Machine Safety: Who is responsible for international standards?

A lot of work has gone into harmonizing international machine standards but a dilemma still exists – who is responsible? Ensure you know the answer.

03/26/2014


A lot of work has gone into harmonizing international standards but a dilemma still exists – who is responsible? International standards have been the subject of many articles and blogs over time. I have authored several for Control Engineering, and I’ve participated in both domestic and international standards committees for more than 10 years. 

Machine safety compliance and enforcement comparisons, Control Engineering Machine Safety Blog, J.B. Titus

It’s my experience that international standards are heavily influenced by the concentrated countries of Europe because typically each country has one vote. Europe is also heavily influenced by law, which for them is called the Machinery Directive. The U.S. machine safety standard outlook is a bit complex. However, OSHA is first in line for U.S. enforcement. OSHA is then backed up by a court system for litigation. Then, overshadowing our entire system are influences like due diligence, best-in-class, workers compensation, insurance, and other considerations.

Here’s the deal as I see it. It doesn't really matter if machine safety “enforcement” is first in line or in the background. However, enforcement does matter when it comes to applying the standard to a given machine within a country. Case in point: The international standards in which I have been involved explain in their scope section that they are written for the “designers” as first in line. Why? In my opinion the Machinery Directive considers original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and engineering firms as the suppliers of machinery, and those companies have the designers. Therefore, the machine “designers” have compliance responsibility.

But, in the U.S., OSHA clearly states that its regulations targets manufacturers, which we say are the end users (of machinery). OSHA states that every employer must have a safe work place. Great! So, when OSHA visits an OEM representatives inspect the manufacturing but they don’t inspect the machine that they’re manufacturing. In the U.S., that machine is only possibly inspected once it’s installed at an end user’s facility. Therefore, first in line for enforcement in the U.S. is the end user, many of which do not have machine “designers.”

Who is responsible in the U.S. when a company chooses to follow and adopt an international standard (IEC, ISO, etc.) when that standard states that “designers” shall comply? For enforcement purposes, what if a particular end user doesn’t have “designer” responsibility or capability? Consultants in these situations sometimes advise end user companies to include these responsibilities in purchasing contracts to transfer the responsibility up stream. There are other solutions also, but most of them involve contracts and legal resources to help mold the application and enforcement of an international standard to the U.S. model of enforcement. In contrast (and to harmonize with international standards), over the past 10 years many of our domestic standards have been updating the “responsibility” for compliance to include upstream resources, like OEMs.

I believe it’s still a work in progress!

J.B. Titus, CFSEHas this presented you with any new perspectives? Do you have some specific topic or interest that we could cover in future blog posts? Add your comments or thoughts to the discussion by submitting your ideas, experiences, and challenges in the comments section below.

Related articles:

Machine Safety: ISO 13849-1 is mandatory for conformity to the Machinery Directive in Europe but in the USA?

Machine Safety: Domestic U.S. versus international standards

EHS Today: The Buzz About ISO 13849-1: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (and a Possible Alternate Solution) by Mike Carlson.

Inside Machines: Does adopting ISO 13849-1:2006 change the U.S. model for compliance and enforcement?

Contact: http://www.jbtitus.com for “Solutions for Machine Safety”.



No comments
The Top Plant program honors outstanding manufacturing facilities in North America. View the 2013 Top Plant.
The Product of the Year program recognizes products newly released in the manufacturing industries.
The Engineering Leaders Under 40 program identifies and gives recognition to young engineers who...
The true cost of lubrication: Three keys to consider when evaluating oils; Plant Engineering Lubrication Guide; 11 ways to protect bearing assets; Is lubrication part of your KPIs?
Contract maintenance: 5 ways to keep things humming while keeping an eye on costs; Pneumatic systems; Energy monitoring; The sixth 'S' is safety
Transport your data: Supply chain information critical to operational excellence; High-voltage faults; Portable cooling; Safety automation isn't automatic
Case Study Database

Case Study Database

Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Plant Engineering case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.

These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.

Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.

Maintaining low data center PUE; Using eco mode in UPS systems; Commissioning electrical and power systems; Exploring dc power distribution alternatives
Synchronizing industrial Ethernet networks; Selecting protocol conversion gateways; Integrating HMIs with PLCs and PACs
Why manufacturers need to see energy in a different light: Current approaches to energy management yield quick savings, but leave plant managers searching for ways of improving on those early gains.

Annual Salary Survey

Participate in the 2013 Salary Survey

In a year when manufacturing continued to lead the economic rebound, it makes sense that plant manager bonuses rebounded. Plant Engineering’s annual Salary Survey shows both wages and bonuses rose in 2012 after a retreat the year before.

Average salary across all job titles for plant floor management rose 3.5% to $95,446, and bonus compensation jumped to $15,162, a 4.2% increase from the 2010 level and double the 2011 total, which showed a sharp drop in bonus.

2012 Salary Survey Analysis

2012 Salary Survey Results

Maintenance and reliability tips and best practices from the maintenance and reliability coaches at Allied Reliability Group.
The One Voice for Manufacturing blog reports on federal public policy issues impacting the manufacturing sector. One Voice is a joint effort by the National Tooling and Machining...
The Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals an organization devoted...
Join this ongoing discussion of machine guarding topics, including solutions assessments, regulatory compliance, gap analysis...
IMS Research, recently acquired by IHS Inc., is a leading independent supplier of market research and consultancy to the global electronics industry.
Maintenance is not optional in manufacturing. It’s a profit center, driving productivity and uptime while reducing overall repair costs.
The Lachance on CMMS blog is about current maintenance topics. Blogger Paul Lachance is president and chief technology officer for Smartware Group.