Regulations (Preambles to Final Rules) - Table of Contents Regulations (Preambles to Final Rules) - Table of Contents
• Record Type: Logging Operations
• Section: 3
• Title: Section 3 - III. Basis for Agency Action

III. Basis for Agency Action

A. Hazards

The safety hazards present in the logging industry are well-known,(1) and there is no dispute among participants in this rulemaking that logging is a high hazard industry (Ex. 2-1 through 2-10, 2-30, 5-18, 38B, 38C). The tools and equipment which logging employees use or operate, such as chain saws, axes and tractors, pose hazards wherever they are utilized in industry. As logging employees use their tools and equipment, they are dealing with massive weights and irresistible momentum of falling, rolling, and sliding trees and logs. The hazards are even more acute when dangerous environmental conditions are factored in, such as uneven, unstable or rough terrain; inclement weather including rain, snow, lightning, winds, and extreme cold; remote and isolated work sites where health care facilities are not immediately accessible. The combination of these hazards present a significant risk to employees working in logging operations throughout the country, regardless of the type of timber being logged, where it is logged or the end use of the wood.

__________

Footnote(1) The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has identified a number of health hazards that are also present in the logging industry (Ex. 5-42). According to NIOSH, 20 to 50 percent of employees in felling operations may be affected by hand-arm vibration syndrome. Logging employees are also exposed to chain-saw exhaust, wood dust, tree fungi and bacteria. However, NIOSH has said that at this time there is insufficient data to project the magnitude of risk for some of these potential health hazards. The final rule on logging addresses health hazards, but only in certain specific ways (e.g., safety and health meetings). However, for those health hazards not specifically addressed in the logging final rule, other sections of Part 1910 apply. For example, occupational noise exposure is addressed by 29 CFR 1910.95. A permissible exposure limit for occupational exposure to wood dust is contained in 29 CFR 1910.1000. OSHA notes that hand-arm vibration, manual lifting and other risk factors associated with musculoskeletal disorders are being addressed in OSHA's rulemaking on ergonomic safety and health management.

There is also no dispute that these hazards and the resulting injuries and fatalities are severe and are not limited to the pulpwood sector of the industry (Ex. 2-1, 5-6, 5-10, 5-17, 5-18, 5-21, 5-36, 5-42, 5-46, 5-48, 5-49, 5-54, 5-61, 5-65). The 1992 Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, a public report compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), indicated there were 158 fatalities in the logging industry, which amounts to a 2 in 1,000 risk of death each year. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) estimates that there are 16,500 compensable injuries each year in the logging industry (Ex. 37). This amounts to an incidence rate of 1 in every 5 loggers. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the accident rate in the logging industry has pushed workers' compensation insurance to 40 percent of payroll costs (Ex. 5-18). The USDA estimates that this now amounts to $90 million annually in the Pacific Northwest Region alone. According to a study conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), as least 47 percent of all injuries reported occurred in non-pulpwood logging operations (Ex. 2-1).

The following discussion of the accident and injury data shows that injury incidence rate for the logging industry is among the highest industry incidence rates in the country.

B. Accident, Injury, and Other Data

OSHA looked at several data sources to identify and characterize the degree of risk faced by employees in the logging industry. The data show that the logging industry has one of the highest injury incidence rates. For example, the most recent injury incidence rate for the logging industry (15.6) compiled by the BLS is almost double the incidence rate for the combined private sector (7.9). The logging incidence rate was also well above the incidence rate for the manufacturing sector (11.2).

To assess the level of risk in logging operations, OSHA relied primarily on the following data sources. These data sources are described and discussed below.

1. "Bureau of Labor Statistics." The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) publishes annual reports that list the estimates of injuries in the private sector during the year under consideration, Occupational Injuries and Illnesses in the United States by Industry (Ex. 2-1, 2-2, 2-3, 2-4, 2-5, 2-6, 2-7, 2-8, 2-9, 2-10, 2-30, 38B and 38C). The data and information are broken down industry by industry according to Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes. The BLS injury reports and data are generated from inquiries to selected employers about the OSHA Form 200 (Log and Summary of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses).

Table 1 shows BLS occupational injury incidence data for the logging industry for 1972 through 1991. The data in Table 1 were derived from the BLS data using SIC code 241 (Logging Camps and Logging Contractors). While this classification covers the majority of the employees engaging in logging operations, it does not cover loggers employed by mills (SIC 242-Sawmills and Planing Mills) and other loggers working for other miscellaneous employers (SIC 24-Lumber and Wood Products, Except Furniture). Although the incidence rates for SIC 242 and 24 are very close to the rates for SIC 241, OSHA did not include incidence rates for those SIC codes in its determination of incidence rates for logging because BLS does not provide incidence rates for occupational categories within a SIC code. As such, OSHA was not able to identify and segregate out the percentage of accidents which occurred while employees were performing logging as opposed to other operations in those related industries. OSHA is aware that there has been a move on the part of some mill owners to increasingly use private contractors rather than mill employees to harvest the trees that the mills process. OSHA believes, however, that SIC 241 does capture the vast majority of employees performing logging operations. To the extent that some logging operations may still be performed by employees in other than SIC 241, OSHA does not believe that their accident data significantly alter the level of risk present in logging operations.

     Table 1. -- Occupational Injuries Logging Camps and Logging
                       Contractors, SIC 241
_________________________________________________________________________
      |          |             |               |            |
      |          |     Lost    |    Nonfatal   |   Average  |
Year  |   Total  |   workday   |   without     |    lost    |    Lost
      |   cases  |    cases    |    lost       |  workdays  |  workdays
      |          |             |   workdays    |            |
______|__________|_____________|_______________|____________|____________
      |          |             |               |            |
1972  |    32.2  |      16.0   |       16.0    |       16.0 |     266.3
1973  |    31.2  |      16.1   |       15.0    |       20.5 |     307.8
1974  |    28.8  |      15.6   |       13.0    |       18.8 |     296.2
1975  |    25.5  |      13.9   |       11.5    |       20.3 |     282.5
1976  |    24.6  |      13.8   |       10.7    |       20.6 |     284.5
1977  |    25.8  |      15.4   |       10.3    |       21.2 |     327.0
1978  |    25.6  |      15.5   |        9.9    |       20.4 |     315.5
1979  |    24.0  |      14.7   |        9.1    |       21.1 |     310.4
1980  |    22.4  |      13.8   |        8.5    |       24.4 |     338.1
1981  |    19.1  |      12.2   |        6.8    |       23.6 |     288.1
1982  |    20.1  |      12.9   |        7.1    |       23.5 |     302.8
1983  |    21.2  |      13.6   |        7.5    |       23.5 |     319.4
1984  |    21.4  |      13.8   |        7.5    |       23.1 |     318.7
1985  |    19.8  |      12.2   |        7.5    |       25.9 |     316.1
1986  |    18.9  |      12.5   |        6.3    |       23.3 |     291.7
1987  |    19.1  |      12.3   |        6.7    |       26.9 |     330.4
1988  |    19.6  |      12.7   |        6.8    |       27.2 |     345.4
1989  |    19.2  |      11.6   |        7.5    |       26.2 |     306.0
1990  |    17.2  |      10.7   |        6.3    |       26.2 |     280.3
1991  |    15.6  |       9.9   |        5.7    |       27.8 |     274.8
______|__________|_____________|_______________|____________|______________
  Notes:
  1. Total cases, lost workday cases and nonfatal without lost workday
cases are expressed as incidence rates are per 100 full-time employees
(200,000 person hours).
  2. Average lost workdays are the average number of lost workdays per
lost workday case.
  Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin Nos. 1830 (1972), 1932
(1974), 1981 (1975), 2047 (1977), 2097 (1979), 2130 (1980), 2196 (1982),
2236 (1983), 2259 (1984), 2278 (1985), 2399 (1990), 2424 (1991)
"Occupational Injuries and Illnesses in the United States by Industry."

While the injury incidence rate remains high in the logging industry, the BLS data show a steady decrease in the incidence rate for the industry since the pulpwood logging standard was adopted in 1971.(2) The decrease in incidence rates occurs in both lost-workday and non-lost-workday cases. In contrast, the data also show a steady increase in the average number of lost workdays per case, that indicates that the severity of injuries has increased over time.

__________

Footnote(2) The decrease in injuries since 1971 is also due in part to adoption of comprehensive logging standards by six states. For example, the state of California, which has a comprehensive standard, reported 457 logging fatalities in the 1950s, prior to adoption of the standard. In 1981, after the logging standard had been promulgated, California's logging fatalities hit a record low (6 fatalities) (Ex. 2-11).

The 1991 logging industry incidence rates still remain far above the total incidence rates and lost-workday incidence rates for other industries, as Table 2 indicates. For example, the most recent logging industry incidence rate (15.6) is almost double the incidence rate for the private sector combined (7.9). It is also 40 percent higher than the manufacturing sector incidence rate (11.2). The logging injury incidence rates also are well above the incidence rates for the construction industry (12.8) and mining (7.1), industries generally considered as high hazard.

   Table 2.-- Comparison of Incidence Rates Logging vs. Major Industry
                             Divisions 1991
__________________________________________________________________________
                           |          |          |            |
                           |          |          |  Nonfatal  |
                           |   Total  |   Lost   | cases w/o  |  Lost
         Industry          |   cases  |  workday |     lost   | workdays
                           |          |   cases  |  workdays  |
___________________________|__________|__________|____________|____________
                           |          |          |            |
Logging................... |     15.6 |      9.9 |       5.7  |     274.8
Private sector............ |      7.9 |      3.7 |       4.2  |      79.8
Agriculture, forestry,     |          |          |            |
 fishing.................. |     10.2 |      5.2 |       4.9  |     104.6
Mining.................... |      7.1 |      4.4 |       2.7  |     127.8
Construction.............. |     12.8 |      6.0 |       6.8  |     146.2
Manufacturing............. |     11.2 |      5.0 |       6.2  |     101.1
Transportation and         |          |          |            |
 utilities................ |      9.1 |      5.3 |       3.7  |     136.8
Wholesale and retail trade |      7.5 |      3.4 |       4.1  |      69.7
Finance, insurance and     |          |          |            |
 real estate.............. |      2.3 |      1.0 |       1.2  |      21.5
Services.................. |      5.9 |      2.8 |       3.2  |      57.7
                           |          |          |            |
___________________________|__________|__________|____________|____________
  Notes: 1. Total cases, lost workday cases and nonfatal without lost
workday cases are expressed as incidence rates are per 100 full-time
employees (200,000 person hours).
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2424, "Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses in the United States by Industry, 1991."

The most recent lost-workday incidence rate for logging was 9.9, which is almost double the 5.0 incidence rate in the manufacturing sector and almost three times the 3.7 incidence rate for the private sector combined. The lost-workday rate, that is an indicator of the severity of cases, is extremely high in the logging industry (274.8 lost workdays per 100 full-time workers). It is more than three times the private sector lost-workday rate (79.8) and more than double the manufacturing lost-workday rate (101.1).

2. "Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries." The Bureau of Labor Statistics also publishes an annual Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI). The CFOI is a systematic and verifiable count of fatally injured public and private sector workers. This census uses administrative records, such as death certificates, workers' compensation fatality claims, medical examiners' records, and other reports to Federal and State agencies, to identify the workplace fatalities and complete descriptive data on the workers and circumstances of their deaths. According to the 1992 CFOI, the most recent data available, 158 logging employees were killed while performing logging operations. Table 3 shows that more than 60 percent were using power tools and performing cutting activities at the time of their death. Almost 20 percent were killed while operating logging machines or vehicles.

   Table 3. -- Fatal Injuries in SIC 241 by Activity of Employee, 1992
_________________________________________________________________________
                                              |             |
                                              |  Number of  |
         Activity at time of accident         |  fatalities | Percent
______________________________________________|_____________|____________
                                              |             |
Using or Operating Tools, Machines............| 108         |       68
  Operating Heavy Equipment...................|          4  | ...........
  Using Power tools...........................|         14  |
  Logging, trimming, pruning..................|         86  | ...........
  Other.......................................|          4  | ...........
Vehicular and Transportation Operations.......|  24         |       15
  Driving, operating..........................|         15  | ...........
  Riding in, on...............................|          3  | ...........
  Vehicular and Transportation Operations,    |             |
   n.e.c......................................|          3  | ...........
  Other.......................................|          3  | ...........
Material Handling Operations*.................|   6         |        4
Physical activity, n.e.c......................|   4         |        3
All other activities..........................|  16         |       10
                                              |-------------|-------------
    Total.....................................| 158         |      100
______________________________________________|_____________|_____________
  Notes:
  * Loading, unloading materials.
  n.e.c. Not elsewhere classified.
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1992 Census of Fatal Occupational
Injuries, April, 1994.

Applying the CFOI fatality estimate to the most recent logging employment estimate of 72,100 developed for the Regulatory Impact Analysis (see Section VI of this preamble), the fatality incidence rate is .22. The logging industry fatality incidence rate is 8.1 times higher than the fatality incidence rate the mining sector (.027), the next closest industrial division. In addition, the logging fatality rate is 53.6 times higher than the fatality rate for the manufacturing sector (.0041).

3. "BLS Work Injury Report (WIR)." The most detailed data source available to the Agency on logging injuries and their causes is a June 1984 BLS Work Injury Report survey of 1,086 injured logging employees, hereafter referred to as the WIR survey (Ex. 2-1). It is significant to note that all 1,086 injuries occurred within just a three-month period.(3)

__________

Footnote(3) Not all questions were answered by all survey participants, therefore, total responses vary in each table of data presented.

Included in the report are employees who were injured while performing logging activities at the logging site or while moving or transporting logs across terrain. Motor vehicle accidents were included when the accident occurred at the work site, while hauling logs to the mill, returning from the mill, or transporting tools, equipment, or workers to or from the logging site in company-owned vehicles.

Almost one half (47%) of those responding indicated they were performing non-pulpwood logging operations, therefore they were not covered by OSHA's existing pulpwood logging standard. Another 17 percent did not know what type of timber they were logging.(4) OSHA believes it is reasonable to assume that some percentage of those employees were not covered by OSHA's existing logging standard and therefore, more than one half of the injured employees were not covered by the OSHA standard. Approximately 35 percent of the injured employees were engaged in pulpwood logging operations.

__________

Footnote(4) Of those who responded, 62 percent were engaged in clear cutting, 27 percent in selective cutting, and 8 percent in salvage logging. Approximately 4 percent did not know the type of logging being conducted.

The survey also contained the following information: (1) the work site where the injury occurred (Table 4); (2) work activity being performed at the time of the accident (Table 5); (3) causes of the accidents (Table 6); (4) sources of the accidents (Tables 7-10); (5) protective equipment in use at the time of the accident (Table 11); (6) safety features of vehicles or equipments operated at the time of the accident (Table 12); (7) safety training given prior to the accident (Table 13); (8) factors contributing to the injury (Table 14); (9) severity of the injury (Table 15-16).

a. "Work site where injury occurred." Table 4 shows that more than one-half of employees injured were at cutting sites in the woods, while only 20 percent were injured at landings. In addition, more than one-half of those injured were working on sloping terrain at the time and more than 60 percent reported that the work site contained moderate or heavy brush.

        Table 4. -- Description of Work Site Where Injury Occurred
_________________________________________________________________________
                                                      |        |
              Description of work site                |   No.  | Percent
______________________________________________________|________|_________

                        Location of Accident
_________________________________________________________________________
                                                      |        |
Cutting site........................................  |    570 |    53
Landing.............................................  |    219 |    20
Between cutting site and landing....................  |    188 |    18
Employer built road.................................  |     34 |     3
Highway.............................................  |     17 |     2
Other...............................................  |     45 |     4
                                                      |--------|--------
    Total...........................................  |  1,073 |   100
                                                      |        |
______________________________________________________|________|________

                     Terrain Where Accident Occurred
_________________________________________________________________________
                                                      |        |
Flat ground.........................................  |    476 |    44
Medium slope........................................  |    388 |    36
Steep slope.........................................  |    206 |    19
                                                      |--------|---------
    Total...........................................  |  1,070 |   (1)
______________________________________________________|________|_________

                    Ground Cover at Accident Site
_________________________________________________________________________
                                                      |        |
Little or no brush..................................  |    369 |    35
Moderate brush......................................  |    386 |    37
Heavy brush.........................................  |    273 |    26
Swampy, marshy, boggy...............................  |     29 |     3
                                                      |--------|---------
    Total...........................................  |  1,057 |   (1)
______________________________________________________|________|_________
  Notes:
  1. Due to rounding, percentages may not add to 100.
  2. Because incomplete questionnaires were used, the total number of
responses may vary by question.
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Work Injury Report (WIR),
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, dated June 1984 (Ex.
2-1).

b. "Work activity at time of accident." Table 5 shows that almost one-half of all injured employees were engaged in cutting activities (felling, limbing, bucking) at the time of their accidents, and almost one-fourth of all injured employees were felling trees. Twenty-eight percent of the employees were injured during yarding operations (choker setting or hooking up, tractor or cable skidding, chasing). The remainder of the accidents occurred when the logs were being prepared to move from the landing (loading/unloading and rigging) or were being transported to the mill or other final destination. Other unspecified logging activities accounted for eight percent of the accidents. Finally, servicing and maintaining of equipment accounted for four percent of the accidents, a figure that is consistent with the information found for servicing or maintenance accidents throughout general industry. (See Docket S-012A.) Table 3 outlines the activity being performed at the time of the accidents and the percentage each activity represents.

         Table 5. -- Activity Being Performed at Time of Accident
___________________________________________________________________________
                                                   |         |
                     Activity                      | Number  |  Percent
___________________________________________________|_________|_______________
                                                   |         |
Felling trees..................................... |     253 |      23
Limbing........................................... |     165 |      15
Choker setting or hooking up...................... |     156 |      14
Bucking........................................... |     134 |      12
Tractor or cable skidding......................... |      92 |       9
Chasing........................................... |      49 |       5
Loading/unloading................................. |      51 |       5
Rigging........................................... |      39 |       4
Servicing or maintaining equipment................ |      43 |       4
Hauling logs to mill.............................. |      15 |       1
Other logging activity............................ |      84 |       8
                                                   |---------|------------
    Total......................................... |   1,084 |     100
___________________________________________________|_________|_____________
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Work Injury Report (WIR),
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, dated June 1984 (Ex.
2-1).

c. "Causes of accidents." Table 6 indicates that almost one-fourth of the employees were injured when hit by trees, limbs or logs. Another quarter of the accidents were due to slips and falls. It is important to note that 20 percent of all injuries were chain saw related.

                      Table 6. -- Cause of Accident
__________________________________________________________________________
                                                      |        |
             Cause of injury/accident                 | Number |  Percent
______________________________________________________|________|___________
                                                      |        |
Injured by limb, tree or log (hit by) (See Table 7).. |    259 |     24
Slip, trip or fall (see Table 8)..................... |    258 |     24
Injured by chain saw (see Table 9)................... |    222 |     20
Muscular strain...................................... |     85 |      8
Hit by cable, hook, chain, etc....................... |     60 |      6
Chip or other object in eye.......................... |     55 |      5
Mobile equipment accident (see Table 10)............. |     33 |      3
Other................................................ |    114 |     10
                                                      |--------|----------
    Total............................................ |   1086 |    100
______________________________________________________|________|__________
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Work Injury Report (WIR)
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, June 1984 (Ex. 2-1).

d. "Sources of injury." The WIR survey broke down the sources of injuries into employees hit by trees; injured in slips or falls; while using chain saws; and while operating equipment or motor vehicles (Tables 7-10). As Table 7 indicates, almost one-half of those employees injured by trees were hit by falling wood.

  Table 7. -- Sources of Injury When Employee Struck by Limb, Tree or Log
_________________________________________________________________________
                                                   |         |
                 Source of injury                  |  Number | Percent
___________________________________________________|_________|___________
                                                   |         |
Falling wood...................................... |     127 |    49
Rolling logs...................................... |      37 |    14
Logs rigged for yarding........................... |      30 |    12
Other (springpoles, etc.)......................... |      65 |    25
                                                   |---------|-----------
    Total......................................... |     259 |   100
___________________________________________________|_________|___________
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Work Injury Report (WIR)
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, June 1984.

Approximately one-fourth of employees were injured in slips or falls, as shown in Table 8. Of these employees, 47 percent were injured when they fell from elevations. Approximately 28 percent fell from some type of mobile equipment or motor vehicle.

                    Table 8. -- Slips, Trips and Falls
________________________________________________________________________
                                                   |         |
                  Falls from, to                   | Number  | Percent
___________________________________________________|_________|__________
                                                   |         |
  Falls from elevation (surface fell from)........ |     105 |    47
  Ground surface.................................. |       9 |     9
  Felled trees, rolling or moving................. |      16 |    15
  Felled trees, stationary........................ |      46 |    45
  Standing timber................................. |       2 |     2
  Skidder......................................... |       8 |     8
  Truck........................................... |      14 |    13
  Yarder.......................................... |       3 |     3
  Mobile equipment, n.e.c......................... |       4 |     4
  Other........................................... |       2 |     2
  Unknown......................................... |       1 |     1
  Falls to same level (Fell to)................... |     117 |    53
  Ground surface or tools......................... |      48 |    41
  Ground wood, stationary......................... |      29 |    25
  Skidder......................................... |       2 |     2
  Truck........................................... |       1 |     1
  Yarder.......................................... |       2 |     2
  Other........................................... |       8 |     7
  Unknown......................................... |      27 |    23
                                                   |---------|----------
    Total......................................... |     222 |   100
___________________________________________________|_________|__________
  Notes:
  1. The percentages of the major categories are of the total. The
percentages of the subcategories are of the major categories.
  2. Due to rounding, the percentages will not necessarily equal 100.
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Work Injury Report (WIR)
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, June 1984 (Ex. 2-1).

It should be noted that in a majority of cases where an employee slipped or fell, the fall was due to an uneven surface. Many of these employees lost their balance on those uneven surfaces, such as standing on felled trees. Other employees slipped and fell from slippery or loose bark, sudden shifting of trees or logs, protruding roots, deadwood, leaves, vines, other wood litter and rocks.

As stated above, one-fifth of all employees were injured while operating chain saws, as shown in Table 9. Of these employees, about two-thirds were hurt when the chain saw kicked back.

               Table 9. -- Causes of the Chain Saw Injuries
__________________________________________________________________________
                                                   |          |
                      Cause                        |  Number  |  Percent
___________________________________________________|__________|___________
                                                   |          |
Chain saw kicked back............................. |     140  |    64
Fell on saw....................................... |      28  |    13
Didn't have tight grip on saw..................... |      15  |     7
Hand slipped into chain........................... |      14  |     6
Wrong cutting method.............................. |       7  |     3
Chain on saw broke................................ |       7  |     3
Using wrong size saw.............................. |       3  |     1
Saw ran after shutoff............................. |       2  |     1
Saw not properly maintained....................... |       1  |     *
Other............................................. |      39  |    18
                                                   |----------|-----------
    Total......................................... |     222  |   (1)
___________________________________________________|__________|___________
  Notes:
  (1) Because more than one response is possible, the sum of the responses
and percentages may not equal the total. Percentages are calculated by
dividing each response by the total number of persons who answered the
question.
  * Less than 1 percent.
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Work Injury Report (WIR)
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, June 1984.

Table 10 shows the type of machine or vehicle the employee was operating at the time of injury. Over one-half of those injuries involved logging trucks, on which logs are loaded for transport to mills, etc.

       Table 10. -- Sources of Injury in Mobile Equipment Accidents
___________________________________________________________________________
                                                   |         |
                 Source of injury                  |  Number |  Percent
___________________________________________________|_________|____________
                                                   |         |
Skidder........................................... |      9  |     27
Log truck......................................... |     17  |     52
Mobile equipment, n.e.c........................... |      2  |      6
Ground surface.................................... |      1  |      3
Other or non-classifiable......................... |      4  |     12
                                                   |---------|------------
    Total......................................... |     33  |    100
___________________________________________________|_________|____________
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Work Injury Report (WIR)
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, June 1984.

e. "Protective equipment." Also included in the WIR survey was information about the type of protective equipment being worn or used at the time of the accident. Table 11 shows that the majority of employees were wearing logging boots, gloves and head protection when they were injured. However, less than one-third of those injured were wearing leg protection, even though almost 60 percent of the injuries investigated occurred when employees were performing activities that required the use of a chain saw (brushing, felling trees, limbing, and bucking). In addition, only six of the 33 employees injured while operating equipment or vehicles were using seat belts. Since more than one-half of all injured employees said they were working on sloping terrain at the time, OSHA believes it is reasonable to assume that some of the machine accidents were rollovers or tipovers and that seat belts could have prevented some of those injuries.

              Table 11. -- Protective Equipment Worn or Used
___________________________________________________________________________
                                                   |          |
          Type protective equipment used           |  Number  | Percent
___________________________________________________|__________|______________
                                                   |          |
Calk- or cork-soled boots......................... |     659  |    62
Dust masks........................................ |      16  |     2
Earplugs or other hearing protector............... |     264  |    25
Glasses or goggles................................ |     179  |    17
Gloves............................................ |     788  |    75
Hard hat.......................................... |     916  |    87
Leg protection.................................... |     303  |    29
Seat belts........................................ |       6  |     1
Steel-toed boots.................................. |     295  |    28
Other............................................. |      19  |     2
Not using protective equipment.................... |      38  |     4
                                                   |----------|-----------
    Total......................................... |    1057  |   (1)
___________________________________________________|__________|___________
  Note: (1) Because more than one response is possible, the sum of the
responses and percentages may not equal the total. Percentages are
calculated by dividing each response by the total number of persons who
answered the question.
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Work Injury Report (WIR)
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, June 1984.

f. "Equipment and vehicle safety features." Table 12 clearly shows that a significant number of machines and vehicles involved in the logging accidents were not equipped with fall protection, rollover protection or seat belts.

          Table 12. -- Safety Equipment on Vehicles or Equipment
___________________________________________________________________________
                                                   |         |
        Mobile equipment safety equipment          | Number  |  Percent
___________________________________________________|_________|_____________
                                                   |         |
Falling object protective structure............... |     30  |     59
Rollover protective structure..................... |     27  |     53
Seat belt......................................... |     32  |     63
Other............................................. |      4  |      8
Not aware of safety devices....................... |      5  |     10
                                                   |---------|------------
    Total......................................... |     51  |    (1)
___________________________________________________|_________|____________
  Note: (1) Because more than one response is possible, the sum of the
responses and percentages may not equal the total. Percentages are
calculated by dividing each response by the total number of persons who
answered the question.
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Work Injury Report (WIR)
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, June 1984.

g. "Safety training." The WIR survey also contained information on whether employees had received safety training prior to their accidents. Table 13 indicates that over one-third of the injured employees had never received training on safe work practices or in the operation of machines and vehicles used in logging operations. Only 40 percent of employees injured said they had received training from the employer. In fact, 19 percent of those injured said that whatever training they had received had come from a relative.

             Table 13. -- Safety Training of WIR Participants
___________________________________________________________________________
                                                   |          |
            Source of safety training              |  Number  | Percent
___________________________________________________|__________|____________
                                                   |          |
Never received training........................... |    392   |     37
Supervisor or employer............................ |    419   |     40
Co-worker......................................... |    300   |     29
Relative.......................................... |    200   |     19
Other............................................. |     72   |      7
                                                   |----------|-----------
    Total......................................... |   1046   |    (1)
___________________________________________________|__________|___________
  Note: (1) Because more than one response is possible, the sum of the
responses and percentages are calculated by dividing each response by the
total number of persons who answered the question.
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Work Injury Report (WIR)
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, June 1984.

h. "Factors contributing to the accident." Table 14 shows the conditions or factors that the injured worker felt contributed to his/ her accident. With regard to natural conditions, more than 30 percent said the sloping terrain and heavy brush had been a factor. In addition, 15 percent of the injured employees said that a danger tree had contributed to the accident.

Human factors also contributed to accidents, according to the injured employees. More than 20 percent said that the fast speed at which they had been working contributed to their accident. OSHA notes that 10 percent of those injured were unaware of the hazards when they were injured.

       Table 14. -- Conditions or Factors Contributing to Accident
___________________________________________________________________________
                                                   |          |
Conditions or factors employee felt contributed to |          |
                     accident                      |  Number  |  Percent
___________________________________________________|__________|____________
                                                   |          |
Natural conditions:                                |          |
  Defects in tree................................. |       63 |      7
  Snag or deadwood in tree........................ |       75 |      8
  Spring pole or wood under tension............... |      105 |     11
  Hidden wood on ground........................... |       61 |      7
  Weather conditions.............................. |       56 |      6
  Slippery conditions............................. |       80 |      9
  Heavy brush or ground cover..................... |      173 |     19
  Steep terrain................................... |      109 |     12
  Other natural conditions........................ |       71 |      8
  No natural conditions contributed............... |      335 |     36
                                                   |----------|-----------
    Total......................................... |      934 |    (1)
                                                   |==========|===========
Other factors:                                     |          |
  Co-worker's activity............................ |       54 |      6
  Working too fast................................ |      186 |     22
  Too noisy....................................... |       13 |      2
  Working when tired or fatigued.................. |       64 |      8
  Handling too heavy an object.................... |       45 |      5
  Misjudged time or distance...................... |      118 |     14
  Not paying full attention....................... |       65 |      8
  Unaware of hazards.............................. |       83 |     10
  Wrong cutting method............................ |       35 |      4
  Other:.......................................... |       53 |      6
  No other factors contributed.................... |      282 |     34
                                                   |----------|-----------
    Total......................................... |      839 |    (1)
___________________________________________________|__________|___________
  Notes: (1) Because more than one response is possible, the sum of the
responses and percentages are calculated by dividing each response by the
total number of persons who answered the question.
  (2) Due to rounding, the percentages may not add to 100.
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Work Injury Report (WIR)
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, June 1984.

i. "Severity of injury." The WIR survey also indicates that when employees were injured in logging operations, their injuries were more severe than injuries occurring in other industry sectors. Table 15 shows that almost three-fourths of those injured missed more than 1 day of work due to their injuries. Over 30 percent missed more than 10 days of work. The average lost-time case resulted in 23 days away from work. In addition, Table 16 shows that more than one-fifth of those injured were hospitalized an average of six nights.

                Table 15. -- Estimated Days Away From Work
___________________________________________________________________________
                                                   |          |
               Days away from work                 |  Number  | Percent
___________________________________________________|__________|____________
                                                   |          |
No days........................................... |     270  |     26
1 to 5 days....................................... |     234  |     22
6 to 10 days...................................... |     103  |     10
11 to 15 days..................................... |      57  |      5
16 to 20 days..................................... |      58  |      6
21 to 25 days..................................... |      27  |      3
26 to 30 days..................................... |      47  |      4
31 to 40 days..................................... |      45  |      4
41 to 60 days..................................... |      43  |      4
More than 60 days................................. |      50  |      5
Lost-time cases for which days not estimated...... |     116  |     11
                                                   |----------|-----------
    Total......................................... |   1,050  |    100
Mean days away from work:                          |      23  |
Median days away from work:                        |      10  |
___________________________________________________|__________|___________
  Notes:
  (1) Total excludes 5 employees for whom data were not available.
  (2) Due to rounding, percentages may not add to 100.
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Work Injury Report (WIR)
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, June 1984.
                  Table 16. -- Length of Hospitalization
__________________________________________________________________________
                                                     |         |
              Length of hospitalization              |  Number | Percent
_____________________________________________________|_________|__________
                                                     |         |
No hospitalization.................................. |    849  |   80
1 night............................................. |     29  |    3
2 nights............................................ |     26  |    2
3 nights............................................ |     27  |    3
4 nights............................................ |     16  |    2
5 nights............................................ |     26  |    2
6 nights............................................ |     11  |    1
7 nights............................................ |     13  |    1
8 nights............................................ |     15  |    1
9 nights............................................ |      3  |  (1)
10 nights........................................... |      6  |    1
11 to 20 nights..................................... |      9  |    1
21 to 30 nights..................................... |      8  |    1
More than 30 nights................................. |      4  |  (1)
                                                     |---------|----------
    Total........................................... |  1,059  |  100
Mean length of stay in hospital: 6 days              |         |
Median length of stay in hospital: 4 days            |         |
_____________________________________________________|_________|__________
  Note:
  (1) Due to rounding, percentages may not add to 100.
  Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Work Injury Report (WIR)
"Injuries in the Logging Industry", Bulletin 2203, June 1984.

4. "OSHA First Reports of Serious Injury (FRSI)." OSHA also utilizes a telephone reporting system for the field staff to inform the national office of the occurrence of serious or significant accidents. This telephone call system is part of the OSHA emergency communications system. Regional Administrators are required to file first reports of fatalities, catastrophes and other important events (such as those that receive significant publicity) to the National Office. The information is recorded on a form entitled First Report of Serious Accident (FRSI). Approximately 1,200 reports are received by the National Office yearly.

None of the reports are screened prior to OSHA receiving them to eliminate those from a certain industry, occupation or because of other factors. None of these reports may be considered statistically significant by themselves in attempting to determine the number of accidents that have occurred. However, they do give an indication of where many serious accidents have occurred and the types of work being performed at the time of the accidents.

OSHA has examined the FRSI reports and identified 105 (Ex. 4-65) that occurred while employees were performing logging operations. These accidents occurred between October 1985 and December 1989. Table 17 lists the logging accident reports as a percentage of all accident reports received.

Table 17. -- First Reports of Serious Injury Accidents in Logging Industry

__________________________________________________________________________
                                          |         |         |
                                          |  Total  |         |
                  Period                  | reports | Logging | Percentage
                                          |         |         |
__________________________________________|_________|_________|___________
                                          |         |         |
Oct-Dec 85............................... |     228 |      12 |    5.26
Jan-Dec 86............................... |    1147 |      30 |    2.62
Jan-Dec 87............................... |    1236 |      29 |    2.35
Jan-Dec 88............................... |    1330 |      23 |    1.73
Jan-Dec 89............................... |    1150 |      11 |     .96
                                          |---------|---------|-----------
    Totals............................... |    5091 |     105 |    2.06
__________________________________________|_________|_________|___________
  Source: Office of Electronic/Electrical and Mechanical Engineering
Safety Standards, Directorate of Safety Standards Programs, OSHA.

The percentages attributable to logging injuries are particularly large in relation to the total employment in the industries represented. Using employment rates for 1985-1989 for the private sector and for the logging industry, OSHA observes that the percentage of accidents recorded on the FRSI for logging for each year far exceeded the percentage of employees in logging compared with the private sector. Whereas, logging employment constituted one tenth of one percent of total private sector employment, the reports of serious accidents in logging averaged about two percent of the total accidents. Table 18 lists these employment rates as they appear in the BLS annual reports entitled, Occupational Injuries and Illnesses in the United States by Industry, (followed by the year of the data). (See section A above.)

 Table 18. -- Private Sector and Logging Industry Employment Rates
                          (1985-1989)
                 [All numbers are in thousands]
___________________________________________________________________________
                                                |           |
                                                |  Private  |  Logging
                      Year                      |  sector   |  industry
________________________________________________|___________|______________
                                                |           |
1985........................................... |  81,601.3 |   82.7
1986........................................... |  83,291.2 |   82.9
1987........................................... |  85,686.0 |   85.0
1988........................................... |  88.698.8 |   90.3
1989........................................... |  91,111.0 |   87.4
________________________________________________|___________|______________
  Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin Nos. 2278 (1985) (Ex.
2-30), (1986), (1987) (Ex. 38B), (1988) (Ex. 38C), and (1989).

OSHA was also able to identify from the FRSI reports the activity that was being conducted at the time of the accident and the causes of the accidents. For example, more than one-half were involved in cutting activities when they were seriously injured. OSHA also notes that almost nine percent were seriously injured in machine rollover or tipover accidents while only 1 employee was injured by a jillpoke. Table 19 lists the activity being conducted or the causes of the accidents.

      Table 19. -- First Reports of Serious Injuries
                -- Logging Operations October 1985-December 1989
                   Activity Being Conducted/Cause of the Accident
___________________________________________________________________________
                                                |          |
                Activity/Cause                  |   Number |   Percent
________________________________________________|__________|_______________
                                                |          |
Felling Tree................................... |      30  |     28.6
Lodged Tree.................................... |      17  |     16.2
Working Around Danger Tree..................... |      13  |     12.3
Struck by Falling Load......................... |      10  |      9.5
Vehicle Tipover................................ |       9  |      8.6
Struck by Vehicle.............................. |       8  |      7.6
Electrocutions................................. |       3  |      2.9
Fall from Vehicle.............................. |       2  |      1.9
Skidding....................................... |       2  |      1.9
Delimbing...................................... |       1  |      1.0
Jillpokes...................................... |       1  |      1.0
Other.......................................... |       9  |      8.6
                                                |----------|--------------
    Total...................................... |     105  |    100
________________________________________________|__________|______________
  Note: 1. The percentages may not be equal 100 due to rounding.
  Source: Office of Electronic/Electrical and Mechanical Engineering
Safety Standards, Directorate of Safety Standards Programs, OSHA.

5. "OSHA Fatality/Catastrophe Investigations Report (FCI)." OSHA regulations require that all workplace fatalities be reported to the nearest OSHA Area Office. Employers are required to complete a Fatality/Catastrophe Event Report Form (OSHA 36), which is reviewed by the OSHA Area Director to determine whether an investigation of the fatality is warranted. In 1989, OSHA published a study of 141 logging fatalities that occurred during the period of 1978-84 (Ex. 4-61). These fatalities do not represent all logging industry fatalities during that time period.

According to the study, 71 percent of those logging employees killed were out in the cutting area. Only one percent each were killed on skid trails or at landings.

The study also indicated that 43 percent of those killed were felling trees at the time. Employees performing yarding and bucking and limbing operations each accounted for 13 percent of the fatalities. The overwhelming majority of employees (72%) were killed when they were struck or crushed by a tree, log or limb, while 17 percent were killed in machine accidents. One percent were killed in chain-saw accidents.

Unsafe work practices, misjudgments and lack of training or supervision accounted for 42 percent of the fatalities while less than one percent were due to equipment failure.

6. "Maine Bureau of Labor Statistics." The State of Maine Bureau of Labor Statistics (Maine BLS) has compiled various statistics on injuries and fatalities in the logging industry (Ex. 4-174, 4-175, 4-176).

Maine BLS conducted a detailed survey of 189 logging employee injuries that occurred between May and July of 1982 (Ex. 4-175). This number does not represent all logging employees who were injured during that period. According to this survey, 35 percent of employees reporting injuries were struck by trees, logs or limbs. Chain-saw accidents accounted for 26 percent of the reported injuries while 13 percent of the logging employees were injured in slips or falls.

According to Maine BLS, the category that showed a significantly higher than average percentage of disabling injuries was chain-saw accidents. Over one-half of all chain-saw accidents involved kickback. In over 70 percent of the kickback accidents, the chain saws were equipped with chain brakes. Maine BLS said that chain brakes had played a significant role in lessening the effects of the injury. Less than 13 percent of chain-saw accidents where chain brakes were present resulted in hospitalization, while nearly 50 percent of the accidents involving other than chain saws resulted in hospitalization.

This survey also indicates that two-thirds of all logging accidents resulted in lost workdays and 13 percent of all injuries required at least one overnight in the hospital. The average hospitalization was for five days.

Maine BLS has also compiled statistics from 1980-87 of chain-saw injuries that resulted in a first report of serious injury (Ex. 4-176). According to this report, average chain-saw injuries for each year was 362. Of those, an average of 237 (65%) were disabling injuries, that is, injuries which result in lost workdays.

Maine BLS has also examined disabling logging injuries reported from 1985-87 that had resulted in lacerations (Ex. 4-174). During those three years, there were an average of 183 disabling lacerations each year.

7. "Washington State Logging Fatalities." A detailed study has been compiled on logging fatalities in the State of Washington from 1977-83 (Ex. 4-129). Of the 135 fatalities that occurred during those years, the study analyzed 92 percent of them. Death certificates and reports of investigations by Washington OSHA were used in the analysis.

According to this study, the overall annual fatality rate for logging during this period was approximately 2 per 1,000 full-time employees. Those employees who were killed had a mean length of experience in the logging industry of 11.6 years. Less than 10 percent had less than one year's experience.

More than 40 percent of all loggers killed were engaged in felling activities, while 23 percent were killed performing yarding operations. Almost 20 percent of the loggers were operating logging machines at the time of their accident. Table 20 shows the jobs employees were performing at the time of their accident.

       Table 20. -- State of Washington Logging Fatalities, 1977-83
___________________________________________________________________________
                                                  |         |
                   Job title                      |  Number |  Percent
__________________________________________________|_________|______________
                                                  |         |
Feller/bucker...................................  |     53  |      42
Choker-setter...................................  |     23  |      18
Mobile equipment operator.......................  |     16  |      13
Hook tender.....................................  |      8  |       6
Chaser..........................................  |      7  |       6
Yarder operator.................................  |      6  |       5
Loader..........................................  |      6  |       5
Rigging slinger.................................  |      5  |       4
Pondworker......................................  |      1  |       1
                                                  |---------|--------------
  Total.........................................  |    125  |     100
__________________________________________________|_________|______________

More than 65 percent of all employees killed were hit or crushed by a log or tree. While most of these employees who were hit or crushed by a tree were the result of their own activity, more than eight percent were hit by trees being felled by another employee. Approximately nine percent were killed in machine rollover accidents, while 10 percent of those employees killed were struck by a machine or vehicle. Table 21 shows the causes of the accidents in which loggers were killed.

   Table 21. -- State of Washington Logging Fatalities by Type, 1977-83
___________________________________________________________________________
                                                       |         |
            Type of accident                           |  Number | Percent
_______________________________________________________|_________|_________
                                                       |         |
Struck by tree brought down by the deceased........... |    34   |  26
Struck by tree felled by another person............... |    11   |   8
Struck by rolling log................................. |    20   |  15
Struck by log being dragged........................... |    18   |  14
Struck by mobile equipment............................ |    13   |  10
Equipment rollover.................................... |    12   |   9
Struck by boom or rigger.............................. |     7   |   5
Struck by log falling from truck during loading....... |     3   |   2
Electrocution......................................... |     2   |   2
Other................................................. |     9   |   7
Unknown............................................... |     3   |   2
                                                       |---------|---------
  Total............................................... |   132   | 100
_______________________________________________________|_________|_________

According to the study, accident investigation reports indicted that many of the deaths would not have occurred if the employees had been following safe work practices and had remained out of hazardous areas (e.g., other occupied work areas).

C. Need for agency action.

OSHA believes that current logging methods and the inherent dangers posed by work in the woods, such as those caused by inclement weather, uneven terrain and isolation from health care facilities, present significant hazards to employees engaged in logging operations across the nation, regardless of the type logging being conducted or the end use of the wood. The presentation of data in the preceding section further demonstrate the level of risk to which all loggers are exposed. Nevertheless, the existing OSHA safety standard for pulpwood logging (29 CFR 1910.266) specifically addresses only one segment of the logging industry -- logging operations whose forest product ends up as pulp. Although OSHA does not know precisely the breakdown of employment and occupational injuries between pulpwood and other logging operations, the data and other information available to OSHA indicate that similar hazards exist in both sectors of the industry.

The preceding section has shown that the logging industry remains a high risk industry, regardless of the end use of the forest product. In particular, the data show:

1. Employees engaged in logging operations have a substantially higher risk of injury and death than workers in many other industries, including other high hazard industries.

2. If they are injured, loggers are more likely to be hospitalized and lose workdays compared to employees in most other industries, as evidenced by the very high lost-workday incidence rate.

3. When loggers are injured, their injuries are much more severe and result in longer hospitalizations and more lost time per employee than do the injuries of employees in most other industries.

4. Loggers also have a much higher incidence of fatalities than employees in other industries.

In addition, the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the final logging standard estimates, based on the various data in the record, that there are an average of 158 fatalities, 6,798 lost workday injuries and 3,770 non-lost workday injuries that occur each year in the logging industry. (For further discussion see section VI of this preamble.)

Of the 72,100 employees engaged in logging operations as defined by the final rule, only 38 percent (27,170) are covered by State Plan State logging standards,(5) which currently provide protection regardless of kind of logging operation in which the loggers are employed. Of the estimated 62 percent (44,930) of logging employees who are not covered by State plan State standards, OSHA estimates that at only one-third (16,478) are covered by the existing pulpwood logging standard. That means that almost two-thirds (28,452) are not covered by any Federal or State logging standard. (This estimate is consistent with the WIR survey, which indicated that only 35 percent of those surveyed were engaged in pulpwood logging operations.)

__________

Footnote(5) In 1977, the leading states in logging employment (with 48 percent of the total) were Washington (15, 400), Oregon (14,000), California (6,100) and Maine (4,300). By 1982, the employment pattern had shifted and the leading states (with 42 percent of the total) were Washington (11,900, down 3,500); Oregon (11,300, down 2,700); Georgia (5,400, up 1,600); and Alabama (5,000, up 1,200). California (3,900, down 2,200), was no longer one of the leaders. Overall logging employment in the Pacific Coast states decreased 22% during this period. The South was the only region in the country to show an increase in logging employment (21%). This employment trend, resulting in the change from harvesting the Pacific Coast's old-growth timber to increased harvesting of third and forth-growth pine forests in the south, means that an increasing proportion of logging employment is in states not covered by state logging standards. (As noted earlier, only Alaska (16th in 1982), California (7th), Hawaii (very small), Michigan (19th), Oregon (2nd) and Washington (1st) have OSHA approved state logging standards covering all loggers.) This means that as the centers of activity (and employment) shift from the old growth forests of the pacific coast to the pine forests of the south, fewer employees conducting general logging (non-pulpwood logging) will be covered by these State plan State logging standards.

The preceding section shows there has been a steady decrease in injury and lost-workday incidence rates since the adoption of OSHA's existing pulpwood logging standard and the State plan State standards. In addition to a further reduction in accidents for those employers currently covered by OSHA and State logging standards, OSHA believes that a substantial reduction in incidence rates can be achieved by promulgating a uniform national logging standard that provides protection for all employees engaged in logging operations.

In developing the proposed rule, OSHA used the 1978 ANSI standard as its model for a uniform national logging standard, since many of its requirements were stated in performance language. This is in keeping with the Agency's determination that properly drafted performance standards can adequately address safety and health hazards without unnecessarily impeding technological advancement and employer innovation. The final rule provides a base level of safety for employees in all logging operations. At the same time, it still allows those State plan States with more complicated or specialized local conditions to develop their own detailed standards, as several States have already done.

Many participants in this rulemaking have said that a comprehensive performance-based logging standard is necessary to reduce the risk of injury and death (Ex. 5-6, 5-10, 5-17, 5-18, 5-21, 5-22, 5-42, 5-46, 5-74 through 5-92; Tr. W1 21, 73, 202). OSHA agrees with these commenters. The Agency believes that the integrated program of personal protective equipment; equipment, machine and vehicle protective devices, inspection and maintenance; work practices; and training contained in the final rule is reasonably necessary and appropriate to reduce the high injury and fatality incidence rates in this industry.

[59 FR 51672, Oct. 12, 1994]

Regulations (Preambles to Final Rules) - Table of Contents Regulations (Preambles to Final Rules) - Table of Contents