Actually, when it comes to conveyor safety, the answer is no. Without guidelines from OSHA, manufacturers and users looking to keep workers out of harm's way are on their own.
Drive a lift truck or operate an overhead crane, and there are pages and pages of OSHA safety standards to protect you. The same is true if you're securing trucks or trailers to a loading dock or unloading crates of orange juice in a grocery stockroom. And if "work" means deboning a chicken or sitting in front of a computer terminal, OSHA has rules in place for preventing injuries to your wrists or your eyes. But if you work with or around conveyors, you're on your own.
Conveyors are at the same time one of the most useful and one of the most dangerous pieces of equipment in the DC. Between 9,000 and 10,000 accidents—and 30 to 40 deaths—are attributed to conveyors each year. Even so, OSHA has never enacted its own conveyor safety standards. Instead, the agency relegates conveyor safety to its general duty clause section, a kind of generic section of the Occupational Health and Safety Act that addresses areas not covered by any specific standard.
George Schultz thinks that's unacceptable. "If OSHA had done something in 1970 when it initially considered the issue, it could have reduced conveyor accidents by 50 percent," says Schultz, who is vice president of Siebert Engineers in Lombard, Ill., and the author of a book titled, appropriately enough, Conveyor Safety. Indeed, Schultz has spent the last three decades trying to change attitudes and persuade the industry to adopt professional standards.
Without OSHA's leadership, Schultz charges, what's left is an industry with very little incentive to focus on worker safety. "Presently, there is only one book written on conveyor safety, two videotapes and a limited number of training classes available on the subject," he says. "Never in my 55 years in the industry have I been hired by anyone to look at the safety of their conveyors."
That leadership void has left manufacturers struggling to regulate their own activities. The major manufacturers meet regularly in such bodies as the Conveyor Equipment Manufacturers Association (CEMA) to stay on top of safety trends. "As a member of CEMA, we get an industrywide picture of safety issues associated with conveyors," says Chuck Waddle, executive vice president for FKI Logistex's automation division.
12 simple rules for updating your safety program
Steering clear of belts that buckle is not enough. To ensure safe conveyor operation, the FFVA Mutual Insurance Co., based in Orlando, Fla., has come up with these 12 basic rules for safe conveyor operation:
1. Don't perform service on a conveyor until the motor disconnect is locked out.
2. Service conveyors only with authorized maintenance personnel.
3. Keep clothing, fingers, hair and other parts of the body away from the conveyor.
4. Don't climb, step, sit or ride on a conveyor at any time.
5. Don't load the conveyor outside of the design limits.
6. Don't remove or alter conveyor guards or safety devices.
7. Know the location and function of all stop/start controls.
8. Keep all stopping/starting control devices free from obstructions.
9. Make sure all personnel are clear of the conveyor before starting.
10. Operate conveyors with trained personnel only.
11. Keep the area around conveyors clear of obstructions.
12. Report all unsafe practices to a supervisor.
But the fact remains, all the manufacturers have to fall back on right now is the voluntary ANSI B20.1 "specification" standard, which represents the most comprehensive safety standard available today. Under the standard, the responsibility for safety is divided among the owner, management or engineering consultant, the manufacturer (which must build its equipment to the ANSI specification), the installer and the operator or user of the equipment. As a practical matter, everyone—and no one— is responsible.
Safe at any speed?
In the absence of official standards, manufacturers are doing what they can to ensure safe design. Tom Carbott, senior director of sales at the Material Handling Industry of America, a trade group based in Charlotte, N.C., reports that conveyor manufacturers are trying to "progressively make enhancements that will reduce the risk of accidents posed by conveyors."
Waddle says that so far, it's working. "While there haven't been any recent big leaps in design when it comes to safety, there's been a gradual increase in safety features over the past 10 years," he says. "We have fewer claims and injuries than we did even five years ago."
Certainly, as conveyors become more automated, there's less need for humans to come in contact with the equipment. "Increased conveyor automation can many times eliminate the need for operators to interface directly with conveyor equipment," says Boyce Bonham, manager of the technology center at Hytrol Conveyor Co., based in Jonesboro, Ark.
Another advance in safety has been the introduction of 24-volt-powered conveyors, adds Ken Bobick, global product manager at Interroll of Wilmington, N.C. "The 24-volt product has low power, with a low current, and can be stopped with a hand," he says. The 24-volt models typically compete with mechanically driven equipment (i.e., beltdriven or line-shaft conveyors). The 24-volt equipment works by controlling individual sections of a conveyor. Power consumption is reduced because it's only used when needed.
Another design enhancement that makes the equipment safer is the zero pressure feature. "The advantage to zeropressure conveyors is that they don't run continuously, so there's no motion if none is required," explains Bobick. Reduced motion, he says, means reduced chances for accidents. Zero pressure systems use photo eyes mounted in various places to sense the presence or absence of packages. This allows the systems to keep packages spaced out to avoid collisions.
Hytrol's zero pressure system also includes jam protection, which prevents back pressure in jammed conditions. "This often allows the equipment to clear jams without operator assistance," says Bonham, "and that certainly lessens the difficulty of clearing a jam if operator assistance is needed, making the operation safer."
Manufacturers also offer guards, covers and panels aimed at keeping end users from making contact with moving parts like chains, gears or "nip points." (A "nip point" is the point at which an element of the conveyor machinery moving in a line or rotating meets another element that is moving in a line in a manner that makes it possible to nip, pinch or entrap an object coming in contact with one of the two elements.) They'll also provide warning labels that graphically illustrate hazards associated with conveyors. Most manufacturers encourage their customers to display these labels in a prominent place.
Getting smart about safety
Yet warning labels cannot compensate for unsafe behavior. End users must do their part to keep employees safe. Too often, that doesn't happen. "Very few customers inquire about the equipment's safety features," says Waddle."Buyers just assume we meet 'OSHA requirements' and don't ask anything else."
In some cases, buyers even reject the most basic of safety features, says Waddle. "Many customers don't want emergency stops that turn off the entire system," he says. Without that feature, they cannot react to an emergency simply by hitting a button that shuts down the system. Instead, they have to figure out which emergency stop they need in the heat of the moment.
Schultz adds that very few users install warning lights or buzzers to let employees know when a conveyor is going to start up. "Probably 90 percent of conveyors don't have warnings to alert users about startup," he says.
What Schultz and others would like to drive home to end users is that investing in the many types of guarding systems is essential, as is ensuring they are installed and used properly. Users must also make sure the equipment meets the job requirements. "Only use a conveyor in an application that fits within its specific design parameter," says Bonham.
The bottom line is that while conveyor manufacturers must do their part to minimize potential hazards associated with conveyor operation, in the end, the onus of conveyor safety falls on the user. Until OSHA issues its own specific conveyor safety standards, Schultz says, "the responsibility will never really be pinned down. And safety information will never be passed around as it should be."
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."