in the standard. OSHA welcomes such training proposal ... · documentary evidence, must provide in...

3094 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 20 / January 30, 1996 / Proposed Rules

Filing of Testimony and EvidenceBefore the Hearing

Any party requesting more than 10minutes for a presentation at thehearing, or who will submitdocumentary evidence, must provide inquadruplicate, the complete text of thetestimony, including any documentaryevidence to be presented at the hearing.One copy shall not be stapled or boundand be suitable for copying. Thesematerials must be provided to Mr.Thomas Hall, OSHA Division ofConsumer Affairs at the address aboveand be postmarked no later than April15, 1996.

Each such submission will bereviewed in light of the amount of timerequested in the notice of intention toappear. In those instances when theinformation contained in thesubmission does not justify the amountof time requested, a more appropriateamount of time will be allocated and theparticipant will be notified of that factprior to the informal public hearing.

Any party who has not substantiallycomplied with this requirement may belimited to a 10-minute presentation, andmay be requested to return forquestioning at a later time.

Any party who has not filed a noticeof intention to appear may be allowedto testify for no more than 10 minutesas time permits, at the discretion of theAdministrative Law Judge, but will notbe allowed to question witnesses.

Notice of intention to appear,testimony and evidence will beavailable for copying at the DocketOffice at the address above.

Conduct and Nature of the Hearing

The hearing will commence at 9:30a.m. on April 30, 1996. At that time, anyprocedural matters relating to theproceeding will be resolved.

The nature of an informal rulemakinghearing is established in the legislativehistory of section 6 of the OccupationalSafety and Health Act and is reflectedby OSHA’s rules of procedure forhearings (29 CFR 1911.15(a)). Althoughthe presiding officer is anAdministrative Law Judge and limitedquestioning by persons who have filednotices of intention to appear is allowedon crucial issues, the proceeding isinformal and legislative in type. TheAgency’s intent, in essence, is toprovide interested persons with anopportunity to make effective oralpresentations that can proceedexpeditiously in the absence ofprocedural restraints that impede orprotract the rulemaking process.

Additionally, since the hearing isprimarily for information gathering and

clarification, it is an informaladministrative proceeding rather thanan adjudicative one.

The technical rules of evidence, forexample, do not apply. The regulationsthat govern hearings and the pre-hearingguidelines to be issued for this hearingwill ensure fairness and due processand also facilitate the development of aclear, accurate and complete record.Those rules and guidelines will beinterpreted in a manner that furthersthat development. Thus, questions ofrelevance, procedure and participationgenerally will be decided so as to favordevelopment of the record.

The hearing will be conducted inaccordance with 29 CFR part 1911. Itshould be noted that § 1911.4 specifiesthat the Assistant Secretary may, uponreasonable notice, issue alternativeprocedures to expedite proceedings orfor other good cause.

The hearing will be presided over byan Administrative Law Judge whomakes no decision or recommendationon the merits of OSHA’s proposal. Theresponsibility of the Administrative LawJudge is to ensure that the hearingproceeds at a reasonable pace and in anorderly manner. The AdministrativeLaw Judge, therefore, will have all thepowers necessary and appropriate toconduct a full and fair informal hearingas provided in 29 CFR 1911, includingthe powers:

1. To regulate the course of theproceedings;

2. To dispose of procedural requests,objections and comparable matters;

3. To confine the presentations to thematters pertinent to the issues raised;

4. To regulate the conduct of thosepresent at the hearing by appropriatemeans;

5. At the Judge’s discretion, toquestion and permit the questioning ofany witness and to limit the time forquestioning; and

6. At the Judge’s discretion, to keepthe record open for a reasonable, statedtime (known as the post-hearingcomment period) to receive writteninformation and additional data, viewsand arguments from any person who hasparticipated in the oral proceedings.

OSHA recognizes that there may beinterested persons who, through theirknowledge of safety or their experiencein the operations involved, would wishto endorse or support certain provisionsin the standard. OSHA welcomes suchsupportive comments, including anypertinent accident data or costinformation that may be available, inorder that the record of this rulemakingwill present a balanced picture of thepublic response on the issues involved.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 22nd dayof January, 1996.Joseph A. Dear,Assistant Secretary of Labor.[FR Doc. 96–1215 Filed 1–29–96; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4510–26–P

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and HealthAdministration

29 CFR Part 1926

[Docket No. S–008]

Powered Industrial Truck OperatorTraining

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and HealthAdministration, Labor.ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Occupational Safety andHealth Administration (OSHA) isproposing to revise the Agency’sconstruction safety standard thatmandates the training of poweredindustrial truck operators. Theserevisions are being proposed to reducethe number of injuries and deaths thathave continued to occur as a result ofinadequate truck operator training. Theproposal is a follow-up to a parallelproposal to improve truck operatortraining in the general and maritimeindustries that was published in theFederal Register on March 14, 1995.

The proposed operator trainingrequirements would mandate thedevelopment of a training program thatbases the amount and type of trainingon the prior knowledge of the traineeand the ability of that trainee to acquire,retain, and use the knowledge and skillsthat are necessary to safely operate apowered industrial truck. A periodicevaluation of each operator’sperformance would also be required.Refresher or remedial training would berequired, if unsafe vehicle operation, anaccident or near miss, or otherdeficiencies were identified in thisperiodic evaluation.

Today, OSHA also is publishing aFederal Register notice reopening thecomment period for the general industryand maritime industry truck operatortraining proposal. OSHA is scheduling ajoint informal hearing to revisecomments and testimony on bothproposals, i.e., the proposal publishedin March and the one being publishedtoday.DATES: Written comments on theproposed standards and notices ofintention to appear at the informalpublic hearings on the proposedstandards must be postmarked by April

3095Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 20 / January 30, 1996 / Proposed Rules

1, 1996. Parties who request more than10 minutes for their presentations at theinformal public hearing and parties whowill submit documentary evidence atthe hearing must submit the full text oftheir testimony and all documentaryevidence postmarked no later than April15, 1996. The hearing will take place inWashington, DC and is scheduled tobegin on April 30, 1996. OSHA also isreopening the comment period for theproposed revision of the trainingrequirements for powered industrialtruck operators in general industry andthe maritime industries to April 1, 1996as announced in a separate documentpublished today and is scheduling ajoint hearing for those sectors alongwith the construction industry hearing.ADDRESSES: Comments and informationshould be sent in quadruplicate to:Docket Office, Docket No. S–008; RoomN2624; U.S. Department of Labor,Occupational Safety and HealthAdministration; 200 Constitution Ave.,NW., Washington, DC 20210 (202–219–7894).

Notices of intention to appear at theinformal rulemaking hearing, testimony,and documentary evidence are to besubmitted in quadruplicate to: Mr.Thomas Hall, OSHA Division ofConsumer Affairs, Occupational Safetyand Health Administration, 200Constitution Ave., NW., Room N3647,Washington, DC 20210 (202–219–8615).Written comments received, notices ofintention to appear, and all othermaterial related to the development ofthese proposed standards will beavailable for inspection and copying inthe public record in the Docket Office,Room N2624, at the above address.

The hearing will be held in theauditorium of the U.S. Department ofLabor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,Washington, DC.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Ms.Ann Cyr, Office of Information andConsumer Affairs, U.S. Department ofLabor, Occupational Safety and HealthAdministration, Room N3647; 200Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,DC 20210 (202–219–8148, FAX 202–219–5986).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

a. The Construction Safety Standard

Congress amended the Contract WorkHours and Safety Standards Act(CWHSA) (40 U.S.C. 327 et seq.) in 1969by adding a new section 107 (40 U.S.C.333) to provide employees in theconstruction industry with a safer workenvironment and to reduce thefrequency and severity of construction

accidents and injuries. The amendment,commonly known as the ConstructionSafety Act (CSA) (Pub. L. 91–54, August9, 1969), significantly strengthenedemployee protection by providing forthe adoption of occupational safety andhealth standards for employees of thebuilding trades and constructionindustry working on federally financedor federally assisted constructionprojects. Accordingly, the Secretary ofLabor issued Safety and HealthRegulations for Construction at 29 CFRpart 1518 (36 FR 7340, April 17, 1971)pursuant to section 107 of the ContractWork Hours and Safety Standards Act.

The Occupational Safety and HealthAct allowed the Secretary of Labor toadopt established Federal standardsissued under other statutes asoccupational safety and healthstandards that are enforceable under theOSH Act. Accordingly, the Secretary ofLabor adopted the ConstructionStandards that had been issued underthe CSA at 29 CFR part 1518 as OSHAstandards. These standards wereredesignated as part 1926 later in 1971(36 FR 25232, Dec. 30, 1971). Theprovisions pertaining to poweredindustrial trucks are contained at§ 1926.602(c). Section 1926.602(c)(1)(vi)states:

(vi) All industrial trucks in use shall meetthe applicable requirements of design,construction, stability, inspection, testing,maintenance, and operation, as defined inAmerican National Standards InstituteB56.1–1969, Safety Standards for PoweredIndustrial Trucks.

Thus, the construction standard relatingto the training of industrial truckoperators is an adoption by reference ofthe training provision of the consensusstandard which is identical to thecorresponding general industrystandard, which contains the full text ofthe American National StandardsInstitute (ANSI) standard.

The present training provision that isapplicable to construction through crossreference to the ANSI B56.1–1969 (andis directly incorporated into generalindustry as § 1910.178(l)) reads, ‘‘Onlytrained and authorized operators shallbe permitted to operate a poweredindustrial truck. Methods of trainingshall be devised to train operators in thesafe operation of powered industrialtrucks.’’

b. Action on Other Powered IndustrialTruck Operator Training Requirements

In the Federal Register of March 14,1995 (60 FR 13782), OSHA published aproposal to revise the general industrystandard for training powered industrialtruck operators (§ 1910.178(l)) and toadopt the same requirements for the

maritime industries (§§ 1915.120(a),1917.43(I), and 1918.77(a)). Copies of adraft of that Federal Register documenthad been provided to OSHA’s AdvisoryCommittee on Construction Safety andHealth (ACCSH) at the Committee’smeeting on Feb. 28 and March 1, 1995.The Committee advised OSHA that itwould like additional time to study theproposal and would finalize itsrecommendations by its next meeting onMay 25–26, 1995. Because OSHA hadreceived no recommendations or otherinformation from the ACCSH, theAgency decided to delay proposing theadoption of training requirements forpowered industrial truck operators inthe construction industry until theCommittee had concluded itsdeliberations.

ACCSH met on May 25–26, at whichtime the Committee prepared itscomments and recommendations. TheCommittee recommended that OSHApropose improved powered industrialtruck training for constructionemployees. The Committee alsosuggested some changes from thegeneral industry proposed standard thatOSHA is considering incorporating inthe construction standard. Some ofthese suggestions may be of value toemployees in the general and maritimeindustries as well.

OSHA has decided that the mosteffective way to fully consider theCommittee’s suggestions in the proposalis to raise them in the preamblediscussion as a series of issues and toinvite public comment on them. OSHAalso is asking in a companion FederalRegister document published todaywhether some of these changes alsoshould be made to the general andmaritime industries’ powered industrialtruck operator training regulations. Inthe final rule, OSHA will consider thesuggestions of the committee andchanges for the construction, generaland maritime industries based on thecomments and evidence received.

In Section VIII below, OSHAdiscusses the specific recommendationsof the ACCSH. It also poses to the publicvarious questions to focus comments onthese recommendations.

c. Updated Consensus Standard

Since promulgation of the OSHAsafety and health standards forconstruction in 1971, the consensusstandard on which the poweredindustrial truck standard was based(ANSI B56.1) has undergone fourcomplete revisions (dated 1975, 1983,1988 and 1993). The current consensusstandard (Ex. 3–1) addresses retrainingof truck operators as follows:


1 The consensus committees call the standardsfor different pieces of equipment ‘‘volumes’’ and allof the volumes produced by the committee the‘‘standard’’. OSHA has decided to use the samenomenclature.

4.18 Operator qualifications.Only trained and authorized persons shall

be permitted to operate a powered industrialtruck. Operators of powered industrial trucksshall be qualified as to visual, auditory,physical, and mental ability to operate theequipment safely according to 4.19 and allother applicable parts of Section 4.

4.19 Operator training.4.19.1 Personnel who have not been

trained to operate powered industrial trucksmay operate a truck for the purposes oftraining only, and only under the directsupervision of the trainer. This trainingshould be conducted in an area away fromother trucks, obstacles, and pedestrians.

4.19.2 The operator training programshould include the user’s policies for the sitewhere the trainee will operate the truck, theoperating conditions for that location, andthe specific truck the trainee will operate.The training program shall be presented to allnew operators regardless of previousexperience.

4.19.3 The training program shall informthe trainee that:

(a) The primary responsibility of theoperator is to use the powered industrialtruck safely following the instructions givenin the training program.

(b) Unsafe or improper operation of apowered industrial truck can result in: Deathor serious injury to the operator or others;damage to the powered industrial truck orother property.

4.19.4 The training program shallemphasize safe and proper operation to avoidinjury to the operator and others and preventproperty damage, and shall cover thefollowing areas:

(a) Fundamentals of the powered industrialtruck(s) the trainee will operate, including:

(1) Characteristics of the poweredindustrial truck(s), including variationsbetween trucks in the workplace;

(2) Similarities to and differences fromautomobiles:

(3) Significance of nameplate data,including rated capacity, warnings, andinstructions affixed to the truck;

(4) Operating instructions and warnings inthe operating manual for the truck, andinstructions for inspection and maintenanceto be performed by the operator;

(5) Type of motive power and itscharacteristics;

(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 includingtemporary conditions;

(2) Ramps and inclines, with and withoutload;

(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 orexplosion, as defined in ANSI/NFPA 505;

(6) Narrow aisles, doorways, overheadwires and piping, and other areas of limitedclearance;

(7) Areas where the truck may be operatednear other powered industrial trucks, othervehicles, 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 servicea 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 addressing operating safety rulesand practices;

(2) Provisions of this Standard in Section5.5 addressing care of the truck;

(3) Other rules, regulations, or practicesspecified by the employer at the locationwhere the powered industrial truck will beused.

(e) Operational training practice, including;(1) If feasible, practice in the operation of

powered industrial trucks shall be conductedin an area separate from other workplaceactivities and personnel;

(2) Training practice shall be conductedunder the supervision of the trainer;

(3) Training practice shall include theactual operation or simulated performance ofall operating tasks such as load handling,maneuvering, traveling, stopping, starting,and other activities under the conditionswhich will be encountered in the use of thetruck.

4.19.5 Testing, Retraining, andEnforcement

(a) During training, performance and oraland/or written tests shall be given by theemployer to measure the skill and knowledgeof the operator in meeting the requirementsof the Standard. Employers shall establish apass/fail requirement for such tests.Employers may delegate such testing toothers but shall remain responsible for thetesting. Appropriate records shall be kept.

(b) Operators shall be retrained when newequipment is introduced, existing equipmentis modified, operating conditions change, oran operator’s performance is unsatisfactory.

(c) The user shall be responsible forenforcing the safe use of the powered

industrial truck according to the provisionsof this Standard.

Note: Information on operator training isavailable from such sources as poweredindustrial truck manufacturers, governmentagencies dealing with employee safety, tradeorganizations of users of powered industrialtrucks, public and private organizations, andsafety consultants.

(For an explanation of why OSHA decided topropose a standard that is somewhat differentfrom the consensus standard, see sectionentitled Summary and Explanation of theProposed Standard, below.)

Since 1971, the ANSI consensuscommittee has adopted other volumes 1

for additional types of vehicles that fallwithin the broad definition of apowered industrial truck. Specifically,volumes have been developed andadopted for guided industrial vehicles,rough terrain forklift trucks, industrialcrane trucks, personnel and burdencarriers, operator controlled industrialtow tractors, and manually propelledhigh lift industrial trucks. The trainingprovisions OSHA is proposing areperformance oriented and are applicableto all types of industrial trucks.Accordingly, OSHA is proposing thesame training standards language for alltypes of industrial trucks. Comments arerequested on this issue.

d. Petitions and Requests

Since the promulgation of the OSHAstandard in 1971, interested personshave requested that OSHA improve itstraining requirements for poweredindustrial truck operators. ANSI (nowthe American Society of MechanicalEngineers (ASME)) has substantiallyupgraded its training provisions forpowered industrial truck operators.

On March 15, 1988, the IndustrialTruck Association (ITA) petitionedOSHA to revise its standard requiringthe training of powered industrial truckoperators (Ex. 3–2). The petitioncontained suggested language for aproposed requirement along with amodel operator training program bywhich compliance with therecommended requirement could bemet. OSHA responded to the petition onApril 8, 1988, stating that work on therevision of the OSHA poweredindustrial truck operator trainingrequirement would begin as soon asother priority projects were completed.

Congress, in particular, has expresseda special interest in this standard. Aresolution urging OSHA to revise itsregulations on forklift operator safety


training was passed by the Senate in the103rd Congress. Senate ConcurrentResolution 17 was approved by voicevote with 55 cosponsors and broadbipartisan support. Its companionmeasure in the House ofRepresentatives, H. Con. Res. 92, had236 cosponsors from both parties,although no formal vote was taken.

OSHA preliminarily concludes thatupgrading the training requirements forpowered industrial truck operators willsubstantially reduce a significant risk ofdeath and injury caused by the unsafeoperation of powered industrial trucksdriven by untrained or inadequatelytrained operators.

II. The Powered Industrial TruckThe term ‘‘powered industrial truck’’

is defined in the ASME B56.1 (formerlythe ANSI B56.1) standard as a ‘‘mobile,power propelled truck used to carry,push, pull, lift, stack, or tier material.’’Powered industrial trucks areparticularly useful when handlingpalletized materials.

There are presently approximately855,900 powered industrial trucks inuse in American industry. Of thisnumber, OSHA estimates that there areabout 8300 powered industrial trucks inuse in the construction industry.

Powered industrial trucks areclassified by manufacturers according totheir individual characteristics. Thereare seven classes of powered industrialtrucks:

Class 1—Electric Motor, Sit-downRider, Counter-Balanced Trucks (Solidand Pneumatic Tires).

Class 2—Electric Motor Narrow AisleTrucks (Solid Tires).

Class 3—Electric Motor Hand Trucksor Hand/Rider Trucks (Solid Tires).

Class 4—Internal Combustion EngineTrucks (Solid Tires).

Class 5—Internal Combustion EngineTrucks (Pneumatic Tires).

Class 6—Electric and InternalCombustion Engine Tractors (Solid andPneumatic Tires).

Class 7—Rough Terrain ForkliftTrucks (Pneumatic Tires).

Each of the different types of poweredindustrial trucks has its own uniquecharacteristics and inherent hazards. Tomaximize effectiveness, training mustaddress the unique characteristics of thetype vehicle(s) the employee is beingtrained to operate.

These trucks may operate on almostany type surface, from smooth and levelfloors to rocky, uneven ground,provided they were manufactured tooperate on that type floor or ground andthe surface does not have an excessiveslope. Construction forklift trucks aremore frequently operated on rough

terrain than trucks used in otherindustry sectors.

Trucks of different types are designedand manufactured to operate in variouswork environments. Powered industrialtrucks can be used for moving materialabout the workplace. High lift truckscan be used to raise loads up to 30 or40 feet above the ground, to deposit thematerial on a roof under construction, amezzanine or another elevated location,and subsequently to retrieve and lowerthe material.

Powered industrial trucks also may beequipped with, or can be modified toaccept, attachments that allowmovement of odd-shaped materials orpermit the truck to carry out tasks thatmay not have been envisioned when thetruck was designed and manufactured.Many of these attachments may beadded to or installed on the vehicle bythe dealer or by the employer. Forexample, there are powered industrialtruck attachments for grasping barrels ordrums of material. Some of theseattachments not only grasp a barrel ordrum but allow the vehicle operator torotate the barrel or drum to empty thevessel or lay it on its side. OSHArecognizes that certain attachments maylimit the safe use of the vehicle. Toensure that modifications or additionsdo not adversely affect the safe use ofthe vehicle, OSHA requires at§ 1926.602(c)(1)(ii) that:

(ii) No modifications and additions whichaffect capacity and safe operation of theequipment shall be made without themanufacturer’s written approval. If suchmodifications or changes are made, thecapacity, operation, and maintenanceinstruction plates, tags, or decals shall bechanged accordingly. In no case shall theoriginal safety factor of the equipment bereduced.

When the use of specializedattachments restricts the use of thepowered industrial truck or when thetruck is used to lift people, it is essentialthat operator training includeinstruction on the safe use of the vehicleso that the operator knows andunderstands the restrictions orlimitations that are imposed upon theoperation of the vehicle by the use ofthose attachments or the conduct ofthose operations.

III. Powered Industrial Truck HazardsPowered industrial trucks are used in

many construction activities. Theirprincipal utility lies in the fact thateither a large number of objects on apallet or confined in a large box, crateor other container or large objects maybe moved about the workplace andraised and placed on elevated surfaceswith relative ease. Since powered

industrial truck movement is controlledby the operator and is not restricted bythe frame of the machine or otherimpediments, virtually unrestrictedmovement of the vehicle about theworkplace is possible.

The hazards that are commonlyassociated with powered industrialtrucks may not exist or be aspronounced for every type, make ormodel of vehicle. Each type of truckpresents different operating hazards. Forexample, the chance of a falling loadaccident occurring when the truck is asitdown, counterbalanced high lift ridertruck is much greater than when thevehicle is a motorized hand truck,because the height to which the loadcan be raised by a sitdown rider truckis much greater than that for the handtruck.

Correspondingly, the method ormeans to prevent an accident or toprotect employees from injury may bedifferent with different types of trucks.For example, when a rider truck isinvolved in a tipover accident, theoperator has the opportunity to remainin the operator’s position in the vehicleduring the tipover, thereby minimizingthe potential for injury. In most cases,the operator of a rider truck is injuredin a tipover accident when he or sheattempts to jump clear of the vehiclewhen it begins to tip over. Because thenatural tendency of the operator is tojump downward, he or she lands on thefloor or ground and is then crushed bythe overhead guard of the vehicle.Consequently, the operator of a ridertruck should be trained to stay with thevehicle during a lateral tipover. On theother hand, when an order picker tipsover with the platform in a raisedposition, the operator usually shouldattempt to jump clear of the vehicle, andshould be trained accordingly.

Because a powered industrial truck isa motor vehicle, its operation is similarin some respects to that of anautomobile, and some of its hazards arethe same as those experienced duringthe operation of an automobile.Automobile and powered industrialtruck are both subject to a number ofcommon hazards, such as contactingfixed or movable objects (includingemployees) and tipping over.

Additionally, operating a car or anindustrial truck at excessive speed orskidding on a wet or otherwise slipperyground or floor can be dangerous to theoperator or nearby employees. Driving apowered industrial truck at excessivespeed may result in loss of control,causing the vehicle to skid, tip over, orfall off a loading dock or other elevatedwalking or working surface. Failure tomaintain control of the vehicle also may


cause the vehicle to strike an employeeor to strike stored material, causing thematerial to topple and possibly injure anemployee. Driver training is necessaryso that the operator will act properly tominimize the hazard to himself orherself and to other employees.

Although there are many similaritiesbetween the automobile and thepowered industrial truck, there are alsomany differences. Another reason fortraining industrial truck operators is tomake operators aware of thesedifferences. Some of the characteristicsof a powered industrial truck that havea pronounced effect upon truckoperation and safety that are outsideauto driving experience are the truck’sability to change its stability, to raise,lower and tilt loads, and to steer withthe rear wheels while being powered bythe front wheels. In addition, vision issometimes partially obscured by theload. Moving loads upwards,downwards, forwards and backwardscauses a shift of the center of gravityand can adversely affect the overallstability of the vehicle. When a load israised or moved away from the vehicle,the vehicle’s longitudinal stability isdecreased. When the load is lowered ormoved closer to the vehicle, itslongitudinal stability is increased.

To mitigate the hazards posed to thestability of the truck by the movementof the material being handled, the ANSIB56.1–1969 has seven provisions thataddress proper operation of a poweredindustrial truck. These provisionsspecify:

604 Q. While negotiating turns, speed shallbe reduced to a safe level by means of turningthe hand steering wheel in a smooth,sweeping motion. Except when maneuveringat a very low speed, the hand steering wheelshall be turned at a moderate, even rate.

605 A. Only stable or safely arranged loadsshall be handled. Caution shall be exercisedwhen handling off-center loads which cannotbe centered.

605 B. Only loads within the rated capacityof the truck shall be handled.

605 C. The long or high (includingmultiple-tiered) loads which may affectcapacity shall be adjusted.

605 D. Trucks equipped with attachmentsshall be operated as partially loaded truckswhen not handling a load.

605 E. A load engaging means shall beplaced under the load as far as possible; themast shall be carefully tilted backward tostabilize the load.

605 F. Extreme care shall be used whentilting the load forward or backward,particularly when high tiering. Tiltingforward with load engaging means elevatedshall be prohibited except to pick up a load.An elevated load shall not be tilted forwardexcept when the load is in a deposit positionover a rack or stack. When stacking or tiering,only enough backward tilt to stabilize theload shall be used.

Knowledge of and adherence to theseprinciples, as well as the otherrequirements of the OSHA standard, areessential for safe load handling andvehicle operation. Operators of vehiclesused in construction need to be trainedabout the requirements of the consensusstandard because failure to adhere to thetechniques emphasized in theseprovisions are major causes ofaccidents.

The hazards addressed in thisproposed rule are those associated withindustrial trucks in general, as well asthose posed by specific makes or modelsof trucks. Each powered industrial truckhas a different feel that makes itsoperation slightly different from theoperation of other trucks, and operatorsmust therefore be aware of the effects ofthese differences on safe truckoperation. The workplaces where thesetrucks are being used may also presentparticular hazards. For these reasons, auniform and all-inclusive set of hazardsthat applies to all industrial trucks andworkplaces cannot be delineated. Forthe same reason, the development of asingle ‘‘generic’’ training program thatfits all powered industrial trucks and allworkplaces is impractical. In developingan effective powered industrial trucktraining program, there are howeverthree major areas of concern that shouldbe kept in mind. These are the hazardsassociated with the particular make andmodel of truck, the hazards of theworkplace (which are particularlyimportant on construction sites), andthe general hazards that apply to theoperation of all or most poweredindustrial trucks.

In addition, some hazards are relatedto the improper operation of a poweredindustrial truck. Among these hazardsare: Falling loads caused byoverloading, unbalanced loading orother improper loading; the vehiclefalling from a platform, curb, trailer orother surface on which the vehicle isoperating; the vehicle being drivenwhile the operator has an obstructedview in the direction of travel; and thevehicle being operated at an excessiverate of speed.

OSHA has identified several accidentsthat have occurred when an employeeother than the operator is ‘‘given a ride’’on a powered industrial truck. Mosttrucks were designed and are intendedto allow only the operator to ride on thevehicle. The carrying of other personsmay result in an accident when thatother person either falls from thevehicle or hits an obstruction when thevehicle comes too close to thatobstruction. Finally, powered industrialtruck accidents occur because thevehicle is not properly maintained

(These accidents most commonlyinvolve employees being overcome byexcessive carbon monoxide emissions orvehicle component failure).

The seriousness of the consequencesassociated with these accidents dependson such factors as the method ofoperation of the powered industrialtruck, the load being carried, and thecharacteristics of the workplace inwhich the vehicle is being operated.Accordingly, truck operators must betrained to recognize unsafe conditionsand how to react to them when theyoccur.

Several features of powered industrialtrucks contribute either directly orindirectly to the hazards posed by thesevehicles. Some of the factors thatinfluence the extent of the hazardspresented by a particular truck are theplacement of the critical components ofthe vehicle, the age of the vehicle, andthe manner in which the vehicle isoperated and maintained.

There are other hazards related to theuse of powered industrial trucks that arecaused or enhanced by thecharacteristics of the workplace. Thesehazards include the following:Operating powered industrial trucks onrough, uneven or sloped surfaces;operating powered industrial truckswith unusual loads; operating inhazardous (classified) areas; operatingin areas where there are narrow aisles;and operating where there is pedestriantraffic or where employees are workingin or adjacent to the path of travel of thepowered industrial truck. The firsthazard is particularly pronounced onconstruction sites.

The operation of a powered industrialtruck presents hazards not only to theoperator, but also to other employeesworking with or around the vehicle. Asexplained in the section entitled‘‘Studies and Accident, Injury and OtherData,’’ below, employees other thanoperators have been injured or killed inaccidents involving powered industrialtrucks. Proper training can reduceaccidents resulting from the causesdescribed above.

IV. Studies and Accident, Injury andOther Data

A detailed analysis of poweredindustrial truck studies and accidentand injury data appears in the NPRM fortruck training for general industry andthe maritime industry, which waspublished in the Federal Register onMarch 14, 1995 (60 FR 13787). Thesection presented here brieflysummarizes the data relevant to theconstruction industry.


a. Studies Measuring the Effectivenessof an Industrial Lift Truck SafetyTraining Program

In 1984, H. Harvey Cohen and RogerC. Jensen, working under contract withthe National Institute for OccupationalSafety and Health (NIOSH), publishedan article in the Journal of SafetyResearch (Fall 1984, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp.125–135) entitled ‘‘Measuring theEffectiveness of an Industrial Lift TruckSafety Training Program’’ (Ex. 4). Thearticle contained an analysis of twostudies that were undertaken to measureobjectively the effects of safety trainingon the driving performance and safetypractices of powered industrial truckoperators.

This article detailed the results of anexperiment that was conducted toevaluate training of powered industrialtruck operators using a behavioral(work) sampling procedure to obtainobjective data about work practices thatcorrelate with injury risk. There weretwo separate studies conducted in thisexperiment, one at each of two similarwarehouses. The studies that comprisedthe experiment were conducted toassess the value of training and theinfluence of post- training actions on thesafety performance of workers. Thesestudies demonstrate that trainingpowered industrial truck operatorsreduced the operators’ error rates(number of unsuccessful operationsdivided by the total number ofoperations) and that training combinedwith feedback reduced error rates evenmore.

The studies were conducted atdifferent warehouses using similartraining techniques. The training wasconducted to emphasize those operatorbehaviors that were measurable,frequently observed, capable of beingreliably observed, related to frequentaccident occurrence and amenable tocorrective action through training. Therewere 14 behaviors evaluated in thesestudies. Positive reinforcement of thetraining was used with some trainees tomeasure its effectiveness. Theexperiment was conducted in fourphases:

(1) The pre-training phase, duringwhich none of the operators had beentrained;

(2) The post-training 1 phase, duringwhich the control group remaineduntrained, the treatment group hadreceived training, and the treatment-plus-feedback group had receivedtraining and also was receivingperformance feedback;

(3) The post-training 2 phase, duringwhich all three groups had receivedtraining but only the training-plus-

feedback group received performancefeedback; and

(4) The retention phase, which started3 months after the end of the post-training 2 phase (and the end of thefeedback program).

Following the initial training (post-training 1), all three groups showed adecrease in their mean error rates withthe training-plus-feedback groupshowing the largest decrease (from .35to .27, a 23 percent decrease) followedby the training-only (from .33 to .27, an18 percent decrease) and the controlgroup (from .34 to .32, a 6 percentdecrease). The reduction in the errorrate of the control group from the pre-training to the post-training 1 phase ofthe study was attributed to the influenceof peer modeling, i.e., the untrainedcontrol group operators were copyingthe behavior of their trainedcounterparts. Toward the end of thepost-training 1 phase, the error rates ofthe three groups converged, suggestingthat the effects of the training programhad begun to wear off. Observers alsonoted that some behaviors were beingcompromised when employees ofdifferent knowledge levels wererequired to interact, particularly inconflict avoidance situations such assignaling and yielding at blindintersections.

During the post-training 2 phase ofthe study, all groups improved inperformance. The control group’sperformance improved by 28 percent(from a mean error rate of .32 to .23)while the training group experienced a4 percent improvement (from a meanerror rate of .27 to .26) and the training-plus-feedback group had a 7 percentimprovement (from .27 to .25). Theauthors concluded that there wasfurther evidence of the effect of peermodeling because the performance of allthree groups continued to improvealthough no additional instruction wasgiven.

The retention phase of the study wasconducted three months following thecompletion of the post-training 2 phaseof the study. It was intended todetermine the longer term effects of thetraining. During this phase of the study,mean error rates were checked, as wasdone during the other phases of thestudy. The results of this phase of thestudy indicate an additionalimprovement in the performance of theoperators, with the mean error ratedecreasing from .25 to .19, a 24 percentimprovement in their performance. Thetotal performance gain achieved duringthis study was a 44 percentimprovement from the pre-training(baseline) phase through the retentionphase (from a mean error rate of .34 to

a final error rate of .19). The dataindicate that there were significantlyfewer errors at each successive phase ofthe study.

The second study was conducted toverify and extend the findings of thefirst study. A modified experimentaldesign was used to eliminate themitigating influence of the untrainedcontrol group. In the second study, alloperators were trained at the same timeand all received performance feedback.Comparisons were made only beforeand after training. The study wasdivided into three phases: Pre-training,post-training and retention. Theretention phase of the study was againconducted three months after theconclusion of the prior phase.

Following the training of the vehicleoperators, there was a 61 percentimprovement in performance scores(from an error rate of .23 to .09).Observation in the retention phase ofthis study showed an additionalreduction of 22 percent in mean errorrates (from .09 to .07 mean error rate).The overall improvement in mean errorrates between the pre-training error rate(.23) to that achieved during theretention phase (.07) was a reduction of70 percent.

b. The OSHA Fatality/CatastropheReports

OSHA records a summary of theresults of investigations of all accidentsresulting in fatalities, catastrophes,amputations and hospitalizations of twoor more days, and those accidents thathave received significant publicity orcaused extensive property damage.These summaries are recorded on anOSHA Form 170 and include an abstractdescribing the activities taking place atthe time of the accident and the causesof the accident. These reports are storedin a computerized database system.

A substantial percentage of theserious powered industrial truckaccidents that were investigatedoccurred in the construction industry.Specifically, 29 out of the 200 accidentsinvestigated took place in theconstruction industry.

c. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) DataIn April, 1994, BLS published a

booklet entitled ‘‘Fatal WorkplaceInjuries in 1992: A Collection of Dataand Analysis’’ (Ex. 3–4). In this booklet,there was an article written by Gary A.Helmer entitled ‘‘Fatalities InvolvingForklifts and Other Powered IndustrialCarriers, 1991–1992.’’ This reportcontains information contained in theCensus of Fatal Occupational Injuries(CFOI) on 170 fatal powered industrialtruck accidents. Table 1 lists the


classifications of those poweredindustrial truck accidents.

TABLE 1.—CLASSIFICATION OF FORK-LIFT FATALITIES, CFOI, 1991–1992

How accident occurred Num-ber

Per-cent

Forklift overturned ............. 41 24Forklift struck something,

or ran off dock ............... 13 8Worker pinned between

objects ........................... 19 11Worker struck by material . 29 17Worker struck by forklift .... 24 14Worker fell from forklift ..... 24 14Worker died during forklift

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

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

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, ‘‘FatalWorkplace Injuries in 1992, A Collection ofData and Analysis’’, Report 870, April 1994.

d. Fatality and Injury Data

As discussed in the PreliminaryEconomic Analysis, there are on average15 deaths and 1440 serious injuries frompowered industrial truck operations inthe construction industry each year. It isestimated that this standard wouldprevent 3 or 4 deaths and 463 to 601 ofthese serious injuries per year.

V. Basis for Agency Action

OSHA believes that, as the abovediscussion indicates, there is a sufficientbody of data and information on whichto base a revision of the existingstandard for powered industrial truckoperator training in the constructionindustry. The data indicate that thereare a substantial number of fatalities andinjuries from industrial truck accidentsin the construction industry. Studiesindicate that better training wouldsubstantially reduce the number of suchfatalities and serious injuries.Consequently, these requirementswould reduce the number of fatalitiesand injuries resulting from accidentsinvolving powered industrial trucksoperated by untrained or insufficientlytrained employees.

In addition, as discussed above, thereare other reasons to update the standard.For example, there now existsubstantially updated consensusstandards on this subject. In addition,OSHA has been petitioned to improvethe requirements for industrial trucktraining. Further, the AdvisoryCommittee on Construction Safety andHealth has recommended improving thestandard. Finally, the Senate recentlypassed a resolution urging OSHA torevise its outdated powered industrialtruck operator standards.

VI. The Need for TrainingTraining is generally defined as

making a person proficient through theuse of specialized instruction andpractice. Training is the means bywhich an employer ensures thatemployees have the knowledge, skills,and abilities that are necessary for theemployees to do their jobs correctly.

Once an employee acquires the basicknowledge, skills, and abilities,refresher or remedial training may beused to reinforce or improve thoseattributes, to provide new material, toprovide material that was previouslydiscussed in a new manner, or to simplymaintain an awareness of the materialthat has previously been taught.Refresher or remedial training isnormally conducted on a predeterminedperiodic basis, that is, on a monthly,semi-annual, or annual basis.

Training may be as simple andinformal as a supervisor pointing out anerror in the manner in which anemployee is doing a job (making an on-the-spot correction) or showing anemployee how to do a particular task(demonstrating the proper method to dothe job). On the other end of thespectrum is the detailed, structuredinstruction that uses formal methods oftraining (lectures, conferences, formaldemonstrations, practical exercises,examinations, etc.). Formal training isusually used to impart more, or morecomplicated information to a trainee.

For the most part, employees do notstart out with the knowledge, skills, andabilities to perform the tasks necessaryfor safe lift truck operation. Althoughmany employees who are selected orassigned to drive powered industrialtrucks are licensed to drive automobiles,there are enough dissimilarities betweenthese two types of vehicles and theiroperation to require additionalknowledge, skills, and abilities tooperate a powered industrial trucksafely. Operational characteristics ofpowered industrial trucks, such asvehicles equipped with rear-wheelsteering and front-wheel drive and thecapability to hoist-move-lower loads,require operator training and practice tomaster the different driving skills thatmust be used when an employeeoperates powered industrial trucks.

Many accidents can be prevented, orthe seriousness of the injury to theemployee can be mitigated, by trainingemployees. Effective training andsupervision also can prevent theoccurrence of unsafe acts such asspeeding, failing to look in the directionof travel, and failing to slow down orstop and sound the vehicle’s horn atblind intersections and other areas

where pedestrian traffic may not beobservable. Another example in whichtraining can prevent or lessen theseverity of an accident of this kind isdirectly related to the stability ofpowered industrial trucks whentraveling with an elevated load.Effective operator training shouldemphasize that the vehicle can only bemoved when the load is at its lowestpoint. However, even if an operator failsto follow this practice and the vehicletips over, the injury to the operator isusually minimal if he or she stays withthe vehicle. As previously discussed,the usual injury in a powered industrialtruck tipover occurs when the operatorattempts to jump off the vehicle whileit is tipping over. In these cases, sincethe normal tendency is for a person tojump downward, the operator lands onthe floor or ground in the path of theoverhead guard, leading to a crushinginjury of the head, neck or back.Training an employee to stay with thevehicle will reduce the severity of someof these injuries.

The studies conducted by Cohen andJensen, discussed under Studies,Accident, Injury and Other Data earlierin this preamble, found a reduction inoperator errors rate of up to 70 percentfrom training. Although a 70 percenterror rate reduction cannot be directlyequated to a corresponding reduction inthe number of accidents that this or anyother group of operators willexperience, improper or unsafeoperation of powered industrial trucksis the major cause of accidents and theirresultant fatalities and injuries.Therefore, a reduction in the unsafeoperation of these trucks will reduce thenumber of accidents, and the resultantfatalities and injuries.

Although not all powered industrialtruck accident reports spell out lack oftraining as a causal factor in theaccident, each accident can, in part, beattributed to the actions or inactions ofthe operator. For example, when apowered industrial truck tips over, theaccident is caused by one or more ofseveral factors, including speeding,traveling with the load in an elevatedposition, or improperly negotiating aturn. Training can minimize the numberof times that these events occur.

Proper training of an employee musttake into account the fact that differentoperating conditions (including the typeand size of the load, the type andcondition of the surface on which thevehicle is being operated, and otherfactors) can adversely affect vehicleoperation. Construction sites usuallyinclude many of these factors, such asrough terrain. Operator training mustemphasize two points regarding any


potential accident scenario. These twofactors are: (1) The employee should notengage in activities that may cause anaccident, and (2) the employee shouldminimize the potential for injury (eitherto himself or herself or to otheremployees) by taking appropriateactions.

VII. Summary and Explanation of theProposed Rule

a. Specific Provisions Included in theProposed Standard

OSHA is proposing to improve thetraining of powered industrial truckoperators in construction by adding anew 29 CFR 1926.602(d) that wouldsupersede the current crossreference tothe 1969 ANSI standard insofar as thatstandard specifies that only trainedoperators be permitted to operatepowered industrial trucks. Thisproposal is intended to enhance the safeoperation of powered industrial trucksin the construction workplace.

In developing this proposal, OSHAlooked at the training requirements ofthe existing national consensus standardfor powered industrial trucks, ANSIB56.1–1993, as well as trainingrequirements from other standards (bothindustry and government). The non-training related requirements of thosestandards are beyond the scope of thisproposal.

The proposed standard includes sixelements. First, the employer is only touse powered industrial truck operatorswho are trained for and capable ofperforming the job. Operator training isto include both formal training andpractical experience. Various relevanttopics are to be covered in the trainingunless they are not relevant to theemployer’s vehicles or workplace.Refresher training is to be provided, andif there is an accident or unsafeoperation of the vehicle, remedialtraining must be given. Employers are tocertify that employees are trained. Priortraining and experience may counttoward the required training.

At paragraph (d)(1)(i), OSHA specifiesthat each employee who will berequired to operate a powered industrialtruck must be capable of performing theduties that are required of the job aftertraining and appropriateaccommodation. This means that theemployee must have to climb onto andoff a truck, to sit on the vehicle forextended periods of time, to turn his orher body to be able to drive in reverse,and to have the physical and mentalabilities to perform the job. Informationobtained during the initial employeeevaluation can be used to, among otherthings, determine how best to train the

employee. For example, if the employeecannot read and comprehend theoperator’s manuals for the type of trucksthat the employee will operate, thisinformation would have to taught bymeans other than assigning theemployee to read the truck manuals.The initial evaluation can also be usefulin avoiding duplicative training.

Paragraph (d)(1)(ii) provides that theemployer shall ensure that the employeehas received required training, that theemployee has been evaluated and thatthe operator can perform the jobcompetently. After the training, theevaluation must be carried out by adesignated person so that the employercan ensure that the trainee can performthe duties required of an operator in acompetent manner. Conductingevaluations during training is known asa practical exercise or a performancetest. OSHA believes that only throughevaluation by a knowledgeable personafter training can an employer knowthat the employee has been adequatelytrained and can safely perform the job.

The designated person may be theemployer, if qualified. A small businessperson who has employees may decideto send the employees to an outsidetraining organization. Alternately, theemployer may be sufficiently trained toenable the employer to be qualified asa designated person.

At paragraph (d)(2), OSHA isproposing to require that the employerimplement a training program for allpowered industrial truck operators. Thisprogram would ensure that only traineddrivers who have successfullycompleted the training program wouldbe allowed to operate these vehicles. Anexception to the rule would allowtrainees to operate powered industrialtrucks provided the operation is underthe direct supervision of a designatedperson and the operation is conductedwhere there is minimum danger to thetrainee or other employees.

OSHA is proposing at paragraph(d)(2)(ii) that the training consist of acombination of classroom instructionand practical training. The Agencybelieves that only a combination oftraining methods will ensure adequateemployee training. Although classroomtraining is invaluable for the teaching ofthe principles of vehicle operation, it isthe hands-on training and theevaluation of the operation of thevehicle that finally proves the adequacyof the training and the ability of theemployee to use that training to operatea powered industrial truck successfully.

At paragraph (d)(2)(iii), OSHA isproposing to require that all training beconducted by a designated person.OSHA defines a designated person as

one who has the requisite knowledge,training and experience to trainpowered industrial truck operators andjudge their competence. As discussedelsewhere in this preamble, theemployer may have the necessaryprerequisites to qualify as a designatedperson, or he or she may assign thetraining responsibility to another person(either a knowledgeable employee or antrainer from outside the company).

To ensure that the training containsthe appropriate information for theoperator, OSHA has provided a list ofsubjects at paragraph (d)(3). Under thisrule, it is the responsibility of theemployer to select the particular itemsthat are pertinent to the types of truckthat the employee will be allowed tooperate and the work environment inwhich the vehicle will be operated. Forexample, if the employee will beallowed to operate an order picker, it isessential that he or she understand thelocation and function of the controls,the location and operation of thepowerplant, steering and maneuvering,visibility, inspection and maintenance,and other general operating functions ofthe vehicle. Additionally, it is essentialthat the employee know and understandthat he or she must be restrained fromfalling when the platform of the truck isin an elevated position and that thetruck must never be driven when theplatform is elevated. Under thisproposed requirement, it is theresponsibility of the employer to selectthose elements of the training that arenecessary for the type of vehicle to beused and the workplace in which thatvehicle will be operated. The employermay leave out elements if the employercan demonstrate that they are notrelevant to safe operation in theemployer’s workplace.

An additional component of thetraining program is a continuingevaluation of the operator. At paragraph(d)(4), OSHA specifies that thisevaluation be conducted on a periodicbasis so that the employee retains anduses the knowledge, skills and abilitiesthat are necessary for the safe operationof the vehicle. This evaluation needonly be conducted at the intervalsnecessary to ensure that the operatorshave not forgotten or chosen todisregard their training. OSHA isproposing that such evaluations becarried out at least annually. Theevaluation does not have to be formal;for example, it could be something assimple as having the designated personobserve an operation to ensure that thepowered industrial truck is beingoperated safely.

OSHA is requiring at paragraph (d)(5)that the employer certify that the


required training and evaluations havebeen conducted. To minimizepaperwork burden on the employer,OSHA is specifying that the certificationconsist only of the name of theemployee, the date of the training orevaluation, and the signature of theperson conducting the training orevaluation. In light of the PaperworkReduction Act of 1995, OSHA isrequesting comment on ways it candetermine whether employees havebeen properly trained without usingeven the minimal requirement ofcertification. In this paragraph, OSHAalso specifies that all of the currenttraining materials used in the conduct oftraining or the name and address of theoutside trainer, if one is used, bemaintained.

At paragraph (d)(6), OSHA isproposing to allow the employers toforego those portions of the requiredtraining that employees have previouslyreceived. The intent of these provisionsis to prevent duplicative training. Forexample if an employee is alreadytrained in powered industrial truckoperation, knows the necessaryinformation, has been evaluated, andhas proven to be competent to performthe duties of an operator, there is noreason to require an employer to repeatthe training.

As previously discussed, three majorareas must be emphasized whenconducting a powered industrial trucktraining program. These three areas are:(1) The characteristics, operation andlimitations of the vehicles that thetrainee will be authorized to operate, (2)the hazards associated with theworkplace in which these vehicles willoperate, and (3) the general safety rulesthat apply to these vehicles and theiroperation.

This proposed rule has been draftedin performance language to allow theemployer a reasonable degree offlexibility in developing the trainingprogram and conducting the training.OSHA recognizes that there are inherentdifferences in the capabilities andlimitations of employees, both in theirability to assimilate the training andthen to use the knowledge that has beengained. Therefore, the proposedregulation does not limit the employerby specifying the manner in which thetraining must be conducted. Similarly,the specific content of the trainingcourse has not been prescribed becausedifferent topics must be taught toaddress the variations associated withdifferent makes and models of vehiclesand cover hazards specific to eachworkplace. However, the proposal doesidentify the topics that should becovered unless the employer determines

that one or more of them are notrelevant to the employer’s situation.

OSHA believes that the training needsto be administered before the employeebegins to operate a vehicle. To this end,OSHA has required initial training ofemployees so that they will acquire theknowledge and skills that are necessaryfor the safe operation of the poweredindustrial truck before being allowed tooperate the vehicle without closesupervision.

OSHA has generally left theparticulars of the type of training(lecture, conference, demonstration,practical exercise, test or examination,etc.) to the employer. However, thetraining must include some formalinstruction and some practicalexperience. The length of the trainingmust be based on the employee’sexperience and other qualifications andthe nature of the work environment. Thetraining must be based upon the type ofvehicles the employee will be allowedto operate, the conditions that exist inthe workplace, the general safety rulesincluded in this OSHA standard, thetrainer’s skills and knowledge, and thetrainee’s skill level. Consequently,OSHA believes that one standardizedtraining course will not suffice for allemployees.

The employer may choose the trainingprovider. This could include contractingwith an outside professional trainingcompany to come into the company andtrain the powered industrial truckoperators or the employer developingand conducting the training program. Ineither case, the employer can choose themethod or methods by which theemployees will be trained and when thetraining is conducted.

The standard requires at paragraph(d)(4) that a designated person evaluatethe trainee’s understanding of thetraining and his/her competency tooperate a powered industrial truck. Thisis the best method of proving that theoperator has been adequately trainedand that the training has been, andcontinues to be, effective. By observinghow the trainee operates the vehicle, theevaluator can assess how well thetrainee has absorbed the necessaryinformation.

When a new employee claims priorexperience in operating a poweredindustrial truck, the employer mustensure that the employee knows how tooperate the vehicle safely. This can beascertained by questioning theemployee on various aspects of theoperation of the truck and by requiringthe operator to demonstrate his or herability to operate the vehicle safelythrough the conduct of a practicalexercise.

In evaluating the applicability andadequacy of an employee’s priorexperience, the employer must considerthe type of equipment the employee hasoperated, how long ago this experiencewas gained, and the type of workenvironment in which the employeeworked. Some written documentation ofthe earlier training is also necessary todetermine that proper training has beengiven. In addition, the competency ofthe employee must be evaluated. Basedon an evaluation of this information, theemployer can determine whether theexperience is recent and thoroughenough, the documentation sufficient,and the competency adequate to foregosome or much of the initial training.Some training on the specific factors ofthe new employee’s workplace willalways be necessary. Again, the majorcriterion for evaluating an employee is:Does the person know how to do the joband does the vehicle operator have anduse the knowledge that is needed to dothe job safely?

The proposed regulatory text forconstruction includes some minorchanges to improve the clarity from thelanguage proposed for other sectors.OSHA also is proposing to add two non-mandatory appendices to the standard.These appendices are intended toprovide guidance to employers inestablishing a training program(Appendix A) and in understanding thebasic principles of stability (AppendixB). In neither case is the informationcontained in these appendices intendedto provide an exhaustive explanation ofthe techniques of conducting training orof understanding the principles ofstability, but each appendix is intendedto introduce the basic concepts so thatthe employer can use the material toprovide basic training.

b. Specific Provisions of the ASMEStandard Not Included in This Proposal

OSHA has not included some of thesuggested language contained in theASME B56.1–1993 standard.Specifically, paragraph 4.19.2 of theconsensus standard has not beenincluded because other enforceablelanguage in the proposed standardcovers the issue. This paragraph states:

The operator training program shouldinclude the user’s policies for the site wherethe trainee will operate the truck, theoperating conditions for that location, andthe specific truck the trainee will operate.The training program shall be presented to allnew operators regardless of previousexperience.

The Agency also has not adopted thelanguage contained in 4.19.3(a) of theconsensus standard because theresponsibility for providing a safe


workplace (including the use of apowered industrial truck) is vested withthe employer under the OSH Act.Paragraph 4.19.3(a) specifies, ‘‘Theprimary responsibility of the operator isto use the powered industrial trucksafely following the instructions givenin the training program.’’

The consensus standard, at 4.19.4(e)and 4.19.5, specifies the type of trainingand the testing that should beconducted, whereas the OSHA standardleaves the methods of training up to theemployer. As explained above, theemployer is responsible for selecting themethods that are employed to train theoperators. For example, in somecircumstances, the employee may beable to gain valuable information fromreading the operator’s manual for thevehicle. In other circumstances, readingthe manual may be less effective thanpractical lessons in how to operate thetruck safely.

Many OSHA standards and consensusstandards specify that some means beused to verify that training has beenconducted. Examples of suchverification include: (1) Documentationof training, (2) retention of lesson plansand attendance rosters and, (3) issuanceof training certificates. When refresheror remedial training is specified, theseother rules usually require that a setamount of training be conducted at aregular interval (for example, a certainnumber of hours of refresher training beconducted annually). The proposed rulewould require evaluation by adesignated person and certification thatthe employee has taken the training andcan competently operate the truck.Course materials also must be kept.OSHA believes that this is a sufficientmethod of verification. The ASMEprovision would require additionalpaperwork that is discouraged by thePaperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

VIII. The Comments andRecommendations of the AdvisoryCommittee on Construction Safety andHealth

The Advisory Committee onConstruction Safety and Health(ACCSH) was advised at its meeting ofFebruary 28 and March 1, 1995, of theeffort being undertaken by OSHA topromulgate like training requirementsfor all powered industrial truckoperators regardless of where thepowered industrial truck is being used.At that time, the ACCSH recommendedto the Agency that the issuance of anNPRM for construction be delayed untilthe Committee had more time to studythe draft of the proposal and to submitits formal comments andrecommendations to OSHA. At that

meeting, the Committee also set up atask force to consider the matter.

At its meeting of May 25 and 26,ACCSH received the recommendationsfrom the task force. ACCSH votedunanimously that OSHA should publisha proposal for improving the trainingrequirement for powered industrialtruck operators in the constructionindustry. The Committee also suggestedthat OSHA consider the changesrecommended and get feedback from thepublic on the proposal and then proceedfrom there (Tr. pp. 202–223)(Ex. 9).

OSHA has carefully considered thecomments and recommendationsreceived from the ACCSH. OSHA hasdecided that the best approach at thistime is to raise the suggested ACCSHchanges as issues for public comment inthis preamble rather than to incorporatethem into the proposed regulatory text.OSHA believes this is the best approachto highlight these issues for publiccomment. After considering the publiccomments, OSHA will consider the bestapproach for handling the suggestedchanges in the final powered industrialtruck operator training standard forconstruction. OSHA also is publishingthese recommendations forconsideration for inclusion in the finalgeneral industry and maritime rules tosee whether the ACCSHrecommendations may be appropriate inthese industries as well. Therefore,OSHA is not making specific wordchanges in the proposed regulatory textand will examine the commentsreceived in response to this documentbefore it does so. This also may preventpossible confusion, because ACCSHused the specific language andparagraph numbering of the ASMEstandard rather than the proposedgeneral industry regulatory text andparagraphic numeration whenreferencing its discussion.

The following issues were submittedby ACCSH. Also included is a shortdiscussion of the reasons for the ACCSHrecommendations:

1. In the construction industry,should an employer be allowed toaccept the certification of training by athird party such as a union,manufacturer, consultant, or otherprivate or public organization? SinceOSHA does not accredit certifiers, whatcriteria should be used to establish theircredibility?

ACCSH recommended thatconstruction employers be permitted toaccept such accreditation. In theconstruction industry, it is common thatsuch training would be presented by theunion, an apprenticeship program, or bya local employer organization. In

addition, employees often work for anemployer only briefly and it would beinefficient for the new employer to haveto review the performance of each newemployee. If this approach wereadopted, there would need to be somemechanism to ensure that the operatorwould be trained in conditionscomparable to those found at thepresent site and to enable the employerto know that the operator had beentrained.

2. What type of testing should beconducted during initial training tojudge the competency of the trainee(performance testing and oral and/orwritten tests)?

A. If tests are administered, whatsubjects should be tested, and whatmethods, if any, should be used to judgethat the tests are reliable and addressthe subject matter adequately?

B. What, if any, should be theacceptable pass/fail requirement for thetests?

ACCSH recommended that theemployer or other organization trainingoperators give both performance testsand oral/written tests to ensure the skilland knowledge of the operator. Thecommittee also recommended that thereshould be pass/fail requirements forthose tests and that records be kept ofthe results of the tests. ACCSH believedthat this requirement would assist inlowering accident rates. The Committeealso suggested that, if this turned outnot to be effective, OSHA consideraccreditation of training programs.

3. Are some of the listed trainingsubjects not needed?

ACCSH believes that most of thetraining topics in the proposed standardare necessary but that a few might notbe. Specifically, they felt that therecommended topic of the differencesbetween driving an auto and a poweredindustrial truck might be unnecessary.

4. Should an employee receiverefresher or remedial training only ifoperating a vehicle unsafely or ifinvolved in an accident? Is there anyfixed operator retraining frequencysuitable for the construction industry?

The Advisory Committee believedthat a periodic retraining provision forconstruction was inappropriate becausemost construction employees are onlyon a particular job a short period.However, the Committee recommendedreevaluation and possible retrainingafter an incident, accident or expirationof a certificate. (See question 1.)

IX. Statutory ConsiderationsSection 2(b)(3) of the Occupational

Safety and Health (OSH) Act authorizes


‘‘the Secretary of Labor to set mandatoryoccupational safety and healthstandards applicable to businessesaffecting interstate commerce’’, andsection 5(a)(2) provides that ‘‘(eachemployer shall comply withoccupational safety and healthstandards promulgated under this Act’’(emphasis added). Section 3(8) of theOSH Act (29 U.S.C. 652(8)) providesthat ‘‘the term ’occupational safety andhealth standard’ means a standardwhich requires conditions, or theadoption or use of one or morepractices, means, methods, operations,or processes, reasonably necessary orappropriate to provide safe or healthfulemployment and places ofemployment.’’

OSHA considers a standard to be‘‘reasonably necessary or appropriate’’within the meaning of section 3(8) if itmeets the following criteria: (1) Thestandard will substantially reduce asignificant risk of material harm; (2)compliance is technologically feasiblein the sense that the protective measuresbeing required already exist, can bebrought into existence with availabletechnology, or can be created withtechnology that can reasonably bedeveloped; (3) compliance iseconomically feasible in the sense thatindustry can absorb or pass on the costswithout major dislocation or threat ofinstability; and (4) the standard is costeffective in that it employs the leastexpensive protective measures capableof reducing or eliminating significantrisk. Additionally, safety standards mustbetter effectuate the Act’s protectivepurpose than the correspondingnational consensus standards, must becompatible with prior agency action,must be responsive to significantcomment in the record, and, to theextent allowed by statute, must beconsistent with applicable ExecutiveOrders. OSHA believes that applicationof these criteria results in standards thatprovide a high degree of workerprotection without imposing an undueburden on employers. (See thediscussion of 60 FR 13796–13799,March 14, 1995, for a detailed analysisof the case law.)

As discussed in various places in thepreamble of the March 14 notice, OSHAhas determined that the operation ofpowered industrial trucks by untrainedor inadequately trained operatorsgenerally poses significant risks toemployees. It is also OSHA’s view thatoperation of powered industrial trucksby untrained or inadequately trainedoperators poses a significant risk toemployees in the construction industry.There have been on average 15 fatalitiesand 1441 serious injuries in the

construction industry annually due tounsafe powered industrial truckoperation. OSHA estimates thatcompliance with the revised trainingrequirement for powered industrialtruck operators will reduce the risk ofthese injuries and deaths to thoseoperators and other employees bybetween 20 and 45 percent (preventing3 to 4 fatalities and 463 to 600 seriousinjuries annually). This constitutes asubstantial reduction of significant riskof material harm.

The Agency believes that complianceis technologically feasible because thereexists a current rule for the training ofpowered industrial truck operators andthe revised regulation merely specifiesin more detail what is to be taught tothose operators and requires theemployer to institute effectivesupervisory measures to ensurecontinued safe operation of thosevehicles. In many companies, thetraining of vehicle operators and thesubsequent supervisory measuresrequired by the standard have alreadybeen implemented.

Additionally, OSHA believes thatcompliance is economically feasible,because, as documented by thePreliminary Economic Analysis, allregulated sectors can readily absorb orpass on compliance costs. OSHAestimates total costs of $250,000, anegligible percent of the industry’s $500billion in sales and $35 billion in pretaxprofits.

The standard’s costs, benefits, andcompliance requirements arereasonable, amounting to approximately$250,000 per year while preventing 3–4 fatalities and 463–600 serious injuriesper year.

In some subsectors of the constructionindustry there are relatively few lifttrucks and in any given year, there maybe no fatalities and few injuries in thesesubsectors. Nevertheless, OSHAbelieves the risks to individual driversin these environments are significantand that the costs of compliance inthese subsectors will be negligible.

For these reasons and those furtherspelled out in the Federal Registerdocument of March 14, 1995 (60 FR13795), OSHA has determined that it isinappropriate to exclude anyconstruction subsectors merely becausethey have not recently reporteddocumented powered industrial truckinjuries or fatalities, insofar as thesesubsectors contain workplaces wherepowered industrial trucks are operated.

As discussed above in sector VII(b) ofthis preamble; many of the provisions ofthis proposed standard are based on thecurrent ASME consensus standard.Pursuant to section 6(b)(8) of the OSH

Act, OSHA explains above why theproposed provisions that differ from theASME standard better effectuate thepurpose of the Act.

ConclusionOSHA has preliminarily determined

that the proposed powered industrialtruck standard for construction, likeother safety standards, is subject to theconstraints of section 3(8) of the OSHAct, and that the standard is‘‘reasonably necessary or appropriate toprovide safe or healthful employmentand places of employment.’’

The Agency believes that the use ofpowered industrial trucks in theconstruction workplace by untrained orpoorly trained employees posessignificant risks and that the need torequire that only properly trainedemployees operate these vehicles isreasonably necessary to protect affectedemployees from those risks. OSHA alsohas determined that compliance withthe standard for the training of theseoperators is technologically feasiblebecause many companies offer the typeof training that the standard wouldrequire. In addition, OSHA believes thatcompliance is economically feasible,because, as documented by thePreliminary Economic Analysis (Ex. 2),all regulated sectors can readily absorbor pass on initial compliance costs andthe benefits are substantial. Inparticular, the Agency believes thatcompliance with the proposed poweredindustrial truck training requirementswill result in substantial cost savingsand productivity gains at facilities thatutilize powered industrial trucks whoseoperations might otherwise be disruptedby accidents and injuries.

As detailed in OSHA’s March 14,1995, document (60 FR 13799) and inthe Preliminary Economic Analysis, thestandard’s costs, benefits, andcompliance requirements are consistentwith those of other OSHA safetystandards.

X. Summary of the PreliminaryEconomic Feasibility and RegulatoryFlexibility Analyses and EnvironmentalImpact Assessment

Introduction

Executive Order 12866 and theRegulatory Flexibility Act requireFederal Agencies to analyze the costs,benefits and other consequences andimpacts of proposed standards and finalrules. Consistent with theserequirements, OSHA has prepared thispreliminary economic analysis toaccompany the revised proposal beingpublished, which would extendrequirements for the training of powered


industrial truck operators to theconstruction industry. OSHA’s initialproposal, which proposed such trainingfor truck operators in general industryand the maritime industries, waspublished in the Federal Register onMarch 14, 1995 (60 FR 13782). Theseproposed construction industry trainingrequirements will supplement andextend the minimal powered industrialtruck operator training requirementscurrently codified at 29 CFR 1926.602(c)(1)(vi). This preliminary economicanalysis of the potential impacts of theproposal on firms in the constructionindustry will be incorporated into thePreliminary Economic Analysisdeveloped by OSHA to support theproposed powered industrial truckoperator training requirements for thegeneral industry and maritime sectorspublished on March 14, 1995.

This preliminary economic analysis ofthe potential impacts of the proposedrule on the construction industryincludes a description of the industry,an assessment of the benefitsattributable to the proposal, apreliminary determination of thetechnological feasibility of the proposedrequirements, an estimation of the costsof compliance, an analysis of theeconomic feasibility of the proposedprovisions, and an evaluation of theeconomic and other impacts of theproposed rule on establishments in thissector. This preamble discussionsummarizes the more detailed analysisthat is available in the docket (Ex. 2).

Affected IndustriesUsing powered industrial truck sales

data provided by the Industrial TruckAssociation (ITA), OSHA estimates that,of the 822,831 industrial trucks in usein industries covered by OSHA, theconstruction sector (SICs 15–17) usesabout 8,300. This proposed rule willcover construction workers who operatepowered industrial trucks, includingworkers who are employed as dedicated(i.e., full time) truck operators and those

whose operation of powered industrialtrucks is incidental to the performanceof another job. These incidental users ofpowered industrial trucks includemaintenance personnel and generallaborers. Non-driving workers such asmaterials handlers, laborers, andpedestrians who work on or are presentin the vicinity of powered industrialtruck operations may also be injured orkilled in powered industrial truckaccidents.

OSHA estimates that approximately1.2 million workers are employed asindustrial truck operators in industriesregulated by OSHA. OSHA estimatesthat 12,400 of these operators areemployed by the construction sector.

Technological FeasibilityOSHA did not identify any proposed

requirement that raises technologicalfeasibility problems for constructionestablishments that use industrialtrucks. On the contrary, there issubstantial evidence that establishmentscan achieve compliance with all of theproposed requirements using existingmethods and equipment. In addition,the proposed standard introduces notechnological requirements of any type.Therefore, OSHA has preliminarilyconcluded that technological feasibilityis not an issue in relation to theproposed construction industry trainingstandard for powered industrial truckoperators.

Costs of ComplianceThe proposed industrial truck

operator training requirements wouldexpand the training required by OSHA’sexisting industrial truck trainingstandard (29 CFR 1926.602 (c)(1)) toinclude training information on theoperating instructions and warningsappropriate to the type of truck used,the specific hazards found in theworkplace where the truck will beoperated, and the requirements of thisstandard. Additionally, the proposedprovisions require construction

employers to monitor the performanceof industrial truck operators through anannual evaluation and to provideremedial training when this evaluationsuggests that such training is needed.

The annual costs constructionemployers will incur to comply with theproposed revisions are estimated to be$254,420. Table 2 presents estimatedannual costs, by provision, at the three-digit SIC level. OSHA developed theseindustry compliance cost estimatesbased on per- operator costs, the numberof operators affected, and employeeturnover rates. Costs are annualizedbased on a 7 percent discount rate, asdirected by the Office of Managementand Budget, and are projected over 10-years.

Current industry practice was alsotaken into consideration whencalculating costs, i.e., where employershave already voluntarily implementedpractices that would be required by theproposed standard, no cost is attributedto the new standard. OSHA estimatedthat it is current practice for 80 percentof employers in this industry to conductan initial evaluation of each poweredindustrial truck operator’s skill, aswould be required by the proposal. Inaddition, specific equipment training isoften a component of initial training inthis industry. Many operators are alsocurrently trained in both classroom andhands-on settings, and on the specifictype of truck they will use. OSHAestimates that about 75 percent ofemployers currently are in compliancewith these proposed requirements.Across all OSHA-regulated sectors,including construction, 65 percent ofemployers are assumed to be providingtruck operators with training in thehazards of the industrial truckenvironment they will operate in. Thisrequirement is often overlooked ingeneric or off-the-shelf trainingprograms and may be inadequatelycovered in programs provided byexternal trainers.

TABLE 2.—ANNUALIZED COMPLIANCE COSTS

[For the Proposed Industrial Truck Operator Training Standard in the Construction Sector, by Provision and by Three-Digit SIC]

SIC/Industry Initial eval-uation

Initial training MonitoringRemedialtraining Annual costSpecific

equipmentOperating

environmentAnnual

monitoringRecord-keeping

152 Residential building construction .... $905 $2,962 $7,592 $8,297 $6,223 $830 $26,810153 Operative builders ........................... 74 242 620 677 508 68 2,189154 Nonresidential building construction 1,423 4,655 11,931 13,039 9,779 1,304 42,130161 Highway and street construction .... 259 846 2,169 2,371 1,778 237 7,660162 Heavy construction, except high-

way ........................................................ 499 1,632 4,184 4,572 3,429 457 14,773171 Plumbing, heating, air-conditioning . 1,167 3,819 9,788 10,697 8,023 1,070 34,564172 Painting and paper hanging ............ 322 1,054 2,701 2,952 2,214 295 9,539173 Electrical work ................................. 952 3,115 7,983 8,724 6,543 872 28,190


2 The construction operator wage rate, withcompensation estimated at 30 percent of the wagerate, is estimated to be $18.34 per hour. Thesupervisor wage rate of $22.01 used in the analysis

is calculated by increasing the operator’s wage rateby 20 percent.

3 Mean error rate = operator errors divided bytotal number of driving behaviors observed.

TABLE 2.—ANNUALIZED COMPLIANCE COSTS—Continued[For the Proposed Industrial Truck Operator Training Standard in the Construction Sector, by Provision and by Three-Digit SIC]

SIC/Industry Initial eval-uation

Initial training MonitoringRemedialtraining Annual costSpecific

equipmentOperating

environmentAnnual

monitoringRecord-keeping

174 Masonry, stonework and plastering 833 2,727 6,989 7,638 5,728 764 24,679175 Carpentry and floor work ................ 363 1,187 3,042 3,425 2,493 332 10,742176 Roofing, siding and sheet metal

work ....................................................... 366 1,198 3,071 3,356 2,517 336 10,844177 Concrete work ................................. 427 1,397 3,581 3,914 2,935 391 12,646178 Water well drilling ............................ 36 118 302 330 247 33 1,065179 Miscellaneous special trade con-

tractors .................................................. 966 3,159 8,096 8,848 6,636 885 28,590Total Construction Sector .............. 8,592 28,109 72,051 78,739 59,054 7,874 254,420

Source: US Department of Labor, OSHA, Office of Regulatory Analysis, 1995.[a] Costs are annualized over 10 years at a 7 percent discount rate (annualization factor 0.1424).Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.

OSHA estimated per-operatorcompliance costs for each component ofthe proposed standard. Thesecompliance costs include the wages oftrainees and trainers 2, as well asmonitoring and recordkeeping costs.Auxiliary costs (e.g., costs for coursedevelopment and travel) will remainunchanged from those required by theexisting standard, and were notincluded when computing compliancecosts for the proposed revisions. Thecost associated with the 30-minuteinitial truck operator evaluationrequired to categorize operators either asexperienced or inexperienced isestimated to be $11.01; this figureincludes the expense of the supervisor’stime. The cost per trainee for each of theproposed two and one-half hour trainingsessions on specific equipment to beused and the hazards in the operatingenvironment is estimated to be $52.74per session, or $105.48 for both types oftraining. The per-operator cost forannual monitoring and recordkeeping isestimated to be $16.51. Therefore, thecost of compliance for each untrainednewly hired truck operator inconstruction is estimated to be $133.01($11.01 + $105.49 +$16.51).

A more detailed analysis of costs ispresented in Chapter III of the fullPreliminary Economic Analysis. OSHAwelcomes comments on the preliminarycosts and the underlying assumptions

presented in this Preliminary EconomicAnalysis.

BenefitsThe number of truck-related fatalities

and injuries that will be prevented bythe proposed training standard in allOSHA-regulated sectors is estimated byfirst determining the number ofpowered industrial truck fatalities andinjuries attributable to hazardsaddressed by OSHA’s existing poweredindustrial truck training standards aswell as the number of fatalities andinjuries determined not to bepreventable by OSHA’s existingrequirements or by the proposedstandard. The number of fatalities andinjuries likely to be prevented bycompliance with the standard is basedon the Agency’s analysis of poweredindustrial truck accidents as reported inthe narratives and citation data fromOSHA’s fatality catastrophe reportsgathered through the OSHA IntegratedManagement Information System (IMIS).

OSHA used results from the Cohenand Jensen study (Ex. 4) to derive anestimate of the beneficial effect ofenhanced training on poweredindustrial truck accidents. This study,which was conducted in twowarehouses where powered industrialtrucks were widely used, provides aquantitative estimate of the effectivenessof an operators’ training program similar

to the one required by the proposedstandard. The training programdescribed in the study included a seriesof short training sessions, post-trainingfeedback, and supervision andmonitoring of driver behavior. Thestudy estimated the effect of increasedtraining and operator monitoring onoperator driving practices, and showedthat the mean error rates before and aftertraining 3, as well as three months aftertraining, declined by 44 and 70 percentafter training, respectively.

As presented in Table 3, an estimated15 fatalities and 1,441 lost workdayinjuries occur annually as a result ofindustrial truck-related accidents in theconstruction industry. OSHA estimatesthat compliance with the proposedstandard in the construction sector willprevent 3 or 4 of these fatalities andbetween 463 and 600 lost workdayinjuries per year. These preventablefatalities and injuries are attributabledirectly to the proposed trainingrequirements, i.e., they are in additionto the lives already being saved and theinjuries already being prevented byOSHA’s existing powered industrialtruck training requirements forconstruction (29 CFR 1926.602(c)(1)). Adiscussion of the methodology used tocalculate these estimates is presented inChapter IV of the Preliminary EconomicAnalysis.


TABLE 3.—NUMBER OF FATALITIES AND LOST WORKDAY INJURIES POTENTIALLY PREVENTED ANNUALLY BY COMPLIANCEWITH THE PROPOSED POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCK TRAINING STANDARD IN THE CONSTRUCTION SECTOR

Sector

Total num-ber of pow-ered indus-trial truckfatalities

Preventable fatalitiesunder proposed standard

Total num-ber of in-dustrial

truck lostworkday in-

juries

Preventable injuriesunder proposed standard

Low esti-mate

High esti-mate

Low esti-mate

High esti-mate

Construction ..................................................................... 15 3.0 3.8 1,441 463 600

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA, Office of Regulatory Analysis, 1995.

Economic Impacts and RegulatoryFlexibility Analysis

OSHA assessed the potentialeconomic impacts of compliance withthe proposed standard and haspreliminarily determined that thestandard is economically feasible for allcovered industry groups. Detailedinformation at the three-digit SIC levelis presented in Chapter V of the fullPreliminary Economic Analysis.

When an industry enjoys an inelasticdemand for its products, any increase inoperating costs can ordinarily be passedon to consumers. In this case, themaximum expected price increase is

calculated by dividing the averageestimated annualized compliance costin each industry by the average revenuefor that industry. As shown in Table 4,OSHA estimates that the average priceincrease for the construction sectorwould be negligible, i.e., less than0.0001 percent. These estimates indicatethat, even if all costs were passed on toconsumers through price increases, theproposed standard would have anegligible impact on prices overall.Given the minimal price increasesnecessary to cover the cost of theproposed training requirements,employers should be able to pass along

compliance costs to their customers.However, even if all costs were absorbedby the affected firms, the highestreduction in profits in the constructionsector would be 0.001 percent for theconstruction special trades industry(SIC 17). Because most firms will notfind it necessary to absorb all of thecosts from profits and should be able topass most if not all of the standard’scosts on to consumers, average profitsare not expected to decline to the extentcalculated here. OSHA, therefore, doesnot expect the proposed standard tohave a significant economic impact onaffected firms.

TABLE 4.—ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCKS OPERATOR TRAINING STANDARD IN THECONSTRUCTION SECTOR

SIC/Industry sector

Value of in-dustry ship-ments, re-ceipts or

sales($ millions)

Annualizedcompliance

costs

Compliancecosts as a per-cent of sales

Pre-tax in-come

($ millions)

Compliancecosts as apercent ofpre-tax in-

come

15 Building Construction ................................................................. $223,007 $71,128 Negligible .......... $16,149 0.000416 Heavy Construction ................................................................... 77,746 22,433 Negligible .......... 6,496 0.000317 Construction (Special Trades) ................................................... 204,154 160,859 Negligible .......... 13,522 0.0012

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA, Office of Regulatory Analysis, 1995. Negligible denotes less than 0.0001 percent.

In accordance with the RegulatoryFlexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 etseq.), OSHA has also analyzed theeconomic impact of the proposedstandard on small establishments (19 orfewer employees), looking particularlyfor evidence that the rule would have asignificant impact on a substantialnumber of small entities. Smallbusinesses will incur lower compliancecosts than larger businesses because thecompliance costs depend directly on thenumber of industrial truck operatorsrequiring training in a given facility.OSHA has preliminarily concluded thatthe proposed standard would not havea significant impact on a substantialnumber of small entities.

It has already been shown that therevenue and price increases for allbusinesses are negligible. To test thepossibility that the proposed standardmight have significant impacts on some

small businesses, OSHA developed aworst case-analysis of small firms in theconstruction sector by assuming that theestablishment is currently not incompliance with any of therequirements of the proposed standardand that all truck operators in theestablishment would need specificequipment and operating environmenttraining, i.e., that none of the operatorscurrently employed have any training.The representative establishment wasassumed to have 14 employees, theaverage for establishments with 10 to 19employees. OSHA estimates that 60percent of employees, or a total of 8employees, would operate poweredindustrial truck either full-time or aspart of another job. Using a turnover rateof 15 percent, the small establishment isexpected to spend $449 annually toachieve full compliance with theproposed standard. Under this worst

case scenario, the impacts ofcompliance costs as a percent ofrevenues are approximately 0.06percent, an insignificant impact even inthe worst case. Similarly, OSHAestimates that, if the average smallconstruction establishment could notpass any of the compliance coststhrough to its customers (a highlyunlikely scenario), the costs wouldimpact average profits by less than 1.2percent. These impacts are judged to berelatively minor; therefore, the proposedstandard is preliminarily determined tobe economically feasible even for verysmall construction industryestablishments.

Environmental Impact

The proposed standard has beenreviewed in accordance with therequirements of the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act of 1969 (42


U.S.C. 4321, et seq.), the regulation ofthe Council on Environmental Quality(40 CFR part 1500 through 1517), andthe Department of Labor’s NEPAprocedures (29 CFR part 11). As a resultof this review, OSHA has determinedthat the proposed standard will have nosignificant environmental impact.

XIII. FederalismThis proposed regulation has been

reviewed in accordance with ExecutiveOrder 12612 (52 FR 41685, Oct. 30,1987), regarding Federalism. This Orderrequires that agencies, to the extentpossible, refrain from limiting statepolicy options, consult with states priorto taking any actions which wouldrestrict state policy options, and takesuch actions only when there is clearconstitutional authority and thepresence of a problem of national scope.The Order provides for preemption ofstate law only if there is a clearCongressional intent for the Agency todo so. Any such preemption is to belimited to the extent possible.

Section 18 of the Occupational Safetyand Health Act (OSH Act) expressesCongress’ intent to preempt state lawsrelating to issues on which FederalOSHA has promulgated occupationalsafety and health standards. Under theOSH Act, a state can avoid preemptionin issues covered by Federal standardsonly if it submits, and obtains Federalapproval of, a plan for the developmentof such standards and theirenforcement. Occupational safety andhealth standards developed by suchPlan states must, among other things, beat least as effective in providing safe andhealthful employment and places ofemployment as the Federal standards.When such standards are applicable toproducts distributed or used ininterstate commerce they may notunduly burden commerce and must bejustified by compelling local conditions.

The Federal proposed standard onpowered industrial truck operatortraining addresses hazards that are notunique to any one state or region of thecountry. Nonetheless, states withoccupational safety and health plansapproved under section 18 of the OSHAct will be able to develop their ownstate standards to deal with any specialproblems which might be encounteredin a particular state. Moreover, becausethis standard is written in general,performance-oriented terms, there isconsiderable flexibility for state plans torequire, and for affected employers touse, methods of compliance which areappropriate to the working conditionscovered by the standard.

In brief, this proposed rule addressesa clear national problem related to

occupational safety and health ingeneral industry. Those states whichhave elected to participate under section18 of the OSH Act are not preempted bythis standard, and will be able toaddress any special conditions withinthe framework of the Federal Act whileensuring that the state standards are atleast as effective as their standard. Statecomments are invited on this proposaland will be fully considered prior topromulgation of a final rule.

XIV. OMB Review Under thePaperwork Reduction Act

This paragraph contains a collectionof information as defined in OMB’s newregulations at 60 FR 44978 (August 29,1995) in § 1926.602(d)(5). Thisprovision requires employers to prepareand maintain a certification record.Specifically, the employer must preparea record to certify that employees havebeen trained and evaluated as requiredby the standard. The record includes thename of the employee who was trained,the date of the training and the signatureof the person who performed thetraining and evaluation.

Under the Paperwork Reduction Actof 1995, agencies are required to seekOMB approval for all collections ofinformation. As part of the approvalprocess, agencies are required to solicitcomment from affected parties withregard to the collection of information,including the financial and timeburdens estimated by the agencies forthe collection of information. OSHAbelieves it is necessary for employers toprepare the certification record to verifythat powered industrial truck operatorsare trained to perform their dutiescompetently and safely. To comply withthe training requirement, employersmust keep a record certifying that theiremployees have successfully completedpowered industrial truck operatortraining. Safe operation can decrease thenumber of fatalities and injuriesassociated with powered industrialtrucks.

OSHA estimates that it will takeemployers about 1 hour to prepare and8 hours to deliver the training; andanother 15 minutes to prepare acertification record, make it availableduring compliance inspections, retaincurrent training materials and courseoutlines, and document the types oftrucks that an operator is authorized tooperate. It will cost employers onaverage about $53 to initially train andcertify each employee. The totalrespondent burden for constructionworkplaces in the first year is $45,709and 6,411 burden hours. In subsequentyears cost is $6,000 and the hourlyburden is 3,543. The number of

operators in construction is 1% of thetotal number.

OSHA requests comment from thepublic on all aspects of this collectionof information. Specifically, OSHArequests comment on whether thisproposed collection of information does:

• Ensure that the collection of informationis necessary for the proper performance ofthe functions of the agency, includingwhether the information will have practicalutility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’sestimate of the burden of the proposedcollection of information, including thevalidity of the methodology and assumptionsused;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarityof the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection ofinformation on those who are to respond,including through the use of appropriateautomated, electronic, mechanical, or othertechnological collection techniques or otherforms of information technology, e.g.,permitting electronic submissions ofresponses.

Comments on the collection ofinformation proposed provision shouldbe sent to the OMB Desk Officer forOSHA at Room 10235, 726 JacksonPlace, NW, Washington, DC 20503.Commenters are encouraged to send acopy of their comment on the collectionof information to OSHA along with theirother comments. The supportingstatement for this collection ofinformation requirement is available inboth OSHA and OMB Docket Offices.

OMB is currently reviewing OSHAproposed collection of information todetermine its consistency with thePaperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Atthis time OMB has not approved thiscollection of information.

XV. Public ParticipationInterested persons are requested to

submit written data, views andarguments concerning this proposal.These comments must be postmarked byApril 1, 1996, and submitted inquadruplicate to the Docket Office;Docket No. S–008, Room N2624; U.S.Department of Labor, OccupationalSafety and Health Administration; 200Constitution Ave., NW; Washington, DC20210.

All written comments received withinthe specified comment period will bemade a part of the record and will beavailable for public inspection andcopying at the above Docket Officeaddress. The comments submitted aspart of this proposal for constructionalso will be considered part of therecord for general industry andmaritime and the comments for generalindustry and maritime will beconsidered part of the record for this


rulemaking. In addition, OSHA isreopening the record for additionalcomment on the proposed requirementsfor general industry and maritime tocoincide with the comment period forconstruction.

This rulemaking is for proceduralpurposes combined with the rulemakingthat was proposed for general industryand maritime industries on March 14,1995. The docket will be combined,comments and evidence submitted inresponse to one notice, need not berepeated for the other notice and will beconsidered for all sectors. The hearingwill be conducted for all sectors. Ofcourse, to the extent that the recordsupports different provisions fordifferent sectors, these differences willbe incorporated into the final rule.

Notice of Intention to Appear at theInformal Hearing

Pursuant to section 6(b)(3) of the Act,an opportunity to submit oral testimonyconcerning the issues raised by theproposed standard including economicand environmental impacts, will beprovided at an informal public hearingto be held in Washington, DC on April30, 1996. If OSHA receives sufficientrequests to participate in the hearing,the hearing period may be extended.Conversely, the hearing may beshortened if there are few requests.

The hearing will commence at 9:30a.m. on April 30, 1996, in theAuditorium, Frances Perkins Building,U.S. Department of Labor, 200Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,DC 20210.

All persons desiring to participate atthe hearing must file in quadruplicate anotice of intention to appear,postmarked on or before April 1, 1996.The notice of intention to appear, whichwill be available for inspection andcopying at the OSHA Technical DataCenter Docket Office (Room N2624),telephone (202) 219–7894, must containthe following information:

1. The name, address, and telephonenumber of each person to appear;

2. The capacity in which the personwill appear;

3. The approximate amount of timerequired for the presentation;

4. The issues that will be addressed;5. A brief statement of the position

that will be taken with respect to eachissue; and

6. Whether the party intends tosubmit documentary evidence and, if so,a brief summary of it.

The notice of intention to appear shallbe mailed to Mr. Thomas Hall, OSHADivision of Consumer Affairs, Docket S–008, Room N3647, U.S. Department ofLabor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW,

Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)219–8615.

A notice of intention to appear alsomay be transmitted by facsimile to (202)219–5986 (Attention: Thomas Hall), bythe same date, provided the original and3 copies are sent to the same addressand postmarked no more than 3 dayslater.

Filing of Testimony and EvidenceBefore the Hearing

Any party requesting more than 10minutes for a presentation at thehearing, or who will submitdocumentary evidence, must provide inquadruplicate, the complete text of thetestimony, including any documentaryevidence to be presented at the hearing.One copy shall not be stapled or boundand be suitable for copying. Thesematerials must be provided to Mr.Thomas Hall, OSHA Division ofConsumer Affairs at the address aboveand be postmarked no later than April15, 1996.

Each such submission will bereviewed in light of the amount of timerequested in the notice of intention toappear. In those instances when theinformation contained in thesubmission does not justify the amountof time requested, a more appropriateamount of time will be allocated and theparticipant will be notified of that factprior to the informal public hearing.

Any party who has not substantiallycomplied with this requirement may belimited to a 10-minute presentation, andmay be requested to return forquestioning at a later time.

Any party who has not filed a noticeof intention to appear may be allowedto testify for no more than 10 minutesas time permits, at the discretion of theAdministrative Law Judge, but will notbe allowed to question witnesses.

Notice of intention to appear,testimony and evidence will beavailable for copying at the DocketOffice at the address above.

Conduct and Nature of the HearingThe hearing will commence at 9:30

a.m. on April 30, 1996. At that time, anyprocedural matters relating to theproceeding will be resolved.

The nature of an informal rulemakinghearing is established in the legislativehistory of section 6 of the OSH Act andis reflected by OSHA’s rules ofprocedure for hearings (29 CFR1911.15(a)). Although the presidingofficer is an Administrative Law Judgeand limited questioning by persons whohave filed notices of intention to appearis allowed on crucial issues, theproceeding is informal and legislative intype. The Agency’s intent, in essence, is

to provide interested persons with anopportunity to make effective oralpresentations that can proceedexpeditiously in the absence ofprocedural restraints that impede orprotract the rulemaking process.

Additionally, since the hearing isprimarily for information gathering andclarification, it is an informaladministrative proceeding rather thanan adjudicative one. The technical rulesof evidence, for example, do not apply.The regulations that govern hearingsand the pre-hearing guidelines to beissued for this hearing will ensurefairness and due process and alsofacilitate the development of a clear,accurate and complete record. Thoserules and guidelines will be interpretedin a manner that furthers thatdevelopment. Thus, questions ofrelevance, procedure and participationgenerally will be decided so as to favordevelopment of the record.

The hearing will be conducted inaccordance with 29 CFR part 1911. Itshould be noted that § 1911.4 specifiesthat the Assistant Secretary may, uponreasonable notice, issue alternativeprocedures to expedite proceedings orfor other good cause.

The hearing will be presided over byan Administrative Law Judge whomakes no decision or recommendationon the merits of OSHA’s proposal. Theresponsibility of the Administrative LawJudge is to ensure that the hearingproceeds at a reasonable pace and in anorderly manner. The AdministrativeLaw Judge, therefore, will have all thepowers necessary and appropriate toconduct a full and fair informal hearingas provided in 29 CFR part 1911,including the powers:

1. To regulate the course of theproceedings;

2. To dispose of procedural requests,objections and comparable matters;

3. To confine the presentations to thematters pertinent to the issues raised;

4. To regulate the conduct of thosepresent at the hearing by appropriatemeans;

5. At the Judge’s discretion, toquestion and permit the questioning ofany witness and to limit the time forquestioning; and

6. At the Judge’s discretion, to keepthe record open for a reasonable, statedtime (known as the post-hearingcomment period) to receive writteninformation and additional data, viewsand arguments from any person who hasparticipated in the oral proceedings.

OSHA recognizes that there may beinterested persons who, through theirknowledge of safety or their experiencein the operations involved, would wishto endorse or support certain provisions


in the standard. OSHA welcomes suchsupportive comments, including anypertinent accident data or costinformation that may be available, sothat the record of this rulemaking willpresent a balanced picture of the publicresponse on the issues involved.

XVI. State Plan Standards

The 25 States with their own OSHAapproved occupational safety and healthplans must adopt a comparable standardwithin six months of the publicationdate of the final standard. These Statesare: Alaska, Arizona, California,Connecticut (for State and localgovernment employees only), Hawaii,Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland,Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, NewMexico, New York (for State and localgovernment employees only), NorthCarolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, SouthCarolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont,Virginia, Virgin Islands, Washington,and Wyoming. Until such time as aState standard is promulgated, FederalOSHA will provide interim enforcementassistance, as appropriate, in thoseStates.

List of Subjects in 29 CFR part 1926

Construction industry, Motor vehiclesafety, Occupational safety and health,Transportation.

XVII. Authority

This document was prepared underthe direction of Joseph A. Dear,Assistant Secretary of Labor forOccupational Safety and Health, U.S.Department of Labor, 200 ConstitutionAvenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.

Accordingly, pursuant to section 4,6(b), 8(c) and 8(g) of the OccupationalSafety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C.653, 655, 657), the Construction SafetyAct (40 U.S.C. 333), Secretary of Labor’sOrder No. 1–90 (55 FR 9033), and 29CFR part 1911, it is proposed to amend29 CFR part 1926 as set forth below.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 22nd dayof January, 1996.Joseph A. Dear,Assistant Secretary of Labor.

PART 1926—CONSTRUCTION SAFETYAND HEALTH STANDARDS

1. The authority citation for subpart Oof part 1926 would be revised to read asfollows:

Authority: Section 107, Construction WorkHours and Safety Standards Act(Construction Safety Act) (40 U.S.C. 333);secs. 4, 6, 8 of the Occupational Safety andHealth Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657);Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 12–71 (36 FR8754), 8–76 (41 FR 25059), 9–83 (48 FR35736), or 1–90 (55 FR 9033), as applicable.

Section 1926.602 also issued under 29 CFRpart 1911.

2. Section 1926.602 is proposed to beamended by adding a new paragraph (d)and by adding appendices A and B toread as follows:

§ 1926.602 Material handling equipment.

* * * * *(d) Powered industrial, truck Operator

training.—(1) Operator qualifications. (i)The employer shall ensure that eachpowered industrial truck operator iscapable of performing the duties that arerequired to operate the truck safely.

(ii) Prior to permitting an operator todrive except for training purposes, theemployer shall ensure that eachoperator has received the trainingrequired by this paragraph, that eachoperator has been evaluated by adesignated person while performing therequired duties, and that each operatorperforms the required dutiescompetently.

(2) Training program implementation.(i) The employer shall implement atraining program and ensure that onlytrained operators who have successfullycompleted the training program areallowed to operate powered industrialtrucks. Exception: Trainees under thedirect supervision of a designatedperson shall be allowed to operate apowered industrial truck provided theoperation of the vehicle is conducted inan area where other employees are notnear and where the conditions are suchthat the trainee can safely operate thetruck.

(ii) Training shall consist of acombination of classroom instruction(Lecture, discussion, video tapes, and/orconference) and practical training(demonstrations and practical exercisesby the trainee).

(iii) All training and evaluation shallbe conducted by a designated personwho has the requisite knowledge,training and experience to trainpowered industrial truck operators andjudge their competency.

(3) Training program content.Powered industrial truck operatortrainees shall be trained in the followingtopics unless the employer candemonstrate that some of the topics arenot needed for safe operation.

(i) Truck related topics.(A) All necessary operating

instructions, warnings and precautionsfor the types of trucks the operator willbe authorized to operate;

(B) Similarities to and differencesfrom the automobile;

(C) Controls and instrumentation:location, what they do and how theywork;

(D) Power plant operation andmaintenance;

(E) Steering and maneuvering;(F) Visibility (including restrictions

due to loading);(G) Fork and attachment adaption,

operation and use limitations;(H) Vehicle capacity;(I) Vehicle stability;(J) Vehicle inspection and

maintenance;(K) Refueling or charging and

recharging batteries;(L) Operating limitations; and(M) Any other operating instruction,

warning, or precaution listed in theoperator’s manual for the type vehiclethat the employee is being trained tooperate.

(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 affectthe stability of the vehicle;

(H) Other unique or potentiallyhazardous environmental conditionsthat exist or may exist in the workplace;and

(I) Operating the vehicle in closedenvironments and other areas whereinsufficient ventilation could cause abuildup of carbon monoxide or dieselexhaust.

(iii) The requirements of this section.(4) Evaluation and refresher or

remedial training. (i) Sufficientevaluation and remedial training shallbe conducted so that the employeeretains and uses the knowledge, skillsand ability needed to operate thepowered industrial truck safely.

(ii) An evaluation of the performanceof each powered industrial truckoperator shall be conducted at leastannually by a designated person.

(iii) Refresher or remedial trainingshall be provided when there is reasonto believe that there has been unsafeoperation, when an accident or a near-miss occurs or when an evaluationindicates that the operator is not capableof performing the assigned duties.

(5) Certification. (i) The employershall certify that each operator hasreceived the training, has beenevaluated as required by this paragraph,and has demonstrated competency inthe performance of the operator’s duties.The certification shall include the name


of the trainee, the date of training, andthe signature of the person performingthe training and evaluation.

(ii) The employer shall retain thecurrent training materials and courseoutline or the name and address of theperson who conducted the training if itwas conducted by an outside trainer.

(6) Avoidance of duplicative training.(i) Each current truck operator who hasreceived training in any of the elementsspecified in paragraph (d)(3) of thissection for the types of truck theemployee is authorized to operate andthe type of workplace that the trucks arebeing operated in need not be retrainedin those elements if the employercertifies in accordance with paragraph(d)(5)(i) of this section that the operatorhas been evaluated and found to becompetent to perform those duties.

(ii) Each new truck operator who hasreceived training in any of the elementsspecified in paragraph (d)(3) of thissection for the types of truck theemployee will be authorized to operateand the type of workplace in which thetrucks will be operated need not beretrained in those elements before initialassignment in the workplace if theemployer has a record of the trainingand if the employee is evaluatedpursuant to paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of thissection and is found to be competent.

Appendix A—Training of PoweredIndustrial Truck Operators(Non-mandatory appendix to paragraph (d) ofthis section)

A–1. Operator SelectionA–1.1. Prospective operators of powered

industrial trucks should be identified basedupon their ability to be trained and permittedto perform job functions that are essential tothe operation of a powered industrial truck.Determination of the capabilities of aprospective operator to fulfill the demands ofthe job should be based upon the tasks thatthe job demands.

A–1.2. The employer should identify allthe aspects of the job that the employee mustmeet/perform when doing his or her job.These aspects could include the level atwhich the employee must see and hear, thephysical demands of the job, and theenvironmental extremes of the job.

A–1.3. One factor to be considered is theability of the candidate to see and hearwithin reasonably acceptable limits. Includedin the vision requirements are the ability tosee at distance and peripherally. In certaininstances, there also is a requirement for thecandidate to discern different colors,primarily red, yellow and green.

A–1.4. The environmental extremes thatmight be demanded of a potential poweredindustrial truck operator include the abilityof the person to work in areas of excessivecold or heat.

A–1.5. After an employee has been trainedand appropriate accommodations have beenmade, the employer needs to determine

whether the employee can safely perform thejob.

A–2. The Method(s) of Training

A–2.1. Among the many methods oftraining are the lecture, conference,demonstration, test (written and/or oral) andthe practical exercise. In most instances, acombination of these methods has beensuccessfully used to train employees in theknowledge, skills and abilities that areessential to perform the job function that theemployee is being trained to perform. Toenhance the training and to make the trainingmore understandable to the employee,employers and other trainers have usedmovies, slides, video tapes and other visualpresentations. Making the presentation moreunderstandable has several advantagesincluding:

(1) The employees being trained remainmore attentive during the presentation ifgraphical presentation is used, therebyincreasing the effectiveness of the training;

(2) The use of visual presentations allowsthe trainer to ensure that the necessaryinformation is covered during the training;

(3) The use of graphics makes betterutilization of the training time by decreasingthe need for the instructor to carry on longdiscussions about the instructional material;and

(4) The use of graphics during instructionprovides greater retention by the trainees.

A–3. Training Program Content

A–3.1. Because each type (make andmodel) of powered industrial truck hasdifferent operating characteristics, limitationsand other unique features, an optimumemployee training program for poweredindustrial truck operators must be basedupon the type vehicles that the employeewill be trained and authorized to operate.The training must also emphasize thefeatures of the workplace that will affect themanner in which the vehicle must beoperated. Finally, the training must includethe general safety rules applicable to theoperation of all powered industrial trucks.

A–3.2. Selection of the methods of trainingthe operators has been left to the reasonabledetermination of the employer. Whereassome employees can assimilate instructionalmaterial while seated in a classroom, otheremployees may learn best by observing theconduct of operations (demonstration) and/orby having to personally conduct theoperations (practical exercise). In someinstances, an employee can receive valuableinstruction through the use of electronicmediums, such as the use of video tapes andmovies. In most instances, a combination ofthe different training methods may providethe mechanism for providing the besttraining in the least amount of time. OSHAhas specified at paragraph (d)(2)(ii) that thetraining must consist of a combination ofclassroom instruction and practical exercise.The use of both of these modes of instructionis the only way of ensuring that the traineehas received and comprehended theinstruction and can use the information tosafely operate a powered industrial truck.

A–4. Initial TrainingA–4.1. The following is an outline of a

generalized forklift operator trainingprogram:

(1) Characteristics of the poweredindustrial truck(s) the employee will beallowed to operate:

(a) Similarities to and differences from theautomobile;

(b) Controls and instrumentation: location,what they do and how they work;

(c) Power plant operation andmaintenance;

(d) Steering and maneuvering;(e) Visibility;(f) Fork and/or attachment adaption,

operation and limitations of their use;(g) Vehicle capacity;(h) Vehicle stability;(i) Vehicle inspection and maintenance;(j) Refueling or charging and recharging

batteries.(k) Operating limitations.(l) Any other operating instruction,

warning, or precaution listed in theoperator’s manual for the type of vehicle theemployee 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 that would affect the stabilityof the vehicle;

(h) Other unique or potentially hazardousenvironmental conditions that exist or mayexist in the workplace.

(i) Operating the vehicle in closedenvironments and other areas whereinsufficient ventilation could cause a buildupof carbon monoxide or diesel exhaust.

(3) The requirements of this OSHAStandard.

A–5. Trainee Evaluation

A–5.1. The provisions of these proposedrequirements specify that an employeeevaluation be conducted both as part of thetraining and after completion of the training.The initial evaluation is useful for manyreasons, including:

(1) the employer can determine whatmethods of instruction will produce aproficient truck operator with the minimumof time and effort;

(2) the employer can gain insight into theprevious training that the trainee hasreceived; and

(3) a determination can be made as towhether the trainee will be able tosuccessfully operate a powered industrialtruck. This initial evaluation can becompleted by having the employee fill out aquestionnaire, by an oral interview, or by acombination of these mechanisms. In manycases, answers received by the employee canbe substantiated by contact with otheremployees or previous employers.


A–6. Refresher or Remedial TrainingA–6.1. (The type of information listed

below would be used when the training ismore than an on-the-spot correction beingmade by a supervisor or when multipleinstances of on-the-spot corrections haveoccurred.) When an on-the-spot correction isused, the person making the correctionshould point out the incorrect manner ofoperation of the truck or other unsafe actbeing conducted, tell the employee how to dothe operation correctly, and then ensure thatthe employee does the operation correctly.

A–6.2. The following items may be usedwhen a more general, structured retrainingprogram is utilized to train employees andeliminate unsafe operation of the vehicle:

(1) Common unsafe situations encounteredin the workplace;

(2) Unsafe methods of operating observedor known to be used;

(3) The need for constant attentiveness tothe vehicle, the workplace conditions and themanner in which the vehicle is operated.

A–6.3. Details about the above subjectareas need to be expanded upon so that theoperator receives all the information that isnecessary for the safe operation of thevehicle. Insight into some of the specifics ofthe above subject areas may be obtained fromthe vehicle manufacturers’ literature, thenational consensus standards [e.g. the ASMEB56 series of standards (current revisions)]and this OSHA Standard. Appendix B—Stability of Powered Industrial Trucks (Non-mandatory appendix to paragraph (d) of thissection)

B–1. DefinitionsTo understand the principle of stability,

understanding definitions of the following isnecessary:

Center of Gravity is that point of an objectat which all of the weight of an object canbe considered to be concentrated.

Counterweight is the weight that is a partof the basic structure of a truck that is used

to offset the weight of a load and to maximizethe resistance of the vehicle to tipping over.

Fulcrum is the axis of rotation of the truckwhen it tips over.

Grade is the slope of any surface that isusually measured as the number of feet ofrise or fall over a hundred foot horizontaldistance (this measurement is designated asa percent).

Lateral stability is the resistance of a truckto tipping over sideways.

Line of action is an imaginary vertical linethrough the center of gravity of an object.

Load center is the horizontal distance fromthe edge of the load (or the vertical face ofthe forks or other attachment) to the line ofaction through the center of gravity of theload.

Longitudinal stability is the resistance of atruck to overturning forward or rearward.

Moment is the product of the weight of theobject times the distance from a fixed point.In the case of a powered industrial truck, thedistance is measured from the point that thetruck will tip over to the line of action of theobject. The distance is always measuredperpendicular to the line of action.

Track is the distance between wheels onthe same axle of a vehicle.

Wheelbase is the distance between thecenterline of the front and rear wheels of avehicle.

B–2. GeneralB–2.1. Stability determination for a

powered industrial truck is not complicatedonce a few basic principles are understood.There are many factors that influence vehiclestability. Vehicle wheelbase, track, heightand weight distribution of the load, and thelocation of the counterweights of the vehicle(if the vehicle is so equipped), all contributeto the stability of the vehicle.

B–2.2. The ‘‘stability triangle’’, used inmost discussions of stability, is notmysterious but is used to demonstrate truckstability in a rather simple fashion.

B–3. Basic Principles

B–3.1. The determination of whether anobject is stable is dependent on the momentof an object at one end of a system beinggreater than, equal to or smaller than themoment of an object at the other end of thatsystem. This is the same principle on whicha see saw or teeter-totter works, that is, if theproduct of the load and distance from thefulcrum (moment) is equal to the moment atthe other end of the device, the device isbalanced and it will not move. However, ifthere is a greater moment at one end of thedevice, the device will try to movedownward at the end with the greatermoment.

B–3.2. Longitudinal stability of acounterbalanced powered industrial truck isdependent on the moment of the vehicle andthe moment of the load. In other words, if themathematic product of the load moment (thedistance from the front wheels, the pointabout which the vehicle would tip forward)to the center of gravity of the load times theweight of the load is less than the momentof the vehicle, the system is balanced andwill not tip forward. However, if the load-moment is greater than the vehicle-moment,the greater load-moment will force the truckto tip forward.

B–4. The Stability Triangle

B–4.1. Almost all counterbalancedpowered industrial trucks have a three pointsuspension system, that is, the vehicle issupported at three points. This is true evenif it has four wheels. The steer axle of mosttrucks is attached to the truck by means ofa pivot pin in the center of the axle. Thisthree point support forms a triangle calledthe stability triangle when the points areconnected with imaginary lines. Figure 1depicts the stability triangle.

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P


BILLING CODE 4510–26–C

B–4.2. When the line of action of the vehicle or load-vehicle falls within the stability triangle, the vehicle is stable and willnot 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


BILLING CODE 4510–26–C


B–5. Longitudinal Stability

B–5.1. The axis of rotation when a trucktips forward is the point of contact of thefront wheels of the vehicle with thepavement. When a powered industrial trucktips forward, it is this line that the truck willrotate about. When a truck is stable thevehicle-moment must exceed the load-moment. As long as the vehicle-moment isequal to or exceeds the load-moment, thevehicle will not tip over. On the other hand,if the load-moment slightly exceeds thevehicle-moment, the truck will begin the tipforward, thereby causing loss of steeringcontrol. If the load-moment greatly exceedsthe vehicle-moment, the truck will tipforward.

B–5.2. In order to determine the maximumsafe load moment, the truck manufacturernormally rates the truck at a maximum loadat a given distance from the front face of theforks. The specified distance from the frontface of the forks to the line of action of theload is commonly called a load center.Because larger trucks normally handle loadsthat are physically larger, these vehicles havegreater load centers. A truck with a capacityof 30,000 pounds or less capacity is normallyrated at a given load weight at a 24-inch loadcenter. For trucks of greater than 30,000pound capacity, the load center is normallyrated at 36- or 48-inch load center distance.In order to safely operate the vehicle, theoperator should always check the data plateand determine the maximum allowableweight at the rated load center.

B–5.3. Although the true load momentdistance is measured from the front wheels,this distance is greater than the distance fromthe front face of the forks. Calculation of themaximum allowable load moment using theload center distance always provides a lowerload moment than the truck was designed tohandle. When handling unusual loads, suchas those that are larger than 48 inches long(the center of gravity is greater than 24inches), with an offset center of gravity, etc.,then calculation of a maximum allowableload moment should be undertaken and thisvalue used to determine whether a load canbe handled. For example, if an operator isoperating a 3000 pound capacity truck (witha 24 inch load center), the maximumallowable load moment is 72,000 inch-pounds (3,000 times 24). If a probable loadis 60 inches long (30 inch load center), thenthe maximum weight that this load canweigh is 2,400 pounds (72,000 divided by30).

B–6. Lateral StabilityB–6.1. The lateral stability of a vehicle is

determined by the position of the line ofaction (a vertical line that passes through thecombined center of gravity of the vehicle andthe load) relative to the stability triangle.When the vehicle is not loaded, the locationof the center of gravity of the truck is the onlyfactor to be considered in determining thestability of the truck. As long as the line ofaction of the combined center of gravity ofthe vehicle and the load falls within thestability triangle, the truck is stable and will

not tip over. However, if the line of actionfalls outside the stability triangle, the truckis not stable and may tip over.

B–6.2. Factors that affect the lateralstability of a vehicle include the placementof the load on the truck, the height of theload above the surface on which the vehicleis operating, and the degree of lean of thevehicle.

B–7. Dynamic Stability

B–7.1. Up to this point, we have coveredstability of a powered industrial truckwithout consideration of the dynamic forcesthat result when the vehicle and load are putinto motion. The transfer of weight and theresultant shift in the center of gravity due tothe dynamic forces created when themachine is moving, braking, cornering,lifting, tilting, and lowering loads, etc., areimportant stability considerations.

B–7.2. When determining whether a loadcan be safely handled, the operator shouldexercise extra caution when handling loadsthat cause the vehicle to approach itsmaximum design characteristics. Forexample, if an operator must handle amaximum load, the load should be carried atthe lowest position possible, the truck shouldbe accelerated slowly and evenly, and theforks should be tilted forward cautiously.However, no precise rules can be formulatedto cover all of these eventualities.

[FR Doc. 96–1216 Filed 1–29–96; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4510–26–P

in the standard. OSHA welcomes such training proposal ... · documentary evidence, must provide in...

Documents

Transcript of in the standard. OSHA welcomes such training proposal ... · documentary evidence, must provide in...