Regulations (Preambles to Final Rules) - Table of Contents|
| Record Type:||Longshoring and Marine Terminals|
| Title:||Section 5 - V. Other Issues|
V. Other Issues
Recent animal studies in rats and mice confirm an association between the induction of cancer and exposure to whole diesel exhaust. The lung is the primary site identified with carcinogenic or tumorigenic responses following inhalation exposures. Limited epidemiologic evidence suggests an association between occupational exposure to diesel engine emissions and lung cancer. The consistency of these toxicologic and epidemiologic findings suggests that a potential occupational carcinogenic hazard exists in human exposure to diesel exhaust. (Ex. 81.)
Although studies have been conducted concerning the effects of diesel exhaust by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) in the mining industry, no specific studies relating to the longshoring industry had been completed when OSHA published this final rule. Diesel exhaust particulates, which have been identified by OSHA as a priority for further study by the Priority Planning Process, may be the subject of a future rulemaking, during which OSHA anticipates the availability of more conclusive scientific data. Consequently, OSHA has decided to defer any regulatory action on this issue in this rulemaking.
In response, OSHA received one comment from a manufacturer of safety devices that prevent the inadvertent lifting of the fifth wheel with the container. These devices shut down the container gantry crane when they detect the uneven balance to the load that occurs when a fifth wheel is lifted. The experience of this commenter suggests that administrative work practices are not fully effective (Ex. 6-3).
This issue received very little attention during the hearings and public comment period. However, OSHA believes that the wider use of SATLs will help to prevent accidents caused by the inadvertent lifting of the chassis and container together. When SATLs are being used, as explained earlier, the longshore workers remain on the quay to place the SATLs on the bottom of the container after it is lifted only a foot or two off the chassis. In contrast, when manual twist locks are in use, they are inserted on the ship; lifts of the container from the chassis in this situation are usually much quicker and much higher, since the crane operator does not have to stop after a foot or two to allow the SATLs to be inserted. Although a lift of this magnitude is enough to allow the fifth wheel to disengage and depart, the lift would not be a substantial lift of twenty to fifty feet, but a limited lift of only a few feet. With a two foot lift, even if the chassis does not disengage from the container, the injury potential would be greatly reduced. Because this rulemaking will increase the use of SATLs in this industry, OSHA has decided not to take any further regulatory action on the fifth wheel hoisting issue at this time. It is OSHA's intention to monitor the frequency of this operation further and engage in joint studies with the assistance of the Maritime Advisory Committee for Occupational Safety and Health (MACOSH) to assess the need to address such accidents in the future.
For the most part, repairs to shipboard equipment are normally accomplished by the crew of the vessel and are only infrequently performed by longshore workers. However, to provide protection in those instances where longshore workers may do repairs that would require the locking out of equipment, and to assure regulatory consistency with marine cargo handling operations, OSHA is including the same lockout/ tagout provisions of 1917.151(b)(7) in the Longshoring Standards (codified at 1918.96(e)).
He further recommended that:
The use of systems that are at foot level, thereby creating a tripping hazard, should be discouraged. If these systems are to be used, then, the components that make up the system should be of a high visibility color. (Ex. 1-139.)
The final container top fall protection provisions are crafted in performance-oriented language to promote innovation and flexibility in providing fall protection. The key performance tests that a fall protection system must meet are that it (1) be rigged to reduce free-fall distance so that the employee will not contact any lower level stowage or vessel structure; and (2) be designed so that the fall will not produce an arresting force on an employee that exceeds 1800 pounds (8kN) ( See 1918.85(k)(3) and (4)).
Although elevated anchorage points are important considerations in the design of fall protection systems, these provisions of the final rule focus on the performance criteria for such systems rather than their specific design aspects. Consequently, OSHA has determined that it would not be appropriate to include this single design consideration in the final rule.
|Regulations (Preambles to Final Rules) - Table of Contents|
The Department of Labor does not endorse, takes no responsibility for, and exercises no control over the linked organization or its views, or contents, nor does it vouch for the accuracy or accessibility of the information contained on the destination server. The Department of Labor also cannot authorize the use of copyrighted materials contained in linked Web sites. Users must request such authorization from the sponsor of the linked Web site. Thank you for visiting our site. Please click the button below to continue.