title: sae conag council adoption of iso standards american.pdf · 2004-05-27 · title: sae conag...

AEM/CECE/CEMA/KOCEMA Joint Technical Liaison Meeting Municg, Germany 5 & 6 April 2004

AGENDA ITEM: 6.1.1 Preparation date: 13 Mar 2004By: D. Gamble of 1

Page 1 of 1

Title: SAE CONAG Council Adoption of ISO Standards

Background: Status report on the NA adoption of ISO standards via the SAE CONAG Council.

Current status: SAE CONAG Council has adopted 103 ISO Standards from TC127 “Earthmoving”, TC23/SC15 “Purpose Built Forestry” and TC43 “Sound” for USA. SAE CONAG Council is proposing Fast Track approval process for adopting ISO standards and superseding equivalent SAE standards.

Actions to be taken: None – information only. (Presentation attached to the meeting documents.) Annex:

Action Information X

AEM/CECE/CEMA/KOCEMA Joint Technical Liaison Meeting Munich, Germany April 5-6, 2004

AGENDA ITEM: 6.1.1 Preparation date: 2004-03-26 By: Daniel Moss Page 1 of 1

Title: ISO/TC 214 Elevating Work Platforms ISO/TC 214 and its Working Groups will be meeting in Montreal, Canada on 26 –30 April 2004. Current Document Status: ISO 16368 has been published as an International Standard. A NWI (new work item) has been proposed to TC 214 to amend ISO 16368. The NWIP ballot did not initially pass due to the necessary 5-expert rule, but since then, experts have been identified and the proposal has been approved.

ISO 18878, ISO 18893 and ISO 20381 have been submitted for FDIS ballot and are currently at the Central Secretariat. ISO/CD 16653 –1 and ISO/CD 16653–2 proposals have been submitted to the members of Work Group 1 for comment and these comments will be discussed at the Montreal meeting. Observation: IEC/TC 78 has circulated a revision to the ISO 1057 document for live working. There has been much discussion within TC 214 as the scope of this project, and it has been noted that some requirements in this revision conflict with those found in the 16368 and 16653-2 documents. Some requirements also conflict with those found in EN 280.


D. Gamble 5-6 April 2004 1

AEM,CECE,CEMAJoint Technical Meeting

North American Issues

SAE CONAG CouncilAdoption of ISO Standards

In a global marketplace, the objective of the standards development process must be one globally applied standard and one globally accepted test for each characteristic of a product, process or service.

The Goal: One Global Standard The Goal: One Global Standard Accepted by AllAccepted by All


SAE CONAG Process


SAE Status on ISO Adoption58 - ISO Standard adopted by SAE CONAG Council

46 – TC127 ISO “Earthmoving” standards6 – TC43 “Sound” ISO standards 6 – TC23/SC15 “Forestry” ISO standards


New ConAg Fast Track Proposal

National Adoption of ISO via ANSI?


Assumed Value withANSI National Adoption

• Recognition by US Governmental Agencies• Referenced or cited by OSHA, MSHA or

other regulatory bodies• Public recognition as accredited balanced

consensus standard• Stronger claim as unbiased in defense

suits


Findings about National Adoption

• US DoC sees SAE, ASAE, ASME as equal to ISO for trade matters

• OSHA is indifferent to national adoption • MSHA prefers national adoption• Society may not know, understand or value• Litigators may argue industry bias


New ConAg Fast Track Proposal

ISO StdsSAE CONAGCouncil + TC Ballot Approval

Supersede orCancel SAEEquivalent Stds

US IndustryConsensusISO Stds


Fast Track Advantages

US Earthmoving, Foresty & Agricultural Industries committed to one global standard – ISOVery rapid adoption process managed by IndustryElimination of costly & time consuming SDO (ANSI & SAE) administration delaying adoption


SAE Fast Track TimetableApr 25 - Formal presentation to CONAG CouncilApr 26 – US TC127 TAG vote for approvalJun 26 – CONAG Council ballot closureOct 27 – CONAG Council adoption of all relevant ISO standards & supersede equivalent SAE standards

AEM/CECE/CEMA/KOCEMA Joint Technical Liaison Meeting Munich, Germany 5 & 6 April 2004

AGENDA ITEM: 6.1.2 Preparation date: 11 Mar 2004By: D. Taylor Page 1 of 1

Page 1 of 1

Title: Two inch versus three inch belt issues

No written report



AGENDA ITEM: 6.2.1 Preparation date: 18 Mar 2004 By: Richard Dressler Page 1 of 1

Page 1 of 1

Title: Negotiated Rulemaking-Crane Safety Standards

Background: The Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) has begun the process of updating the Federal Safety Standard for Cranes, 29 CFR 1926.550. AEM members Mike Brunet (Manitowoc Crane Group) and Bernie McGrew (Link-Belt Construction Equipment) are members of the rulemaking committee, along with other crane manufacturers, users and dealers.

Current status: The first meeting was held in August of 2003, with monthly meetings thereafter. The date for completion of the OSHA Safety Standard for Cranes document is projected for July of 2004.

Actions to be taken: AEM is hosting monthly teleconferences prior to the meetings, where members of the Crane Technical Committee can discuss the issues with committee members. AEM plans to attend an upcoming full committee meeting in Washington D.C. Lessons learned from the crane negotiated rulemaking process will be applied to encourage OSHA to hopefully update outdated rules for other equipment sectors. Annex:



AGENDA ITEM: 6.2.2 Preparation date: 13 Mar 2004 By: D. Gamble Page 1 of 1

Page 1 of 1

Title: NA Northwest Forestry Issues – Operator Protection

Background: Oregon OSHA revised regulations for Forestry Operator Protection.

Current status: Oregon OSHA regulations released and effective 1 July 2004. (Regulation inserted) SAE MTC SC4 Forestry Committee approved NWI for cab guarding on cab side opposite to the boom on 360 degree rotation forestry machines. (Draft inserted)

Actions to be taken: Information only. Annex:

"2004 div7_h.pdf" "03-5-27.SAE NWI proposal for



AGENDA ITEM: 6.2.3 Preparation date:26 March 2004By: A.. Vidakovic Page 1 of 3

Title: Silica dust exposure regulations (OSHA, MSHA) Background and Issue Status:

MINE SAFETY & HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (MSHA) Respirable Dust Level Regulation

(for inside cab environment) Silica Dust is a known cause of Silicosis

NOTE: Respirable dust means dust collected with a sampling device approved by the

Secretary of Labor (MSHA)

SILICOSIS: Disabling and potentially fatal lung disease caused by silica dust imbedded in the lung tissue.

Reduced lung capacity and labored breathing Accumulative and non-reversible 250 deaths per year

This is a passionate issue within MSHA and the mining industry

MSHA REGULATION FOR RESPIRABLE DUST – 1977 Why is MSHA just now enforcing regulation?

• Regulation and testing has always been enforced in underground mines. • Recent x-ray testing of surface miners showed that 7-8% have signs of silicosis.

Therefore, local districts are testing and issuing citations for high dust levels in cabs of mining equipment.




From MSHA Presentation in Beckley, West, Virginia (August 25, 1999)

Silica Content of Material

Coal 0 – 5% Limestone 0 – 5% Shale 5 – 20% Granite 5 – 30% Sandstone 50 – 100% Implication for Equipment Manufacturers Since manufacturers cannot predict or control the type of rock in which their equipment operate, they must provide a cab which will meet (or have provisions to meet) at least the standard of 50% Silica rock: 0.2 mg/m3 of respirable dust

MSHA DUST STANDARD 30 CFR, Part 71.100 (1977) – Surface Coal

30 CFR, Part 56.5002 – Metal/Non-Metal Surface

Allowable amount of silica (1) dust – 0.1 mg/m3 in one shift (10 hours) (100 mcg/1 cubic meter of air)

Allowable amount of total respirable dust depends on the silica content at a particular mine.

Silica Content of Rock Total Allowable Respirable (2) Dust – Coal (3) 5% 2 mg/m3 of air

10% 1 mg/m3 of air 20% 0.5 mg/m3 of air

50% (sandstone) 0.2 mg/m3 of air 100% (sandstone) 0.1 mg/m3 of air

(1) 0.3 – 3 micron size particle


(3) To calculate total allowable respirable dust;

TDK coal mine in For Coal: 10 ÷ silica content of rock in% Corsica, PA

For metal/non-metal: 10 ÷ (silica content in % + 2)



NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH – NIOSH Criteria for crystalline silica standard is based on NIOSH 1974 publication which recommended worker exposure to free silica to maximum of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air as determined by a full shift sample of up to a 10-hour workday, 40 hour workweek. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH ADMINISTRATION – OSHA OSHA regulates dust exposure for construction and for general industry (manufacturing works). The limit in both cases for crystalline silica (quartz) is:

250 / (%SiO2 + 5) millions of particles per cubic foot of air (mppcf), based on impinger samples counted by light-field techniques

29 CFR, Part 1910.100, Table Z-3, Mineral Dusts (1971) 29 CFR, Part 1926.55, Appendix A, Mineral Dusts (1974)

OSHA announced in 1999 that it intends to issue a comprehensive rule on silica as recommended by NIOSH. OSHA has prepared a draft rule for the construction industry, and has submitted it for early review of the rule’s impact on small businesses, as required by law. Progress of the rule to date has been very slow. MINE SAFETY & HEALTH ADMINISTRATION – MSHA MSHA has been considering rulemaking to set a separate exposure limit for silica which is not tied to the respirable dust standard. No timeframe has been set on this long-term agenda item. Future Outcome/Proposed JTLM Action: Continue to monitor and report on rulemaking and enforcement activities of MSHA and OSHA.



Title: Silica dust exposure regulations (OSHA, MSHA) Background and Issue Status:

MINE SAFETY & HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (MSHA) Respirable Dust Level Regulation

(for inside cab environment) Silica Dust is a known cause of Silicosis

NOTE: Respirable dust means dust collected with a sampling device approved by the

Secretary of Labor (MSHA)

SILICOSIS: Disabling and potentially fatal lung disease caused by silica dust imbedded in the lung tissue.

Reduced lung capacity and labored breathing Accumulative and non-reversible 250 deaths per year

This is a passionate issue within MSHA and the mining industry

MSHA REGULATION FOR RESPIRABLE DUST – 1977 Why is MSHA just now enforcing regulation?

• Regulation and testing has always been enforced in underground mines. • Recent x-ray testing of surface miners showed that 7-8% have signs of silicosis.

Therefore, local districts are testing and issuing citations for high dust levels in cabs of mining equipment.




Title: Silica dust exposure regulations

From MSHA Presentation in Beckley, West, Virginia (August 25, 1999)

Silica Content of Material

Coal 0 – 5% Limestone 0 – 5% Shale 5 – 20% Granite 5 – 30% Sandstone 50 – 100% Implication for Equipment Manufacturers Since manufacturers cannot predict or control the type of rock in which their equipment operate, they must provide a cab which will meet (or have provisions to meet) at least the standard of 50% Silica rock: 0.2 mg/m3 of respirable dust

MSHA DUST STANDARD 30 CFR, Part 71.100 (1977) – Surface Coal

30 CFR, Part 56.5002 – Metal/Non-Metal Surface

Allowable amount of silica (1) dust – 0.1 mg/m3 in one shift (10 hours) (100 mcg/1 cubic meter of air)

Allowable amount of total respirable dust depends on the silica content at a particular mine.

Silica Content of Rock Total Allowable Respirable (2) Dust – Coal (3) 5% 2 mg/m3 of air

10% 1 mg/m3 of air 20% 0.5 mg/m3 of air

50% (sandstone) 0.2 mg/m3 of air 100% (sandstone) 0.1 mg/m3 of air



(3) To calculate total allowable respirable dust;

TDK coal mine in For Coal: 10 ÷ silica content of rock in%



Corsica, PA For metal/non-metal: 10 ÷ (silica content in % + 2)

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH – NIOSH Criteria for crystalline silica standard is based on NIOSH 1974 publication which recommended worker exposure to free silica to maximum of 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air as determined by a full shift sample of up to a 10-hour workday, 40 hour workweek. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH ADMINISTRATION – OSHA OSHA regulates dust exposure for construction and for general industry (manufacturing works). The limit in both cases for crystalline silica (quartz) is:

250 / (%SiO2 + 5) millions of particles per cubic foot of air (mppcf), based on impinger samples counted by light-field techniques

29 CFR, Part 1910.100, Table Z-3, Mineral Dusts (1971) 29 CFR, Part 1926.55, Appendix A, Mineral Dusts (1974)

OSHA announced in 1999 that it intends to issue a comprehensive rule on silica as recommended by NIOSH. OSHA has prepared a draft rule for the construction industry, and has submitted it for early review of the rule’s impact on small businesses, as required by law. Progress of the rule to date has been very slow. MINE SAFETY & HEALTH ADMINISTRATION – MSHA MSHA has been considering rulemaking to set a separate exposure limit for silica which is not tied to the respirable dust standard. No timeframe has been set on this long-term agenda item. Future Outcome/Proposed JTLM Action: Continue to monitor and report on rulemaking and enforcement activities of MSHA and OSHA.


AGENDA ITEM: 6.3 Preparation date: 17 Mar 2004 By: D. Drollinger Page 1 of 2

Page 1 of 2

Title: U.S. Department of Commerce Initiative Regarding Standards and ITAC-16

Background: On March 19, 2003, the U.S. Department of Commerce (DoC) Secretary, Donald Evans, announced a U.S. standards initiative aimed at addressing concerns being voiced that standards and conformity assessment to those standards are among the greatest barriers to expanding trade. Shortly after announcing this program, DoC also launched a manufacturing initiative with the stated objective to help address the significant competitive challenges facing American manufacturing. The two efforts are largely unrelated; however, it is anticipated that both programs will likely share a number of common action elements. The standards initiative outlines eight points for action and the DoC is in the near final stages of releasing a status report on what has been accomplished over the last year. In an effort to gain industry sector insights, DoC held a series of information gathering “round table” sessions. AEM presented in the session dealing with manufacturing.

Current status: DoC has made significant progress over the past year in addressing the eight-point initiative. Status on the specific points includes: 1. Developing a Commerce Standards Activity Assessment: The DoC’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) conducted an assessment of all existing DoC programs in an effort to reduce standards-related barriers to trade. The International Trade Administration (ITA) is also working with NIST to survey the offices it works with to better understand their standards related activities. Internal review and evaluation is ongoing. 2. Reinforcing Expertise in Key Markets: NIST and ITA have developed an intensive training program for DoC standards attaches. 3. Devising an Effective Training and Outreach Program: NIST and ITA in cooperation with various U.S. standards developing organizations (SDO’s) are creating standards training programs for Commercial Service and Foreign Service officers. 4. Creating a “Best Practice” Database: DoC is still working to figure out a way to create a database that will serve as a “toolkit” that will allow them to work more effectively with U.S. industry. 5. Expanding the Early Warning System: Work continues to expand the “Export Alert!” service. This is a free, web-based service to disseminate market intelligence and information on standards developments in key priority foreign markets as identified by DoC department desks and overseas offices. 6. Partnering with the President’s Export Council on Standards Leadership: A dialogue is taking place on standards within the President’s Export Council.

Action X Information X


AGENDA ITEM: 6.3 Preparation date: 17 Mar 2004 By: D. Drollinger Page 2 of 2

Page 2 of 2

7. Reaching out to U.S. Industry: DoC held a series of industry-specific roundtable sessions and will bundle the results in a final report. 8. Appointing a Liaison at the International Trade Administration: A senior official, Heidi Hijikata, was named as ITA’s Standards Liaison last fall. She has established herself quickly with the various U.S. government agencies and familiarized herself with the on-going standards-related activities. AEM has had a number of contacts with her in her brief tenure and has invited her to take part in a special standards session to be hosted by the AEM Technical and Safety Council, which will be held on June 1, 2004, near Chicago O’Hare airport. Separately, I have just received confirmation that I have been re-affirmed for another term on the DoC advisory committee dealing with standards and regulations. The DoC advisory structure and been re-designed and the standards group is now Industry Trade Advisory Committee (ITAC) 16. I plan to continue active participation with this group and provide periodic reports to the JTL.

Actions to be taken: JTL members may wish to participate in the AEM standards session to be held on June 1, 2004, in Chicago where Heide Hijikata (ITA standards liaison) will provide an update on the DoC standards initiative and be informed of key standards issues of interest to the off-road industry. Annex:


AGENDA ITEM: 6.4 Preparation date: 2004-03-19 By: Stan Mullins for AEM Page 1 of 2

Page 1 of 1

Title: AEM White Paper on Support of Consensus Standards Development

Background: The Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM), an international industry trade organization with its members being manufacturers of many types of equipment and components, actively supports the voluntary consensus standards development process affecting its member’s products. Questions are often asked of AEM’s role and position of support in the standards development process.

Current status: AEM has developed a draft ‘White Paper’ stating its vision and policy regarding the support of the voluntary consensus standards development process nationally and internationally. See attachment. Once finalized, this paper will be distributed among its members and posted on the AEM website (http://www.aem.org). It is envisioned this paper will clarify and demonstrate AEM’s commitment to the development of standards that facilitate free trade through out the world.

Actions to be taken: Other associations are asked to review the draft paper and provide comment. Are the other associations willing to provide a similar type of written statement concerning their support of the standards development process?

Annex: see attachment

Aemmkefile\\ \emidata$ Technical an\


http://www.aem.org/



Title: Pictorial Only Safety Signs

Background: Many variations of safety signs are being used on construction equipment. The goal is for equipment manufacturers to use consistent and common (where possible) pictorial only safety signs. Use of pictorial safety signs on equipment in USA seems to be lagging that of the rest of the world.

Current status: AEM has developed a rationale statement (attached) encouraging logical migration toward increased use of pictorial only safety signs. A task force has been formed to identify the issues and a path for increased use of pictorial safety signs in the USA. Actions to be taken: AEM encourages other associations to promote use of pictorial only safety signs consistent with ISO 9244. Additional reference info: Relevant standards work pertinent for the objective to use no-text safety signs include: - ISO 7000 recently updated and published, now contains +2600 symbols.

Comment: These symbols are used primarily to identify features and/or controls. However, some symbols (such as seat belt) can be incorporated and used in creation of 2 panel safety signs.

- ISO 9244 has been adopted by SAE and submitted to ANSI for National Adoption. Revision is planned to update text and to add additional examples of 2 panel no-text safety signs. - ANSI Z535.4 published in 2002, still adheres to use of signal word and panel colors. However reference is made to no text format in international standards. Further plans to harmonize with ISO standards pertaining to safety signs is ongoing. - prEN 474-1 contains examples in Annex C that are not consistent with 2 panel no-text format of ISO 9244, ie they do not show the hazard avoidance. Additional examples consistent with ISO 9244 format are being proposed for final draft. - ISO 3864-1 published in 2002 (corrected version 12-2003) & ISO 3864-2 is at FDIS stage which introduces use of colors for signal word panel and different hazard alert symbol. Comment: this is not considered primary standard for earthmoving machines however it is included as reference in latest prEN 474 along with ISO 9244.




Use of No Text Safety Signs Rational

AEM members are manufacturers of machines, engines, and other components, which are distributed and sold throughout the world. Due to the wide distribution to international markets, equipment has traditionally been provided with markings including control function, service and safety messages in numerous languages to satisfy requirements of the regional markets. Since it is impossible to know the geographical location of a given machine, language skills or even literacy of an operator from day to day, communication of important information to users of equipment is an increasing issue. Multi language requirements are the norm in markets such as Europe but are also increasingly becoming an issue in other markets such as North America where English has been the historical norm. Current international and national accepted standards exist which define format and content of messages used on off-road equipment. These standards have generally evolved from text-based messages, which require translations into the respective languages for a given region. Even when a machine is marked for a given region, users can still be exposed to communication and marking differences due to movement of machines into secondary markets, rental and re-distribution processes which undermine the assumption of a single “‘correct” language for a given machine. To address this issue, standards have been developed to reduce the language sensitivities by the introduction of “pictorials” or “symbols” to replace text messages. These standards are continuing to be refined and updated to use common formats and database of internationally registered symbols for manufactures to use. The evidence of this work is seen in the presence of more and more symbols appearing in all industries including automotive, Ag, earthmoving, forestry, mining, consumer goods and even public safety. Use of industry accepted and recognized symbols in lieu of text safety signs and messages wherever applicable should be a common industry goal. For the above stated reasons, it is recognized that the industry must move from historical text based messages and their limitations to the use of international symbols to better address the diversity of customers and to make the equipment more flexible and user friendly to an increasing multi-language work force. SAE, ANSI and ISO standards are being harmonized to recognize the use and format of no-text messages. The intent of this AEM rational is to encourage the transition to no-text messages and to promote their commonality among manufactures.

title: sae conag council adoption of iso standards american.pdf · 2004-05-27 · title: sae conag...

Documents