13782 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration

29 CFR Parts 1910, 1915, 1917, and

1918

[Docket No. S–008]

Powered Industrial Truck Operator

Training

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health

Administration, Labor.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Occupational Safety and

Health Administration (OSHA) is

proposing to revise the general industry

safety standard for training powered

industrial truck operators and to add

equivalent training requirements for the

maritime industries. The existing

standard in part 1910 requires that only

trained operators who are authorized to

do so can operate powered industrial

trucks and that methods of training be

devised. The proposed training

requirements would mandate the

development of a training program that

would base the amount, type, degree,

and sufficiency of training on the

knowledge of the trainee and the ability

of the vehicle operator to acquire, retain,

and use the knowledge and the skills

and abilities that are necessary to safely

operate the truck. A periodic evaluation

of each operator’s performance would

be required. Refresher or remedial

training also would be required, based

primarily on unsafe operation, an

accident or near miss, or deficiencies

found in a periodic evaluation of the

operator.

DATES: Written comments and requests

for a hearing on this proposed rule must

be postmarked by July 12, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments, information,

and hearing requests should be sent in

quadruplicate to: Docket Office, Docket

No. S–008; Room N2624; U.S.

Department of Labor, Occupational

Safety and Health Administration; 200

Constitution Avenue NW; Washington,

DC 20210 (202–219–7894).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Richard P. Liblong, Office of

Information and Consumer Affairs, U.S.

Department of Labor, Occupational

Safety and Health Administration,

Room N3641; 200 Constitution Avenue

NW; Washington, DC 20210 (202–219–

8148).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

a. The General Industry Standard

On May 29, 1971 (36 FR 10466),

OSHA adopted some of the existing

Federal standards and national

consensus standards as OSHA standards

under the procedures described in

section 6(a) of the Occupational Safety

and Health Act (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C.

655, et.al.). Section 6(a) permitted

OSHA to adopt, without rulemaking,

within 2 years of the effective date of

the Act, any established Federal

standard or national consensus

standard.

One of the consensus standards that

was adopted under the 6(a) procedure

was the American National Standards

Institute (ANSI) B56.1–1969 Safety

Standard for Powered Industrial Trucks.

Among the provisions adopted from that

standard was the operator training

requirement codified at 29 CFR

1910.178(l), which states:

Only trained and authorized operators

shall be permitted to operate a powered

industrial truck. Methods of training shall be

devised to train operators in the safe

operation of powered industrial trucks.

In that consensus standard, a powered

industrial truck is defined as a mobile,

power-driven vehicle used to carry,

push, pull, lift, stack, or tier material.

One truck may be known by several

different names. Included are vehicles

that are commonly referred to as high

lift trucks, counterbalanced trucks,

cantilever trucks, rider trucks, forklift

trucks; high lift trucks, high lift platform

trucks; low lift trucks, low lift platform

trucks; motorized hand trucks, pallet

trucks; narrow aisle rider trucks,

straddle trucks; reach rider trucks;

single side loader rider trucks; high lift

order picker rider trucks; motorized

hand/rider trucks; or counterbalanced

front/side loader lift trucks. Excluded

from the scope of the OSHA standard

are vehicles used for earth moving or

over-the-road haulage.

b. The Maritime Safety Standards

In 1958, Congress amended the

Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’

Compensation Act (LHWCA) (44 Stat.

1424; 33 U.S.C. 901 et seq.) to provide

maritime employees with a safe work

environment. The amendments (Pub. L.

85–742, 72 Stat. 835) required

employers covered by the LHWCA to

‘‘furnish, maintain and use’’ equipment

and to establish safe working conditions

in accordance with regulations

promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.

Two years later, the Labor Standards

Bureau (LSB) issued the first set of

safety and health regulations for

longshoring activities as 29 CFR part 9

(25 FR 1565, February 20, 1960). These

regulations only covered longshoring

activities taking place aboard vessels.

Passage of the OSH Act (84 Stat. 1590;

29 U.S.C. 650 et seq.) authorized the

Secretary of Labor to adopt established

Federal standards issued under other

statutes, including the LHWCA, as

occupational safety and health

standards under the OSH Act.

Accordingly, the Secretary adopted the

existing shipyard employment and

longshoring regulations and recodified

these rules as 29 CFR parts 1915 and

1918 (39 FR 22074, June 19, 1974).

Since the OSH Act comprehensively

covered all private employment, the

longshoring standards also applied to

shoreside cargo-handling operations.

(See 29 CFR 1910.16.) The requirements

for the use of mechanically powered

vehicles used aboard vessels were

codified at § 1918.73. These provisions

did not include a requirement for the

training of vehicle operators.

In addition, in accordance with

established policy codified at 29 CFR

1910.5(c)(2), OSHA has applied its

general industry regulations to

shoreside activities not covered by its

older longshoring rules. Citations also

have been issued under section 5(a)(1)

(the General Duty Clause) of the OSH

Act (84 Stat. 1593; 29 U.S.C. 654), since

some serious hazards are not addressed

by the requirements of part 1910, 1915,

or 1918.

On July 5, 1983 (48 FR 30886), OSHA

published its final standard for Marine

Terminals. These rules were intended to

address the shoreside segment of marine

cargo handling. Section 1917.27

Personnel required that:

(a) Qualifications of machinery operators.

(1) Only those employees determined by

the employer to be competent by reason of

training or experience, and who understand

the signs, notices and operating instructions

and are familiar with the signal code in use

shall be permitted to operate a crane, winch

or other power operated cargo handling

apparatus, or any power operated vehicle, or

give signals to the operator of any hoisting

apparatus.

Exception: Employees being trained and

supervised by a designated person may

operate such machinery and give signals to

operators during training.

(2) No employee known to have defective

uncorrected eyesight or hearing, or to be

suffering from heart disease, epilepsy, or

other ailments which may suddenly

incapacitate him shall be permitted to

operate a crane, winch or other poweroperated cargo handling apparatus or a

power-operated vehicle.

The Marine Terminal Standards also

had requirements for powered industrial
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13783

trucks at § 1917.43 Powered industrial

trucks. However, these requirements

were for the operation, maintenance and

outfitting of those vehicles and did not

expand upon the training requirements

found at § 1917.27.

On June 2, 1994, OSHA published in

the Federal Register (59 FR 28594) a

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

for the revision of the longshoring and

marine terminals standards.

That NPRM did not propose to amend

significantly the aforementioned

training requirements of § 1917.27 or to

incorporate a training requirement for

longshoring (on-board vessel)

operations.

c. Updated Consensus Standard

Since promulgation of the OSHA

standards, the consensus standard

(ANSI B56.1) has undergone four

complete revisions (dated 1975, 1983,

1988 and 1993). The current consensus

standard (Ex. 3–1) states:

4.18 Operator qualifications.

Only trained and authorized persons shall

be permitted to operate a powered industrial

truck. Operators of powered industrial trucks

shall be qualified as to visual, auditory,

physical, and mental ability to operate the

equipment safely according to 4.19 and all

other applicable parts of Section 4.

4.19 Operator training.

4.19.1 Personnel who have not been

trained to operate powered industrial trucks

may operate a truck for the purposes of

training only, and only under the direct

supervision of the trainer. This training

should be conducted in an area away from

other trucks, obstacles, and pedestrians.

4.19.2 The operator training program

should include the user’s policies for the site

where the trainee will operate the truck, the

operating conditions for that location, and

the specific truck the trainee will operate.

The training program shall be presented to all

new operators regardless of previous

experience.

4.19.3 The training program shall inform

the trainee that:

(a) The primary responsibility of the

operator is to use the powered industrial

truck safely following the instructions given

in the training program.

(b) Unsafe or improper operation of a

powered industrial truck can result in: death

or serious injury to the operator or others;

damage to the powered industrial truck or

other property.

4.19.4 The training program shall

emphasize safe and proper operation to avoid

injury to the operator and others and prevent

property damage, and shall cover the

following areas:

(a) Fundamentals of the powered industrial

truck(s) the trainee will operate, including:

(1) characteristics of the powered

industrial truck(s), including variations

between trucks in the workplace;

(2) similarities to and differences from

automobiles:

(3) significance of nameplate data,

including rated capacity, warnings, and

instructions affixed to the truck;

(4) operating instructions and warnings in

the operating manual for the truck, and

instructions for inspection and maintenance

to be performed by the operator;

(5) type of motive power and its

characteristics;

(6) method of steering;

(7) braking method and characteristics,

with and without load;

(8) visibility, with and without load,

forward and reverse;

(9) load handling capacity, weight and load

center.

(10) stability characteristics with and

without load, with and without attachments;

(11) controls-location, function, method of

operation, identification of symbols;

(12) load handling capabilities; forks,

attachments;

(13) fueling and battery charging;

(14) guards and protective devices for the

specific type of truck;

(15) other characteristics of the specific

industrial truck.

(b) Operating environment and its effect on

truck operation, including:

(1) floor or ground conditions including

temporary conditions;

(2) ramps and inclines, with and without

load;

(3) trailers, railcars, and dockboards

(including the use of wheel chocks, jacks,

and other securing devices;

(4) fueling and battery charging facilities;

(5) the use of ‘‘classified’’ trucks in areas

classified as hazardous due to risk of fire or

explosion, as defined in ANSI/NFPA 505;

(6) narrow aisles, doorways, overhead

wires and piping, and other areas of limited

clearance;

(7) areas where the truck may be operated

near other powered industrial trucks, other

vehicles, or pedestrians;

(8) use and capacity of elevators;

(9) operation near edge of dock or edge of

improved surface;

(10) other special operating conditions and

hazards which may be encountered.

(c) Operation of the powered industrial

truck, including:

(1) proper preshift inspection and

approved method for removing from service

a truck which is in need of repair;

(2) load handling techniques, lifting,

lowering, picking up, placing, tilting;

(3) traveling, with and without loads;

turning corners;

(4) parking and shutdown procedures;

(5) other special operating conditions for

the specific application.

(d) Operating safety rules and practices,

including:

(1) provisions of this Standard in Sections

5.1 to 5.4 address operating safety rules and

practices;

(2) provisions of this Standard in Section

5.5 address care of the truck;

(3) other rules, regulations, or practices

specified by the employer at the location

where the powered industrial truck will be

used.

(e) Operational training practice, including;

(1) if feasible, practice in the operation of

powered industrial trucks shall be conducted

in an area separate from other workplace

activities and personnel;

(2) training practice shall be conducted

under the supervision of the trainer;

(3) training practice shall include the

actual operation or simulated performance of

all operating tasks such as load handling,

maneuvering, traveling, stopping, starting,

and other activities under the conditions

which will be encountered in the use of the

truck.

4.19.5 Testing, Retraining, and

Enforcement.

(a) During training, performance and oral

and/or written tests shall be given by the

employer to measure the skill and knowledge

of the operator in meeting the requirements

of the Standard. Employers shall establish a

pass/fail requirement for such tests.

Employers may delegate such testing to

others but shall remain responsible for the

testing. Appropriate records shall be kept.

(b) Operators shall be retrained when new

equipment is introduced, existing equipment

is modified, operating conditions change, or

an operator’s performance is unsatisfactory.

(c) The user shall be responsible for

enforcing the safe use of the powered

industrial truck according to the provisions

of this Standard.

Note: Information on operator training is

available from such sources as powered

industrial truck manufacturers, government

agencies dealing with employee safety, trade

organizations of users of powered industrial

trucks, public and private organizations, and

safety consultants.

(For an explanation of why OSHA

decided to propose a somewhat

different standard, see section entitled

Summary and Explanation of the

Proposed Standard, below.)

Since 1971, the consensus committee

has adopted other volumes for

additional types of vehicles that fall

within the broad definition of a

powered industrial truck. Specifically,

requirements have been adopted for

guided industrial vehicles, rough terrain

forklift trucks, industrial crane trucks,

personnel and burden carriers, operator

controlled industrial tow tractors, and

manually propelled high lift industrial

trucks. This rulemaking would adopt

training requirements for all types of

powered industrial trucks regardless of

their usage and the industry in which

they are operating.

d. Petitions and Requests

On March 15, 1988, the Industrial

Truck Association (ITA) petitioned

OSHA to revise its standard requiring

the training of powered industrial truck

operators (Ex. 3–2). The petition

contained suggested language for a

proposed requirement along with a

model operator training program by

which compliance with the

recommended requirement could be

met. OSHA responded to the petition on

April 8, 1988, stating that work on the
13784 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

revision of the OSHA powered

industrial truck operator training

requirement would begin as soon as

other priority projects were completed.

In addition to the petition, other

interested persons have frequently

asked questions about training operators

of powered industrial trucks, such as:

• What constitutes the necessary and

sufficient training of forklift operators?

• How can one ensure that all forklift

operators have been trained?

• What testing, if any, should be

conducted as part of the training?

• Should the prior experience of a

newly hired employee be considered as

fulfilling part or all of the training

requirement or totally fulfilling the

employer’s obligation to train that

employee?

Some interested persons have

suggested that OSHA develop a

standardized training course or at least

review and comment on or endorse

various training courses, programs,

agenda, or outlines. Others have

suggested that OSHA license or certify

all powered industrial truck operators to

attest to their ability to properly operate

powered industrial trucks. These

concerns also were considered in the

development of the proposed

rulemaking. OSHA is proposing to

amend the current powered industrial

truck operator training requirements for

general industry and to adopt the same

requirement for the maritime industries.

e. Reasons for the Proposal

As discussed in the benefits discussed

below and in the Regulatory Impact

Analysis, powered industrial truck

accidents cause approximately 85

fatalities and 34,900 serious injuries

each year. It is estimated that

approximately 20 to 25 percent are at

least in part caused by inadequate

training.

As just discussed, the ITA and others

have requested that OSHA improve its

training requirement for powered

industrial truck operators. ANSI has

substantially upgraded its

recommended training requirements.

OSHA preliminarily concludes that

upgrading the training requirements for

powered industrial truck operators will

substantially reduce a significant risk of

death and injury from untrained

operators driving powered industrial

trucks.

II. The Powered Industrial Truck

The term powered industrial truck is

defined in the American Society of

Mechanical Engineers, ASME B56.1

(formerly the ANSI B56.1 standard) as a

‘‘mobile, power propelled truck used to

carry, push, pull, lift, stack, or tier

material.’’

There are presently approximately

822,830 powered industrial trucks in

use in American industry. This number

was generated using the available

information on truck shipments of

powered industrial trucks and the

percentage of market that ITA members

control. This information was provided

OSHA by the Industrial Truck

Association.

The Industrial Truck Association

stated in conversations with OSHA

representatives that it considers the

average useful life of a powered

industrial truck to be 8 years. The 8-year

life cycle has been used throughout the

preparation of this proposed rule and in

the formulation of the Preliminary

Regulatory Impact Analysis. The vehicle

manufacturers also estimate that there

are, on average, 1.5 operators for each

industrial truck. A search of the

available literature indicates that this

number has not been disputed. OSHA

believes that this number is a fair

assessment of the number of powered

industrial operators since many

employers (particularly small

employers) have one operator per truck

and the vehicle is used only during one

shift per day whereas other vehicles are

used by multiple operators during

multiple shifts.

Powered industrial trucks are

classified by the manufacturers

according to their individual characters.

There are seven classes of powered

industrial trucks:

Class 1—Electric Motor, Sit-down

Rider, Counter-Balanced Trucks (Solid

and Pneumatic Tires).

Class 2—Electric Motor Narrow Aisle

Trucks (Solid Tire).

Class 3—Electric Motor Hand Trucks

or Hand/Rider Trucks (Solid Tires).

Class 4—Internal Combustion Engine

Trucks (Solid Tires).

Class 5—Internal Combustion Engine

Trucks (Pneumatic Tires).

Class 6—Electric and Internal

Combustion Engine Tractors (Solid and

Pneumatic Tires).

Class 7—Rough Terrain Fork Lift

Trucks (Pneumatic Tires).

Each of these different types of

powered industrial trucks has its own

unique characteristics, and inherent

hazards. To maximize the effectiveness

of the training, it must be somewhat

unique for each type vehicle. For

example, an operator of a high lift rider

truck must have an understanding of the

basics of the vehicle’s stability

(including those factors which affect

that stability), the need to not overload

the vehicle, and the need to operate the

vehicle according to established rules

(such as not using the vehicle to elevate

employees who are standing on its

forks). On the other hand, order picker

trucks elevate the operator along with a

platform that is used to hold material

destined for storage or retrieval from

storage in high stacking racks or bins.

The platforms on these trucks are not

completely enclosed by railings, toe

boards, or other similar fall protection

devices to prevent an operator from

falling off an elevated platform. To be

protected, the operator must wear a

body harness or belt with a lanyard

affixed to the mast of the vehicle or the

overhead guard. Therefore, training for

employees who use order picker trucks

must emphasize that the use of the body

belt or harness and lanyard is essential

whenever the operator is aloft.

Powered industrial trucks may be

powered by gasoline, propane, diesel or

liquified petroleum gas engines or by

electric motors. Each of the basic

powerplants (except propane) and their

associated components (such as

mufflers on internal combustion engines

and switches and wiring on electric

trucks) may be upgraded and the entire

truck may be approved by a nationally

recognized testing laboratory for

operation in certain classified hazardous

areas. These classified hazardous areas

are those parts of a plant, factory or

other workplace where there exists or

may exist concentrations of flammable

gases or vapors, combustible dust, or

easily ignitible flyings or fibers so that

the risk of fire or explosion is increased.

The current OSHA general industry

standard for powered industrial trucks

contains basic descriptions of the types

of approved powered industrial trucks

and the various classes, divisions, and

groups of classified hazardous areas and

some of the materials whose presence

would cause classification of those

areas. However, the number of

substances whose presence causes the

hazards of fire and/or explosion have

increased greatly since promulgation of

the OSHA standards. (For additional

information on the properties and

classifications of materials, see the

National Fire Protection Association

(NFPA) 505–1992 Fire Safety Standard

for Powered Industrial Trucks Including

Type Designation, Areas of Use,

Maintenance, and Operation.) (Ex. 3–3).

In addition to the general

requirements for truck operation, such

as vehicle stability and load carrying

capability, training must be provided for

unusual situations, such as training

operators to handle asymmetrical loads

when their work includes this activity.

The only way that unusual loads may be

moved safely with some powered
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13785

industrial trucks is for the operator to

understand and apply the principles of

moments and stability of the vehicle.

(These principles are explained in more

detail in the part of this preamble

entitled ‘‘Powered Industrial Truck

Hazards.’’) With many powered

industrial trucks, the capacity is given

as some weight at some load center

[usually 24′′ (61 cm)]. If the operator

does not understand that the load center

is the distance from the vertical face of

the forks to the center of gravity of the

load and that loads are usually

symmetrical, then the operator may pick

up a load incorrectly. If the operator

understands that the capacity of the

vehicle decreases as the load center

increases, then some asymmetrical or

off-center loads may be safely picked up

and moved using a high lift truck. Other

type trucks, such as low lift platform

trucks, can handle asymmetrical or offcenter loads with minimum danger to

an employee because the load is not

raised far above the ground. However,

because these type trucks are unable to

raise loads far above the ground, they

are of little or no use when working in

a workplace that has high stacking racks

or bins where powered industrial trucks

must be able to deposit and retrieve

loads from considerable distances above

the ground or floor.

Powered industrial trucks also are

used to move large items or many

smaller items about the workplace

without the restrictions that generally

exist with other mechanical material

handling equipment. Other material

handling equipment, like overhead

cranes or conveyors, are restricted to

moving material along a particular,

predetermined pathway. A powered

industrial truck, on the other hand, may

operate along any aisleway or

passageway provided it is wide enough

to accommodate the vehicle and can

support the vehicle and its load. Once

one of these trucks has left an area, there

is no remaining obstruction to the flow

of employee or vehicular traffic, as

would normally occur when fixed

equipment is used.

Powered industrial trucks may be

operated in and among employees with

little or no inconvenience to the

employees. Although it may be

convenient to operate a powered

industrial truck around employees, this

can be dangerous, particularly when the

employees may be hidden from view

(for example, when they are working

behind stored material.)

These trucks may operate on almost

any type surface, from smooth and level

floors to rocky, uneven ground,

provided they were manufactured to

operate on that type floor or ground and

the surface does not have an excessive

slope. Different type trucks are designed

and manufactured to operate in various

work environments. Not only may

powered industrial trucks be used for

moving material about the workplace,

high lift trucks are used to raise loads

up to 30 or 40 feet above the floor and

deposit the material on a rack,

mezzanine or other elevated location

and then retrieve and lower the

material. Many trucks were designed

specifically to operate in restricted areas

such as narrow aisles and passageways.

Because powered industrial trucks are

intended to accomplish specific tasks in

a particular manner, their use is

restricted. For example, a powered

industrial truck that was designed to

operate in a restricted space (such as in

a narrow aisle or passageway) must be

manufactured with a narrow track (the

distance between the two wheels on the

same axle or at the same end of the

vehicle). In many cases, the maximum

width of a truck must be significantly

less than the minimum width of the area

in which it is operated since the vehicle

will normally have to make turns so that

loads may be deposited in and retrieved

from racks or bins which are adjacent to

the aisle or passageway. Narrow aisle

trucks cannot be safely operated on a

floor or the ground that is not smooth.

Another design criterion, the

maximum lateral dimension of the

vehicle, usually dictates where the

various components of the vehicle, such

as the engine or motor, the transmission

and the seat for the operator, will be

placed. The placement of these

components may be higher or lower

than their most desirable locations. The

placement of the various components at

a higher point of the vehicle than is

desirable, which is the usual case, raises

the center of gravity of the entire

vehicle, thereby making the vehicle less

stable. The greater the distance that the

center of gravity of the vehicle and its

load is above the ground, the less stable

the vehicle (if all other factors remain

constant). A more stable design of a

powered industrial truck would require

a wider track. This would allow

installing the engine, transmission, and

other components at a lower level of the

truck, thereby lowering the center of

gravity of the vehicle.

Because the powered industrial truck

is a motor vehicle, its operation is

similar to the automobile and some of

its hazards are the same as those

experienced during operation of the

automobile. Like the automobile, the

internal combustion engine powered

industrial truck will move when the gas

pedal depressed, and stop when the

brake is applied. Some internal

combustion engine and electric powered

industrial trucks have both the

accelerator and brake functions

combined in one pedal or other

controller providing restriction to

movement of the vehicle when no

pressure is applied to the pedal (or

when the controller is in the neutral

position). As pressure is applied to the

pedal or other controller, the brake is

gradually released, until at a given point

of controller travel, the brake is

completely disengaged. At this point,

the vehicle can coast without restriction

from the brake. Finally, as the pedal or

other controller is actuated further, the

motor or engine is engaged and the

vehicle moves under the power

supplied by the engine or motor. The

vehicle then moves progressively faster

as the pedal or controller is further

actuated. Clearly good training is

needed when design characteristics may

reduce stability, limit vision or cause

non-uniform methods of control.

Powered industrial trucks also may

come equipped with, or can be modified

to accept, attachments that allow

movement of odd shaped materials or

permit the truck to carry out tasks that

may not have been envisioned when the

truck was designed and manufactured.

Many of these attachments may be

added to or installed on the vehicle by

the dealer or by the employer. For

example, there are powered industrial

truck attachments for grasping barrels or

drums of material. Some of these

attachments will not only grasp a barrel

or drum but allow the vehicle operator

to rotate the barrel or drum to empty the

vessel or lay it on its side. Another

attachment that looks like a long spike

may be positioned within rolled

material, such as carpeting. This

attachment allows the movement of

material without causing damage to the

material being handled. All of these

attachments may adversely effect the

ability of a powered industrial truck to

perform its primary function or may

cause the vehicle to be used safely only

under limited operating conditions,

such as under reduced speed or loadcarrying capacity. OSHA recognizes that

certain attachments may limit the safe

use of the vehicle. To ensure that

modifications or additions do not

adversely affect the safe use of the

vehicle, OSHA requires at

§ 1910.178(b)(4) that:

(4) Modifications and additions which

affect capacity and safe operation shall not be

performed by the customer or user without

the manufacturer’s prior written approval.

Capacity, operation, and maintenance

instruction plates, tags, or decals shall be

changed accordingly.
13786 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

When the use of specialized

attachments restricts the use of the

powered industrial truck or when the

truck is used to lift people, it is essential

that operator training must include

instruction on the safe use of the vehicle

so that the operator knows and

understands the restrictions or

limitations that are imposed upon the

operation of the vehicle by the

utilization of those attachments.

Another type of attachment that alters

the basic use of the vehicle and presents

unique hazards is an overhead hoist

attachment. It is made up of a rail (like

an I-beam) that is attached to the truck

and supports an overhead hoist. It is

very easy for an operator to pick up a

load with an overhead hoist attachment

while the load is close to the vehicle

and, without realizing it, exceed the

moment of the vehicle by moving the

load further from the body of the

vehicle. In order to operate this type

attachment successfully, the operator

must have specific training in the use of

this attachment, including training in

calculating the maximum load at

different points in front of the vehicle

and instruction in the causes of

longitudinal vehicle tipover and its

prevention.

In an attempt to improve the load

carrying capability of the vehicle, some

people add extra counterweights to

powered industrial trucks. Although

this will increase the ability of the

vehicle to resist longitudinal tipover

when the vehicle is overloaded,

additional weight imposes extra stresses

on the vehicle and its components. The

added stresses also can cause changes in

the driving characteristics of the vehicle

and premature failure of the truck and

its components, sometimes with

catastrophic effects. Training is needed

so that operators avoid creating those

hazards.

III. Powered Industrial Truck Hazards

Powered industrial trucks are used in

all industries. Their principle utility lies

in the fact that either a large number of

objects confined in a large box, crate or

other container or large objects may be

moved about the workplace with

relative ease. Since powered industrial

truck movement is controlled by the

operator and is not restricted by the

frame of the machine or other

impediments, virtually unrestricted

movement of the vehicle about the

workplace is possible.

The hazards that are commonly

associated with powered industrial

trucks may not exist or be as

pronounced for every type, make or

model vehicle. For example, the hazard

of tipping over the vehicle due to

unstable operation does not exist

(except in the most extraordinary

circumstance) with the low lift platform

truck, the motorized hand truck or the

motorized hand/rider truck because

each of these trucks does not allow the

raising of the load to a point that will

cause the vehicle to become unstable.

On the other hand, the counterbalanced

rider truck and the order picker truck

allow the load to be raised very high,

causing the vehicle to become less

stable as the load is raised.

Each type truck has different hazards

associated with its operation. For

example, the chance of a falling load

accident occurring when the truck is a

sitdown, counterbalanced rider truck is

much greater than when the vehicle is

a motorized hand truck because the

height that the load can be raised on the

sitdown rider truck is much greater than

the hand truck.

Correspondingly, the method or

means to prevent the accident or to

protect the employee from injury may

be different with different type trucks.

When a rider truck is involved in a

tipover accident, the operator has the

opportunity to remain in the operator’s

position on the vehicle during the

tipover, thereby minimizing the

potential for injury. In most cases, the

operator of a rider truck is injured in a

tipover accident when he or she

attempts to jump clear of the vehicle

when it begins to tip over. Because the

natural tendency of the operator is to

jump downward, he or she lands on the

floor or ground and is then crushed by

the overhead guard of the vehicle.

Consequently, the operator should be

trained to stay with the vehicle during

a lateral tipover. On the other hand,

when an order picker tips over with the

platform in a raised position, generally

the operator should attempt to jump

clear of the vehicle, and should be

trained accordingly.

Because the powered industrial truck

is a motor vehicle, its operation is

similar to the automobile and some of

its hazards are the same as those

experienced during operation of the

automobile. Both the automobile and

the powered industrial truck are subject

to some of the same hazards such as

contacting both fixed and movable

objects (including employees) and

tipping over.

Additionally, there are hazards

associated with operating the vehicle at

an excessive rate of speed and the

hazard of skidding on a wet or

otherwise slippery ground or floor.

Driving a powered industrial truck at an

excessive rate of speed may result in the

loss of control of the vehicle, causing

the vehicle to skid, tipover, or fall off a

loading dock or other elevated walking

or working surface. Failure to maintain

control of the vehicle also may cause the

vehicle to strike an employee or some

stored material, causing the material to

topple and possibly injure another

employee. In these cases, training which

reinforces driver training is necessary so

that the operator will react properly to

minimize the hazard to him or herself

and to other employees.

Although there are many similarities

between the automobile and the

powered industrial truck, there are also

many differences. Here greater training

is required so that operators are aware

of the differences. Some of the

characteristics of a powered industrial

truck that have a pronounced effect

upon its operation and safety that are

outside their auto driving experience are

its ability to change its dynamic

stability, to raise, lower and tilt loads,

and to steer with the rear wheels while

powered by the front wheels. The

capability to move loads upwards,

downwards, forwards and backwards

causes a shift of the center of gravity of

the vehicle and can adversely affect the

overall stability. When a load is raised

or moved away from the vehicle, the

vehicle’s longitudinal stability is

decreased. When the load is lowered or

moved closer to the vehicle, its

longitudinal stability is increased.

To mitigate the hazards of stability

caused by the movement of the material

being handled, OSHA has seven

provisions that address proper operation

of a powered industrial truck. These

provisions are § 1910.178 (n)(15), (o)(1),

(o)(2), (o)(3), (o)(4), (o)(5), and (o)(6).

These provisions specify:

(15) While negotiating turns, speed shall be

reduced to a safe level by means of turning

the hand steering wheel in a smooth,

sweeping motion. Except when maneuvering

at a very low speed, the hand steering wheel

shall be turned at a moderate, even rate.

(O) Loading. (1) Only stable or safely

arranged loads shall be handled. Caution

shall be exercised when handling off-center

loads which cannot be centered.

(2) Only loads within the rated capacity of

the truck shall be handled.

(3) The long or high (including multipletiered) loads which may affect capacity shall

be adjusted.

(4) Trucks equipped with attachments shall

be operated as partially loaded trucks when

not handling a load.

(5) A load engaging means shall be placed

under the load as far as possible; the mast

shall be carefully tilted backward to stabilize

the load.

(6) Extreme care shall be used when tilting

the load forward or backward, particularly

when high tiering. Tilting forward with load

engaging means elevated shall be prohibited

except to pick up a load. An elevated load

shall not be tilted forward except when the
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13787

load is in a deposit position over a rack or

stack. When stacking or tiering, only enough

backward tilt to stabilize the load shall be

used.

Knowledge of, and adherence to these

principles, as well as the other

requirements of the OSHA standard, are

essential for safe load handling and

vehicle operation. Training is needed in

these requirements.

Each powered industrial truck has a

different ‘‘feel’’ that makes its operation

slightly different from the operation of

other trucks. The workplaces where

these trucks are being used also present

particular hazards. For these reasons, a

uniform or consistent set of hazards for

all industrial trucks and their operation

cannot be delineated. The hazards

addressed in this section relating to the

use of powered industrial trucks have

been generalized rather than being make

or model specific. For this reason,

development of a single ‘‘generic’’

training program which fits all powered

industrial trucks and their operation is

impractical. In developing an effective

training program, there are three major

areas of concern regarding the hazards

of the operation of powered industrial

trucks. The three major groups of

hazards of powered industrial trucks

and their operation are hazards

associated with the particular make and

model truck, hazards of the workplace,

and general hazards that apply to the

operation of all or most powered

industrial trucks.

There are other hazards caused by

improper operation of a powered

industrial truck. Among these hazards

are: Falling loads caused by overloading

or improperly loading powered

industrial trucks (including carrying

unbalanced or unstable loads); the

vehicle falling from platforms, curbs,

trailers or other surfaces on which the

vehicle is operating; driving the vehicle

while the operator has obstructed view

in the direction of travel or the operator

not paying full attention to the

operation of the powered industrial

truck; and the vehicle being operated at

an excessive rate of speed. OSHA has

identified several accidents that have

occurred when an employee other than

the operator is ‘‘given a ride’’ on a

powered industrial truck. Most trucks

were designed and are intended to allow

only the operator to ride on the vehicle.

The carrying of other persons may result

in an accident when that other person

either falls from the vehicle or contacts

some obstruction when the vehicle is

driven in proximity to that obstruction.

Finally, powered industrial truck

accidents have occurred because the

vehicle was not maintained (most

commonly, employees being overcome

by excessive carbon monoxide

exposure) or when the powered

industrial truck was not being

maintained properly.

Each of these hazards may be more or

less consequential based upon the

method of operation of the powered

industrial truck, the loads being carried,

and the workplace where the vehicle is

being operated. Truck operators must be

trained to recognize unsafe conditions

and how to react to them when they

occur.

Several features of a powered

industrial truck contribute either

directly or indirectly to the existence or

severity of the hazards of the vehicle.

Some of the factors, that would either

create or enhance the hazards of the

particular truck, are the placement of

the critical components of the vehicle,

the age of the vehicle, and the manner

in which the vehicle is operated and

maintained.

There are other hazards related to the

use of powered industrial trucks that are

caused or enhanced by the

characteristics of the workplace. Those

hazards include the following: operating

powered industrial trucks on rough,

uneven or unlevel surfaces; operating

powered industrial trucks with unusual

loads; operations in hazardous

(classified) areas; operation in areas

where there are narrow aisles; where

there is pedestrian traffic; or where

employees are working in or adjacent to

the path of travel of the powered

industrial truck.

The operation of a powered industrial

truck presents hazards not only to the

operator, but also endangers other

employees working with or around the

vehicle. As explained in the section

entitled ‘‘Accident, injury and other

data’’, below, employees other than

operators have been injured or killed in

accidents involving powered industrial

trucks. Proper training can reduce

accidents resulting from the above

causes.

IV. Accident, Injury and Other Data

This section of the preamble contains

a discussion of the reports, studies and

other sources of data and information

that were analyzed to determine the

magnitude and extent of the problems

that powered industrial truck operator

training can mitigate.

A. The Bureau of Labor Statistics

(BLS) maintains a database entitled,

Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries

(CFOI). The CFOI is a compilation of

information on fatal work injuries that

occurred in the 50 States and the

District of Columbia. The CFOI uses

death certificates, workers

compensation reports and other Federal

and State records to gather pertinent

information. Work relationships are

verified by using at least two source

documents.

The program collects information on

the workers and the circumstances

surrounding each fatality. The data are

compiled on an annual basis.

In April, 1994, BLS published a

booklet entitled, Fatal Workplace

Injuries in 1992: A Collection of Data

and Analysis (Ex. 3–4). In this booklet,

there was an article written by Gary A.

Helmer entitled, Fatalities Involving

Forklifts and Other Powered Industrial

Carriers, 1991–1992. This report

contains information contained in the

CFOI on 170 fatal powered industrial

truck accidents. Table 1 lists the

classifications of those powered

industrial truck accidents.

TABLE 1.—CLASSIFICATION OF FORKLIFT FATALITIES, CFOI, 1991–1992

How accident occurred No. Percent

Forklift overturned ......... 41 24

Forklift struck something, or ran off dock . 13 8

Worker pinned between

objects ....................... 19 11

Worker struck by material .............................. 29 17

Worker struck by forklift 24 14

Worker fell from forklift . 24 14

Worker died during forklift repair .................... 10 6

Other accident .............. 10 6

Total ................... 170 100

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Fatal

Workplace Injuries in 1992, A Collection of

Data and Analysis, Report 870, April 1994.

B. Measuring the Effectiveness of an

Industrial Lift Truck Safety Training

Program.

In 1984, H. Harvey Cohen and Roger

C. Jensen, working under contract with

the National Institute for Occupational

Safety and Health (NIOSH), published

an article in the Journal of Safety

Research (Fall 1984, Vol. 15, No. 3, pps.

125–135) entitled, Measuring the

Effectiveness of an Industrial Lift Truck

Safety Training Program (Ex. 3–5). The

article contained an analysis of two

studies that were undertaken to measure

objectively the effects of safety training

of powered industrial truck operators.

This article detailed the results of an

experiment that was conducted to

evaluate the value of training powered

industrial truck operators using a

behavioral (work) sampling procedure

to obtain objective data about work

practices that correlate with injury risk.

There were two separate studies

conducted in this experiment, one at

each of two similar warehouses. The
13788 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

studies that comprised the experiment

were conducted to assess the value of

training and the influence of post

training actions on the safety

performance of workers.

There were 14 criteria used in

measuring the performance of the

trainees. Each of the criterion was

selected because it was (a) measurable,

(b) frequently observable, (c) capable of

being reliably observed, (d) related to

accident occurrence, and (e) amenable

to corrective action through training.

The fourteen criteria observed were:

Warns other operators, yields to trucks,

warns co-workers, yields to co-workers,

sounds horn at blind intersection, slows

down at blind intersection, looks at

blind intersection, looks in direction of

travel, maintains moderate speed,

avoids quick starts/changes of direction,

keeps all body parts within truck,

maintains forks in proper position,

maintains balanced load, and drives

properly in reverse. Each observation of

the operation of the powered industrial

trucks resulted in all criteria being

evaluated (either correctly performed,

incorrectly performed, or not observed).

An error rate for each criterion was

calculated by dividing the number of

incorrect behaviors observed by the total

behaviors observed.

Each of the groups of employees were

subdivided into smaller groups. These

groups were then given training at

different times during the study and, in

some cases, additional feedback

following the training.

The first study was conducted in four

phases. The pretraining phase was

conducted with none of the operators

having received special training. During

the second phase, the control group

remained untrained, the treatment

group received training, and the

treatment-plus-feedback group received

training and also received performance

feedback. In the third phase, the control

group received training so that all three

groups had received training but only

the training-plus-feedback group

received performance feedback. The

retention phase started three months

after the end of the third phase of the

study and the performance of all

operators was evaluated without regard

to their previous categorization.

The error rates of the various groups

during the different phases of the study

are given in Table 2.

TABLE 2.—SUMMARY OF MEAN ERROR RATES 1

[Warehouse 1]

Group Pre-training Post-training 1 Post-training 2 Retention

Control .............................................................................................................. .34 .32 .23

Training ............................................................................................................. .33 .27 .26

Training + Feedback ........................................................................................ .35 .27 .25

All operators ..................................................................................................... .34 .27 .25 .19

The mean error rate is defined in the study as the number of incorrect behaviors observed divided by the total behaviors observed.

NOTE: The mean error rate for all operators began at .34, that is, in 34 percent of the observed criteria, the tasks observed and evaluated were

performed improperly.

Source: Measuring the Effectiveness of Industrial Lift Truck Safety Training Program, Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 15, No. 3, Fall 1984, pp.

125–135.

Following the initial training (posttraining 1), all three groups showed a

decrease in their mean error rates with

the training-plus-feedback group

showing the largest decrease (from .35

to .27, a 23 percent decrease) followed

by the training-only (from .33 to .27, an

18 percent decrease) and the control

group (from .34 to .32, a 6 percent

decrease). The reduction in the error

rate of the control group from the pretraining to the post-training 1 phase of

the study was attributed to a peer

modeling influence, i.e., the control

group operators were copying the

behavior of their previously trained

counterparts. Toward the end of the

post-training 1 phase, the error rates of

the three groups converged, suggesting

that the effects of the training program

had begun to wear off. Observers also

noted that some behaviors were being

compromised when employees of

different knowledge levels were

required to interact, particularly in

conflict avoidance situations such as

signaling and yielding at blind

intersections.

During the post-training 2 phase of

the study, all groups improved in

performance, particularly the original

control group. This group’s performance

improved by 28 percent (from a mean

error rate of .32 to .23). Additional

evidence of the effect of peer modeling

may be deduced from the fact that the

performance of the other two groups

(the training and the training and

feedback groups) continued to improve

although there was no additional

instruction given to those groups.

The retention phase of the study was

conducted three months following the

completion of the post-training 2 phase

of the study. It was intended to

determine the longer term effects of the

training. The results of this phase of the

study indicate an additional

improvement in the performance of the

operators with the mean error rate

decreasing from .25 to .19, a 24 percent

improvement in their performance. The

total performance gain achieved during

this study was a 44 percent

improvement from the pre-training

(baseline) phase through the retention

phase (from a mean error rate of .34 to

a final error rate of .19). The data

indicate that there were significantly

fewer errors at each successive phase of

the study.

The second study was conducted in

order to verify and extend the findings

of the first study. Consequently, a

modified experimental design was used

to eliminate the mitigating influence of

the untrained control group. In the

second study, all operators were trained

at the same time and all received

performance feedback. Comparisons

were made only before and after

training. The study was divided into

three phases: Pre-training, post-training

and retention. The retention phase of

the study was again conducted three

months after the conclusion of the prior

phase. The mean error rates during the

three phases of the study are given in

Table 3.

TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF MEAN ERROR

RATES STUDY 2

Pre-training Post-training Retention

.23 .09 .07

Source: Measuring the Effectiveness of Industrial Lift Truck Safety Training Program,

Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 15, No. 3,

Fall 1984, pp. 125–135.

Following the training of the vehicle

operators, there was a 61 percent
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13789

improvement in performance scores

(from an error rate of .23 to .09).

Observation in the retention phase of

this study showed an additional

reduction of 22 percent in mean error

rates (from .09 to .07 mean error rate).

This corresponds closely to the 24

percent gain experienced in Study 1.

The overall improvement in mean error

rates between the pre-training error rate

(.23) to that achieved during the

retention phase (.07) was a reduction of

70 percent.

C. In 1987, Nancy Stout-Wiegand of

the National Institute for Occupational

Safety and Health (NIOSH) published an

article in the Journal of Safety Research

(Winter 1987, Vol 18, No. 4, pp. 179–

190) entitled, Characteristics of WorkRelated Injuries Involving Forklift

Trucks (Ex. 3–6). This article analyzed

powered industrial truck injuries

reported in two occupational injury

databases—the National Electronic

Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) and

the Bureau of Labor Statistics’

Supplementary Data System (SDS).

The NEISS database is composed of

records from a national sample of 200

hospital emergency rooms and burn

centers handling all types of injuries.

The NEISS database was originally

established by the Consumer Product

Safety Commission, therefore, the

original intent was to gather data about

accidents involving commercial

products rather than industrial injuries.

The hospital emergency rooms were not

necessarily those located in industrial

areas that would predominantly treat

industrial injuries and illnesses. The

data from this sample are weighted to

represent the nation in numbers and

characteristics of traumatic injuries

treated in emergency rooms and burn

centers. A subset of this database—the

work related injuries—is maintained by

NIOSH. Since the NEISS database

records only injuries treated in

emergency rooms and burn centers,

traumatic work injuries treated by

private practitioners or by industry or

private clinics are not included in the

NEISS database. Moreover, chronic

injuries, such as injuries due to

overexertion, are not as likely to be

treated in emergency room as are acute

traumatic injuries, and, therefore are

probably underrepresented in the NEISS

database. Other probable sources of

error in the calculation of accident rates

include misclassification of the sources

of injury or the agent of injury. For

example, if an employee fell while

elevated on the forks of a powered

industrial truck, the accident could be

misclassified as a fall from elevation

rather than a fall from a forklift.

Similarly, if an employee were struck in

the head by part of a load which fell

from a powered industrial truck, the

accident could be classified as employee

struck by falling object. In either case,

the accident would have involved a

powered industrial truck, but in neither

case would the accident have been

classified as one in which a powered

industrial truck was involved.

The Supplementary Data System

(SDS) database is composed of workers’

compensation claims for injuries

involving lost workdays. There were 30

states that provided information to the

SDS system. The SDS system reports the

occupations of injured workers and

states where the claim was filed. SDS

includes only compensable injuries. The

definition of a compensable injury

varies from state to state, with some

injuries being compensable, for

example, if they result in one day or

more away from work. In other states,

the time away from work may be up to

7 days before the injury becomes

compensable.

The SDS and NEISS data do not

necessarily represent the same injuries

because injuries treated in emergency

rooms do not always result in lost

workdays. At the same time,

compensable injuries included in SDS

may not have been treated in emergency

rooms and thus would not be

represented in NEISS. However, both of

these databases represent the more

serious injuries involving powered

industrial trucks, that is, those requiring

treatment in emergency rooms and those

which result in compensable injuries.

In 1983, the SDS system identified

13,417 workers’ compensation claims

for lost-workday injuries involving

powered industrial trucks that occurred

in 30 states. Assuming that these 30

states represent an average of the whole

population, then the number of

accidents which occurred nationally

would be five-thirds of the 13,417

accidents, or approximately 22,400

compensation claims for lost-workday

injuries involving powered industrial

trucks filed nationally. This number is

comparable to the estimated 24,000

forklift-related injuries that were treated

in U.S. emergency rooms in 1983 as

reported by NIOSH from information

gathered by the NEISS system. In 1985,

the NEISS system figures were used to

determine that about 34,000 powered

industrial truck related accidents were

treated in emergency rooms. This is an

increase of about 39% over a three-year

period of time.

This report also contained a

tabulation of the occupations of the

injured workers. The breakdown of the

occupations of those employees and the

corresponding percentage of the

accidents is listed in Table 4.

TABLE 4.—PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION

OF POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCK INJURIES BY OCCUPATION OF INJURED

EMPLOYEE

Occupation Percent

Professional, technical and kindred

workers ........................................ 0.3

Managers and administrators (except farm) .................................... 2.0

Sales workers ................................. 0.8

Clerical and kindred workers .......... 5.0

Craftsmen and kindred workers ..... (15.5)

Mechanics ................................... 6.5

Foremen ...................................... 3.0

Other craftsmen and kindred

workers .................................... 6.0

Operatives (except transportation) . (17.5)

Assemblers ................................. 1.4

Packers/wrappers ....................... 1.1

Welders ....................................... 0.9

Miscellaneous/unspecified

operatives ................................ 9.2

Other operatives ......................... 4.9

Transportation equipment operatives ........................................... (20.8)

Powered industrial truck operators ........................................... 12.3

Truck drivers ............................... 5.5

Motormen .................................... 1.7

Deliverymen ................................ 1.2

Other transportation equipment

operators ................................. 0.1

Laborers (except farm) ................... (37.3)

Warehousemen ........................... 10.4

Freight and material handlers ..... 7.3

Stock handlers ............................ 4.4

Construction laborers .................. 2.2

Miscellaneous/unspecified laborers ............................................ 8.0

Other laborers ............................. 1.6

Farmers (managers and laborers) . 1.5

Service workers .............................. 1.8

Occupations unspecified ................ 1.1

Source: Characteristics of Work-Related Injuries Involving Forklift Trucks, Journal of

Safety Research, Vol. 18 No. 4, Winter 1987,

pp. 179–190.

D. Industrial Forklift Truck

Fatalities—A Summary.

The Office of Data Analysis (ODA) of

OSHA’s Directorate of Policy conducted

an examination of 53 investigative case

files involving powered industrial truck

fatalities that occurred between 1980

and 1986 (Ex. 3–7). The results of their

analysis is summarized below.

TABLE 5.—OFFICE OF DATA ANALYSIS

TYPE ACCIDENTS—53 POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCK FATALITIES

Type accident No. Percent

Crushed by tipping vehicle .............................. 22 42

Crushed between vehicle and a surface ...... 13 25
13790 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 5.—OFFICE OF DATA ANALYSIS

TYPE ACCIDENTS—53 POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCK FATALITIES—Continued

Type accident No. Percent

Crushed between two

vehicles ..................... 6 11

Struck or run over by

vehicle ....................... 5 10

Struck by falling material .............................. 4 8

Fall from platform on

forks ........................... 2 4

Accidental activation of

controls ...................... 1 2

Source: Industrial Forklift Truck Fatalities—A

Summary, Report from Office of Data Analysis, Directorate of Policy, OSHA, dated June

1990.

The single largest cause of the

accidents was vehicle tipovers. These

tipovers were attributed to the

following: (1) The vehicle being out of

control (speeding, elevated loads,

mechanical problems, etc.; 7 instances—

13 percent); (2) the vehicle being run

off/over the edge of the surface (4

instances—8 percent); (3) attempting to

make too sharp a turn (excessive speed,

unbalanced load, etc.; 4 instances—8

percent); (4) employee jumped from

overturning vehicle being pulled by

another vehicle (2 instances—4

percent); vehicle skidded or slipped on

slippery surface (2 instances—4

percent); (5) wheels on one side of

vehicle ran over raised surface or object

(2 instances—4 percent); and (6) vehicle

tipped over when struck by another

vehicle (1 instance—2 percent).

The second highest number of

fatalities reported in the ODA study was

caused by an employee being crushed

between a vehicle and a surface. The

accidents were attributed to: (1) The

operator getting off the vehicle while it

was running (7 instances—13 percent);

(2) worker on platform being crushed

between platform and overhead surface

(2 instances—4 percent); (3) employees

leg being caught when vehicle

sideswiped metal surface (1 instance—

2 percent); (4) employee attempting to

prevent vehicle tipover by holding up

overhead guard (1 instance—2 percent);

(5) employee changing tire and vehicle

fell from jack (1 instance—2 percent)

and (6) empty 55 gallon drum used for

support vehicle during maintenance

collapsed (1 instance—2 percent).

The six accidents that were attributed

to employees being crushed between

two vehicles were caused by contact

between two moving powered industrial

trucks (4 cases) and between a powered

industrial truck and a stationary vehicle

in the other two instances.

Of the five accidents which were

identified as an employee being struck

or run over by vehicle, four were

accidents where employees other than

the vehicle operator were struck by the

vehicle. The remaining one was an

operator trying unsuccessfully to board

a free rolling vehicle.

E. The OSHA Fatality/Catastrophe

Reports. OSHA records a summary of

the results of investigations of all

accidents resulting in fatalities,

catastrophes, amputations and

hospitalizations of two or more days,

and those accidents that have received

significant publicity or property

damage. These summaries are recorded

on an OSHA Form 170 and include an

abstract describing the activities taking

place at the time of the accident and the

causes of the accident. These reports are

stored in a computerized database

system.

OSHA queried the computer for all

reports that contained the keyword

‘‘industrial truck’’. There were 4268

total reports in the system that resulted

in 3038 fatalities, 3244 serious injuries,

and 1413 non-serious injuries (many of

the accidents resulted in multiple

fatalities and/or injuries). The use of the

keyword ‘‘industrial truck’’ produced a

printout of 208 accidents (Ex. 3–8).

These 208 accidents resulted in 147

fatalities, 115 serious injuries and 34

non-serious injuries.

By adding the number of fatalities,

serious injuries and non-serious injuries

and dividing by the number of

accidents, it was determined that 1.4

injuries of some nature occurred per

accident. OSHA also determined the

percent of each of the three classes of

accidents that involved powered

industrial trucks. Those percentages are

4.8 percent of the fatalities, 3.5 percent

of the serious injuries and 2.4 percent of

the non-serious injuries were

attributable to an accident that involved

a powered industrial truck.

OSHA looked at the OSHA 170s to

determine the causes of the accidents

that were attributable to the use of

powered industrial trucks in general

industry. Table 6 presents a compilation

of the causes of those accidents.

TABLE 6.—CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS 1—

OSHA INVESTIGATION SUMMARIES

(OSHA 170S)

Cause No. of

reports

No training 2 .................................... 19

Improper equipment ....................... 10

Overturn .......................................... 53

Unstable load .................................. 45

Overload, improper use .................. 15

TABLE 6.—CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS 1—

OSHA INVESTIGATION SUMMARIES

(OSHA 170S)—Continued

Cause No. of

reports

Obstructed view .............................. 10

Carrying excess passenger ............ 8

Operator inattention ........................ 59

Falling from platform or curb .......... 9

Falling from trailer ........................... 6

Elevated employee ......................... 26

Operator struck by load .................. 37

Other employee struck by load ...... 8

Accident during maintenance ......... 14

Vehicle left in gear .......................... 6

Speeding ......................................... 5

Not powered industrial truck accident ............................................. 9

1The causes of the accidents were determined by the narrative in the accident report.

In most cases, the narrative emphasized the

cause of the accident, however, in a few

cases, reasonable and appropriate assumptions were made. In some cases, multiple accident causes were described in the narrative

portion of the report, or were assumed to have

caused the accident. (See Ex. 3–8.) 2 Of the 19 instances when the report contained the indication that a lack of training was

one of the causal factors of the accident, there

were 6 serious violations issued, 2 other

(nonserious) violations and 11 instances

where no citation was issued.

Source: Office of Electrical, Electronic and

Mechanical Engineering Safety Standards, Directorate of Safety Standards Programs,

OSHA.

Using the OSHA Form 170 data,

OSHA also compiled a listing of the

industries in which accidents occurred.

Table 7 presents a tabulation of the SIC

codes, the description of the industry,

and the number of times that accidents

were identified as having occurred in

those industries. For a complete listing

of the individual industries, see Ex. 3–

9.

TABLE 7.—INDUSTRIES WHERE ACCIDENTS OCCURRED—OSHA INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY (OSHA FORM

170) REPORTS

SICP division Description Times

cited

B ............. Mining ......................... 4

C ............. Construction ............... 25

D ............. Manufacturing ............ 95

E ............. Transportation, communication and utilities.22

F ............. Wholesale trades ....... 25

G ............ Retail trades ............... 18

I .............. Services ..................... 7

J ............. Public administration .. 4

NOTE: The breakdown of accidents does not

include agricultural accidents since establishments of 10 or less employees in this industry

are exempt from OSHA jurisdiction.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13791

Source: Office of Electrical, Electronic and

Mechanical Engineering Safety Standards, Directorate of Safety Standards Programs,

OSHA.

F. The OSHA Emergency

Communications System Reports.

OSHA has another internal system for

collecting information about serious

accidents. This is a telephone system

which requires that serious and/or

significant accidents be telephoned into

the National Office.

The telephone call system is part of

the OSHA emergency communications

system. Regional Administrators are

required to file a first report of fatalities,

catastrophes and other important events

(such as those that receive significant

publicity) to the National Office. The

information contained in these reports

is disseminated to the responsible

officials in OSHA and to the directorates

of the Agency. These reports are broken

down within the various offices and

distributed to the appropriate personnel.

There are approximately 1200 reports

received by the National Office yearly.

See Ex. 3–10.

None of the reports are screened

before the OSHA National Office

receives them to eliminate those from a

certain industry, occupation or because

of other factors. Although these reports

may not be considered statistically

significant by themselves in attempting

to determine the number of accidents

that have occurred, the lack of prior

screening indicates that they represent a

reasonable sampling of the most serious

type accidents and that the causes of the

accidents closely parallel the

distribution of the causes of all

accidents.

OSHA has examined the First Report

of Serious Injury reports and identified

247 that involved powered industrial

trucks. These accidents occurred

between 1980 and the present. OSHA

looked at the number of accidents

reported through its telephonic system

and determined the percentage of those

accidents that involved powered

industrial trucks. Table 8 contains a

listing of the number of First Reports of

Serious Accident reports which were

received from 1980 to present, the

number of those accidents which

involved powered industrial trucks, and

the corresponding percentage.

TABLE 8.—YEARLY SUMMARY OF FIRST REPORT OF SERIOUS ACCIDENTS

Year Total

reports

Pit

accidents Percent

1980 ....................................................................................................................................................... 200 2 1

1981 ....................................................................................................................................................... 125 2 1.6

1982 ....................................................................................................................................................... 113 0 0

1983 ....................................................................................................................................................... 115 3 2.6

1984 ....................................................................................................................................................... 181 1 .6

1985 ....................................................................................................................................................... 456 15 3.3

1986 ....................................................................................................................................................... 1,147 44 3.8

1987 ....................................................................................................................................................... 1,236 38 3.1

1988 ....................................................................................................................................................... 1,330 47 3.5

1989 ....................................................................................................................................................... 1,150 44 3.8

1990 ....................................................................................................................................................... 1,105 41 3.7

1991 ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 215 10 4.7

Totals 2 ......................................................................................................................................... 6,424 247 3.6

1These are the number of total reports received between the first of the year until March 31.

2The total number of reports, the number of accidents involving powered industrial trucks and the percentage were calculated using the figures

from 1985–1990. The number of accidents reported during the years 1980–1984 and those reported during 1991 were too few to be representative.

Source: Office of Electrical, Electronic and Mechanical Engineering Safety Standards, Directorate of Safety Standards Programs, OSHA.

Each of these reports were examined

to determine the causes of the accidents.

In some instances, multiple causes were

identified. Table 9 lists the causes of the

accidents and the number of accidents

which were attributable to that cause.

TABLE 9.—CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS

(POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCKS)

FIRST REPORTS OF SERIOUS ACCIDENT

Cause of the accident No. Accidents

Tipover ............................................ 58

Struck by powered industrial truck . 43

Struck by falling load ...................... 33

Elevated employee on truck ........... 28

Ran off loading dock or other surface ............................................. 16

Improper maintenance procedures 14

Lost control of truck ........................ 10

Truck struck material ...................... 10

TABLE 9.—CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS

(POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCKS)

FIRST REPORTS OF SERIOUS ACCIDENT—Continued

Cause of the accident No. Accidents

Employees overcome by carbon

monoxide or propane fuel ........... 10

Faulty powered industrial truck ...... 7

Unloading unchocked trailer ........... 7

Employee fell from vehicle ............. 7

Improper use of vehicle .................. 6

Electrocutions ................................. 2

Source: Office of Electrical, Electronic and

Mechanical Engineering Safety Standards, Directorate of Safety Standards Programs,

OSHA.

G. The OSHA General Duty Clause

Citation Analysis.

The Office of Mechanical Engineering

Safety Standards of OSHA, conducted

an analysis of the citations which were

issued between 1979 and 1984 for

violations of the general duty clause

(section 5(a)(1)) of the Occupational

Safety and Health Act. During that

period, there were a total of 3637

inspections in which at least one 5(a)(1)

citation was issued. See Ex. 3–11.

Sixty-five general duty clause

citations involved powered industrial

truck operations. Each was examined to

determine the nature of the violation.

Table 10 lists the violation that was

alleged to have occurred.

TABLE 10.—SUMMARY OF GENERAL

DUTY CLAUSE (5(A)(1)) CITATIONS

Violation No. instances

Employee elevated on forks ........... 44

Improper operation of vehicle ......... 13

Improper maintenance on vehicle .. 5

No vehicle operator training ........... 2
13792 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 10.—SUMMARY OF GENERAL

DUTY CLAUSE (5(A)(1)) CITATIONS—

Continued

Violation No. instances

Order picker without fall protection 1

Source: Office of Electrical, Electronic and

Mechanical Engineering Safety Standards, Directorate of Safety Standards Programs,

OSHA.

V. Basis for Agency Action

OSHA believes that, as the above

discussion indicates, that there is a

sufficient body of data and information

on which to base a revision of the

existing standard for powered industrial

truck operator training and the

promulgation of the same requirement

for powered industrial truck operator

training in the construction, maritime

and agriculture industries. These

requirements would reduce the number

of fatalities and injuries resulting from

accidents involving powered industrial

trucks operated by untrained or

insufficiently trained employees.

According to OSHA’s data and

information, powered industrial truck

accidents account for approximately 4.8

percent of the fatalities, 3.5 percent of

the serious injuries and 2.4 percent of

the non-serious injuries that occur in

general industry each year. These

accidents resulted in an average of 107

fatalities, 33,800 serious injuries, and

61,800 non-serious injuries per year

from 1981 through 1990.

In analyzing its accident data, OSHA

has derived two separate estimates of

the number of fatalities and serious

injuries that occur to employees due to

powered industrial truck accidents.

Because the two set of numbers are in

the same range, the Agency has

presented both. It should be noted that

the number of fatalities is virtually

identical using either method of

derivation. However, slightly different

definitions are used for estimating

injuries. The other set of estimates are

presented in the Preliminary Regulatory

Impact Analysis, below.

There are approximately 68,400

accidents involving powered industrial

trucks in general industry per year. This

figure was arrived at by totaling the

fatalities, serious, and non-serious

injuries and dividing this result by 1.4

(the number of injuries per accident

determined from the OSHA Fatality/

Catastrophe Reports). According to the

Industrial Truck Association (ITA),

there are currently approximately

855,900 powered industrial trucks in

the United States, therefore

approximately 8 percent of the powered

industrial trucks will be involved in an

accident this year (this assumes a truck

is involved in only one accident this

year). Since the ITA has stated that the

useful life of a powered industrial truck

is 8 years, that means that at some point

during its useful life, almost two-thirds

of the powered industrial trucks will be

involved in some type accident (again,

assuming there is only one accident per

truck).

OSHA also looked at the type

accidents that were described in the

section of this preamble entitled

‘‘Accident, injury and other data.’’ The

three reports that contained that

information were the ‘‘Industrial

Forklift Truck Fatalities—A Summary’’

(ODA Study); ‘‘The OSHA Fatality/

Catastrophe Reports’’ (Fat/Cat Study);

and the ‘‘OSHA Emergency

Communications System Reports, First

Reports.’’ The number of different types

of accidents are given in Table 12,

below. Since the Industrial Forklift

Truck Fatalities report was the only one

that used a single causation

methodology for categorizing the

accidents, this is the only study for

which percentages of the accidents were

calculated. These percentages appear in

parentheses following the numbers.

TABLE 11.—CAUSES OF POWERED

INDUSTRIAL TRUCK ACCIDENTS

Cause

Study

ODA study Fat/cats First

reports

Tipovers .. 22 (42%) 53 58

Struck by

vehicle . 24 (46%) ............. 43

Struck by

falling

material 4 (8%) 90 1 43

Elevated

employees ....... 2 (4%) 26 28

Control activation . 1 (2%) 2 6 .............

Improper

equipment or

usage ... ................. 10 3 13

Vehicle

overloaded .. ................. 15 .............

Obstructed

view ..... ................. 10 .............

Maintenance

acc ....... ................. 14 14

Speeding . ................. 5 .............

Fell from

platform ................. ............. 4 23

Lost control ........ ................. ............. 10

Overcome

by CO .. ................. ............. 10

TABLE 11.—CAUSES OF POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCK ACCIDENTS—Continued

Cause

Study

ODA study Fat/cats First

reports

Employee

fell from

vehicle . ................. ............. 7

Electrocution ....... ................. ............. 2

1This number represents the accidents due

to material that was in the powered industrial

truck (a portion of the load) falling on an employee-33 cases, and stacked material falling

on an employee when struck by a powered industrial truck-10 cases. 2This number represents the accidents due

to the operator leaving the vehicle in gear, dismounting the vehicle and being struck when

the vehicle moved. 3This number represents the number of accidents when either the vehicle was used improperly (6 instances) or the vehicle was defective (7 instances). 4This number represents the number of accidents when the operator drove the vehicle

off an elevated dock (16 instances) or fell

against the face of the dock when an

unchocked trailer rolled away from the dock

when being loaded or unloaded.

Sources: ‘‘The Forklift Truck Fatalities—A

Summary Report’’ (ODA Study); ‘‘The OSHA

Fatality/Catastrophe Reports’’ (Fat/Cats); and

‘‘The OSHA Emergency Communications System Reports (First Reports)’’.

In 9 percent of the accident

investigations in which an OSHA 170

was prepared (19 of 208), lack of

training was identified as a causal

factor. In more than half of these

accident investigations (11 of 19), lack

of training was not cited by OSHA

compliance officers. However, OSHA’s

standard specifies that only trained and

authorized operators are allowed to

operate powered industrial trucks.

Absence of a citation when lack of

training was identified as a causal factor

in the accident can only be attributed to

the fact that many compliance officers

believe that the powered industrial

truck training requirement (29 CFR

1910.178(l)) is vague and unenforceable

in its present form.

In addition, most of the accidents

where lack of training was not

mentioned, clearly could have been

avoided through better training. When

OSHA completes this rulemaking, in

light of the large number of industrial

truck accidents, based on priorities and

resources, it will consider whether to

revise the entire powered industrial

truck standard. Persons also may wish

to comment on whether OSHA should

revise the entire standard in the future.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13793

VI. The Need for Training

Training is generally defined as

making a person proficient through the

use of specialized instruction and

practice. Training is the means by

which an employer ensures that

employees have the knowledge, skills,

and abilities that are necessary for the

employees to do their jobs correctly.

Once an employee acquires the basic

knowledge, skills, and abilities,

refresher or remedial training may be

used to reinforce or improve those

attributes, to provide new material, to

provide material that was previously

discussed in a new manner, or to simply

maintain an awareness of the material

that had previously been taught.

Refresher or remedial training is

normally conducted on a predetermined

periodic basis, that is, on a monthly,

semi-annual, or annual basis.

Training may be as simple and

informal as a supervisor pointing out

either an error in the manner in which

an employee is doing a job (making an

on-the-spot correction) or showing an

employee how to do a particular task

(demonstrating the proper method to do

the job). On the other end of the

spectrum is the detailed, structured

instruction that uses the classical

methods of training (lectures,

conferences, formal demonstrations,

practical exercises, examinations, etc.).

Formal training is usually used to

impart a greater amount of, more

complicated, or more detailed

information to a trainee.

For the most part, employees do not

start out with the innate knowledge,

skills, and abilities to perform many of

the complicated or difficult practices

and procedures that occur commonly in

the workplace. For example, many

states require potential car drivers to

pass either driver training and/or driver

education programs to qualify for a

drivers license. Even with this training,

young drivers are involved in a

disproportionate number of accidents. It

is only after the drivers have more

experience that the number of accidents

decreases. Although many employees

who are selected or assigned to drive

powered industrial trucks are licensed

to drive automobiles, there are enough

dissimilarities between these two types

of vehicles and their operation to

require additional knowledge, skills,

and abilities to operate a powered

industrial trucks safely. Operational

characteristics of powered industrial

trucks, such as using vehicles equipped

with rear-wheel steering and frontwheel drive and the hoisting—moving—

lowering of loads, require operator

training and practice to master the

different driving skills that must be used

when an employee operates powered

industrial trucks.

Many of these accidents either can be

prevented, or the seriousness of the

injury to the employee can be mitigated

by training employees. Effective training

and supervision also can prevent the

occurrence of unsafe acts such as

speeding, failing to look in the direction

of travel, and failing to slow down or

stop and sound the vehicle’s horn at

blind intersections and other areas

where pedestrian traffic may not be

observable. Another example in which

training can prevent or lessen the

severity of an accident of this kind is

directly related to the stability of

powered industrial trucks when

traveling with an elevated load.

Effective operator training should

include the admonition that the vehicle

can only be moved when the load is at

its lowest point. Even if this admonition

is ignored and the vehicle tips over, the

injury to the operator is usually minimal

if the he or she stays with the vehicle.

As previously discussed, the usual

injury in a powered industrial truck

tipover occurs when the operator

attempts to jump off the vehicle when

it is tipping over. Since the normal

tendency is for a person to jump

downward, the operator lands on the

floor or ground in the path of the

overhead guard and the usual injury is

a crushing injury of the head, neck or

back when the overhead guard contacts

the employee. Training an employee to

stay with the vehicle will reduce the

severity of some of these injuries.

In 1990, the Office of Technology

Assessment of the U.S. Congress

published a book at the request of the

Senate Labor and Human Resources

Committee, the House Education and

Labor Committee, and the Senate

Finance Committee. This book is

entitled, Worker Training: Competing in

the New International Economy, OTA–

ITE–457 (Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office, September

1990; Ex. 3–12) Although this book

addresses the need for training so that

American industry can remain

competitive in the world marketplace,

there were many salient facts presented,

both about the state of training in the

workplace and the need for additional

training.

To be effective, training must impart

appropriate skills, must not include

irrelevant information and must

accommodate varying employee

backgrounds and learning styles.

Training is most effective when it is

quickly reinforced on the job. Poor

timing of training, lack of reinforcement

at work, and other factors prevent

effective transfer of knowledge to the

job.

The book also pointed out that small

business access to new employees with

good skills is limited. Employees hired

by companies reflect the labor pool

available and is dependent upon the

size of the company. Small companies

must draw their employees from the

locally available talent pool whereas

larger companies can attract prospective

employees from a much larger

geographical area. In order to make up

for the limitations of the limited talent

pool, small employers usually must

provide additional training and

education to achieve comparable

employee performance.

The OTA book pointed out that

inadequate training costs firms and

employers not only in health and safety

risks, but also downtime, defective parts

and equipment, wasted material, late

deliveries, inferior quality products and

poor customer service. To maximize its

effectiveness, training must be focused

on workplace problems because simply

providing more generalized, nondirected training will not promote

industrial competitiveness. If the work

is not organized to tap employee skills,

the training investment will be wasted.

Finally, the book emphasized that

employers historically have not trained

their workers for several reasons. First,

high labor turnover has mistakenly led

employers to believe that skilled

workers will leave so their companies

will not recoup their training

investment. Second, many employers

believe that an increase in productivity

will not offset the cost of training

employees. As the book points out, that

is not the case.

The studies conducted by Cohen and

Jensen, discussed under Accident,

injury and other data earlier in this

preamble, found a reduction in operator

error rate of up to 70 percent. Although

a 70 percent error rate reduction can not

be directly equated to a corresponding

reduction in the number of accidents

that this or any other group of operators

will experience, improper or unsafe

operation of a powered industrial truck

is the major cause of the accidents and

their resultant fatalities and injuries.

Therefore, a reduction in the unsafe

operation of a powered industrial truck

will reduce the number of accidents,

and the resultant fatalities and injuries.

Many standards promulgated by

OSHA explicitly require the employer to

train employees in the safety and health

aspects of their jobs. These requirements

reflect OSHA’s belief that training is an

essential part of an effective employer’s

program for protecting workers from

accidents and illnesses. (See Ex. 3–13
13794 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

for a complete list of the OSHA

standards that require training.)

Although not all powered industrial

truck accident reports spell out the lack

of training as a causal factor of the

accidents, each accident can, in part, be

attributed to either being caused or

worsened by the actions or inactions of

the operator. For example, when a

powered industrial truck tips over, the

accident is caused by one or more of

several factors, including speeding,

traveling with the load in an elevated

position, or improperly negotiating a

turn. Training can minimize the times

that these events occur.

Proper training of an employee must

take into account the fact that different

operating conditions (including the type

and size of the load, the type and

condition of the surface on which the

vehicle is being operated, and other

factors) can adversely affect vehicle

operation. Operator training must

emphasize two points regarding any

potential accident scenario. These two

factors are: (1) The employee should not

engage in activities that may cause an

accident, and (2) the employee should

minimize the potential for injury (either

to himself or herself or to other

employees) by taking appropriate

actions.

OSHA is not proposing a program of

licensing or certification of powered

industrial truck operators either by itself

or as an adjunct to operator training.

OSHA does not have the resources to

conduct such a program since there are

close to 1.5 million employees who

operate powered industrial trucks.

VII. Summary and Explanation of the

Proposed Rule

OSHA is proposing to revise the

training requirement for powered

industrial truck operators, 29 CFR

1910.178(l), contained in the general

industry standards, and to add

equivalent training requirements for the

maritime industries. This proposal is

intended to enhance the safe operation

of powered industrial trucks in the

workplace.

On February 27, 1995, OSHA

submitted to the Advisory Committee

on Construction Safety and Health (AC)

a draft of this document. The ACCOSH

recommended to OSHA that the Agency

not proceed with rulemaking for that

industry until the Advisory Committee

had sufficient time to completely study

the document and provide further

recommendations. Consequently, this

rulemaking is limited to general

industry and the maritime industries.

The Agency intends to propose to adopt

for the construction industry similar

requirements for training the operators

of powered industrial trucks after

receiving and taking into account the

recommendations of the ACCOSH.

In developing this proposal, OSHA

looked at the training requirements of

the existing national consensus standard

for powered industrial trucks, ANSI

B56.1–1993, as well as training

requirements from other standards (both

industry and government). The nontraining related requirements of those

standards are beyond the scope of this

proposal.

OSHA has not included suggestive

language contained at paragraph 4.19.2

of the consensus standard because other

enforceable language in the proposed

standard covers the issue. This

paragraph states, ‘‘The operator training

program should include the user’s

policies for the site where the trainee

will operate the truck, the operating

conditions for that location, and the

specific truck the trainee will operate.

The training program shall be presented

to all new operators regardless of

previous experience.’’

The Agency has not adopted the

language contained in 4.19.3(a) of the

consensus standard because the

responsibility for providing a safe

workplace (including the use of a

powered industrial truck) is vested with

the employer under the OSH Act. This

paragraph specifies, ‘‘The primary

responsibility of the operator is to use

the powered industrial truck safely

following the instructions given in the

training program.’’

The consensus standard, at 4.19.4(e)

and 4.19.5 specifies the type of training

and the testing that should be

conducted, whereas the OSHA standard

leaves the methods of training up to the

employer. As explained elsewhere in

this preamble, the employer is

responsible for selecting the methods

that are employed to train the operators.

In some circumstances, the employee

may be able to gain valuable

information from reading the operators

manual for the vehicle. In other

circumstances, the employee may not be

able to read and comprehend the

contents of the manual and may have to

be shown how to operate the truck

safely.

Many of the other OSHA standards

and the consensus standards specify

that some means be used to verify that

training was conducted. Examples of

such verification include: (1) Requiring

documentation of the training, (2) the

production and retention of lesson

plans, (3) attendance rosters, and (4) the

issuance of training certificates. When

refresher or remedial training is

specified, these other rules usually

require that a set amount of training be

conducted at a regular interval (for

example, a certain number of hours of

refresher training be conducted

annually). OSHA is including

evaluation by a designated person and

certification that the employee has taken

the training and can competently

operate the truck. Course materials also

must be kept. OSHA believes that this

is the appropriate method of

verification. As operators vary greatly in

the experience and backgrounds and

they will be required to operate different

types of vehicles, different types and

amounts of training are necessary and

OSHA does not believe it can specify a

rigid curriculum.

This proposed revision of the training

requirement found in § 1910.178(l) for

operators of powered industrial trucks

and the imposition of the same

requirement for operators of powered

industrial trucks in other industries

(construction and maritime) specifies

that the employer develop a complete

training program. This program consists

of an evaluation of each potential truck

operator and the training of the

potential operator in those subject

matters relating to the operation of the

truck, the work environment in which

the truck will be operated and the

requirements of the OSHA standard.

This training program also must include

a periodic evaluation of the performance

of the operator and refresher or remedial

training as necessary. To maximize the

effectiveness of the training, OSHA is

proposing to allow the employer to

avoid having to conduct training that is

duplicative of other training the

employee has previously received.

Finally, the training provisions would

require that the employer certify that the

training and evaluations have been

conducted.

At paragraph (1)(i), OSHA specifies

that each potential operator of a

powered industrial truck must be

capable of performing the duties that are

required of the job after training and

appropriate accommodation. This

would include being able to climb onto

and off of a truck, to sit on the vehicle

for extended periods of time, and to turn

his or her body to be able to look in the

direction of travel when driving in

reverse. Elements of this evaluation may

include the employee having the

physical and mental abilities to perform

the job. Information obtained during the

initial employee evaluation can be used

to, among other things, determine how

best to train the employee. For example,

if the employee cannot read and

comprehend the operator’s manuals for

the type trucks that the employee will

operate, then this information would

have to taught by means other than
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13795

having the employee try to read the

truck manuals. The initial evaluation

can be useful for the avoidance of

duplicative training.

Paragraph (1)(ii) provides that the

employer shall assure that the employee

has received required training, that the

employee has been evaluated and that

the potential operator can perform the

job competently. The evaluation must

be carried out after the training by a

designated person so that the employer

can assure that the potential operator

can perform the duties required of an

operator in a competent manner. The

conduct of this evaluation during the

training is known as a practical exercise

or a performance test. OSHA believes

that only through evaluation by a

knowledgeable person after training can

an employer know that the employee

has been adequately trained and can

safely perform the job.

The designated person may be the

employer if qualified. A small business

person who has employees may send

the employees to an outside training

organization. Alternately, the employer

may take or have training so that the

employer is qualified as a designated

person.

At paragraph (2), OSHA is proposing

to require that the employer implement

a training program for all powered

industrial truck operators. This program

would ensure that only trained drivers

who have successfully completed the

training program would be allowed to

operate these vehicles. An exception to

the rule would allow trainees to operate

powered industrial trucks provided the

operation is under the direct

supervision of a designated person and

the operation is conducted where is

minimum danger to the trainee or other

employees.

OSHA is proposing at paragraph

(2)(ii) that the training consist of a

combination of classroom instruction

and practical training. The Agency

believes that only by the use of a

combination of training methods will

the employee be adequately trained.

Although classroom training is

invaluable for the teaching of the

principles of vehicle operation, it is the

hands-on training and the evaluation of

the operation of the vehicle that finally

proves the adequacy of the training and

the ability of the employee to use that

training to successfully operate a

powered industrial truck.

At paragraph (2)(iii), OSHA is

proposing to require that all training be

conducted by a designated person.

OSHA defines a designated person as

one who has the requisite knowledge,

training and experience to train

powered industrial truck operators. As

discussed elsewhere in this preamble,

the employer may have the necessary

prerequisites to qualify as a designated

person or he or she may assign the

training responsibility to another person

(either a knowledgeable employee or an

trainer from outside the company).

To ensure that the training contains

the appropriate information for the

operator, OSHA has provided a list of

subjects at paragraph (3). Under this

rule, it is the responsibility of the

employer to select the particular items

that are pertinent to the type trucks that

the employee will be allowed to operate

and the work environment in which the

vehicle will be operated. For example,

if the employee will be allowed to

operate an order picker, it is essential

that he or she understand the location

and function of the controls, the

location and operation of the

powerplant, steering and maneuvering,

visibility, inspection and maintenance

and other general operating functions of

the vehicle. Additionally, it is essential

that the employee know and understand

that he or she must be restrained from

falling when the platform of the truck is

in an elevated position and that the

truck must never be driven when the

platform is elevated. Under this

proposed requirement, it is the

responsibility of the employer to select

those elements of the training that are

necessary for the type vehicle to be used

and the workplace in which that vehicle

will be operated. The employer may

leave out elements if the employer can

demonstrate that they are not relevant to

safe operation in the employer’s

workplace.

An additional component of the

training program is a continuing

evaluation of the operator. At paragraph

(4), OSHA specifies that this evaluation

be conducted on a periodic basis so that

the employee retains and uses the

knowledge, skills and abilities that are

necessary for the safe operation of the

vehicle. This evaluation need not be

conducted continuously, however, the

employer should conduct these

evaluations at intervals that will ensure

that the operators have not forgotten or

chosen to disregard their training. This

evaluation does not have to be

formalized but must consist of a

designated person observing the

operation to ensure that the use of the

powered industrial truck is being

conducted safely. OSHA requires that

this evaluation be carried out at least

annually.

OSHA is requiring at paragraph (5)

that the employer certify that the

required training and evaluations have

been conducted. To minimize the

paperwork burden on the employer,

OSHA is specifying that the certification

consist of the name of the employee, the

date of the training or evaluation and

the signature of the person conducting

the training or evaluation.

Under this paragraph, OSHA also

specifies that all the current training

materials used in the conduct of training

or the name and address of the outside

trainer, if one is used, be maintained.

At paragraph (6), OSHA is proposing

to allow the employer to forgo that

portion of the training that an employee

has previously received. The intent of

these provisions is to allow the

employer to not have to train an

employee in those phases of the

operation of a powered industrial truck

if the employee knows the necessary

information and has been evaluated and

has proven to be competent to perform

those duties.

As previously discussed, there are

three major areas of consideration that

must be emphasized when conducting a

powered industrial truck training

program. These three areas are: (1) The

characteristics, operation and

limitations of the vehicles that the

trainee will be authorized to operate, (2)

the hazards due to the characteristics of

the workplace in which these vehicles

will operate, and (3) the general safety

rules that apply to these vehicles and

their operation.

This proposed rule has been drafted

in performance language to allow

reasonable flexibility to the employer

for developing the training program and

conducting the training. OSHA

recognizes the inherent differences in

the capabilities and limitations of

employees, both to assimilate the

training and then to utilize the

knowledge that has been gained.

Therefore, the proposed regulation does

not limit the employer by specifying the

manner in which the training must be

conducted. Similarly, the specific

content of the training course has not

been stated because there are different

topics which must be taught due to

variances in the operation of the many

makes and models of vehicles and

because there are different hazards in

each workplace. However, OSHA has

proposed the various subject matters

that should be covered unless the

employer determines they are not

relevant to the employer’s vehicle and

workplace. Although some areas of

concern may not be pertinent to any one

workplace and vehicle, other areas are

pertinent to all vehicles and workplaces.

OSHA believes that a training

program needs to be conducted before

the employee begins to operate a

vehicle. To this end, OSHA has required

initial training of employees so that they
13796 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

will acquire the knowledge and skills

are necessary for the safe operation of

the powered industrial truck before

being allowed to operate the vehicle

without close supervision.

OSHA has left the particulars of the

type of training (lecture, conference,

demonstration, practical exercise, test or

examination, etc.) to the employer. The

length of the training and other

variables must be based on the

employee’s experience and other

qualifications and the nature of the

work environment. The training must be

based upon the type of vehicles the

employee will be allowed to operate, the

conditions that exist in the workplace,

the general safety rules from this OSHA

standard, the ability of the trainer to

teach, and the ability of the trainee to

learn. The ability of the employee to

assimilate the information presented in

the training must be used as the primary

criterion for the length, type and other

details of the training. Since each

employee is different in his or her

ability to comprehend, assimilate and

use the information received in the

training, OSHA believes that one

standardized training course will not

suffice for all employees.

The employer may choose the training

provider. This could include contracting

with an outside professional training

company to come into the company and

train the powered industrial truck

operators or the employer developing

and conducting the training program. In

either case, the employer can choose the

method or methods by which the

employees will be trained and when the

training is conducted.

The standard requires not only

appropriate training but evaluation of

the operators competency by a

designated person with the knowledge

to make that evaluation. This is the

method that will most accurately prove

that the operator has been trained and

that the training has been, and

continues to be, effective. Through

observation of the operation of the

vehicle, these questions can be

answered.

When a new employee claims prior

experience in operating a powered

industrial truck, the employer must

ensure that the employee knows how to

operate the vehicle safely. This can be

ascertained by questioning the

employee on various aspects of the

operation of the truck and by requiring

the operator to demonstrate his or her

ability to operate the vehicle safely

through the conduct of a practical

exercise.

In making a determination of an

employee’s claim of sufficient prior

experience, the employer must consider

the type of equipment that this

employee professes to have operated,

how long ago this experience was

gained, and the type work environment

in which the employee worked. Written

documentation of the earlier training is

also necessary to determine that proper

training has been given. In addition, the

competency of the employee must be

evaluated. Based on the resolution of

these issues, the employer can

determine whether the experience is

recent and thorough enough, the

documentation complete, and the

competency sufficient to forgo some or

much of the initial training. Some

training on the specific factors of the

new employees workplace is always

going to be necessary. Again, the major

criterion of evaluation of the employee

is: Does the person know how to do the

job and does the vehicle operator use

those knowledge, skills and abilities to

do the job safely?

OSHA also is proposing to add two

non-mandatory appendices. These

appendices are intended to provide

guidance to employers in establishing a

training program (Appendix A) and in

understanding to basic principles of

stability (Appendix B). In neither case is

the information contained in these

appendices intended to provide a

exhaustive explanation of the

techniques of conducting training or of

understanding the principles of

stability, but each appendix is intended

to introduce the basic concepts so that

the employer can utilize the material to

provide basic training.

VIII. Statutory Considerations

A. Introduction

Section 2(b)(3) of the Occupational

Safety and Health Act authorizes ‘‘the

Secretary of Labor to set mandatory

occupational safety and health

standards applicable to businesses

affecting interstate commerce’’, and

section 5(a)(2) provides that ‘‘[e]ach

employer shall comply with

occupational safety and health

standards promulgated under this Act’’

(emphasis added). Section 3(8) of the

OSH Act (29 U.S.C. 652(8)) provides

that ‘‘the term ’occupational safety and

health standard’ means a standard

which requires conditions, or the

adoption or use of one or more

practices, means, methods, operations,

or processes, reasonably necessary or

appropriate to provide safe or healthful

employment and places of

employment.’’

OSHA considers a standard to be

‘‘reasonably necessary or appropriate’’

within the meaning of section 3(8) if it

meets the following criteria:

(1) The standard will substantially

reduce a significant risk of material

harm;

(2) Compliance is technologically

feasible in the sense that the protective

measures being required already exist,

can be brought into existence with

available technology, or can be created

with technology that can reasonably be

developed;

(3) Compliance is economically

feasible in the sense that industry can

absorb or pass on the costs without

major dislocation or threat of instability;

and

(4) The standard is cost effective in

that it employs the least expensive

protective measures capable of reducing

or eliminating significant risk.

Additionally, safety standards must

better effectuate the Act’s protective

purpose than any applicable national

consensus standard, must be compatible

with prior agency action, must be

responsive to significant comment in

the record, and, to the extent allowed by

statute, must be consistent with

applicable Executive Orders. OSHA

believes that application of these criteria

results in standards that provide a high

degree of worker protection without

undue burden on employers.

OSHA has long interpreted section

3(8) of the OSH Act to require that,

before it promulgates ‘‘a health or safety

standard, it must find that a place of

employment is unsafe—in the sense that

significant risks are present and can be

eliminated or lessened by a change in

practices [See Industrial Union Dep’t,

AFL-CIO v. American Petroleum Inst.,

448 U.S. 607, 642 (1980) (plurality)

(Benzene).’’ When, as frequently

happens in safety rulemaking, OSHA

promulgates standards that differ from

existing national consensus standards, it

must explain ‘‘why the rule as adopted

will better effectuate the purposes of

this Act than the national consensus

standard [29 U.S.C. 655(b)(8)].’’ Thus,

national consensus standards provide

the minimum level of effectiveness for

standards which OSHA may adopt (29

U.S.C. 655(a)).

As a result, OSHA is precluded from

regulating insignificant safety risks or

from issuing safety standards that do not

lessen risk in a significant way.

The OSH Act also limits OSHA’s

discretion to issue overly burdensome

rules, as the agency also has long

recognized that ‘‘any standard that was

not economically or technologically

feasible would a fortiori not be

‘reasonably necessary or appropriate’

under the Act. See Industrial Union

Dep’t v. Hodgson, [499 F.2d 467, 478

(D.C. Cir. 1974)] (‘Congress does not

appear to have intended to protect
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13797

employees by putting their employers

out of business.’) [American Textile

Mfrs. Inst. Inc., 452 U.S. at 513 n. 31 (a

standard is economically feasible even if

it portends ‘‘disaster for some marginal

firms,’’ but it is economically infeasible

if it ‘‘threaten[s] massive dislocation to,

or imperil[s] the existence of,’’ the

industry)].’’

By stating the test in terms of ‘‘threat’’

and ‘‘peril,’’ the Supreme Court made

clear in ATMI that economic

infeasibility begins short of industrywide bankruptcy. OSHA itself has

placed the line considerably below this

level. (See for example, ATMI, 452 U.S.

at 527 n. 50; 43 FR 27,360 (June 23,

1978). Proposed 200 μg/m3 PEL for

cotton dust did not raise serious

possibility of industry-wide bankruptcy,

but impact on weaving sector would be

severe, possibly requiring

reconstruction of 90 percent of all

weave rooms. OSHA concluded that the

200 μg/m3 level was not feasible for

weaving and that 750 μg/m3 was all that

could reasonably be required). See also

54 FR 29,245–246 (July 11, 1989);

American Iron & Steel Institute, 939

F.2d at 1003. OSHA raised the

engineering control level for lead in

small nonferrous foundries to avoid the

possibility of bankruptcy for about half

of small foundries even though the

industry as a whole could have survived

the loss of small firms.) Although the

cotton dust and lead rulemakings

involved health standards, the economic

feasibility ceiling established therein

applies equally to safety standards.

Indeed, because feasibility is a

necessary element of a ‘‘reasonably

necessary or appropriate’’ standard, this

ceiling boundary is the same for health

and safety rulemaking since it comes

from section 3(8), which governs all

permanent OSHA standards.

All OSHA standards must also be

cost-effective in the sense that the

protective measures being required must

be the least expensive measures capable

of achieving the desired end (ATMI, at

514 n. 32; Building and Constr. Trades

Dep’t AFL-CIO v. Brock, 838 F.2d 1258,

1269 (D.C. Cir. 1988)). OSHA gives

additional consideration to financial

impact in setting the period of time that

should be allowed for compliance

allowing as much as ten years for

compliance phase-in. (See United

Steelworkers of Am. v. Marshall, 647

F.2d 1189, 1278 (D.C. Cir. 1980), cert.

denied, 453 U.S. 913 (1981).)

Additionally, OSHA’s enforcement

policy takes account of financial

hardship on an individualized basis.

OSHA’s Field Operations Manual

provides that, based on an employer’s

economic situation, OSHA may extend

the period within which a violation

must be corrected after issuance of a

citation (CPL. 2.45B, Chapter III,

paragraph E6d(3)(a), Dec. 31, 1990).

To reach the necessary findings and

conclusions that a safety standard

substantially reduces a significant risk

of harm, is both technologically and

economically feasible, and is cost

effective, OSHA must conduct

rulemaking in accord with the

requirements of section 6 of the OSH

Act. The regulatory proceeding allows it

to determine the qualitative and, if

possible, the quantitative nature of the

risk with and without regulation, the

technological feasibility of compliance,

the availability of capital to the industry

and the extent to which that capital is

required for other purposes, the

industry’s profit history, the industry’s

ability to absorb costs or pass them on

to the consumer, the impact of higher

costs on demand, and the impact on

competition with substitutes and

imports. (See ATMI at 2501–2503;

American Iron & Steel Institute

generally.)

Finally, general principles of

administrative law require the Agency

to justify significant departures from

prior practice. (See International Union,

UAW v. Pendergrass, 878 F.2d 389, 400

(D.C. 1989)). In the twenty years since

enactment of the OSH Act, OSHA has

promulgated numerous safety

standards—standards that provide

benchmarks for judging risks, benefits,

and feasibility of compliance in

subsequent rulemakings. (OSHA’s

Hazardous Waste Operations and

Emergency Response Standard, for

example, required use of existing

technology and well accepted safety

practices to eliminate at least 32 deaths

and 18,700 lost workday injuries at a

cost of about $153 million per year (54

FR 9311–9312; March 6, 1989). The

Excavation standard also drew on

existing technology and recognized

safety practices to save 74 lives and over

800 lost workday injuries annually at a

cost of about $306 million. (54 FR

45,954; Oct. 31, 1989). OSHA’s Grain

Handling Facilities standard relied

primarily on simple housekeeping

measures to save 18 lives and 394

injuries annually, at a total net cost of

$5.9 to $33.4 million (52 FR 49,622;

Dec. 31, 1991).)

B. The proposed amendment to the

standard for the training of powered

industrial truck operators and the

promulgation of like requirements for

the construction and maritime

industries complies with the statutory

criteria described above.

As explained in Section I,

Background, Section II, The Powered

Industrial Truck, Section III, Powered

Industrial Truck Hazards, Section IV,

Accident, Injury and Other Data, and

Section V, Basis for Agency Action,

earlier in this preamble, and in Section

IX, Summary of the Regulatory Impact

and Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and

Environmental Impact Assessment, later

in this preamble, OSHA has determined

that the operation of powered industrial

trucks by untrained or inadequately

trained operators pose significant risks

to employees. There have been on

average 85 fatalities, 34,900 serious

injuries and 61,800 non-serious injuries

annually since 1981 due to unsafe

powered industrial truck operation.

OSHA estimates that compliance with

the revised training requirement for

powered industrial truck operator will

reduce the risk of hazards to those

operators and other employees by 25

percent (preventing 17 to 22 fatalities,

10,898 to 14,118 serious injuries and

15,450 non-serious injuries annually).

This constitutes a substantial reduction

of significant risk of material harm.

The Agency believes that compliance

is technologically feasible because there

exists a current rule for the training of

powered industrial truck operators and

the revised regulation specifies in more

detail what is to be taught to those

operators, and requires the employer to

institute effective supervisory measures

to ensure continued safe operation of

those vehicles. In many companies, the

training of vehicle operators and the

subsequent supervisory measures

required by the standard have already

been implemented.

Additionally, OSHA believes that

compliance is economically feasible,

because, as documented by the

Regulatory Impact Analysis, all

regulated sectors can readily absorb or

pass on compliance costs.

The standard’s costs, benefits, and

compliance requirements are

reasonable, amounting to approximately

34.9 million in the first year and 19.4

million per year thereafter, preventing

17 to 22 fatalities, 10,898 to 14,118

serious injuries and 15,450 non-serious

injuries per year. As explained above,

using another definition, OSHA

estimates that it will eliminate between

11,968 and 15,504 lost workday injuries

in addition to the fatalities prevented.

These percentages are consistent with

those of other OSHA safety standards.

C. The requirement for the training of

powered industrial truck operators is

necessary to address the significant risks

of material harm posed by the operation

of those vehicles.

OSHA believes that Section I,

Background, Section II, The Powered

Industrial Truck, Section III, Powered
13798 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Industrial Truck Hazards, Section IV,

Accident, Injury and Other Data, and

Section V, Basis for Agency Action,

earlier in this preamble have clearly and

comprehensively set out the Agency’s

bases for concluding that the operation

of powered industrial trucks by

untrained or inadequately trained

employees pose significant risks and

that the training of those operators is

reasonably necessary to protect affected

employees from those risks. In

particular, as detailed in Section IX,

Preliminary Regulatory Impact and

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and

Environmental Impact Assessment, later

in this preamble, OSHA estimates that

the improper operation of powered

industrial trucks causes 85 fatalities,

34,902 serious injuries, and 61,800 nonserious injuries annually, and that

revision of and compliance with the

requirements of the OSHA standard for

the training of powered industrial truck

operators will reduce the risk of fatality

and injury by 25 percent (preventing 17

to 22 fatalities, 10,898 to 14,118 serious

injuries and 15,450 non-serious

injuries).

OSHA emphasizes that its risk

assessment is based on employee

exposure to the hazards of the operation

of powered industrial trucks, hazards

that exists in a large range of industries.

Although Section IX, Preliminary

Regulatory Impact and Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis and Environmental

Impact Assessment, later in this

preamble, presents OSHA’s estimate of

the costs and benefits of the revision of

the training requirement in terms of the

Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)

codes for the industries regulated,

OSHA does not believe that the risk

associated with these hazards vary

according to what SIC code a vehicle

may be operated in. Thus, some of the

industry categories within the scope of

the final rule that will have compliance

costs have had few or no documented

powered industrial truck accidents or

injuries or fatalities during the period

covered by the PRIA. In this case, OSHA

has considered developing a scope of

the rule to cover those situations it has

determined to be hazardous. As

explained more fully below, OSHA has

determined that the lack of prior

documented injuries and deaths in some

SIC Codes does not indicate that the

employees in those industries are not

exposed to significant risks from the

unsafe operation of powered industrial

trucks. As the summary of the PRIA

explains in detail, OSHA has

determined that it is appropriate to

include those industries within the

scope of the standard because

employees in those industries are

exposed to the same kinds of hazards as

employees in industries for which there

are reported injuries and fatalities.

Even in industry sectors in which no

injuries or fatalities have been reported,

the Agency believes there is sufficient

information for OSHA to determine that

employees who work in areas in which

powered industrial trucks are operated

or operate those vehicles face significant

risks, based on analysis of the elements

of the hazards identified and of the

similarity of hazard elements between

industry sectors. Therefore, the Agency

has determined that all employees who

operate those vehicles or work in areas

in which those vehicles are operated

face a significant risk of material harm

and that compliance with the powered

industrial truck standard is reasonably

necessary to protect affected employees

from those risks, regardless of the

number of accidents and injuries

reported for the SIC code to which the

employer has been assigned.

Also, because of the difficulties the

Agency has experienced in compiling a

database for powered industrial truck

accidents, injuries or fatalities may have

occurred in industries, including those

for which no incidents have been

documented, without being recorded. In

addition, the SIC code-based

organization of incident data may mask

actual or potential hazards of the

operation of powered industrial trucks

because, while a business is classified

for SIC purposes according to its

principal activity, the workplace may

also contain warehousing areas where

materials are stored as a ‘‘secondary’’

purpose, that have necessitated the use

of powered industrial trucks with their

resultant injuries or fatalities. For

example, a new car dealer would be

classified under the new car dealer SIC,

even though the dealer may store a large

number of auto accessories, such as tires

and batteries. In many instances, large

quantities of items like batteries are

palletized for ease of handling. When

these pallets of material are delivered to

the dealer, the items are either removed

from the pallet and handling manually,

or the pallet and the material are moved

with some type of powered industrial

truck, such as a pallet jack. Although

the workplace is a new car dealer, a

powered industrial truck is in use and

an accident would have nothing to do

with selling new cars. Therefore, OSHA

believes, based on the limitations of the

accident data and the circumstantial

nature of many vehicle accidents, that it

is appropriate to require that employers

protect affected employees from the

hazards of vehicle operations in all

workplaces where powered industrial

trucks are used, rather than to

characterize workplaces according to

the injury or fatality experience of the

SIC codes in which they have been

classified.

The Agency also notes that many

accidents that occur as a result of

powered industrial truck operations are

not classified as an accident involving a

truck. For example, if a powered

industrial truck is used to lift an

employee who is standing on the forks

of the vehicle and the employee falls

from those forks while aloft, the

accident could be classified as a fall

from height or a fall from an elevated

platform. In both instances, the fact that

the employee was unsafely taken aloft

on the forks of a powered industrial

truck and fell from those forks is not

transferred to the accident report

because the accident was attributed to

other causes.

Finally, it is well established in the

OSH Act enforcement context that the

lack of injuries or deaths to a particular

employer’s employees does not

establish that the employees are not

exposed to a hazard. In a frequently

quoted passage, the Fifth Circuit long

ago observed that ‘‘the goal of the Act

is to prevent the first accident, not to

serve as a source of consolation for the

first victim or his survivors’’ (Mineral

Industries & Heavy Construction Group

v. OSHRC, 639 F.2d 1289, 1294 (5th Cir.

1981)). This principle applies to

regulatory actions as well. Once the

agency determines that exposure to a

particular condition constitutes a

significant risk, it need not repeat that

analysis for every situation or type of

workplace in which the condition is

found.

In addition, those segments with

fewer trucks and, consequently fewer

accidents, will have lower costs for

training and evaluation. However, the

risk to each individual operator for each

year of operation is approximately the

same as in industries with more trucks

and operators. This approach was

upheld in International Union, UAW, v.

OSHA, —F. 2d—, (D.C. Circ., October

21, 1994)

For all of the foregoing reasons, OSHA

has determined that it is inappropriate

to exclude any of the SICs merely

because they have not recently had

documented powered industrial truck

injuries or fatalities, insofar as those

SICs contain workplaces where those

vehicles are operated.

D. Conclusion

OSHA has determined that the

powered industrial truck standard, like

other safety standards, is subject to the

constraints of section 3(8) of the OSH
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13799

Act, that the standard is ‘‘reasonably

necessary or appropriate to provide safe

or healthful employment and places of

employment.’’ But the standard is not

subject to the section 6(b)(5)

requirement that it limit significant risk

‘‘to the extent feasible.’’

The Agency believes that the use of

powered industrial trucks in the

workplace by untrained or poorly

trained employees poses significant

risks and that the need to require that

only properly trained employees operate

those vehicles is reasonably necessary to

protect affected employees from those

risks. OSHA also has determined that

compliance with the standard for the

training of those operators is

technologically feasible because many

companies offer the type training that

the standard would require. In addition,

OSHA believes that compliance is

economically feasible, because, as

documented by the Preliminary

Regulatory Impact Analysis (Ex. 2), all

regulated sectors can readily absorb or

pass on initial compliance costs and

economic benefits will ultimately

exceed compliance costs. In particular,

the Agency believes that compliance

with the powered industrial truck

training requirement will result in

substantial cost savings and

productivity gains at facilities that

utilize powered industrial trucks that

might otherwise be disrupted by

accidents and injuries.

As detailed in the Summary of the

Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis,

the standard’s costs, benefits, and

compliance requirements are consistent

with those of other OSHA safety

standards. For example, the Hazardous

Waste Operations and Emergency

Response standard (29 CFR 1910.120)

requires the use of existing technology

and well accepted safety practices to

eliminate at least 32 deaths and 18,700

lost workday injuries at a cost of about

$153 million per year (54 FR 9311–

9312; March 6, 1989). The Excavations

standard (29 CFR 1926, Subpart P) also

drew on existing technology and

recognized safety practices to save 74

lives and over 800 lost workday injuries

annually at a cost of about $306 million

(54 FR 45,954; Oct. 31, 1989).

Additionally, the Grain Handling

Facilities standard (29 CFR 1910.272)

relied primarily on simple

housekeeping measures to save 18 lives

and 394 injuries annually, at a total net

cost of between $5.9 million and $33.4

million (52 FR 49,622; Dec. 31, 1987).

Also, compliance with the planning,

work practice, and training provisions

of the Process Safety Management

standard (29 CFR 1910.119) will reduce

the risk of catastrophic fire and

explosion (330 fatalities and 1917

injuries and illnesses annually) by 80

percent, at an annualized cost of $888.7

million in the first five years and at an

annualized cost of $470.8 million in the

following five years.

IX. Summary of the Preliminary

Economic, Feasibility and Regulatory

Flexibility Analyses and Environmental

Impact Assessment

A. Introduction

Executive Order 12866 and the

Regulatory Flexibility Act require

Federal Agencies to analyze the costs,

benefits and other consequences and

impacts of proposed standards and final

rules. Consistent with these

requirements, OSHA has prepared a

preliminary economic analysis for the

proposed revisions to and adoption of

the powered industrial truck operator

training provisions which are proposed

in this document.

This analysis includes a description

of the industries that would be affected

by the regulation, an assessment of the

benefits attributable to adoption of the

proposal, a determination of the

technological feasibility of the proposed

revisions, estimation of the costs of

compliance, a determination of the

economic feasibility of compliance with

the proposed provisions, and an

analysis of the economic and other

impacts of this rulemaking. The

Advisory Committee on Construction

Safety and Health is currently reviewing

the proposed rule for applicability to the

construction industry and based on the

Advisory Committee’s

recommendations, OSHA may extend

the coverage of the proposed rule to this

sector in the future.

Affected Industries

Using powered industrial truck sales

data provided by the Industrial Truck

Association (ITA), OSHA estimates that

there are 822,831 industrial trucks in

use in industries covered by the

proposed standard. Industries with the

largest number of powered industrial

trucks include wholesale trade-nondurable goods (SIC 51) with an

estimated 109,232 powered industrial

trucks, and food and kindred products

(SIC 20) with an estimated 71,275 such

trucks.

The proposed OSHA revisions will

cover workers who operate powered

industrial trucks. This includes

operators using these vehicles in the

general industry and maritime sectors.

The population-at-risk in powered

industrial truck accidents consists

primarily of the operators of these

trucks. Operators of powered industrial

trucks include workers employed as

designated truck operators as well as

those who might operate powered

industrial truck as part of another job.

These alternate users of powered

industrial trucks include shipping and

receiving clerks, order pickers,

maintenance personnel, and general

temporary workers. Non-driving

workers such as warehousemen,

materials handlers, laborers and

pedestrians who work on or are present

in the vicinity of powered industrial

trucks are also injured or killed in

powered industrial truck accidents.

Estimates of the number of non-driving

employees are not included in the

population-at-risk numbers presented in

this economic analysis. However, nondriving employees are included in the

number of preventable fatal and nonfatal injuries estimated to be associated

with compliance with the proposed

rule.

OSHA estimates that approximately

1.2 million workers are employed as

industrial truck operators in industries

regulated by OSHA. Industries with the

largest number of operators include

wholesale trade (SIC 51) with 163,848

operators, and food and kindred

products (SIC 20) with 106,913

operators.

Technological Feasibility

OSHA could not identify any

requirement in the proposed standard

that raises technological feasibility

problems for establishments that use

industrial trucks. On the contrary, there

is substantial evidence that

establishments can achieve compliance

with all requirements using existing

methods and equipment. In addition,

the standard introduces no

technological requirements of any type.

Therefore, OSHA has preliminarily

concluded that technological feasibility

is not an issue for the proposed

standard.

Costs of Compliance

The proposed OSHA industrial truck

operator training standard would

expand the initial training required by

the existing standard to include

information on the operating

instructions and warnings appropriate

to the type of truck used, the specific

hazards in the workplace where the

truck will be operated, and instructions

pertaining to the requirements of the

OSHA standard. Additionally, the

proposed standard requires employers

to monitor the performance of industrial

truck operators through an annual

evaluation and to provide remedial

training when this evaluation suggests

that such training is needed.
13800 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

OSHA estimates that the first year

cost of compliance with the proposed

standard will be $34.9 million and that

the annual cost of compliance thereafter

will be $19.4 million. Table 12 outlines

the annual costs by each sector affected

by the proposed standard. Industry

sectors with the highest estimated

annualized compliance costs are

manufacturing, with $9.8 million, and

wholesale and retail trade with $5.6

million. Existing industry practice was

taken into consideration when

calculating costs, i.e., where employers

have already voluntarily implemented

practices that would be required by the

proposed standard, no cost is attributed

to the standard. OSHA welcomes

comments on the preliminary costs and

assumptions presented in this

Preliminary Economic Analysis.

TABLE 12.—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR THE PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL TRUCK OPERATOR TRAINING

STANDARD

Sector Initial

evaluation

Initial

training Monitoring Remedialtraining Total

Agriculture ........................................................................................ $2,457 $28,637 $39,404 $2,251 $72,749

Mining a ............................................................................................. 1,109 12,923 17,778 1,016 32,825

Manufacturing ................................................................................... 332,222 3,872,651 5,327,726 304,441 9,837,040

Transportation and Utilities ............................................................... 91,344 1,064,777 1,464,847 83,706 2,704,674

Wholesale and Retail Trade ............................................................. 189,193 2,205,396 3,034,033 173,373 5,601,996

Finance, Insurance, & Real Estate .................................................. 2,607 30,389 41,807 2,389 77,192

Services ............................................................................................ 37,477 436,859 601,001 34,343 1,109,679

Total ....................................................................................... 656,408 7,651,632 10,526,595 601,519 19,436,154

aOil and gas extraction.

Note: Costs are annualized over 10 years at a 7 percent interest rate (annualization factor 0.1424).

Source: US Department of Labor, OSHA, Office of Regulatory Analysis, based on ERG [1, Section 3].

Benefits

An estimated 85 fatalities and 34,902

injuries result annually from industrial

truck-related accidents. As presented in

Table 13, OSHA estimates that full

compliance with the proposed standard

will prevent between 17 and 22 of these

fatalities per year and between 10,898

and 14,118 lost workday injuries. These

preventable fatalities and injuries are in

addition to lives saved and injuries

prevented by OSHA’s existing standard.

The proposed standard will also

reduce property damage and trainingrelated litigation. OSHA’s preliminary

analysis of the impacts of improved

training show reductions in property

damage valued at an estimated $8

million to $42 million annually. In

addition, OSHA estimates that

approximately $770,018 will be saved

annually in damages and settlements in

court cases that would have been

awarded as a result of injuries caused by

deficiencies in industrial truck operator

training.

TABLE 13.—NUMBER OF FATALITIES AND INJURIES PREVENTED BY COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROPOSED POWERED

INDUSTRIAL TRUCK TRAINING STANDARD

Industry group

Total number of industrial

truck fatalities

Preventable fatalities

under proposed standard

Total number of industrial

truck injuries

Preventable injuries

under proposed standard

Low High Low High

Forestry, Fishing and Agricultural Services ..................... 0 0 0 219 68 88

Mining—oil and gas extraction ......................................... 1 0.2 0.3 84 26 34

Manufacturing ................................................................... 30 5.9 7.7 14,895 4,651 6,025

Transportation, communication, and utilities .................... 20 3.9 5.1 4,265 1,332 1,725

Wholesale and retail trade ............................................... 25 4.9 6.4 12,012 3,751 4,859

Finance, insurance, and real estate ................................. 0 0 0 212 66 86

Services ............................................................................ 9 1.8 2.3 3,215 1,004 1,300

All industries .......................................................... 85 17 22 34,902 10,898 14,118

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA, Office of Regulatory Analysis, based on ERG Report (1, Section 4).

Economic Impacts and Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis

OSHA assessed the potential

economic impacts of compliance with

the proposed standard and has

preliminarily determined that the

standard is economically feasible for all

industry groups. Detailed information at

the three-digit SIC level is presented in

OSHA’s Preliminary Economic

Analysis. When an industry enjoys an

inelastic demand for its products, an

increase in operating costs can

ordinarily be passed on to consumers. In

this case, the maximum expected price

increase is calculated by dividing the

average estimated compliance cost in

each industry by the average revenue for

that industry. OSHA estimates that the

average price increase would be

negligible, about 0.0002 percent. Table

14 shows that the average price increase

at the two-digit SIC level would be

extremely small. (For impacts at the

three-digit SIC level, see economic

analysis, Table V–1). These estimates

indicate that even if all costs were

passed on to consumers through price

increases, the proposed standard would

have a negligible impact on prices

overall.

Given the minuscule price increases

necessary to cover the cost of the

proposed training requirements,

employers should be able to pass along

compliance costs to customers.

However, even if all costs were absorbed

by the affected firms, the average
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13801

reduction in profits would be only 0.007

percent. As presented in Table 14, the

largest potential decrease in profits—

0.038 percent—would occur in SIC 51,

Nondurable Goods. Because most firms

will not find it necessary to absorb all

of the costs from profits and should be

able to pass most if not all of the

standard’s costs on to consumers,

average profits are not expected to

decline to the extent calculated here.

OSHA, therefore, does not expect the

revised standard to have a significant

economic impact on affected firms or

industries.

TABLE 14.—ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCKS OPERATOR TRAINING STANDARD

SIC/Industry sector

Value of industry shipments, receipts or

sales ($ millions)

Annualized

compliance

costs

Compliance

costs as a

percent of

sales

Pre-tax income ($

millions)

Compliance

costs as a

percent of

pre-tax income

07 Agricultural services .................................................................... NA $72,749 ...................... ................... ...................

13 Mining—oil and gas extraction ................................................... $48,178 32,825 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

20 Food and kindred products ......................................................... 387,601 1,774,023 0.0005 ......... 36,213 0.005

21 Tobacco products ....................................................................... 32,032 43,951 0.0001 ......... (1) (1)

22 Textile mill products .................................................................... 65,706 384,461 0.0006 ......... 5,102 0.008

23 Apparel and other textile products ............................................. 65,345 109,656 0.0002 ......... 3,548 0.003

24 Lumber and wood products ........................................................ 70,569 415,093 0.0006 ......... 2,881 0.014

25 Furniture and fixtures .................................................................. 40,027 194,006 0.0005 ......... 1,942 0.010

26 Paper and allied products ........................................................... 128,824 760,042 0.0006 ......... 7,307 0.010

27 Printing, publishing, and allied industries ................................... 156,685 435,959 0.0003 ......... 13,171 0.003

28 Chemicals and allied products ................................................... 292,326 931,407 0.0003 ......... 24,169 0.004

29 Petroleum refining and related industries ................................... 158,076 92,786 0.0001 ......... 11,193 0.001

30 Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products ............................. 100,668 522,973 0.0005 ......... 5,366 0.010

31 Leather and leather products ..................................................... 9,142 47,059 0.0005 ......... (2) (2)

32 Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products ................................. 59,611 396,003 0.0007 ......... 2,664 0.015

33 Primary metal industries ............................................................. 132,837 567,368 0.0004 ......... 3,133 0.018

34 Fabricated metal products .......................................................... 157,077 717,423 0.0005 ......... 7,660 0.009

35 Industrial and commercial machinery and computer equip ....... 243,479 900,774 0.0004 ......... ................... ...................

36 Electric and electronic equipment .............................................. 197,880 492,784 0.0002 ......... 15,378 0.003

37 Transportation equipment ........................................................... 364,032 691,674 0.0002 ......... 1,916 0.036

38 Instruments and related equipment ............................................ 127,160 141,176 0.0001 ......... 8,326 0.002

39 Miscellaneous manufacturing industries ..................................... 37,131 218,423 0.0006 ......... 2,418 0.009

40 Railroad transportation ............................................................... 44,422 69,042 0.0002 ......... ................... ...................

41 Local, suburban, and interurban passenger transit .................... 8,094 51,782 0.0006 ......... ................... ...................

42 Trucking and warehousing ......................................................... 110,103 1,800,849 0.0016 ......... ................... ...................

44 Water transportation ................................................................... 18,336 105,655 0.0006 ......... ................... ...................

45 Transportation by air ................................................................... 82,055 188,820 0.0002 ......... ................... ...................

46 Pipelines, except natural gas ..................................................... 2,098 4,707 0.0002 ......... ................... ...................

47 Transportation services .............................................................. 54,432 156,391 0.0003 ......... ................... ...................

48 Communications ......................................................................... 232,257 60,673 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

49 Electric, gas and sanitary services ............................................. 292,280 266,754 0.0001 ......... ................... ...................

50 Durable goods ............................................................................ 981,208 1,335,982 0.0001 ......... 4,880 0.027

51 Nondurable goods ...................................................................... 943,174 2,201,118 0.0002 ......... 5,831 0.038

52 Building materials and garden supplies ..................................... 115,855 426,997 0.0004 ......... ................... ...................

53 General merchandise stores ...................................................... 266,991 683,253 0.0003 ......... ................... ...................

54 Food stores ................................................................................. 392,400 690,815 0.0002 ......... ................... ...................

55 Automatic dealers and service stations ...................................... 587,890 67,212 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

56 Apparel and accessory stores .................................................... 106,128 39,537 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

57 Furniture and home furnishings stores ....................................... 113,673 136,581 0.0001 ......... ................... ...................

58 Eating and drinking places ......................................................... 211,036 28,035 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

59 Miscellaneous retails .................................................................. 249,463 265,974 0.0001 ......... ................... ...................

60 Banking ....................................................................................... 48,477 15,103 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

61 Credit agencies other than banks .............................................. 69,148 6,293 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

62 Security and commodity brokers and services .......................... 41,226 5,034 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

63 Insurance carriers ....................................................................... 521,036 27,269 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

64 Insurance agents, brokers, and services ................................... 31,623 2,937 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

65 Real estate .................................................................................. 96,942 13,425 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

67 Holding and other investment offices ......................................... 47,301 7,132 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

70 Hotels and other lodging places ................................................. 64,630 13,486 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

72 Personal services ....................................................................... 59,052 13,486 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

78 Motion pictures ........................................................................... 43,838 17,164 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

79 Amusement and recreation services .......................................... 51,107 25,746 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

80 Health services ........................................................................... 285,040 72,743 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

81 Legal services ............................................................................. 96,179 4,495 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

82 Educational services ................................................................... 4,617 64,569 0.0014 ......... ................... ...................

83 Social services ............................................................................ 68,312 22,068 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

84 Museums, art galleries, botanical and zoological gardens ........ 3,551 1,226 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

86 Membership organizations .......................................................... 39,118 7,765 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

87 Engineering, accounting, research and management svcs ....... 224,238 52,309 Negligible ..... ................... ...................

89 Miscellaneous services, n.e.c. .................................................... 23,871 15,938 0.0001 ......... ................... ...................
13802 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 14.—ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCKS OPERATOR TRAINING STANDARD—

Continued

SIC/Industry sector

Value of industry shipments, receipts or

sales ($ millions)

Annualized

compliance

costs

Compliance

costs as a

percent of

sales

Pre-tax income ($

millions)

Compliance

costs as a

percent of

pre-tax income

Totals ....................................................................................... ................... 19,436,154 0.0002 ......... ................... 0.007

1 =included under SIC 20.

2 =included under SIC 23.

Negligible denotes less than 0.00001 percent.

Source: US Department of Labor, OSHA, Office of Regulatory Analysis, based on ERG Report (1, Chapter 6).

In accordance with the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et

seq.), OSHA has also analyzed the

economic impact of the proposed

standard on small establishments (19 or

fewer employees), looking particularly

for evidence that the rule would have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Small

businesses will incur lower compliance

costs than larger businesses because the

compliance costs depend directly on the

number of industrial truck operators in

a given facility. OSHA has preliminarily

concluded that it would not have a

significant impact upon a substantial

number of small entities. Assuming a 15

percent turnover rate, compliance costs

for a typical small business in public

warehousing and storage (SIC 422) will

be $1,188 in the first year and $280

annually thereafter. OSHA estimates

that the average price impact for small

establishments will not exceed 0.12

percent. Similarly, OSHA estimates that,

if the average establishment could not

pass any of these costs to its customers

through this very small price increase (a

highly unlikely scenario), the costs

would impact average profits by less

than 1.2 percent. These impacts are

judged to be relatively minor; therefore,

the proposed standard is economically

feasible for small establishments.

XI. Environmental Assessment

The proposed rules have been

reviewed in accordance with the

requirements of the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the

regulations of the Council of

Environmental Quality (CEQ) (40 CFR

part 1500), and DOL NEPA procedures

(29 CFR part 11). The provision of the

standard focuses on the reduction and

avoidance of incidents involving

powered industrial trucks.

Consequently, no major negative impact

is foreseen on air, water or soil quality,

plant or animal life, the use of land or

other aspects of the environment.

Therefore, this revision is categorized as

an excluded action according to subpart

B, § 11.10 of the DOL NEPA regulations.

X. International Trade

This revision of the OSHA standards

on powered industrial trucks and the

promulgation of the same standard for

other industries is not likely to have a

significant effect on international trade

because of the small magnitude of any

price increase that would be required

for passing forward compliance costs.

As shown above, the maximum price

increases generated from the proposed

rule would be less that 1.0 percent for

the majority of affected establishments.

Further, none of the compliance

requirements affect the demand for

foreign-made safety equipment. It can be

concluded, therefore, that there will be

no measurable impacts on foreign trade.

XII. Federalism

This proposed regulation has been

reviewed in accordance with Executive

Order 12612 (52 FR 41685, October 30,

1987), regarding Federalism. This Order

requires that agencies, to the extent

possible, refrain from limiting state

policy options, consult with states prior

to taking any actions which would

restrict state policy options, and take

such actions only when there is clear

constitutional authority and the

presence of a problem of national scope.

The Order provides for preemption of

state law only if there is a clear

Congressional intent for the Agency to

do so. Any such preemption is to be

limited to the extent possible.

Section 18 of the Occupational Safety

and Health Act (OSH Act) expresses

Congress’ intent to preempt state laws

relating to issues on which Federal

OSHA has promulgated occupational

safety and health standards. Under the

OSH Act, a state can avoid preemption

in issues covered by Federal standards

only if it submits, and obtains Federal

approval of, a plan for the development

of such standards and their

enforcement. Occupational safety and

health standards developed by such

Plan states must, among other things, be

at least as effective in providing safe and

healthful employment and places of

employment as the Federal standards.

When such standards are applicable to

products distributed or used in

interstate commerce they may not

unduly burden commerce and must be

justified by compelling local conditions.

The Federal proposed standard on

powered industrial truck operator

training addresses hazards that are not

unique to any one state or region of the

country. Nonetheless, states with

occupational safety and health plans

approved under section 18 of the OSH

Act will be able to develop their own

state standards to deal with any special

problems which might be encountered

in a particular state. Moreover, because

this standard is written in general,

performance-oriented terms, there is

considerable flexibility for state plans to

require, and for affected employers to

use, methods of compliance which are

appropriate to the working conditions

covered by the standard.

In brief, this proposed rule addresses

a clear national problem related to

occupational safety and health in

general industry. Those states which

have elected to participate under section

18 of the OSH Act are not preempted by

this standard, and will be able to

address any special conditions within

the framework of the Federal Act while

ensuring that the state standards are at

least as effective as their standard. State

comments are invited on this proposal

and will be fully considered prior to

promulgation of a final rule.

XIII. Public Participation

Interested persons are requested to

submit written data, views and

arguments concerning this proposal.

These comments must be postmarked by

July 12, 1995, and submitted in

quadruplicate to the Docket Office;

Docket No. S–008, Room N2624; U.S.

Department of Labor, Occupational

Safety and Health Administration; 200
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13803

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,

DC 20210.

All written comments received within

the specified comment period will be

made a part of the record and will be

available for public inspection and

copying at the above Docket Office

address.

Additionally, under section 6(b)(3) of

the OSH Act and 29 CFR 1911.11,

interested persons may file objections to

the proposal and request an informal

hearing. The objections and hearing

requests should be submitted in

quadruplicate to the Docket Office at the

above address and must comply with

the following conditions:

1. The objection must include the

name and address of the objector;

2. The objections must be postmarked

by July 12, 1995;

3. The objections must specify with

particularity grounds upon which the

objection is based;

4. Each objection must be separately

numbered; and

5. The objections must be

accompanied by a detailed summary of

the evidence proposed to be adduced at

the requested hearing.

Interested persons who have

objections to various provisions or have

changes to recommend may of course

make those objections and their

recommendations in their comments

and OSHA will fully consider them.

There is only need to file formal

‘‘objections’’ separately if the interested

person requests a public hearing.

OSHA recognizes that there may be

interested persons who, through their

knowledge of safety or their experience

in the operations involved, would wish

to endorse or support certain provisions

in the standard. OSHA welcomes such

supportive comments, including any

pertinent accident data or cost

information which may be available, in

order that the record of this rulemaking

will present a balanced picture of the

public response on the issues involved.

XIV. State Plan Standards

The 25 States with their own OSHA

approved occupational safety and health

plans must adopt a comparable standard

within six months of the publication

date of the final standard. These States

are: Alaska, Arizona, California,

Connecticut (for State and local

government employees only), Hawaii,

Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland,

Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New

Mexico, New York (for State and local

government employees only), North

Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South

Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont,

Virginia, Virgin Island, Washington, and

Wyoming. Until such time as a State

standard is promulgated, Federal OSHA

will provide interim enforcement

assistance, as appropriate, in those

States.

List of Subjects

29 CFR Part 1910

Motor vehicle safety, Occupational

safety and health, Transportation.

29 CFR Part 1915

Motor vehicle safety, Occupational

safety and health, Transportation,

Vessels.

29 CFR Part 1917

Marine terminals, Motor vehicle

safety, Occupational safety and health,

Vessels.

29 CFR Part 1918

Longshoring, Motor vehicle safety,

Occupational safety and health, Vessels.

XV. Authority

This document was prepared under

the direction of Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary of Labor for

Occupational Safety and Health, U.S.

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.

Accordingly, pursuant to section 4,

6(b), 8(c) and 8(g) of the Occupational

Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C.

653, 655, 657), Secretary of Labor’s

Order No. 1–90 (55 FR 9033), and 29

CFR part 1911, it is proposed to amend

29 CFR parts 1910, 1915, 1917, 1918

and 1926 as set forth below.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of

February, 1995.

Joseph A. Dear,

Assistant Secretary of Labor.

PART 1910—OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY

AND HEALTH STANDARDS

1. The authority citation for subpart N

of part 1910 would be revised to read as

follows:

Authority: Secs. 4, 6, 8 of the Occupational

Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653,

655, 657); Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–

71 (36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83

(48 FR 35736) or 1–90 (55 FR 9033), as

applicable.

Section 1910.177 also issued under 5

U.S.C. 553 and 29 CFR part 1911.

Sections 1910.176, 1910.178, 1910.179,

1910.183, 1910.184, 1910.189, and 1910.190

also issued under 29 CFR part 1911.

2. Section 1910.178 would be

amended by revising paragraph (l) and

by adding appendices A and B at the

end of the section to read as follows:

§ 1910.178 Powered industrial trucks.

* * * * *

(l) Operator training.

(1) Operator qualifications. (i) The

employer shall ensure that each

potential operator of a powered

industrial truck is capable of performing

the duties that are required of the job.

(ii) In determining operator

qualifications, the employer shall

ensure that each potential operator has

received the training required by this

paragraph (l), that each potential

operator has been evaluated by a

designated person while performing the

required duties, and that each potential

operator performs those operations

competently.

(2) Training program implementation.

(i) The employer shall implement a

training program and ensure that only

trained drivers who have successfully

completed the training program are

allowed to operate powered industrial

trucks. Exception: Trainees under the

direct supervision of a designated

person shall be allowed to operate a

powered industrial truck provided the

operation of the vehicle is conducted in

an area where other employees are not

near and the operation of the truck is

under controlled conditions.

(ii) Training shall consist of a

combination of classroom instruction

(Lecture, discussion, video tapes, and/or

conference) and practical training

(demonstrations and practical exercises

by the trainee).

(iii) All training and evaluation shall

be conducted by a designated person

who has the requisite knowledge,

training and experience to train

powered industrial truck operators and

judge their competency.

(3) Training program content.

Powered industrial truck operator

trainees shall be trained in the following

topics unless the employer can

demonstrate that some of the topics are

not needed for safe operation.

(i) Truck related topics.

(A) All operating instructions,

warnings and precautions for the types

of trucks the operator will be authorized

to operate;

(B) Similarities to and differences

from the automobile;

(C) Controls and instrumentation:

location, what they do and how they

work;

(D) Power plant operation and

maintenance;

(E) Steering and maneuvering;

(F) Visibility (including restrictions

due to loading);

(G) Fork and attachment adaption,

operation and limitations of their

utilization;

(H) Vehicle capacity;

(I) Vehicle stability;

(J) Vehicle inspection and

maintenance;
13804 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

(K) Refueling or charging, recharging

batteries;

(L) Operating limitations; and

(M) Any other operating instruction,

warning or precaution listed in the

operator’s manual for the type vehicle

which the employee is being trained to

operate.

(ii) Workplace related topics.

(A) Surface conditions where the

vehicle will be operated;

(B) Composition of probable loads and

load stability;

(C) Load manipulation, stacking,

unstacking;

(D) Pedestrian traffic;

(E) Narrow aisles and other restricted

places of operation;

(F) Operating in hazardous classified

locations;

(G) Operating the truck on ramps and

other sloped surfaces that could affect

the stability of the vehicle;

(H) Other unique or potentially

hazardous environmental conditions

that exist or may exist in the workplace;

and

(I) Operating the vehicle in closed

environments and other areas where

insufficient ventilation could cause a

buildup of carbon monoxide or diesel

exhaust.

(iii) The requirements of this section.

(4) Evaluation and refresher or

remedial training.

(i) Sufficient evaluation and remedial

training shall be conducted so that the

employee retains and uses the

knowledge, skills and ability needed to

operate the powered industrial truck

safely.

(ii) An evaluation of the performance

of each powered industrial truck

operator shall be conducted at least

annually by a designated person.

(iii) Refresher or remedial training

shall be provided when there is reason

to believe that there has been unsafe

operation, when an accident or a nearmiss occurs or when an evaluation

indicates that the operator is not capable

of performing the assigned duties.

(5) Certification.

(i) The employer shall certify that

each operator has received the training,

has been evaluated as required by this

paragraph, and has demonstrated

competency in the performance of the

operator’s duties. The certification shall

include the name of the trainee, the date

of training, and the signature of the

person performing the training and

evaluation.

(ii) The employer shall retain the

current training materials and course

outline or the name and address of the

person who conducted the training if it

was conducted by an outside trainer.

(6) Avoidance of Duplicative Training.

(i) Each current truck operator who

has received training in any of the

elements specified in paragraph (l)(3) of

this section for the types of trucks the

employee is authorized to operate and

the type workplace that the trucks are

being operated in need not be retrained

in those elements if the employer

certifies in accordance with paragraph

(l)(5)(i) of this section that the operator

has been evaluated to be competent to

perform those duties.

(ii) Each new truck operator who has

received training in any of the elements

specified in paragraph (l)(3) of this

section for the types of trucks the

employee will be authorized to operate

and the type of workplace in which the

trucks will be operated need not be

retrained in those elements before initial

assignment in the workplace if the

employer has written documentation of

the training and if the employee is

evaluated pursuant to paragraph (l)(4) of

this section to be competent.

Note to paragraph (l): Appendices A and

B at the end of this section provide nonmandatory guidance to assist employers in

implementing this paragraph (l).

* * * * *

Appendixes to 31910.178

Appendix A—Training of Powered

Industrial Truck Operators

(Non-mandatory appendix to paragraph

(l) of this section)

A–1. Operator Selection

A–1.1. Prospective operators of

powered industrial trucks should be

identified based upon their ability to be

trained and accommodated to perform

job functions that are essential to the

operation of a powered industrial truck.

Determination of the capabilities of a

prospective operator to fulfill the

demands of the job should be based

upon the tasks that the job demands.

A–1.2. The employer should identify

all the aspects of the job that the

employee must meet/perform when

doing his or her job. These aspects

could include the level at which the

employee must see and hear, the

physical demands of the job, and the

environmental extremes of the job.

A–1.3. One factor to be considered is

the ability of the candidate to see and

hear within reasonably acceptable

limits. Included in the vision

requirements are the ability to see at

distance and peripherally. In certain

instances, there also is a requirement for

the candidate to discern different colors,

primarily red, yellow and green.

A–1.4. The environmental extremes

that might be demanded of a potential

powered industrial truck operator

include that ability of the person to

work in areas of excessive cold or heat.

A–1.5. After an employee has been

trained and appropriate

accommodations have been made, the

employer needs to determine whether

the employee can safely perform the job.

A–2. The Method(s) of Training

A–2.1. Among the many methods of

training are the lecture, conference,

demonstration, test (written and/or oral)

and the practical exercise. In most

instances, a combination of these

methods have been successfully used to

train employees in the knowledge, skills

and abilities that are essential to

perform the job function that the

employee is being trained to perform.

To enhance the training and to make the

training more understandable to the

employee, employers and other trainers

have used movies, slides, video tapes

and other visual presentations. Making

the presentation more understandable

has several advantages including:

(1) The employees being trained

remain more attentive during the

presentation if graphical presentation

are used, thereby increasing the

effectiveness of the training;

(2) The use of visual presentations

allows the trainer to ensure that the

necessary information is covered during

the training;

(3) The use of graphics makes better

utilization of the training time by

decreasing the need for the instructor to

carry on long discussions about the

instructional material; and

(4) The use of graphics during

instruction provides greater retention by

the trainees.

A–3. Training Program Content

A–3.1. Because each type (make and

model) powered industrial truck has

different operating characteristics,

limitations and other unique features,

an optimum employee training program

for powered industrial truck operators

must be based upon the type vehicles

that the employee will be trained and

authorized to operate. The training must

also emphasize the features of the

workplace which will affect the manner

in which the vehicle must be operated.

Finally, the training must include the

general safety rules applicable to the

operation of all powered industrial

trucks.

A–3.2. Selection of the methods of

training the operators has been left to

the reasonable determination of the

employer. Whereas some employees can

assimilate instructional material while

seated in a classroom, other employees

may learn best by observing the conduct

of operations (demonstration) and/or by
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13805

having to personally conduct the

operations (practical exercise). In some

instances, an employee can receive

valuable instruction through the use of

electronic mediums, such as the use of

video tapes and movies. In most

instances, a combination of the different

training methods may provide the

mechanism for providing the best

training in the least amount of time.

OSHA has specified at paragraph

(l)(2)(ii) of this section that the training

must consist of a combination classroom

instruction and practical exercise. The

use of both these modes of instruction

is the only way of assuring that the

trainee has received and comprehended

the instruction and can utilize the

information to safely operate a powered

industrial truck.

A–4. Initial Training

A–4.1. The following is an outline of

a generalized forklift operator training

program:

(1) Characteristics of the powered

industrial truck(s) the employee will be

allowed to operate:

(a) Similarities to and differences

from the automobile;

(b) Controls and instrumentation:

location, what they do and how they

work;

(c) Power plant operation and

maintenance;

(d) Steering and maneuvering;

(e) Visibility;

(f) Fork and/or attachment adaption,

operation and limitations of their

utilization;

(g) Vehicle capacity;

(h) Vehicle stability;

(i) Vehicle inspection and

maintenance;

(j) Refueling or charging, recharging

batteries.

(k) Operating limitations.

(l) Any other operating instruction,

warning or precaution listed in the

operator’s manual for the type vehicle

which the employee is being trained to

operate.

(2) The operating environment:

(a) Floor surfaces and/or ground

conditions where the vehicle will be

operated;

(b) Composition of probable loads and

load stability;

(c) Load manipulation, stacking,

unstacking;

(d) Pedestrian traffic;

(e) Narrow aisle and restricted place

operation;

(f) Operating in classified hazardous

locations;

(g) Operating the truck on ramps and

other sloped surfaces which would

affect the stability of the vehicle;

(h) Other unique or potentially

hazardous environmental conditions

which exist or may exist in the

workplace.

(i) Operating the vehicle in closed

environments and other areas where

insufficient ventilation could cause a

buildup of carbon monoxide or diesel

exhaust.

(3) The requirements of this OSHA

Standard.

A–5. Trainee Evaluation

A–5.1. The provisions of these

proposed requirements specify that an

employee evaluation be conducted both

as part of the training and after

completion of the training. The initial

evaluation is useful for many reasons,

including:

(1) the employer can determine what

methods of instruction will produce a

proficient truck operator with the

minimum of time and effort;

(2) the employer can gain insight into

the previous training that the trainee has

received; and

(3) a determination can be made as to

whether the trainee will be able to

successfully operate a powered

industrial truck. This initial evaluation

can be completed by having the

employee fill out a questionnaire, by an

oral interview, or by a combination of

these mechanisms. In many cases,

answers received by the employee can

be substantiated by contact with other

employees or previous employers.

A–6. Refresher or Remedial Training

A–6.1. (The type information listed at

paragraph A–6.2 of this appendix would

be used when the training is more than

an on-the-spot correction being made by

a supervisor or when there have been

multiple instances of on-the-spot

corrections having to be made.) When

an on-the-spot correction is used, the

person making the correction should

point out the incorrect manner of

operation of the truck or other unsafe

act being conducted, tell the employee

how to do the operation correctly, and

then ensure that the employee does the

operation correctly.

A–6.2. The following items may be

used when a more general, structured

retraining program is utilized to train

employees and eliminate unsafe

operation of the vehicle:

(1) Common unsafe situations

encountered in the workplace;

(2) Unsafe methods of operating

observed or known to be used;

(3) The need for constant

attentiveness to the vehicle, the

workplace conditions and the manner in

which the vehicle is operated.

A–6.3. Details about the above subject

areas need to be expanded upon so that

the operator receives all the information

which is necessary for the safe operation

of the vehicle. Insight into some of the

specifics of the above subject areas may

be obtained from the vehicle

manufacturers’ literature, the national

consensus standards [e.g. the ANSI B56

series of standards (current revisions)]

and this OSHA Standard.

Appendix B—Stability of Powered

Industrial Trucks

(Non-mandatory appendix to paragraph

(l) of this section)

B–1. Definitions

To understand the principle of

stability, understanding definitions of

the following is necessary:

Center of gravity is that point of an

object at which all of the weight of an

object can be considered to be

concentrated.

Counterweight is the weight that is a

part of the basic structure of a truck that

is used to offset the weight of a load and

to maximize the resistance of the

vehicle to tipping over.

Fulcrum is the axis of rotation of the

truck when it tips over.

Grade is the slope of any surface that

is usually measured as the number of

feet of rise or fall over a hundred foot

horizontal distance (this measurement is

designated as a percent).

Lateral stability is the resistance of a

truck to tipping over sideways.

Line of action is an imaginary vertical

line through the center of gravity of an

object.

Load center is the horizontal distance

from the edge of the load (or the vertical

face of the forks or other attachment) to

the line of action through the center of

gravity of the load.

Longitudinal stability is the resistance

of a truck to overturning forward or

rearward.

Moment is the product of the weight

of the object times the distance from a

fixed point. In the case of a powered

industrial truck, the distance is

measured from the point that the truck

will tip over to the line of action of the

object. The distance is always measured

perpendicular to the line of action.

Track is the distance between wheels

on the same axle of a vehicle.

Wheelbase is the distance between the

centerline of the front and rear wheels

of a vehicle.

B–2. General

B–2.1. Stability determination for a

powered industrial truck is not

complicated once a few basic principles

are understood. There are many factors

that influence vehicle stability. Vehicle

wheelbase, track, height and weight

distribution of the load, and the location
13806 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

of the counterweights of the vehicle (if

the vehicle is so equipped), all

contribute to the stability of the vehicle.

B–2.2. The ‘‘stability triangle’’, used

in most discussions of stability, is not

mysterious but is used to demonstrate

truck stability in rather simple fashion.

B–3. Basic Principles

B–3.1. The determination of whether

an object is stable is dependent on the

moment of an object at one end of a

system being greater than, equal to or

smaller than the moment of an object at

the other end of that system. This is the

same principle on which a see saw or

teeter-totter works, that is, if the product

of the load and distance from the

fulcrum (moment) is equal to the

moment at the other end of the device,

the device is balanced and it will not

move. However, if there is a greater

moment at one end of the device, the

device will try to move downward at the

end with the greater moment.

B–3.2. Longitudinal stability of a

counterbalanced powered industrial

truck is dependent on the moment of

the vehicle and the moment of the load.

In other words, if the mathematic

product of the load moment (the

distance is from the front wheels, the

point about which the vehicle would tip

forward) the system is balanced and will

not tip forward. However, if the loadmoment is greater than the vehiclemoment, the greater load-moment will

force the truck to tip forward.

B–4. The Stability Triangle

B–4.1. Almost all counterbalanced

powered industrial trucks have a three

point suspension system, that is, the

vehicle is supported at three points.

This is true even if it has four wheels.

The steer axle of most trucks is attached

to the truck by means of a pivot pin in

the center of the axle. This three point

support forms a triangle called the

stability triangle when the points are

connected with imaginary lines. Figure

1 depicts the stability triangle.

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13807

BILLING CODE 4510–26–C
13808 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

B–4.2. When the line of action of the

vehicle or load-vehicle falls within the

stability triangle, the vehicle is stable

and will not tip over. However, when

the line of action of the vehicle or the

vehicle/load combination falls outside

the stability triangle, the vehicle is

unstable and may tip over. (See Figure

2.)

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13809

BILLING CODE 4510–26–C
13810 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

B–5. Longitudinal Stability

B–5.1. The axis of rotation when a

truck tips forward is the point of contact

of the front wheels of the vehicle with

the pavement. When a powered

industrial truck tips forward, it is this

line that the truck will rotate about.

When a truck is stable the vehiclemoment must exceed the load-moment.

As long as the vehicle-moment is equal

to or exceeds the load-moment, the

vehicle will not tip over. On the other

hand, if the load-moment slightly

exceeds the vehicle-moment, the truck

will begin the tip forward, thereby

causing loss of steering control. If the

load-moment greatly exceeds the

vehicle-moment, the truck will tip

forward.

B–5.2. In order to determine the

maximum safe load moment, the truck

manufacturer normally rates the truck at

a maximum load at a given distance

from the front face of the forks. The

specified distance from the front face of

the forks to the line of action of the load

is commonly called a load center.

Because larger trucks normally handle

loads that are physically larger, these

vehicles have greater load centers. A

truck with a capacity of 30,000 pounds

or less capacity is normally rated at a

given load weight at a 24 inch load

center. For trucks of greater than 30,000

pound capacity, the load center is

normally rated at 36 or 48 inch load

center distance. In order to safely

operate the vehicle, the operator should

always check the data plate and

determine the maximum allowable

weight at the rated load center.

B–5.3. Although the true load moment

distance is measured from the front

wheels, this distance is greater than the

distance from the front face of the forks.

Calculation of the maximum allowable

load moment using the load center

distance always provides a lower load

moment than the truck was designed to

handle. When handling unusual loads,

such as those that are larger than 48

inches long (the center of gravity is

greater than 24 inches), with an offset

center of gravity, etc., then calculation

of a maximum allowable load moment

should be undertaken and this value

used to determine whether a load can be

handled. For example, if an operator is

operating a 3,000 pound capacity truck

(with a 24 inch load center), the

maximum allowable load moment is

72,000 inch-pounds (3,000 times 24). If

a probable load is 60 inches long (30

inch load center), then the maximum

weight that this load can weigh is 2,400

pounds (72,000 divided by 30).

B–6. Lateral Stability

B–6.1. The lateral stability of a vehicle

is determined by the position of the line

of action (a vertical line that passes

through the combined center of gravity

of the vehicle and the load) relative to

the stability triangle. When the vehicle

is not loaded, the location of the center

of gravity of the truck is the only factor

to be considered in determining the

stability of the truck. As long as the line

of action of the combined center of

gravity of the vehicle and the load falls

within the stability triangle, the truck is

stable and will not tip over. However, if

the line of action falls outside the

stability triangle, the truck is not stable

and may tip over.

B–6.2. Factors that affect the lateral

stability of a vehicle include the

placement of the load on the truck, the

height of the load above the surface on

which the vehicle is operating, and the

degree of lean of the vehicle.

B–7. Dynamic Stability

B–7.1. Up to this point, we have

covered stability of a powered industrial

truck without consideration of the

dynamic forces that result when the

vehicle and load are put into motion.

The transfer of weight and the resultant

shift in the center of gravity due to the

dynamic forces created when the

machine is moving, braking, cornering,

lifting, tilting, and lowering loads, etc.,

are important stability considerations.

B–7.2. When determining whether a

load can be safely handled, the operator

should exercise extra caution when

handling loads that cause the vehicle to

approach its maximum design

characteristics. For example, if an

operator must handle a maximum load,

the load should be carried at the lowest

position possible, the truck should be

accelerated slowly and evenly, and the

forks should be tilted forward

cautiously. However, no precise rules

can be formulated to cover all of these

eventualities.

PART 1915—OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY

AND HEALTH STANDARDS FOR

SHIPYARD EMPLOYMENT

3. The authority citation for part 1915

would be revised to read as follows:

Authority: Section 41, Longshore and

Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (33

U.S.C. 941); secs. 4, 6, 8, Occupational Safety

and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,

657); Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–71

(36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 (48

FR 35736) or 1–90 (55 FR 9033), as

applicable.

Sections 1915.120 and 1915.152 also

issued under 29 CFR part 1911.

4. A new § 1915.120 with appendices

A and B would be added to subpart G

to read as follows:

§ 1915.120 Powered industrial trucks.

(a) Operator training. (1) Operator

qualifications. (i) The employer shall

ensure that each potential operator of a

powered industrial truck is capable of

performing the duties that are required

of the job.

(ii) In determining operator

qualifications, the employer shall

ensure that each potential operator has

received the training required by this

paragraph, that each potential operator

has been evaluated by a designated

person while performing the required

duties, and that each potential operator

performs those operations competently.

(2) Training program implementation.

(i) The employer shall implement a

training program and ensure that only

trained drivers who have successfully

completed the training program are

allowed to operate powered industrial

trucks. Exception: Trainees under the

direct supervision of a designated

person shall be allowed to operate a

powered industrial truck provided the

operation of the vehicle is conducted in

an area where other employees are not

near and the operation of the truck is

under controlled conditions.

(ii) Training shall consist of a

combination of classroom instruction

(Lecture, discussion, video tapes, and/or

conference) and practical training

(demonstrations and practical exercises

by the trainee).

(iii) All training and evaluation shall

be conducted by a designated person

who has the requisite knowledge,

training and experience to train

powered industrial truck operators and

judge their competency.

(3) Training program content.

Powered industrial truck operator

trainees shall be trained in the following

topics unless the employer can

demonstrate that some of the topics are

not needed for safe operation.

(i) Truck related topics.

(A) All operating instructions,

warnings and precautions for the types

of trucks the operator will be authorized

to operate;

(B) Similarities to and differences

from the automobile;

(C) Controls and instrumentation:

location, what they do and how they

work;

(D) Power plant operation and

maintenance;

(E) Steering and maneuvering;

(F) Visibility (including restrictions

due to loading);

(G) Fork and attachment adaption,

operation and limitations of their

utilization;
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13811

(H) Vehicle capacity;

(I) Vehicle stability;

(J) Vehicle inspection and

maintenance;

(K) Refueling or charging, recharging

batteries;

(L) Operating limitations; and

(M) Any other operating instruction,

warning or precaution listed in the

operator’s manual for the type vehicle

which the employee is being trained to

operate.

(ii) Workplace related topics.

(A) Surface conditions where the

vehicle will be operated;

(B) Composition of probable loads and

load stability;

(C) Load manipulation, stacking,

unstacking;

(D) Pedestrian traffic;

(E) Narrow aisles and other restricted

places of operation;

(F) Operating in hazardous classified

locations;

(G) Operating the truck on ramps and

other sloped surfaces that could affect

the stability of the vehicle;

(H) Other unique or potentially

hazardous environmental conditions

that exist or may exist in the workplace;

and

(I) Operating the vehicle in closed

environments and other areas where

insufficient ventilation could cause a

buildup of carbon monoxide or diesel

exhaust.

(iii) The requirements of this section.

(4) Evaluation and refresher or

remedial training.

(i) Sufficient evaluation and remedial

training shall be conducted so that the

employee retains and uses the

knowledge, skills and ability needed to

operate the powered industrial truck

safely.

(ii) An evaluation of the performance

of each powered industrial truck

operator shall be conducted at least

annually by a designated person.

(iii) Refresher or remedial training

shall be provided when there is reason

to believe that there has been unsafe

operation, when an accident or a nearmiss occurs or when an evaluation

indicates that the operator is not capable

of performing the assigned duties.

(5) Certification.

(i) The employer shall certify that

each operator has received the training,

has been evaluated as required by this

paragraph, and has demonstrated

competency in the performance of the

operator’s duties. The certification shall

include the name of the trainee, the date

of training, and the signature of the

person performing the training and

evaluation.

(ii) The employer shall retain the

current training materials and course

outline or the name and address of the

person who conducted the training if it

was conducted by an outside trainer.

(6) Avoidance of duplicative training.

(i) Each current truck operator who

has received training in any of the

elements specified in paragraph (a)(3) of

this section for the types of trucks the

employee is authorized to operate and

the type workplace that the trucks are

being operated in need not be retrained

in those elements if the employer

certifies in accordance with paragraph

(a)(5)(i) of this section that the operator

has been evaluated to be competent to

perform those duties.

(ii) Each new truck operator who has

received training in any of the elements

specified in paragraph (a)(3) of this

section for the types of trucks the

employee will be authorized to operate

and the type of workplace in which the

trucks will be operated need not be

retrained in those elements before initial

assignment in the workplace if the

employer has written documentation of

the training and if the employee is

evaluated pursuant to paragraph (a)(4)

of this section to be competent.

(b) [Reserved]

Appendixes to § 1915.120

Appendix A—Training of Powered

Industrial Truck Operators

(Non-mandatory appendix to paragraph

(a) of this section)

A–1. Operator Selection

A–1.1. Prospective operators of

powered industrial trucks should be

identified based upon their ability to be

trained and accommodated to perform

job functions that are essential to the

operation of a powered industrial truck.

Determination of the capabilities of a

prospective operator to fulfill the

demands of the job should be based

upon the tasks that the job demands.

A–1.2. The employer should identify

all the aspects of the job that the

employee must meet/perform when

doing his or her job. These aspects

could include the level at which the

employee must see and hear, the

physical demands of the job, and the

environmental extremes of the job.

A–1.3. One factor to be considered is

the ability of the candidate to see and

hear within reasonably acceptable

limits. Included in the vision

requirements are the ability to see at

distance and peripherally. In certain

instances, there also is a requirement for

the candidate to discern different colors,

primarily red, yellow and green.

A–1.4. The environmental extremes

that might be demanded of a potential

powered industrial truck operator

include that ability of the person to

work in areas of excessive cold or heat.

A–1.5. After an employee has been

trained and appropriate

accommodations have been made, the

employer needs to determine whether

the employee can safely perform the job.

A–2. The Method(s) of Training

A–2.1. Among the many methods of

training are the lecture, conference,

demonstration, test (written and/or oral)

and the practical exercise. In most

instances, a combination of these

methods have been successfully used to

train employees in the knowledge, skills

and abilities that are essential to

perform the job function that the

employee is being trained to perform.

To enhance the training and to make the

training more understandable to the

employee, employers and other trainers

have used movies, slides, video tapes

and other visual presentations. Making

the presentation more understandable

has several advantages including:

(1) The employees being trained

remain more attentive during the

presentation if graphical presentation

are used, thereby increasing the

effectiveness of the training;

(2) The use of visual presentations

allows the trainer to ensure that the

necessary information is covered during

the training;

(3) The use of graphics makes better

utilization of the training time by

decreasing the need for the instructor to

carry on long discussions about the

instructional material; and

(4) The use of graphics during

instruction provides greater retention by

the trainees.

A–3. Training Program Content

A–3.1. Because each type (make and

model) powered industrial truck has

different operating characteristics,

limitations and other unique features,

an optimum employee training program

for powered industrial truck operators

must be based upon the type vehicles

that the employee will be trained and

authorized to operate. The training must

also emphasize the features of the

workplace which will affect the manner

in which the vehicle must be operated.

Finally, the training must include the

general safety rules applicable to the

operation of all powered industrial

trucks.

A–3.2. Selection of the methods of

training the operators has been left to

the reasonable determination of the

employer. Whereas some employees can

assimilate instructional material while

seated in a classroom, other employees

may learn best by observing the conduct

of operations (demonstration) and/or by
13812 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

having to personally conduct the

operations (practical exercise). In some

instances, an employee can receive

valuable instruction through the use of

electronic mediums, such as the use of

video tapes and movies. In most

instances, a combination of the different

training methods may provide the

mechanism for providing the best

training in the least amount of time.

OSHA has specified at paragraph

(a)(2)(ii) of this section that the training

must consist of a combination classroom

instruction and practical exercise. The

use of both these modes of instruction

is the only way of assuring that the

trainee has received and comprehended

the instruction and can utilize the

information to safely operate a powered

industrial truck.

A–4. Initial Training

A–4.1. The following is an outline of

a generalized forklift operator training

program:

(1) Characteristics of the powered

industrial truck(s) the employee will be

allowed to operate:

(a) Similarities to and differences

from the automobile;

(b) Controls and instrumentation:

location, what they do and how they

work;

(c) Power plant operation and

maintenance;

(d) Steering and maneuvering;

(e) Visibility;

(f) Fork and/or attachment adaption,

operation and limitations of their

utilization;

(g) Vehicle capacity;

(h) Vehicle stability;

(i) Vehicle inspection and

maintenance;

(j) Refueling or charging, recharging

batteries;

(k) Operating limitations;

(l) Any other operating instruction,

warning or precaution listed in the

operator’s manual for the type vehicle

which the employee is being trained to

operate.

(2) The operating environment:

(a) Floor surfaces and/or ground

conditions where the vehicle will be

operated;

(b) Composition of probable loads and

load stability;

(c) Load manipulation, stacking,

unstacking;

(d) Pedestrian traffic;

(e) Narrow aisle and restricted place

operation;

(f) Operating in classified hazardous

locations;

(g) Operating the truck on ramps and

other sloped surfaces which would

affect the stability of the vehicle;

(h) Other unique or potentially

hazardous environmental conditions

which exist or may exist in the

workplace;

(i) Operating the vehicle in closed

environments and other areas where

insufficient ventilation could cause a

buildup of carbon monoxide or diesel

exhaust.

(3) The requirements of this OSHA

Standard.

A–5. Trainee Evaluation

A–5.1. The provisions of these

proposed requirements specify that an

employee evaluation be conducted both

as part of the training and after

completion of the training. The initial

evaluation is useful for many reasons,

including:

(1) the employer can determine what

methods of instruction will produce a

proficient truck operator with the

minimum of time and effort;

(2) the employer can gain insight into

the previous training that the trainee has

received; and

(3) a determination can be made as to

whether the trainee will be able to

successfully operate a powered

industrial truck. This initial evaluation

can be completed by having the

employee fill out a questionnaire, by an

oral interview, or by a combination of

these mechanisms. In many cases,

answers received by the employee can

be substantiated by contact with other

employees or previous employers.

A–6. Refresher or Remedial Training

A–6.1. (The type information listed at

paragraph A–6.2 of this appendix would

be used when the training is more than

an on-the-spot correction being made by

a supervisor or when there have been

multiple instances of on-the-spot

corrections having to be made.) When

an on-the-spot correction is used, the

person making the correction should

point out the incorrect manner of

operation of the truck or other unsafe

act being conducted, tell the employee

how to do the operation correctly, and

then ensure that the employee does the

operation correctly.

A–6.2. The following items may be

used when a more general, structured

retraining program is utilized to train

employees and eliminate unsafe

operation of the vehicle:

(1) Common unsafe situations

encountered in the workplace;

(2) Unsafe methods of operating

observed or known to be used;

(3) The need for constant

attentiveness to the vehicle, the

workplace conditions and the manner in

which the vehicle is operated.

A–6.3. Details about the above subject

areas need to be expanded upon so that

the operator receives all the information

which is necessary for the safe operation

of the vehicle. Insight into some of the

specifics of the above subject areas may

be obtained from the vehicle

manufacturers’ literature, the national

consensus standards [e.g. the ANSI B56

series of standards (current revisions)]

and this OSHA Standard.

Appendix B—Stability of Powered

Industrial Trucks

(Non-mandatory appendix to paragraph

(a) of this section)

B–1. Definitions

To understand the principle of

stability, understanding definitions of

the following is necessary:

Center of Gravity is that point of an

object at which all of the weight of an

object can be considered to be

concentrated.

Counterweight is the weight that is a

part of the basic structure of a truck that

is used to offset the weight of a load and

to maximize the resistance of the

vehicle to tipping over.

Fulcrum is the axis of rotation of the

truck when it tips over.

Grade is the slope of any surface that

is usually measured as the number of

feet or rise of fall over a hundred foot

horizontal distance (this measurement is

designated as a percent).

Lateral stability is the resistance of a

truck to tipping over sideways.

Line of action is a imaginary vertical

line through the center of gravity of an

object.

Load center is the horizontal distance

from the edge of the load (or the vertical

face of the forks or other attachment) to

the line of action through the center of

gravity of the load.

Longitudinal stability is the resistance

of a truck to overturning forward or

rearward.

Moment is the product of the weight

of the object times the distance from a

fixed point. In the case of a powered

industrial truck, the distance is

measured from the point that the truck

will tip over to the line of action of the

object. The distance is always measured

perpendicular to the line of action.

Track is the distance between wheels

on the same axle of a vehicle.

Wheelbase is the distance between the

centerline of the front and rear wheels

of a vehicle.

B–2. General

B–2.1. Stability determination for a

powered industrial truck is not

complicated once a few basic principles

are understood. There are many factors

that influence vehicle stability. Vehicle

wheelbase, track, height and weight

distribution of the load, and the location
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13813

of the counterweights of the vehicle (if

the vehicle is so equipped), all

contribute to the stability of the vehicle.

B–2.2. The ‘‘stability triangle’’, used

in most discussions of stability, is not

mysterious but is used to demonstrate

truck stability in rather simple fashion.

B–3. Basic Principles

B–3.1. The determination of whether

an object is stable is dependent on the

moment of an object at one end of a

system being greater than, equal to or

smaller than the moment of an object at

the other end of that system. This is the

same principle on which a see saw or

teeter-totter works, that is, if the product

of the load and distance from the

fulcrum (moment) is equal to the

moment at the other end of the device,

the device is balanced and it will not

move. However, if there is a greater

moment at one end of the device, the

device will try to move downward at the

end with the greater moment.

B–3.2. Longitudinal stability of a

counterbalanced powered industrial

truck is dependent on the moment of

the vehicle and the moment of the load.

In other words, if the mathematic

product of the load moment (the

distance is from the front wheels, the

point about which the vehicle would tip

forward) the system is balanced and will

not tip forward. However, if the loadmoment is greater than the vehiclemoment, the greater load-moment will

force the truck to tip forward.

B–4. The Stability Triangle

B–4.1. Almost all counterbalanced

powered industrial trucks have a three

point suspension system, that is, the

vehicle is supported at three points.

This is true even if it has four wheels.

The steer axle of most trucks is attached

to the truck by means of a pivot pin in

the center of the axle. This three point

support forms a triangle called the

stability triangle when the points are

connected with imaginary lines. Figure

1 depicts the stability triangle.

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
13814 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4510–26–C
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13815

B–4.2. When the line of action of the

vehicle or load-vehicle falls within the

stability triangle, the vehicle is stable

and will not tip over. However, when

the line of action of the vehicle or the

vehicle/load combination falls outside

the stability triangle, the vehicle is

unstable and may tip over. (See Figure

2.)

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
13816 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13817

B–5. Longitudinal Stability

B–5.1. The axis of rotation when a

truck tips forward is the point of contact

of the front wheels of the vehicle with

the pavement. When a powered

industrial truck tips forward, it is this

line that the truck will rotate about.

When a truck is stable the vehiclemoment must exceed the load-moment.

As long as the vehicle-moment is equal

to or exceeds the load-moment, the

vehicle will not tip over. On the other

hand, if the load-moment slightly

exceeds the vehicle-moment, the truck

will begin the tip forward, thereby

causing loss of steering control. If the

load-moment greatly exceeds the

vehicle-moment, the truck will tip

forward.

B–5.2. In order to determine the

maximum safe load moment, the truck

manufacturer normally rates the truck at

a maximum load at a given distance

from the front face of the forks. The

specified distance from the front face of

the forks to the line of action of the load

is commonly called a load center.

Because larger trucks normally handle

loads that are physically larger, these

vehicles have greater load centers. A

truck with a capacity of 30,000 pounds

or less capacity is normally rated at a

given load weight at a 24 inch load

center. For trucks of greater than 30,000

pound capacity, the load center is

normally rated at 36 or 48 inch load

center distance. In order to safely

operate the vehicle, the operator should

always check the data plate and

determine the maximum allowable

weight at the rated load center.

B–5.3. Although the true load moment

distance is measured from the front

wheels, this distance is greater than the

distance from the front face of the forks.

Calculation of the maximum allowable

load moment using the load center

distance always provides a lower load

moment than the truck was designed to

handle. When handling unusual loads,

such as those that are larger than 48

inches long (the center of gravity is

greater than 24 inches), with an offset

center of gravity, etc., then calculation

of a maximum allowable load moment

should be undertaken and this value

used to determine whether a load can be

handled. For example, if an operator is

operating a 3000 pound capacity truck

(with a 24 inch load center), the

maximum allowable load moment is

72,000 inch-pounds (3,000 times 24). If

a probable load is 60 inches long (30

inch load center), then the maximum

weight that this load can weigh is 2,400

pounds (72,000 divided by 30).

B–6. Lateral Stability

B–6.1. The lateral stability of a vehicle

is determined by the position of the line

of action (a vertical line that passes

through the combined center of gravity

of the vehicle and the load) relative to

the stability triangle. When the vehicle

is not loaded, the location of the center

of gravity of the truck is the only factor

to be considered in determining the

stability of the truck. As long as the line

of action of the combined center of

gravity of the vehicle and the load falls

within the stability triangle, the truck is

stable and will not tip over. However, if

the line of action falls outside the

stability triangle, the truck is not stable

and may tip over.

B–6.2. Factors that affect the lateral

stability of a vehicle include the

placement of the load on the truck, the

height of the load above the surface on

which the vehicle is operating, and the

degree of lean of the vehicle.

B–7. Dynamic Stability

B–7.1. Up to this point, we have

covered stability of a powered industrial

truck without consideration of the

dynamic forces that result when the

vehicle and load are put into motion.

The transfer of weight and the resultant

shift in the center of gravity due to the

dynamic forces created when the

machine is moving, braking, cornering,

lifting, tilting, and lowering loads, etc.,

are important stability considerations.

B–7.2. When determining whether a

load can be safely handled, the operator

should exercise extra caution when

handling loads that cause the vehicle to

approach its maximum design

characteristics. For example, if an

operator must handle a maximum load,

the load should be carried at the lowest

position possible, the truck should be

accelerated slowly and evenly, and the

forks should be tilted forward

cautiously. However, no precise rules

can be formulated to cover all of these

eventualities.

PART 1917—MARINE TERMINALS

5. The authority citation for part 1917

would be revised to read as follows:

Authority: Section 41, Longshore and

Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (33

U.S.C. 941); secs. 4, 6, 8, Occupational Safety

and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,

657); Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–71

(36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 (48

FR 35736) or 1–90 (55 FR 9033), as

applicable.

Section 1917.43 also issued under 29 CFR

part 1911.

6. Section 1917.43 would be amended

by adding a new paragraph (i) and by

adding appendices A and B at the end

of the section to read as follows:

§ 1917.43 Powered industrial trucks.

* * * * *

(i) Operator training.

(1) Operator qualifications. (i) The

employer shall ensure that each

potential operator of a powered

industrial truck is capable of performing

the duties that are required of the job.

(ii) In determining operator

qualifications, the employer shall

ensure that each potential operator has

received the training required by this

paragraph, that each potential operator

has been evaluated by a designated

person while performing the required

duties, and that each potential operator

performs those operations competently.

(2) Training program implementation.

(i) The employer shall implement a

training program and ensure that only

trained drivers who have successfully

completed the training program are

allowed to operate powered industrial

trucks. Exception: Trainees under the

direct supervision of a designated

person shall be allowed to operate a

powered industrial truck provided the

operation of the vehicle is conducted in

an area where other employees are not

near and the operation of the truck is

under controlled conditions.

(ii) Training shall consist of a

combination of classroom instruction

(Lecture, discussion, video tapes, and/or

conference) and practical training

(demonstrations and practical exercises

by the trainee).

(iii) All training and evaluation shall

be conducted by a designated person

who has the requisite knowledge,

training and experience to train

powered industrial truck operators and

judge their competency.

(3) Training program content.

Powered industrial truck operator

trainees shall be trained in the following

topics unless the employer can

demonstrate that some of the topics are

not needed for safe operation.

(i) Truck related topics.

(A) All operating instructions,

warnings and precautions for the types

of trucks the operator will be authorized

to operate;

(B) Similarities to and differences

from the automobile;

(C) Controls and instrumentation:

location, what they do and how they

work;

(D) Power plant operation and

maintenance;

(E) Steering and maneuvering;

(F) Visibility (including restrictions

due to loading);

(G) Fork and attachment adaption,

operation and limitations of their

utilization;
13818 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

(H) Vehicle capacity;

(I) Vehicle stability;

(J) Vehicle inspection and

maintenance;

(K) Refueling or charging, recharging

batteries;

(L) Operating limitations; and

(M) Any other operating instruction,

warning or precaution listed in the

operator’s manual for the type vehicle

which the employee is being trained to

operate.

(ii) Workplace related topics.

(A) Surface conditions where the

vehicle will be operated;

(B) Composition of probable loads and

load stability;

(C) Load manipulation, stacking,

unstacking;

(D) Pedestrian traffic;

(E) Narrow aisles and other restricted

places of operation;

(F) Operating in hazardous classified

locations;

(G) Operating the truck on ramps and

other sloped surfaces that could affect

the stability of the vehicle;

(H) Other unique or potentially

hazardous environmental conditions

that exist or may exist in the workplace;

and

(I) Operating the vehicle in closed

environments and other areas where

insufficient ventilation could cause a

buildup of carbon monoxide or diesel

exhaust.

(iii) The requirements of this section.

(4) Evaluation and refresher or

remedial training. (i) Sufficient

evaluation and remedial training shall

be conducted so that the employee

retains and uses the knowledge, skills

and ability needed to operate the

powered industrial truck safely.

(ii) An evaluation of the performance

of each powered industrial truck

operator shall be conducted at least

annually by a designated person.

(iii) Refresher or remedial training

shall be provided when there is reason

to believe that there has been unsafe

operation, when an accident or a nearmiss occurs or when an evaluation

indicates that the operator is not capable

of performing the assigned duties.

(5) Certification.

(i) The employer shall certify that

each operator has received the training,

has been evaluated as required by this

paragraph, and has demonstrated

competency in the performance of the

operator’s duties. The certification shall

include the name of the trainee, the date

of training, and the signature of the

person performing the training and

evaluation.

(ii) The employer shall retain the

current training materials and course

outline or the name and address of the

person who conducted the training if it

was conducted by an outside trainer.

(6) Avoidance of duplicative training.

(i) Each current truck operator who

has received training in any of the

elements specified in paragraph (i)(3) of

this section for the types of trucks the

employee is authorized to operate and

the type workplace that the trucks are

being operated in need not be retrained

in those elements if the employer

certifies in accordance with paragraph

(i)(5)(i) of this section that the operator

has been evaluated to be competent to

perform those duties.

(ii) Each new truck operator who has

received training in any of the elements

specified in paragraph (i)(3) of this

section for the types of trucks the

employee will be authorized to operate

and the type of workplace in which the

trucks will be operated need not be

retrained in those elements before initial

assignment in the workplace if the

employer has written documentation of

the training and if the employee is

evaluated pursuant to paragraph (i)(4) of

this section to be competent.

Note to paragraph (i): Appendices A and

B provide non-mandatory guidance to assist

employers in implementing this paragraph

(i).

Appendices to § 1917.43

Appendix A—Training of Powered

Industrial Truck Operators

(Non-mandatory appendix to paragraph

(i) of this section)

A–1. Operator Selection

A–1.1. Prospective operators of

powered industrial trucks should be

identified based upon their ability to be

trained and accommodated to perform

job functions that are essential to the

operation of a powered industrial truck.

Determination of the capabilities of a

prospective operator to fulfill the

demands of the job should be based

upon the tasks that the job demands.

A–1.2. The employer should identify

all the aspects of the job that the

employee must meet/perform when

doing his or her job. These aspects

could include the level at which the

employee must see and hear, the

physical demands of the job, and the

environmental extremes of the job.

A–1.3. One factor to be considered is

the ability of the candidate to see and

hear within reasonably acceptable

limits. Included in the vision

requirements are the ability to see at

distance and peripherally. In certain

instances, there also is a requirement for

the candidate to discern different colors,

primarily red, yellow and green.

A–1.4. The environmental extremes

that might be demanded of a potential

powered industrial truck operator

include that ability of the person to

work in areas of excessive cold or heat.

A–1.5. After an employee has been

trained and appropriate

accommodations have been made, the

employer needs to determine whether

the employee can safely perform the job.

A–2. The Method(s) of Training

A–2.1. Among the many methods of

training are the lecture, conference,

demonstration, test (written and/or oral)

and the practical exercise. In most

instances, a combination of these

methods have been successfully used to

train employees in the knowledge, skills

and abilities that are essential to

perform the job function that the

employee is being trained to perform.

To enhance the training and to make the

training more understandable to the

employee, employers and other trainers

have used movies, slides, video tapes

and other visual presentations. Making

the presentation more understandable

has several advantages including:

(1) The employees being trained

remain more attentive during the

presentation if graphical presentation

are used, thereby increasing the

effectiveness of the training;

(2) The use of visual presentations

allows the trainer to ensure that the

necessary information is covered during

the training;

(3) The use of graphics makes better

utilization of the training time by

decreasing the need for the instructor to

carry on long discussions about the

instructional material; and

(4) The use of graphics during

instruction provides greater retention by

the trainees.

A–3. Training Program Content

A–3.1. Because each type (make and

model) powered industrial truck has

different operating characteristics,

limitations and other unique features,

an optimum employee training program

for powered industrial truck operators

must be based upon the type vehicles

that the employee will be trained and

authorized to operate. The training must

also emphasize the features of the

workplace which will affect the manner

in which the vehicle must be operated.

Finally, the training must include the

general safety rules applicable to the

operation of all powered industrial

trucks.

A–3.2. Selection of the methods of

training the operators has been left to

the reasonable determination of the

employer. Whereas some employees can

assimilate instructional material while

seated in a classroom, other employees

may learn best by observing the conduct
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13819

of operations (demonstration) and/or by

having to personally conduct the

operations (practical exercise). In some

instances, an employee can receive

valuable instruction through the use of

electronic mediums, such as the use of

video tapes and movies. In most

instances, a combination of the different

training methods may provide the

mechanism for providing the best

training in the least amount of time.

OSHA has specified at paragraph

(i)(2)(ii) of this section that the training

must consist of a combination classroom

instruction and practical exercise. The

use of both these modes of instruction

is the only way of assuring that the

trainee has received and comprehended

the instruction and can utilize the

information to safely operate a powered

industrial truck.

A–4. Initial Training

A–4.1. The following is an outline of

a generalized forklift operator training

program:

(1) Characteristics of the powered

industrial truck(s) the employee will be

allowed to operate:

(a) Similarities to and differences

from the automobile;

(b) Controls and instrumentation:

location, what they do and how they

work;

(c) Power plant operation and

maintenance;

(d) Steering and maneuvering;

(e) Visibility;

(f) Fork and/or attachment adaption,

operation and limitations of their

utilization;

(g) Vehicle capacity;

(h) Vehicle stability;

(i) Vehicle inspection and

maintenance;

(j) Refueling or charging, recharging

batteries.

(k) Operating limitations.

(l) Any other operating instruction,

warning or precaution listed in the

operator’s manual for the type vehicle

which the employee is being trained to

operate.

(2) The operating environment:

(a) Floor surfaces and/or ground

conditions where the vehicle will be

operated;

(b) Composition of probable loads and

load stability;

(c) Load manipulation, stacking,

unstacking;

(d) Pedestrian traffic;

(e) Narrow aisle and restricted place

operation;

(f) Operating in classified hazardous

locations;

(g) Operating the truck on ramps and

other sloped surfaces which would

affect the stability of the vehicle;

(h) Other unique or potentially

hazardous environmental conditions

which exist or may exist in the

workplace.

(i) Operating the vehicle in closed

environments and other areas where

insufficient ventilation could cause a

buildup of carbon monoxide or diesel

exhaust.

(3) The requirements of this OSHA

Standard.

A–5. Trainee Evaluation

A–5.1. The provisions of these

proposed requirements specify that an

employee evaluation be conducted both

as part of the training and after

completion of the training. The initial

evaluation is useful for many reasons,

including:

(1) the employer can determine what

methods of instruction will produce a

proficient truck operator with the

minimum of time and effort;

(2) the employer can gain insight into

the previous training that the trainee has

received; and

(3) a determination can be made as to

whether the trainee will be able to

successfully operate a powered

industrial truck. This initial evaluation

can be completed by having the

employee fill out a questionnaire, by an

oral interview, or by a combination of

these mechanisms. In many cases,

answers received by the employee can

be substantiated by contact with other

employees or previous employers.

A–6. Refresher or Remedial Training

A–6.1. (The type information listed in

paragraph A–6.2 of this appendix would

be used when the training is more than

an on-the-spot correction being made by

a supervisor or when there have been

multiple instances of on-the-spot

corrections having to be made.) When

an on-the-spot correction is used, the

person making the correction should

point out the incorrect manner of

operation of the truck or other unsafe

act being conducted, tell the employee

how to do the operation correctly, and

then ensure that the employee does the

operation correctly.

A–6.2. The following items may be

used when a more general, structured

retraining program is utilized to train

employees and eliminate unsafe

operation of the vehicle:

(1) Common unsafe situations

encountered in the workplace;

(2) Unsafe methods of operating

observed or known to be used;

(3) The need for constant

attentiveness to the vehicle, the

workplace conditions and the manner in

which the vehicle is operated.

A–6.3. Details about the above subject

areas need to be expanded upon so that

the operator receives all the information

which is necessary for the safe operation

of the vehicle. Insight into some of the

specifics of the above subject areas may

be obtained from the vehicle

manufacturers’ literature, the national

consensus standards [e.g. the ANSI B56

series of standards (current revisions)]

and this OSHA Standard.

Appendix B—Stability of Powered

Industrial Trucks

(Non-mandatory appendix to paragraph

(i) of this section)

B–1. Definitions

To understand the principle of

stability, understanding definitions of

the following is necessary:

Center of Gravity is that point of an

object at which all of the weight of an

object can be considered to be

concentrated.

Counterweight is the weight that is a

part of the basic structure of a truck that

is used to offset the weight of a load and

to maximize the resistance of the

vehicle to tipping over.

Fulcrum is the axis of rotation of the

truck when it tips over.

Grade is the slope of any surface that

is usually measured as the number of

feet of rise of fall over a hundred foot

horizontal distance (this measurement is

designated as a percent).

Lateral stability is the resistance of a

truck to tipping over sideways.

Line of action is a imaginary vertical

line through the center of gravity of an

object.

Load center is the horizontal distance

from the edge of the load (or the vertical

face of the forks or other attachment) to

the line of action through the center of

gravity of the load.

Longitudinal stability is the resistance

of a truck to overturning forward or

rearward.

Moment is the product of the weight

of the object times the distance from a

fixed point. In the case of a powered

industrial truck, the distance is

measured from the point that the truck

will tip over to the line of action of the

object. The distance is always measured

perpendicular to the line of action.

Track is the distance between wheels

on the same axle of a vehicle.

Wheelbase is the distance between the

centerline of the front and rear wheels

of a vehicle.

B–2. General

B–2.1. Stability determination for a

powered industrial truck is not

complicated once a few basic principles

are understood. There are many factors
13820 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

that influence vehicle stability. Vehicle

wheelbase, track, height and weight

distribution of the load, and the location

of the counterweights of the vehicle (if

the vehicle is so equipped), all

contribute to the stability of the vehicle.

B–2.2. The ‘‘stability triangle’’, used

in most discussions of stability, is not

mysterious but is used to demonstrate

truck stability in rather simple fashion.

B–3. Basic Principles

B–3.1. The determination of whether

an object is stable is dependent on the

moment of an object at one end of a

system being greater than, equal to or

smaller than the moment of an object at

the other end of that system. This is the

same principle on which a see saw or

teeter-totter works, that is, if the product

of the load and distance from the

fulcrum (moment) is equal to the

moment at the other end of the device,

the device is balanced and it will not

move. However, if there is a greater

moment at one end of the device, the

device will try to move downward at the

end with the greater moment.

B–3.2. Longitudinal stability of a

counterbalanced powered industrial

truck is dependent on the moment of

the vehicle and the moment of the load.

In other words, if the mathematic

product of the load moment (the

distance is from the front wheels, the

point about which the vehicle would tip

forward) the system is balanced and will

not tip forward. However, if the loadmoment is greater than the vehiclemoment, the greater load-moment will

force the truck to tip forward.

B–4. The Stability Triangle

B–4.1. Almost all counterbalanced

powered industrial trucks have a three

point suspension system, that is, the

vehicle is supported at three points.

This is true even if it has four wheels.

The steer axle of most trucks is attached

to the truck by means of a pivot pin in

the center of the axle. This three point

support forms a triangle called the

stability triangle when the points are

connected with imaginary lines. Figure

1 depicts the stability triangle.

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13821

BILLING CODE 4510–26–C
13822 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

B–4.2. When the line of action of the

vehicle or load-vehicle falls within the

stability triangle, the vehicle is stable

and will not tip over. However, when

the line of action of the vehicle or the

vehicle/load combination falls outside

the stability triangle, the vehicle is

unstable and may tip over. (See Figure

2.)

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13823

BILLING CODE 4510–26–C
13824 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

B–5. Longitudinal Stability

B–5.1. The axis of rotation when a

truck tips forward is the point of contact

of the front wheels of the vehicle with

the pavement. When a powered

industrial truck tips forward, it is this

line that the truck will rotate about.

When a truck is stable the vehiclemoment must exceed the load-moment.

As long as the vehicle-moment is equal

to or exceeds the load-moment, the

vehicle will not tip over. On the other

hand, if the load-moment slightly

exceeds the vehicle-moment, the truck

will begin the tip forward, thereby

causing loss of steering control. If the

load-moment greatly exceeds the

vehicle-moment, the truck will tip

forward.

B–5.2. In order to determine the

maximum safe load moment, the truck

manufacturer normally rates the truck at

a maximum load at a given distance

from the front face of the forks. The

specified distance from the front face of

the forks to the line of action of the load

is commonly called a load center.

Because larger trucks normally handle

loads that are physically larger, these

vehicles have greater load centers. A

truck with a capacity of 30,000 pounds

or less capacity is normally rated at a

given load weight at a 24 inch load

center. For trucks of greater than 30,000

pound capacity, the load center is

normally rated at 36 or 48 inch load

center distance. In order to safely

operate the vehicle, the operator should

always check the data plate and

determine the maximum allowable

weight at the rated load center.

B–5.3. Although the true load moment

distance is measured from the front

wheels, this distance is greater than the

distance from the front face of the forks.

Calculation of the maximum allowable

load moment using the load center

distance always provides a lower load

moment than the truck was designed to

handle. When handling unusual loads,

such as those that are larger than 48

inches long (the center of gravity is

greater than 24 inches), with an offset

center of gravity, etc., then calculation

of a maximum allowable load moment

should be undertaken and this value

used to determine whether a load can be

handled. For example, if an operator is

operating a 3,000 pound capacity truck

(with a 24 inch load center), the

maximum allowable load moment is

72,000 inch-pounds (3,000 times 24). If

a probable load is 60 inches long (30

inch load center), then the maximum

weight that this load can weigh is 2,400

pounds (72,000 divided by 30).

B–6. Lateral Stability

B–6.1. The lateral stability of a vehicle

is determined by the position of the line

of action (a vertical line that passes

through the combined center of gravity

of the vehicle and the load) relative to

the stability triangle. When the vehicle

is not loaded, the location of the center

of gravity of the truck is the only factor

to be considered in determining the

stability of the truck. As long as the line

of action of the combined center of

gravity of the vehicle and the load falls

within the stability triangle, the truck is

stable and will not tip over. However, if

the line of action falls outside the

stability triangle, the truck is not stable

and may tip over.

B–6.2. Factors that affect the lateral

stability of a vehicle include the

placement of the load on the truck, the

height of the load above the surface on

which the vehicle is operating, and the

degree of lean of the vehicle.

B–7. Dynamic Stability

B–7.1. Up to this point, we have

covered stability of a powered industrial

truck without consideration of the

dynamic forces that result when the

vehicle and load are put into motion.

The transfer of weight and the resultant

shift in the center of gravity due to the

dynamic forces created when the

machine is moving, braking, cornering,

lifting, tilting, and lowering loads, etc.,

are important stability considerations.

B–7.2. When determining whether a

load can be safely handled, the operator

should exercise extra caution when

handling loads that cause the vehicle to

approach its maximum design

characteristics. For example, if an

operator must handle a maximum load,

the load should be carried at the lowest

position possible, the truck should be

accelerated slowly and evenly, and the

forks should be tilted forward

cautiously. However, no precise rules

can be formulated to cover all of these

eventualities.

PART 1918—SAFETY AND HEALTH

REGULATIONS FOR LONGSHORING

7. The authority citation for part 1918

would be revised to read as follows:

Authority: Section 41, Longshore and

Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (33

U.S.C. 941); secs. 4, 6, 8, Occupational Safety

and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,

657); Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–71

(36 FR 8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 (48

FR 35736) or 1–90 (55 FR 9033), as

applicable. Section 1918.77 also issued under

29 CFR part 1911.

8. A new § 1918.77 with appendices

A and B would be added to subpart G

to read as follows:

§ 1918.77 Powered Industrial Trucks.

(a) Operator training.

(1) Operator qualifications. (i) The

employer shall ensure that each

potential operator of a powered

industrial truck is capable of performing

the duties that are required of the job.

(ii) In determining operator

qualifications, the employer shall

ensure that each potential operator has

received the training required by this

paragraph, that each potential operator

has been evaluated by a designated

person while performing the required

duties, and that each potential operator

performs those operations competently.

(2) Training program implementation.

(i) The employer shall implement a

training program and ensure that only

trained drivers who have successfully

completed the training program are

allowed to operate powered industrial

trucks. Exception: Trainees under the

direct supervision of a designated

person shall be allowed to operate a

powered industrial truck provided the

operation of the vehicle is conducted in

an area where other employees are not

near and the operation of the truck is

under controlled conditions.

(ii) Training shall consist of a

combination of classroom instruction

(Lecture, discussion, video tapes, and/or

conference) and practical training

(demonstrations and practical exercises

by the trainee).

(iii) All training and evaluation shall

be conducted by a designated person

who has the requisite knowledge,

training and experience to train

powered industrial truck operators and

judge their competency.

(3) Training program content.

Powered industrial truck operator

trainees shall be trained in the following

topics unless the employer can

demonstrate that some of the topics are

not needed for safe operation.

(i) Truck related topics.

(A) All operating instructions,

warnings and precautions for the types

of trucks the operator will be authorized

to operate;

(B) Similarities to and differences

from the automobile;

(C) Controls and instrumentation:

location, what they do and how they

work;

(D) Power plant operation and

maintenance;

(E) Steering and maneuvering;

(F) Visibility (including restrictions

due to loading);

(G) Fork and attachment adaption,

operation and limitations of their

utilization;

(H) Vehicle capacity;

(I) Vehicle stability;

(J) Vehicle inspection and

maintenance;
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13825

(K) Refueling or charging, recharging

batteries;

(L) Operating limitations; and

(M) Any other operating instruction,

warning or precaution listed in the

operator’s manual for the type vehicle

which the employee is being trained to

operate.

(ii) Workplace related topics.

(A) Surface conditions where the

vehicle will be operated;

(B) Composition of probable loads and

load stability;

(C) Load manipulation, stacking,

unstacking;

(D) Pedestrian traffic;

(E) Narrow aisles and other restricted

places of operation;

(F) Operating in hazardous classified

locations;

(G) Operating the truck on ramps and

other sloped surfaces that could affect

the stability of the vehicle;

(H) Other unique or potentially

hazardous environmental conditions

that exist or may exist in the workplace;

and

(I) Operating the vehicle in closed

environments and other areas where

insufficient ventilation could cause a

buildup of carbon monoxide or diesel

exhaust.

(iii) The requirements of this section.

(4) Evaluation and refresher or

remedial training.

(i) Sufficient evaluation and remedial

training shall be conducted so that the

employee retains and uses the

knowledge, skills and ability needed to

operate the powered industrial truck

safely.

(ii) An evaluation of the performance

of each powered industrial truck

operator shall be conducted at least

annually by a designated person.

(iii) Refresher or remedial training

shall be provided when there is reason

to believe that there has been unsafe

operation, when an accident or a nearmiss occurs or when an evaluation

indicates that the operator is not capable

of performing the assigned duties.

(5) Certification.

(i) The employer shall certify that

each operator has received the training,

has been evaluated as required by this

paragraph, and has demonstrated

competency in the performance of the

operator’s duties. The certification shall

include the name of the trainee, the date

of training, and the signature of the

person performing the training and

evaluation.

(ii) The employer shall retain the

current training materials and course

outline or the name and address of the

person who conducted the training if it

was conducted by an outside trainer.

(6) Avoidance of Duplicative Training.

(i) Each current truck operator who

has received training in any of the

elements specified in paragraph (a)(3) of

this section for the types of trucks the

employee is authorized to operate and

the type workplace that the trucks are

being operated in need not be retrained

in those elements if the employer

certifies in accordance with paragraph

(a)(5)(i) of this section that the operator

has been evaluated to be competent to

perform those duties.

(ii) Each new truck operator who has

received training in any of the elements

specified in paragraph (a)(3) of this

section for the types of trucks the

employee will be authorized to operate

and the type of workplace in which the

trucks will be operated need not be

retrained in those elements before initial

assignment in the workplace if the

employer has written documentation of

the training and if the employee is

evaluated pursuant to paragraph (a)(4)

of this section to be competent.

(b) [Reserved]

Appendixes to § 1918.77

Appendix A—Training of Powered

Industrial Truck Operators

(Non-mandatory appendix to paragraph

(a) of this section)

A–1. Operator Selection

A–1.1. Prospective operators of

powered industrial trucks should be

identified based upon their ability to be

trained and accommodated to perform

job functions that are essential to the

operation of a powered industrial truck.

Determination of the capabilities of a

prospective operator to fulfill the

demands of the job should be based

upon the tasks that the job demands.

A–1.2. The employer should identify

all the aspects of the job that the

employee must meet/perform when

doing his or her job. These aspects

could include the level at which the

employee must see and hear, the

physical demands of the job, and the

environmental extremes of the job.

A–1.3. One factor to be considered is

the ability of the candidate to see and

hear within reasonably acceptable

limits. Included in the vision

requirements are the ability to see at

distance and peripherally. In certain

instances, there also is a requirement for

the candidate to discern different colors,

primarily red, yellow and green.

A–1.4. The environmental extremes

that might be demanded of a potential

powered industrial truck operator

include that ability of the person to

work in areas of excessive cold or heat.

A–1.5. After an employee has been

trained and appropriate

accommodations have been made, the

employer needs to determine whether

the employee can safely perform the job.

A–2. The Method(s) of Training

A–2.1. Among the many methods of

training are the lecture, conference,

demonstration, test (written and/or oral)

and the practical exercise. In most

instances, a combination of these

methods have been successfully used to

train employees in the knowledge, skills

and abilities that are essential to

perform the job function that the

employee is being trained to perform.

To enhance the training and to make the

training more understandable to the

employee, employers and other trainers

have used movies, slides, video tapes

and other visual presentations. Making

the presentation more understandable

has several advantages including:

(1) The employees being trained

remain more attentive during the

presentation if graphical presentation

are used, thereby increasing the

effectiveness of the training;

(2) The use of visual presentations

allows the trainer to ensure that the

necessary information is covered during

the training;

(3) The use of graphics makes better

utilization of the training time by

decreasing the need for the instructor to

carry on long discussions about the

instructional material; and

(4) The use of graphics during

instruction provides greater retention by

the trainees.

A–3. Training Program Content

A–3.1. Because each type (make and

model) powered industrial truck has

different operating characteristics,

limitations and other unique features,

an optimum employee training program

for powered industrial truck operators

must be based upon the type vehicles

that the employee will be trained and

authorized to operate. The training must

also emphasize the features of the

workplace which will affect the manner

in which the vehicle must be operated.

Finally, the training must include the

general safety rules applicable to the

operation of all powered industrial

trucks.

A–3.2. Selection of the methods of

training the operators has been left to

the reasonable determination of the

employer. Whereas some employees can

assimilate instructional material while

seated in a classroom, other employees

may learn best by observing the conduct

of operations (demonstration) and/or by

having to personally conduct the

operations (practical exercise). In some

instances, an employee can receive

valuable instruction through the use of
13826 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

electronic mediums, such as the use of

video tapes and movies. In most

instances, a combination of the different

training methods may provide the

mechanism for providing the best

training in the least amount of time.

OSHA has specified at paragraph

(a)(2)(ii) of this section that the training

must consist of a combination classroom

instruction and practical exercise. The

use of both these modes of instruction

is the only way of assuring that the

trainee has received and comprehended

the instruction and can utilize the

information to safely operate a powered

industrial truck.

A–4. Initial Training

A–4.1. The following is an outline of

a generalized forklift operator training

program:

(1) Characteristics of the powered

industrial truck(s) the employee will be

allowed to operate:

(a) Similarities to and differences

from the automobile;

(b) Controls and instrumentation:

location, what they do and how they

work;

(c) Power plant operation and

maintenance;

(d) Steering and maneuvering;

(e) Visibility;

(f) Fork and/or attachment adaption,

operation and limitations of their

utilization;

(g) Vehicle capacity;

(h) Vehicle stability;

(i) Vehicle inspection and

maintenance;

(j) Refueling or charging, recharging

batteries.

(k) Operating limitations.

(l) Any other operating instruction,

warning or precaution listed in the

operator’s manual for the type vehicle

which the employee is being trained to

operate.

(2) The operating environment:

(a) Floor surfaces and/or ground

conditions where the vehicle will be

operated;

(b) Composition of probable loads and

load stability;

(c) Load manipulation, stacking,

unstacking;

(d) Pedestrian traffic;

(e) Narrow aisle and restricted place

operation;

(f) Operating in classified hazardous

locations;

(g) Operating the truck on ramps and

other sloped surfaces which would

affect the stability of the vehicle;

(h) Other unique or potentially

hazardous environmental conditions

which exist or may exist in the

workplace.

(i) Operating the vehicle in closed

environments and other areas where

insufficient ventilation could cause a

buildup of carbon monoxide or diesel

exhaust.

(3) The requirements of this OSHA

Standard.

A–5. Trainee Evaluation

A–5.1. The provisions of these

proposed requirements specify that an

employee evaluation be conducted both

as part of the training and after

completion of the training. The initial

evaluation is useful for many reasons,

including:

(1) the employer can determine what

methods of instruction will produce a

proficient truck operator with the

minimum of time and effort;

(2) the employer can gain insight into

the previous training that the trainee has

received; and

(3) a determination can be made as to

whether the trainee will be able to

successfully operate a powered

industrial truck. This initial evaluation

can be completed by having the

employee fill out a questionnaire, by an

oral interview, or by a combination of

these mechanisms. In many cases,

answers received by the employee can

be substantiated by contact with other

employees or previous employers.

A–6. Refresher or Remedial Training

A–6.1. (The type information listed at

paragraph A–6.2 of this appendix would

be used when the training is more than

an on-the-spot correction being made by

a supervisor or when there have been

multiple instances of on-the-spot

corrections having to be made.) When

an on-the-spot correction is used, the

person making the correction should

point out the incorrect manner of

operation of the truck or other unsafe

act being conducted, tell the employee

how to do the operation correctly, and

then ensure that the employee does the

operation correctly.

A–6.2. The following items may be

used when a more general, structured

retraining program is utilized to train

employees and eliminate unsafe

operation of the vehicle:

(1) Common unsafe situations

encountered in the workplace;

(2) Unsafe methods of operating

observed or known to be used;

(3) The need for constant

attentiveness to the vehicle, the

workplace conditions and the manner in

which the vehicle is operated.

A–6.3. Details about the above subject

areas need to be expanded upon so that

the operator receives all the information

which is necessary for the safe operation

of the vehicle. Insight into some of the

specifics of the above subject areas may

be obtained from the vehicle

manufacturers’ literature, the national

consensus standards [e.g. the ANSI B56

series of standards (current revisions)]

and this OSHA Standard.

Appendix B—Stability of Powered

Industrial Trucks

(Non-mandatory appendix to paragraph

(a) of this section)

B–1. Definitions

To understand the principle of

stability, understanding definitions of

the following is necessary:

Center of Gravity is that point of an

object at which all of the weight of an

object can be considered to be

concentrated.

Counterweight is the weight that is a

part of the basic structure of a truck that

is used to offset the weight of a load and

to maximize the resistance of the

vehicle to tipping over.

Fulcrum is the axis of rotation of the

truck when it tips over.

Grade is the slope of any surface that

is usually measured as the number of

feet of rise of fall over a hundred foot

horizontal distance (this measurement is

designated as a percent).

Lateral stability is the resistance of a

truck to tipping over sideways.

Line of action is a imaginary vertical

line through the center of gravity of an

object.

Load center is the horizontal distance

from the edge of the load (or the vertical

face of the forks or other attachment) to

the line of action through the center of

gravity of the load.

Longitudinal stability is the resistance

of a truck to overturning forward or

rearward.

Moment is the product of the weight

of the object times the distance from a

fixed point. In the case of a powered

industrial truck, the distance is

measured from the point that the truck

will tip over to the line of action of the

object. The distance is always measured

perpendicular to the line of action.

Track is the distance between wheels

on the same axle of a vehicle.

Wheelbase is the distance between the

centerline of the front and rear wheels

of a vehicle.

B–2. General

B–2.1. Stability determination for a

powered industrial truck is not

complicated once a few basic principles

are understood. There are many factors

that influence vehicle stability. Vehicle

wheelbase, track, height and weight

distribution of the load, and the location

of the counterweights of the vehicle (if

the vehicle is so equipped), all

contribute to the stability of the vehicle.

B–2.2. The ‘‘stability triangle’’, used

in most discussions of stability, is not
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13827

mysterious but is used to demonstrate

truck stability in rather simple fashion.

B–3. Basic Principles

B–3.1. The determination of whether

an object is stable is dependent on the

moment of an object at one end of a

system being greater than, equal to or

smaller than the moment of an object at

the other end of that system. This is the

same principle on which a seesaw or

teeter-totter works, that is, if the product

of the load and distance from the

fulcrum (moment) is equal to the

moment at the other end of the device,

the device is balanced and it will not

move. However, if there is a greater

moment at one end of the device, the

device will try to move downward at the

end with the greater moment.

B–3.2. Longitudinal stability of a

counterbalanced powered industrial

truck is dependent on the moment of

the vehicle and the moment of the load.

In other words, if the mathematic

product of the load moment (the

distance is from the front wheels, the

point about which the vehicle would tip

forward) the system is balanced and will

not tip forward. However, if the loadmoment is greater than the vehiclemoment, the greater load-moment will

force the truck to tip forward.

B–4. The Stability Triangle

B–4.1. Almost all counterbalanced

powered industrial trucks have a threepoint suspension system, that is, the

vehicle is supported at three points.

This is true even if it has four wheels.

The steer axle of most trucks is attached

to the truck by means of a pivot pin in

the center of the axle. This three-point

support forms a triangle called the

stability triangle when the points are

connected with imaginary lines. Figure

1 depicts the stability triangle.

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
13828 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4510–26–C
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13829

B–4.2. When the line of action of the

vehicle or load-vehicle falls within the

stability triangle, the vehicle is stable

and will not tip over. However, when

the line of action of the vehicle or the

vehicle/load combination falls outside

the stability triangle, the vehicle is

unstable and may tip over. (See Figure

2.)

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
13830 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4510–26–C
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13831

B–5. Longitudinal Stability

B–5.1. The axis of rotation when a

truck tips forward is the point of contact

of the front wheels of the vehicle with

the pavement. When a powered

industrial truck tips forward, it is this

line that the truck will rotate about.

When a truck is stable the vehiclemoment must exceed the load-moment.

As long as the vehicle-moment is equal

to or exceeds the load-moment, the

vehicle will not tip over. On the other

hand, if the load-moment slightly

exceeds the vehicle-moment, the truck

will begin the tip forward, thereby

causing loss of steering control. If the

load-moment greatly exceeds the

vehicle-moment, the truck will tip

forward.

B–5.2. In order to determine the

maximum safe load moment, the truck

manufacturer normally rates the truck at

a maximum load at a given distance

from the front face of the forks. The

specified distance from the front face of

the forks to the line of action of the load

is commonly called a load center.

Because larger trucks normally handle

loads that are physically larger, these

vehicles have greater load centers. A

truck with a capacity of 30,000 pounds

or less capacity is normally rated at a

given load weight at a 24 inch load

center. For trucks of greater than 30,000

pound capacity, the load center is

normally rated at 36 or 48 inch load

center distance. In order to safely

operate the vehicle, the operator should

always check the data plate and

determine the maximum allowable

weight at the rated load center.

B–5.3. Although the true load moment

distance is measured from the front

wheels, this distance is greater than the

distance from the front face of the forks.

Calculation of the maximum allowable

load moment using the load center

distance always provides a lower load

moment than the truck was designed to

handle. When handling unusual loads,

such as those that are larger than 48

inches long (the center of gravity is

greater than 24 inches), with an offset

center of gravity, etc., then calculation

of a maximum allowable load moment

should be undertaken and this value

used to determine whether a load can be

handled. For example, if an operator is

operating a 3000 pound capacity truck

(with a 24 inch load center), the

maximum allowable load moment is

72,000 inch-pounds (3,000 times 24). If

a probable load is 60 inches long (30

inch load center), then the maximum

weight that this load can weigh is 2,400

pounds (72,000 divided by 30).

B–6. Lateral Stability

B–6.1. The lateral stability of a vehicle

is determined by the position of the line

of action (a vertical line that passes

through the combined center of gravity

of the vehicle and the load) relative to

the stability triangle. When the vehicle

is not loaded, the location of the center

of gravity of the truck is the only factor

to be considered in determining the

stability of the truck. As long as the line

of action of the combined center of

gravity of the vehicle and the load falls

within the stability triangle, the truck is

stable and will not tip over. However, if

the line of action falls outside the

stability triangle, the truck is not stable

and may tip over.

B–6.2. Factors that affect the lateral

stability of a vehicle include the

placement of the load on the truck, the

height of the load above the surface on

which the vehicle is operating, and the

degree of lean of the vehicle.

B–7. Dynamic Stability

B–7.1. Up to this point, we have

covered stability of a powered industrial

truck without consideration of the

dynamic forces that result when the

vehicle and load are put into motion.

The transfer of wight and the resultant

shift in the center of gravity due to the

dynamic forces created when the

machine is moving, braking, cornering,

lifting, tilting, and lowering loads, etc.,

are important stability considerations.

B–7.2. When determining whether a

load can be safely handled, the operator

should exercise extra caution when

handling loads that cause the vehicle to

approach its maximum design

characteristics. For example, if an

operator must handle a maximum load,

the load should be carried at the lowest

position possible, the truck should be

accelerated slowly and evenly, and the

forks should be tilted forward

cautiously. However, no precise rules

can be formulated to cover all of these

eventualities.

[FR Doc. 95–5826 Filed 3–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P