Arrestledger
A serial-level fall-protection evidence ledger that records custody, inspections and device events, places suspect equipment on hold and routes disposition to an authorized safety owner.
Fall-protection harnesses, lanyards and anchors require asset-level inspection and disposition evidence, but records often live on paper or in fleet tools not designed for personal protective equipment. Arrestledger gives each asset a serial history covering acquisition, assignment, inspection, event evidence, quarantine, authorized disposition and destruction or return to service. The supplied regulatory claim comes from a trade-site fetch rather than a primary agency or standards source, and all three referenced API capabilities remain unverified. Therefore the alleged immediate sensor mandate, per-use report requirement and certification deadline must be independently validated before the product encodes them. A sensor event is not proof that a fall occurred, that a particular force reached a worker or that equipment is safe. Missing telemetry is not evidence of no event. The product can create a fail-safe hold after a credible event, but an authorized competent person applying current law, manufacturer instructions and inspection policy decides retirement or return. A generated report preserves observed inputs and limitations; it is not regulatory compliance or legal defensibility. Asset identity, sensor event, incident report, quarantine, physical inspection, qualified disposition, system command, acknowledgement, inventory readback, worker protection and incident outcome remain separate. Success is a more complete chain and faster removal of suspect assets—not autonomous safety judgment or proof against injury.
A contractor safety, equipment or operations leader responsible for serialized fall-protection assets across crews and sites.
A recent claimed rule change creates urgency only after primary validation.
Teams need immediate fail-safe holds while sensor uncertainty and safety authority prohibit automated retirement conclusions.
Two cross-references and three inbound links support moderate convergence.
Serialized safety assets and event evidence form a concrete workflow, and vendor-neutral lifecycle history is absent from the supplied market review.
The central mandate lacks supplied primary authority, all device APIs are unverified, sensors can be wrong and safety disposition requires qualified human inspection.
Discussion
No comments yet — be the first to weigh in.
