Citation Details


Back to citations


Section: 56.11012
Date: 07/20/2017
District: NC
Negligence: Moderate
Injury or Illness: Reasonbly Likely
Injury or illness could be expected to be: Lost Workdays or Restricted Only
Significant and Substantial: Yes

Condition or Practice: On the Euclid R-35 haul truck #4 the drivers door would open all the way leaving an opening of about 36 inches past the provided rail. This exposes a miner to the hazard of falling through the unprotected opening which could result in a lost workdays or restricted duty type injury. The fall would be about 81 inches to the ground.


Action to Terminate: A chain was added to the door allowing about a 12 inch opening between the provided rail and the door when the door is opened.

Why this concerns you: What concerns us is that the inspector wrote 3 citations during the inspection on 3 of our haul trucks.
These trucks have been at this location since 1995 and had been inspected every inspection with no concern or violation of the manufacturer's engineered opening.
The door straps on all 3 trucks were in great shape, no tears, rips or stretching.
The inspector had the plant mechanic install a piece of chain to narrow the opening to suffice and terminate.
We left the manufacturers straps in the door as we would not want to become the manufacturer of the safety mechanism on the door.
There is no mandated or recommended measurement from the truck manufacturer on the doors recommended opening beyond the engineered safety door straps that were installed and that came with the trucks.
If this is a new concern by MSHA there should be fair notice to all operators and the manufacturer on this matter, as we are not the only quarry site with Euclid R-35 haul trucks.



Abatement Suggestions From Industry


To be factually correct on this citation, the inspector did not direct the mechanic to install the chain, he instructed us to close/narrow the opening in some form, by use of a strap, chain or blocking device.
- posted on 07/21/2017


Post a Comment


We have provided a place where you can post your professional comment or add additional information regarding this citation. Before doing so, please read the following guidelines:

Be nice!
If you are angry, step back and take a breath.

Post like you are talking to someone face-to-face. Better yet, post it like your mother is going to read it.

Don't discuss anything that might be construed as restraining trade. Nothing about boycotts and we certainly don't want to read about the price of rock.


Be honest!
Keep it factual. There is absolutely no need to exaggerate; some citations are hard enough to believe as is. Mine safety is important and those who visit the site must be able to rely on posts being accurate.


We review all posts
Sorry, but all posts come to us first. We want this site to be effective, and we want you to use it. The site can only be effective if it is legal and professional. If we get something that isn't both, we won't post it. None of us want that to happen.


No Guarantees
Anyone who has been a mine safety professional for long knows what one inspector approves, another may consider a violation. As much as we would like to, we cannot guarantee any solution offered here will work for your situation. We certainly hope what others have done provides helpful ideas, but we aren't willing to bet the farm on it passing an inspection and you shouldn't either.


Your name and email will not be shown when you post your comment. We ask for these fields because it helps us identify association members and keeps spam off the website.

Your Name

Your Email

Member Of

*

Comment


Any comments or opinions shown on this website reflect the views and opinions of the individuals or organization who posted them and do not necessarily reflect the views of any of the parties sponsoring or supporting this website. The sponsors are not responsible for the content of any comment posted on this website.