rules are written. From April 28 through 30 2026, our team traveled to Schaumburg, Illinois, for the ANSI/ASSP Z359 Standards Spring Committee Meeting.
During this three-day session, the Kee Safety family of brands (spearheaded by FLS) further established itself as leaders in North American safety standards. Our team contributed vital expertise, taking a definitive stand to shape the future of our industry.
Inside the Room: The Grind of Consensus
The ANSI Z359 consensus standards represent the culmination of the industry’s best minds. Every standard considers the exact needs of individuals working at height, factoring in the unique perspective of everyone involved, including the workers themselves.
To maintain objectivity, the committee comprises experts from every corner of the safety ecosystem. Representatives bring competing business and personal interests to the table, yet everyone operates with a singular, common goal: saving lives.
Here’s a snapshot of representation by Interest Category:
| Interest Category | Total | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Academia | 0 | 0.0% |
| Consulting | 2 | 2.7% |
| Consumer | 0 | 0.0% |
| Employee/Labor | 2 | 2.7% |
| Employer/User | 22 | 29.7% |
| General Interest | 9 | 12.2% |
| Government | 6 | 8.1% |
| Insurance | 3 | 4.1% |
| Manufacturer | 25 | 33.8% |
| Professional Society | 2 | 2.7% |
| Utility | 3 | 4.1% |
| Total | 74 |
Creating these standards is not a series of speeches. An ANSI meeting is a grueling, hands-on work session. For two days, subcommittees sit in intense redlining sessions to debate the specific phrasing of safety standards line by line. They meticulously review testing data, Finite Element Analysis (FEA) results, and public comments to ensure the final language is completely bulletproof.
Our team proudly represented 15% of the 26-person subcommittee responsible for these technical drafts. Our participating subject matter experts included:
- Michael Bailey, P.E.: Lead Subject Matter Expert in structural substrate interaction and dynamic load anchorage.
- Brendon Kerber, P.Eng.: Specialist in safe access platforms, utilizing advanced numerical methods and worst-case scenario simulations.
- Bill Parsons, CD, P.Eng., MIoD: A primary technical authority for Kee Safety globally, specializing in the practical application of fall arrest and restraint standards.
- Simon Zu, P.Eng.: Engineering specialist focused on custom-engineered fall protection systems and technical compliance.
A Major Milestone: ANSI Z359.6 Passes Ballot with No Negative Votes
The most significant outcome of the Schaumburg meeting was the official passage of ANSI Z359.6 (Specifications and Design Requirements for Active Fall Protection Systems). This foundational document serves as the overarching Engineered Fall Protection framework for many other standards in the series.
Z359.6 provides the rigorous guidelines that a Qualified Person must follow when designing an active system. Moving past broad generalities, it mandates specific requirements for structural integrity, strict verification protocols, and safety factors for dynamic loading. The passage of this standard establishes a clear performance benchmark, effectively raising the bar for safe, compliant engineered systems.
Scope has also expanded in this latest iteration. A brand-new appendix has been added for the in-situ testing of anchorages. This provides crucial, practical field guidance to Qualified Persons and Engineers managing both new and existing fall protection anchorages.
Breaking the 10-Year Deadlock on Z359.19
While Z359.6 crossed the finish line, our team also made major headway on ANSI Z359.19 (Rigid Rail). Because rigid rail fall protection is a primary specialization of ours, we deeply understand the complexities of dynamic forces and track deflection.
Our 30 years of hands-on experience with TriTec and FLS rigid systems provided the empirical data necessary to progress the language for these vital anchorage subsystems. After a ten-year industry stalemate, we are finally seeing real movement. The committee is successfully settling the standard language on how these systems are tested and rated for multi-user environments.
Why This Matters to You: Engineering Out the Guesswork
Our direct involvement at the ANSI level provides a distinct advantage that standard market leaders simply cannot match. By helping establish the standard, we eliminate the engineering guesswork that frequently leads to over-designed systems, ballooning project costs, and unexpected installation delays.
Flexible Lifeline System’s seat at the table allows us to drive practical innovation, ensuring high-level safety remains realistic and feasible for your facility. We translate complex regulatory theory into efficient, competitive designs, which streamlines your system’s entire lifecycle from initial engineering and installation to final compliance certification. While our competitors wait for the new standards to be published so they can study and interpret them, our engineering team is already actively building to them.
Discover more about our team or reach out to a Flexible Lifeline Systems Fall Protection Expert today.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the ANSI/ASSP Z359 Fall Protection Code?
A: The ANSI/ASSP Z359 Fall Protection Code is a comprehensive suite of voluntary consensus standards that governs safety requirements for at-height work in North American facilities. Rather than acting as a single rule, it is an interconnected framework that establishes strict criteria for the design, manufacturing, testing, and implementation of fall protection equipment. Following this code is a primary way facilities demonstrate compliance and protect workers from catastrophic fall hazards.
Q: Code vs. Standard: What is the difference?
A: While these terms are often used interchangeably, they have distinct meanings in the safety industry. A standard is a highly specific document that dictates line-by-line technical requirements for a single product, test procedure, or design method. A code is a master compilation of multiple standards organized into one comprehensive system. In this context, ANSI and ASSP explicitly named the entire collective suite of documents the Z359 Fall Protection Code. When an engineer is performing calculations or verifying an anchor, they are opening a specific piece of that code, such as the ANSI Z359.6 Standard, to follow its precise mathematical formulas. Simply put, the standards are the individual building blocks, while the code is the complete protective umbrella.
Q: What is the difference between ANSI and ASSP?
A: ANSI, the American National Standards Institute, is the overarching organization that oversees and accredits the development of voluntary consensus standards in the United States. The American Society of Safety Professionals, or ASSP, serves as the secretariat and administrator for the specific Z359 committee. In short, ASSP manages the expert committees that draft the actual technical language, while ANSI ensures the entire process remains objective, rigorous, and legally sound.
Q: How is the ANSI Z359 numbering system divided?
A: The Z359 series is broken down into individual sub-standards denoted by numbers following the decimal point. These are broadly split into two distinct structural categories. The single-digit standards, which range from dot-zero to dot-nine, establish the overarching umbrella frameworks, general system specifications, and foundational rules for safety programs. The double-digit standards, which cover dot-eleven and up, focus heavily on individual product manufacturing, component-specific testing, and hardware regulations for items like full-body harnesses, self-retracting devices, and rigid rail systems.
Q: What is the significance of the ballot passing of the ANSI Z359.6 update?
A: The passage of the updated ANSI Z359.6 standard represents a major advancement for engineered fall protection systems. It moves past broad generalities to mandate exact verification protocols, safety factors for dynamic loading, and structural integrity requirements that a Qualified Person must follow. Additionally, it introduces a brand-new appendix providing critical field guidance for the in-situ testing of both new and existing anchorages.
Q: Why do some ANSI standards take years to update or get passed?
A: ANSI operates on a strict consensus model, meaning a standard cannot advance if there are unresolved negative votes or intense industry stalemates. Because the committee is balanced with diverse interest categories including competing manufacturers, engineering consultants, employers, and government representatives, getting these groups to agree line-by-line on highly technical data requires an immense amount of work. This rigorous debate is why breaking a ten-year deadlock like the Z359.19 rigid rail standard is such a significant milestone for the industry.
Q: How does a manufacturer’s involvement in ANSI benefit the end user and the industry?
A: When a safety team sits at the committee table helping write the code, they eliminate the engineering guesswork that frequently leads to over-designed, hyper-expensive systems. While typical market competitors must wait for a standard to be officially published and then spend months interpreting it, insider engineers are already actively designing, testing, and building systems to meet the incoming compliance benchmarks. This protects your facility from unexpected installation delays and unnecessary project costs.
Furthermore, this hands-on involvement benefits the safety industry at large. It ensures that when new standards are developed, their technical writing and codification come directly from real-world installation data and field scenarios, rather than pure academic theory. This keeps high-level compliance both realistic and practical for the businesses that must implement them daily.