30 C.F.R. § 77.410

Mobile equipment; automatic warning devices

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Mobile equipment such as front-end loaders, forklifts, tractors, graders, and trucks, except pickup trucks with an unobstructed rear view, shall be equipped with a warning device that—

(1) Gives an audible alarm when the equipment is put in reverse; or

(2) Uses infrared light, ultrasonic waves, radar, or other effective devices to detect objects or persons at the rear of the equipment, and sounds an audible alarm when a person or object is detected. This type of discriminating warning device shall—

(i) Have a sensing area of a sufficient size that would allow endangered persons adequate time to get out of the danger zone.

(ii) Give audible and visual alarms inside the operator's compartment and an audible alarm outside of the operator's compartment when a person or object is detected in the sensing area; and

(iii) When the equipment is put in reverse, activate and give a one-time audible and visual alarm inside the operator's compartment and a one-time audible alarm outside the operator's compartment.

(b) Alarms shall be audible above the surrounding noise levels.

(c) Warning devices shall be maintained in functional condition.

(d) An automatic reverse-activated strobe light may be substituted for an audible alarm when mobile equipment is operated at night.

[54 FR 30517, July 20, 1989]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1975–2015 · leading case: Lucas Coal Co. v. Interior Bd. of Mine Operations Appeals, 522 F.2d 581 (3rd Cir. 1975).
Lucas Coal Co. v. Interior Bd. of Mine Operations Appeals, 522 F.2d 581 (3rd Cir. 1975). “30 C.F.R. § 77.410 (1974), promulgated by the Secretary pursuant to § 101 of the Act, 30 U.”
Power Fuels, LLC v. Fed. Mine Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 777 F.3d 214 (4th Cir. 2015). “See 30 C.F.R. § 77.410 (c), 77.1605(b). The agency assessed a civil penalty of one hundred dollars for each citation.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.