aem/cece/cema/kocema joint technical liaison meeting … · aem/cece/cema/kocema joint technical...

AEM/CECE/CEMA/KOCEMA Joint Technical Liaison Meeting Las Vegas – 25 & 26 March 2002

AGENDA ITEM: 6.1.1 Preparation date: 19 February 2002 By: Gerald H. Ritterbusch of 1

Title: ANSI update and status of National Standards Strategy

Statement of Issue: To provide documentation of the standardsstandards development bodies in the United States for use by all

Background: The standards development process in the USA hadone sector by sector. ANSI, American National Standards Institstandards developers, (SAE, ASME, IEEE, ASTM, etc.), industryinterested parties that support the need for a voluntary, private sedevelopment process. Because of this sectoral approach, it can coherence and coordination that exists. Thus, the membership osimple document that describes the key elements of the standardbe beneficial to all.

Alternatives/Options: To continue without a strategy increases into the process. The USA system is particularly confusing to stain other countries where there generally is a process that is clearstandards body, (BSI, DIN, JIS, etc.). The only desired option wadocument so that all can gain an understanding of the standards

Pro’s and Con’s: The key pro elements of the strategy are that tprocess is: one where decisions are reached through consensus,affected interests, there is balance between the competing intereto those with an interest, there is due process such that all views possible, the process is flexible to meet the needs of the sectors,produce standards when needed, and, there is coherence to avopro results are that standards are: relevant to the needs of the mthe real world needs, and, they are performance-based specifyingrather than detailed designs. The con’s are that not every aspects fits every situation in standastrategy doesn’t replace intelligent thinking to produce the neede Proposed Resolution: That all JTLM participants review the Natuse in their participation in standards development processes. Annex: The National Standards Strategy is available on the ANSI websitehttp://web.ansi.org/public/nss.html

Action Information X

Page 1 of 1

strategy of ANSI and the entities in the USA.

s been one of diversity and ute, is a Federation of many , government and other ctor led standards

be difficult to understand the f ANSI concluded that a s strategy in the USA would

the confusion for new entrants ndards developer participants ly focused through the national s to prepare the strategy development process.

he standards development participation is open to all sts, the process is transparent are considered and appeals the process is timely to id overlap and conflict. The arket, they are responsive to essential characteristics

rds development. Thus, the d standards.

ional Standards Strategy for

at:


AGENDA ITEM: 6.1.2 Preparation date: 2002 March 11 By: Stan Mullins

Title: SAE update on national adoption of international stan

Statement of Issue: 1. US national adoption of ISO standards 2. Elimination of duplicate or conflicting SAE standards

Background: The SAE Construction, Agricultural & Off-Road Machinery (committees have work in process of adopting technically snational standards. Existing duplicate or conflicting SAE scancelled or revised. The current mode of operation is to idISO standard using the designation SAE J/ISO xxxxx with xnumber. Scope differences are being explained on a SAE ‘cpublished ISO document. Revision of Operating Procedures in the last year to streamaccelerate the pace of ‘national adoptions’. Additionally, clobetween the US ISO TAGs and the SAE committees are bein

Status: See SAE data included in report for agenda item 8.3.1 for stAlso attached is a listing of published SAE national standarSummary of national adoption progress to date is: Number ISO documents related to SAE ConAg scope of work

121

ISO documents ready for national adoption

64

ISO documents submitted to SAE

57

ISO documents approved by ConAg Council

38

J/ISO documents published by SAE

29

dards


Page 1 of 1

ConAg) Council and its ound ISO standards as SAE tandards are being either entically adopt an acceptable xxxx being the ISO document over page’ attached to the as-

line the process should ser working relationships g implemented.

atus of specific documents. ds.

Percentage 100

53

47

31

24

J-Report Listing for ConAg Council Committeeas of March 7, 2002

Page 1

ConAg Counci CommitteeReport: G:\cognos\impromptu\reports\ssa\phyllis\j-reports ConAg Cmtes avl.imr

Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJ31_198603 01-MAR-1986 Hydraulic Backhoe Lift Capacity TECMTCS3

01-MAR-1986J38_199108 01-AUG-1991 Lift Arm Support Device for Loaders TECMTCS3

01-AUG-1991J43_198802 01-FEB-1988 Axle Application Load Rating for Industrial Wheel Loaders and Backhoe

LoadersTECMTCS3

01-FEB-1988J48_199305 01-MAY-1993 Guidelines for Liquid Level Indicators TECMTCS7J49_198804 01-APR-1988 Specification Definitions--Hydraulic Backhoes TECMTCS3

01-APR-1988J67_199807 01-JUL-1998 Shovel Dipper, Clam Bucket, and Dragline Bucket Rating TECORMS31

01-JUL-1998J88_199504 01-APR-1995 Sound Measurement--Off-Road Work Machines--Exterior TECMTCS2

01-APR-1995J95_198603 01-MAR-1986 Headlamps for Industrial Equipmenths*HS-34/00* TECOPTCS3

01-MAR-1986J96_198603 01-MAR-1986 Flashing Warning Lamp for Industrial Equipment*HS-34/00* TECOPTCS3

01-MAR-1986J98_199211 25-NOV-1992 Personnel Protection for General Purpose Industrial Machines TECOPTCS1

25-NOV-1992J99_198603 01-MAR-1986 Lighting and Marking of Industrial Equipment on Highways*HS-34/00* TECOPTCS3

01-MAR-1986J115_199502 01-FEB-1995 Safety Signs TECHFS2

01-FEB-1995J153_198705 01-MAY-1987 Operator Precautions TECHFS6

01-MAY-1987J154_199206 01-JUN-1992 Operator Space Envelope Dimensions for Off-Road Machines TECHFS5

01-JUN-1992J159_199404 01-APR-1994 Load Moment System TECORMS31

01-APR-1994J167_199204 01-APR-1992 Overhead Protection for Agricultural Tractors-Test Procedures and

Performance RequirementsTECATSC

01-APR-1992J169_198503 01-MAR-1985 Design Guidelines for Air Conditioning Systems for Off-Road Operator

EnclosuresTECHFS6

01-MAR-1985J176_199412 01-DEC-1994 Fast Fill Fueling Installation for Off-Road Self-Propelled Work Machines TECMTCS7J180_200201 31-JAN-2002 Electrical Charging Systems for Off Highway Work Machines TECCTTS2

31-JAN-2002J185_198806 01-JUN-1988 Access Systems for Off-Road Machines TECHFS5

01-JUN-1988J209_198701 01-JAN-1987 Instrument Face Design and Location for Construction and Industrial

EquipmentTECHFS2

01-JAN-1987J214_198603 01-MAR-1986 Hydraulic Cylinder Test Procedure TECCTTS1

01-MAR-1986J220_199807 01-JUL-1998 Crane Boomstop TECORMS31

01-JUL-1998J226_199506 01-JUN-1995 Engine Preheaters TECCTTS4

01-JUN-1995J232_199404 01-APR-1994 Industrial Rotary Mowers TECOPTCS1


Page 2


Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJ232_199404 01-APR-1994 Industrial Rotary Mowers TECOPTCS1J276_199211 01-NOV-1992 Steering Frame Lock for Articulated Loaders and Tractors TECOPTCS1

01-NOV-1992J283_199911 22-NOV-1999 Test Procedure for Measuring Hydraulic Lift Capacity on Agricultural

Tractors Equipped with Three-point HitchTECATSC1

22-NOV-1999J284_199101 01-JAN-1991 Safety Alert Symbol for Agricultural, Construction and Industrial EquipmentTECHFS2

01-JAN-1991J297_199408 01-AUG-1994 Operator Controls on Industrial Equipment TECHFS1

01-AUG-1994J321_199905 24-MAY-1999 Tire Guards for Operator Protection--Earthmoving Haulage Machines TECOPTCS1

24-MAY-1999J326_198603 01-MAR-1986 Nomenclature—Hydraulic Backhoes TECMTCS3

01-MAR-1986J371_199305 01-MAY-1993 Drain, Fill, and Level Plugs for Off-Road, Self-Propelled Work Machines TECMTCS7J375_199404 01-APR-1994 Radius-of-Load or Boom Angle Indicating Systems TECORMS31

01-APR-1994J376_198504 01-APR-1985 Load Indicating Devices in Lifting Crane Service TECORMS31

01-APR-1985J386_199711 01-NOV-1997 Operator Restraint System for Off-Road Work Machines TECHFS4

01-NOV-1997J397_199510 01-OCT-1995 Deflection Limiting Volume—Protective Structures Laboratory Evaluation TECOPTCS4

01-OCT-1995J572_199812 23-DEC-1998 Requirements for Sealed Lighting Unit for Construction and Industrial

MachinesTECOPTCS3

23-DEC-1998J708_199902 01-SEP-1999 Agricultural Tractor Test Code TECATSC1

01-SEP-1999J709_197705 01-MAY-1977 Agricultural Tractor Tire Loadings, Torque Factors, and Inflation Pressures TECATSC

01-MAY-1977J711_199103 01-MAR-1991 Tire Selection Tables for Agricultural Tractors of Future Design TECATSC

01-MAR-1991J712_199911 22-NOV-1999 Industrial and Agricultural Disc Wheels TECATSC

22-NOV-1999J714_199304 01-APR-1993 Wheel Mounting Elements for Industrial and Agricultural Disc Wheels TECATSC

01-APR-1993J716_199103 01-MAR-1991 Application of Hydraulic Remote Control to Agricultural Tractors and

Trailing Type Agricultural ImplementsTECATSC

01-MAR-1991J725_199103 01-MAR-1991 Mounting Brackets and Socket for Warning Lamp and Slow-Moving

Vehicle (SMV) Identification Emblem*HS-34/00*TECATSC

01-MAR-1991J731_198502 01-FEB-1985 Component Nomenclature--Loader TECMTCS1

01-FEB-1985J732_199206 01-JUN-1992 Specification Definitions—Loaders TECMTCS1

01-JUN-1992J737_198908 01-AUG-1989 Hole Spacing for Scraper and Dozer Cutting Edges TECMTCS6

01-AUG-1989J738_198606 01-JUN-1986 Cutting Edge—Double Bevel Cross Sections TECMTCS8

01-JUN-1986J739_199106 01-JUN-1991 Cutting Edge—Curved Grader TECMTCS6


Page 3


Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJ739_199106 01-JUN-1991 Cutting Edge—Curved Grader TECMTCS6J740_198607 01-JUL-1986 Countersunk Square Holes for Cutting Edges and End Bits TECMTCS6

01-JUL-1986J741_199306 08-JUN-1993 Capacity Rating—Scraper, Open Bowl TECMTCS1

08-JUN-1993J744_199606 01-JUN-1996 Hydraulic Pump and Motor Mounting and Drive Dimensions TECCTTS1

01-JUN-1996J745_199609 01-SEP-1996 Hydraulic Power Pump Test Procedure TECCTTS1

01-SEP-1996J746_199609 01-SEP-1996 Hydraulic Motor Test Procedures TECCTTS1

01-SEP-1996J747_199005 01-MAY-1990 Control Valve Test Procedure TECCTTS1

01-MAY-1990J748_198603 01-MAR-1986 Hydraulic Directional Control Valves, 3000 psi Maximum TECCTTS1

01-MAR-1986J751_199704 01-APR-1997 Off-Road Tire and Rim Classification—Construction Machines TECMTCS8

01-APR-1997J753_199105 23-MAY-1991 Maintenance Interval Chart TECMTCS7J754_197201 01-JAN-1972 Lubricant Types—Construction and Industrial Machinery TECCTTS1

01-JAN-1972J764_199508 01-AUG-1995 Loading Ability Test Procedure--Scrapers TECOPTCS4

01-AUG-1995J765_199010 01-OCT-1990 Crane Load Stability Test Code TECORMS31

01-OCT-1990J817/1_199103 01-MAR-1991 Engineering Design Serviceability Guidelines Construction and Industrial

Machinery Serviceability Definitions Off-Road Work machinesTECMTCS7

J817/2_199103 01-MAR-1991 Engineering Design Serviceability Guidelines Construction and IndustrialMachinery Maintainability Index Off-Road Work Machines

TECMTCS7

J818_198705 01-MAY-1987 Rated Operating Load for Loaders TECMTCS101-MAY-1987

J819_199511 01-NOV-1995 Engine Cooling System Field Test (Air-to-Boil) TECOPTCS101-NOV-1995

J820_199807 01-JUL-1998 Crane Hoist Line Speed and Power Test Code TECORMS3101-JUL-1998

J821_199406 01-JUN-1994 Electrical Wiring Systems for Construction, Agricultural and TECCTTS201-JUN-1994

J833_198905 01-MAY-1989 Human Physical Dimensions TECHFS501-MAY-1989

J872_198605 01-MAY-1986 Drawbar Test Procedure for Construction, Forestry and Industrial MachinesTECMTCS101-MAY-1986

J873_199502 01-FEB-1995 Drag Force Test Procedure for Construction, Forestry, and IndustrialMachines

TECMTCS1

01-FEB-1995J881_198502 01-FEB-1985 Lifting Crane Sheave and Drum Sizes TECORMS31

01-FEB-1985J884_199103 01-MAR-1991 Liquid Ballast Table for Drive Tires of Agricultural Tractors TECATSC

01-MAR-1991J896_198305 01-MAY-1983 Mounting Flanges for Engine Accessory Drives TECMTCS5

01-MAY-1983J897_198510 01-OCT-1985 Machine Slope Operation Test Code TECMTCS1

01-OCT-1985


Page 4


Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJ898_199410 01-OCT-1994 Control Locations for Off-Road Work Machines TECHFS1

01-OCT-1994J899_198812 01-DEC-1988 Operator's Seat Dimensions for Off-Road Self-Propelled Work machines TECHFS4

01-DEC-1988J919_199504 01-APR-1995 Sound Measurement--Off-Road Work Machines--Operator--Singular Type TECMTCS2

01-APR-1995J920_198509 01-SEP-1985 Technical Publications for Off-Road Work Machines TECMTCS7J925_199306 08-JUN-1993 Minimum Service Access Dimensions for Off-Road Machines TECMTCS7J930_199506 01-JUN-1995 Storage Batteries for Off-Road Self-Propelled Work Machines TECCTTS2

01-JUN-1995J931_198603 01-MAR-1986 Hydraulic Power Circuit Filtration TECCTTS1

01-MAR-1986J957_199306 08-JUN-1993 Capacity Rating--Elevating Scrapers TECMTCS1

08-JUN-1993J958_198906 01-JUN-1989 Nomenclature and Dimensions for Crane Shovels TECORMS31

01-JUN-1989J959_199105 01-MAY-1991 Lifting Crane, Wire-Rope Strength Factors TECORMS31

01-MAY-1991J974_199306 10-JUN-1993 Flashing Warning Lamp for Agricultural Equipment*HS-34/00* TECATSC

10-JUN-1993J975_199306 10-JUN-1993 Headlamps for Agricultural Equipment*HS-34/00* TECATSC

10-JUN-1993J983_199810 01-OCT-1998 Crane and Cable Excavator Basic Operating Control Arrangements TECORMS31

01-OCT-1998J987_199404 05-APR-1994 Rope Supported Lattice-Type Boom Crane Structures—-Method of Test TECORMS31

05-APR-1994J990_198703 01-MAR-1987 Nomenclature--Industrial and Agricultural Mowers TECMTCS3

01-MAR-1987J994_199308 03-AUG-1993 Alarm--Backup--Electric Laboratory Performance Testing TECSLS6

03-AUG-1993J999_199807 01-JUL-1998 Crane Boom Hoist Disengaging Device TECORMS31

01-JUL-1998J1001_198703 01-MAR-1987 Industrial Flail Mowers and Power Rakes TECOPTCS1

01-MAR-1987J1008_198701 01-JAN-1987 Sound Measurement—Self-Propelled Agricultural Equipment—-Exterior TECSLS1

01-JAN-1987J1012_199306 28-JUN-1993 Operator Enclosure Pressurization System Test Procedure TECHFS6

28-JUN-1993J1013_199208 01-AUG-1992 Measurement of Whole Body Vibration of the Seated Operator of

Off-Highway Work MachinesTECHFS4

01-AUG-1992J1014_199506 01-JUN-1995 Classification and Nomenclature Towing Winch for Skidders and Crawler

TractorsTECMTCS4

01-JUN-1995J1015_199505 01-MAY-1995 Ton Kilometer Per Hour Test Procedure TECMTCS8

01-MAY-1995J1017_198601 01-JAN-1986 Nomenclature—Rollers and Compactors TECMTCS2

01-JAN-1986J1024_198912 01-DEC-1989 Fuel-Fired Heaters—Air Heating—For Construction and Industrial Machinery TECCTTS4

01-DEC-1989


Page 5


Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJ1028_199810 01-OCT-1998 Mobile Crane Working Area Definitions TECORMS31

01-OCT-1998J1029_199609 01-SEP-1996 Lighting and Marking of Construction, Earthmoving Machinery TECOPTCS3

01-SEP-1996J1032_198704 01-APR-1987 Definitions for Machine Availability (Off-Road Work Machines) TECMTCS7J1040_199405 01-MAY-1994 Performance Criteria for Rollover Protective Structures (ROPS) for

Construction, Earthmoving, Forestry, and Mining MachinesTECOPTCS4

01-MAY-1994J1042_199306 01-JUN-1993 Operator Protection for General-Purpose Industrial Machines TECOPTCS1

01-JUN-1993J1051_199309 01-SEP-1993 Force-Deflection Measurements of Cushioned Components of seats for

off- Road Work MachinesTECHFS4

01-SEP-1993J1063_199311 18-NOV-1993 Cantilevered Boom Crane Structures Method of Test TECORMS31

18-NOV-1993J1069_198106 01-JUN-1981 Oil Change System for Quick Service of Off-Road Self-Propelled Work

MachinesTECMTCS7

J1071_198506 01-JUN-1985 Operator Controls for Graders TECHFS101-JUN-1985

J1078_199404 05-APR-1994 A Recommended Method of Analytically Determining the Competence ofHydraulic Telescopic Cantilevered Crane Booms

TECORMS31

05-APR-1994J1083_198507 01-JUL-1985 Unauthorized Starting or Movement of Machines TECOPTCS1

01-JUL-1985J1084_198004 01-APR-1980 Operator Protective Structure Performance Criteria for certain forestry

EquipmentTECMTCS4

01-APR-1980J1091_199611 01-NOV-1996 Earthmoving Machinery-Operator's Field of View TECHFS5

01-NOV-1996J1092_199308 01-AUG-1993 Nomenclature--Industrial Tractors (General Purpose Wheel) TECMTCS3

01-AUG-1993J1093_199403 01-MAR-1994 Latticed Crane Boom Systems--Analytical Procedure TECORMS31

01-MAR-1994J1098_199505 01-MAY-1995 Ton Kilometer Per Hour Application TECMTCS8

01-MAY-1995J1105_198909 01-SEP-1989 Horn Forward Warning Electric Performance, Test, and Application TECSLS6

01-SEP-1989J1109_199306 28-JUN-1993 Component Nomenclature—Articulated Log Skidder, Rubber-Tired TECMTCS4

28-JUN-1993J1110_199306 28-JUN-1993 Specification Definitions—Articulated Rubber-Tired Log Skidder TECMTCS4

28-JUN-1993J1111_199402 05-FEB-1994 Component Nomenclature Skidder-Grapple TECMTCS4

05-FEB-1994J1112_199402 05-FEB-1994 Specification Definitions—Skidder-Grapple TECMTCS4

05-FEB-1994J1116_199903 01-MAR-1999 Categories of Off-Road Self-Propelled Work Machines TECC

01-MAR-199901-MAR-1999

J1117_198603 01-MAR-1986 Method of Measuring and Reporting the Pressure differential-Flowcharacteristics of a Hydraulic Fluid Power Valve

TECCTTS1

01-MAR-1986


Page 6


Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJ1119_198812 01-DEC-1988 Steel Products for Rollover Protective Structures (ROPS) and Falling

Object Protective Structures (FOPS)TECOPTCS4

01-DEC-1988J1150_199707 01-JUL-1997 Terminology for Agricultural Equipment TECATSC

01-JUL-1997J1158_199606 01-JUN-1996 Specification Definitions—Winches for Crawler Tractors and Skidders TECMTCS4

01-JUN-1996J1163_199708 01-AUG-1997 Determining Seat Index Point TECHFS4

01-AUG-1997J1165_198603 01-MAR-1986 Reporting Cleanliness Levels of Hydraulic Fluids TECCTTS1

01-MAR-1986J1166_199810 01-OCT-1998 Sound Measurement—Off-Road Self-Propelled Work Machines

Operator-Work CycleTECSLS1

01-OCT-1998J1176_198603 01-MAR-1986 External Leakage Classifications for Hydraulic Systems *HS-150/2000* TECCTTS1

01-MAR-1986J1177_198806 01-JUN-1988 Hydraulic Excavator Operator Controls TECMTCS5

01-JUN-1988J1179_199002 01-FEB-1990 Hydraulic Excavator and Backhoe Digging Forces TECMTCS5

01-FEB-1990J1180_198010 01-OCT-1980 Telescopic Boom Length Indicating System TECORMS31

01-OCT-1980J1194_199911 22-NOV-1999 Rollover Protective Structures (ROPS) for Wheeled Agricultural Tractors TECATSC

22-NOV-1999J1197_199102 01-FEB-1991 Rated Operating Load for Loaders Equipped with Log or Material Forks

Without Vertical MastTECMTCS1

01-FEB-1991J1209_199408 01-AUG-1994 Identification Terminology of Mobile Forestry Machines TECMTCS4

01-AUG-1994J1212_198501 01-JAN-1985 Fire Prevention on Forestry Equipment TECMTCS4

01-JAN-1985J1227_198603 01-MAR-1986 Assessing Cleanliness of Hydraulic Fluid Power Components and SystemsTECCTTS1

01-MAR-1986J1233_198501 01-JAN-1985 Commercial Literature Specifications--Off-Road Work Machines TECMTCS1

01-JAN-1985J1234_198501 01-JAN-1985 Specification Definitions--Off-Road Work Machines TECMTCS1

01-JAN-1985J1235_198603 01-MAR-1986 Measuring and Reporting the Internal Leakage of a Hydraulic Fluid Power

ValveTECCTTS1

01-MAR-1986J1238_199807 01-JUL-1998 Rating Lift Cranes on Fixed Platforms Operating in the Ocean environmentTECORMS31

01-JUL-1998J1254_199509 01-SEP-1995 Component Nomenclature--Feller Buncher TECMTCS4

01-SEP-1995J1255_199509 01-SEP-1995 Specification Definitions--Feller/Buncher TECMTCS4

01-SEP-1995J1257_198010 01-OCT-1980 Rating Chart for Cantilevered Boom Cranes TECORMS31

01-OCT-1980J1261_198411 01-NOV-1984 Agricultural Tractor Tire Dynamic Indices TECATSC2

01-NOV-1984J1265_198803 01-MAR-1988 Capacity Rating—Dozer Blades TECMTCS1


Page 7


Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJ1265_198803 01-MAR-1988 Capacity Rating—Dozer Blades TECMTCS1J1272_199409 01-SEP-1994 Felling Head Terminology and Nomenclature TECMTCS4

01-SEP-1994J1276_198603 01-MAR-1986 Standardized Fluid for Hydraulic Component Tests TECCTTS1

01-MAR-1986J1277_199007 30-JUL-1990 Method for Assessing the Cleanliness Level of New Hydraulic Fluid TECCTTS1

30-JUL-1990J1283_200007 19-JUL-2000 Electrical Connector for Auxiliary Starting of Construction,Agricultural, and

Off-Road MachineryTECCTTS2

19-JUL-2000J1289_198104 01-APR-1981 Mobile Crane Stability Ratings TECORMS31

01-APR-1981J1295_198906 01-JUN-1989 Identification Terminology and Specification Definitions—Pipelayers and

Side Booms, Tractor or Loader MountedTECMTCS1

01-JUN-1989J1299_199101 01-JAN-1991 Electrical Propulsion Control—Off-Road Dumpers TECMTCS1

01-JAN-1991J1303_198502 01-FEB-1985 Cutting Edge—Cross Sections Loader Straight TECMTCS6

01-FEB-1985J1304_198502 01-FEB-1985 Cutting Edge—Cross Sections Loader Straight with Bolt Holes TECMTCS6

01-FEB-1985J1305_198706 01-JUN-1987 Two-Block Warning and Limit Systems in Lifting Crane Service TECORMS31

01-JUN-1987J1307_198611 01-NOV-1986 Excavator and Backhoe Hand Signals TECMTCS1

01-NOV-1986J1308_199906 01-JUN-1999 Fan Guard for Off-Road Machines TECOPTCS1

01-JUN-1999J1309_199606 01-JUN-1996 Travel Performance and Rating Procedure, Crawler Mounted Hydraulic

Excavators, Material Handlers, Knuckle Boom Log Loaders, and CertainForestry Equipment

TECMTCS1

01-JUN-1996J1310_199306 01-JUN-1993 Electric Engine Preheaters and Battery Warmers for Diesel Engines TECCTTS4

01-JUN-1993J1315_199101 01-JAN-1991 Off-Road Tire and Rim Selection and Application TECMTCS8

01-JAN-1991J1332_198110 01-OCT-1981 Rope Drum Rotation Indicating Device TECORMS31

01-OCT-1981J1333_199003 01-MAR-1990 Hydraulic Cylinder Rod Corrosion Test TECCTTS1

01-MAR-1990J1334_198706 01-JUN-1987 Hydraulic Cylinder Integrity Test TECCTTS1

01-JUN-1987J1335_199004 01-APR-1990 Hydraulic Cylinder No-Load Friction Test TECCTTS1

01-APR-1990J1336_198706 01-JUN-1987 Hydraulic Cylinder Leakage Test TECCTTS1

01-JUN-1987J1337_199705 01-MAY-1997 Off-Road Rim Maintenance Procedures and Service Precautions TECMTCS8

01-MAY-1997J1350_198803 01-MAR-1988 Selection and Application Guidelines for Diesel, Gasoline, and Propane

Fired Liquid Cooled Engine Pre-HeatersTECCTTS4

01-MAR-1988J1353_199504 01-APR-1995 Nomenclature Clam Bunk Skidder TECMTCS4

01-APR-1995


Page 8


Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJ1354_199509 01-SEP-1995 Nomenclature Forwarder TECMTCS4

01-SEP-1995J1356_198802 01-FEB-1988 Performance Criteria for Falling Object Guards for Excavators TECOPTCS4

01-FEB-1988J1360_198709 01-SEP-1987 Product Identification Numbering System of Off-Road Work Machines TECMTCS1

01-SEP-1987J1362_199707 01-JUL-1997 Graphical Symbols for Operator Controls and Displays on Off-Road

Self-Propelled Work MachinesTECMTCS2

01-JUL-1997J1363_199511 01-NOV-1995 Capacity Rating—Dumper Body and Trailer Body TECMTCS1

01-NOV-1995J1366_200006 29-JUN-2000 Rating Lift Cranes Operating on Platforms in the Ocean Environment TECORMS31

29-JUN-2000J1372_198807 13-JUL-1988 Sound Power Determination—Earthmoving Machinery—Static Condition TECSLS1

13-JUL-1988J1374_198505 01-MAY-1985 Hydraulic Cylinder Rod Seal Endurance Test Procedure TECCTTS1

01-MAY-1985J1382_199306 01-JUN-1993 Classification, Nomenclature, and Specification Definitions for Trenching

MachinesTECMTCS3

01-JUN-1993J1384_199306 22-JUN-1993 Vibration Performance Evaluation of Operator Seats TECHFS4

22-JUN-1993J1385_198306 01-JUN-1983 Classification of Earthmoving Machines for Vibration Tests of Operator

SeatsTECHFS4

01-JUN-1983J1386_198601 01-JAN-1986 Classification of Agricultural Wheeled Tractors for Vibration Tests of

Operator SeatsTECHFS4

01-JAN-1986J1388_198506 01-JUN-1985 Personnel Protection—Skid Steer Loaders TECOPTCS1

01-JUN-1985J1422_199611 01-NOV-1996 Fuel Warmer—Diesel Engines TECCTTS4

01-NOV-1996J1440_199309 01-SEP-1993 Off-Road Tire and Rim Classification—Forestry Machines TECMTCS8

01-SEP-1993J1446_198905 01-MAY-1989 On-Machine Alarm Test and Evaluation Procedure for Construction and

General Purpose Industrial MachineryTECSL

01-MAY-1989J1447_198605 01-MAY-1986 Fire-Resistant Fluid Usage in Hydraulic Systems of Off-Road Work

MachinesTECCTTS1

01-MAY-1986J1454_199501 01-JAN-1995 Dynamic Durability Testing of Seat Cushions for Off-Road Work Machines TECHF

01-JAN-1995J1464_198804 01-APR-1988 Identification Terminology of Loaders/Tractors with Forks and Rough

Terrain ForkliftsTECMTCS1

01-APR-1988J1472_199801 01-JAN-1998 Braking Performance Roller Compactors TECOPTCS2

01-JAN-1998J1493_199711 01-NOV-1997 Shielding of Starter System Energization TECOPTCS1

01-NOV-1997J1503_199801 01-JAN-1998 Performance Test for Air-Conditioned, Heated, and Ventilated Off-Road,

Self-Propelled Work MachinesTECHFS6

01-JAN-1998J1511_199402 01-FEB-1994 Steering for Off-Road, Rubber-Tired Machines TECOPTCS1


Page 9


Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJ1511_199402 01-FEB-1994 Steering for Off-Road, Rubber-Tired Machines TECOPTCS1J1518_198606 01-JUN-1986 Three Point Hitch (Type A) Backhoe Personnel Protection TECOPTCS1

01-JUN-1986J1533_199306 14-JUN-1993 Operator Enclosure Air Filter Element Test Procedure TECHFS6

14-JUN-1993J1535_199608 01-AUG-1996 Performance Test for Windshield Defrosting Systems for Off-Road, Self-

Propelled Work MachinesTECHFS6

01-AUG-1996J1544_198801 01-JAN-1988 Revolutions per Mile and Static Loaded Radius for Off-Road Tires TECMTCS8

01-JAN-1988J1559_199507 01-JUL-1995 Measurement of Solar Heating Effect TECHFS6

01-JUL-1995J1581_198909 01-SEP-1989 Cutting Edge—Optional Cross-Sections and Dimensions Loader Straight TECMTCS6

01-SEP-1989J1611_199808 01-AUG-1998 Operator Controls--Horizontal Earthboring Machines TECMTCS9

01-AUG-1998J1614_199803 01-MAR-1998 Wiring Distribution Systems for Construction, Agricultural, and Off-Road

Work MachinesTECCTTS2

01-MAR-1998J1741_199906 01-JUN-1999 Discriminating Back-Up Alarm System Standard TECSLS6

01-JUN-1999J1790_199806 01-JUN-1998 Self- Propelled Sweepers and Scrubbers Steering Requirements

Single-Circuit Hydraulic Servo-Assisted SystemsTECMTCS2

01-JUN-1998J1792/1_199609 01-SEP-1996 Self-Propelled Sweepers—Air Flow Performance Part 1: Suction Air Volume

PerformanceTECMTCS2

01-SEP-1996J1792/2_199609 01-SEP-1996 Self-Propelled Sweepers—Air Flow Performance Part 2: Suction/Blower Fan

PerformanceTECMTCS2

01-SEP-1996J1793_199910 27-OCT-1999 Self-Propelled Sweepers and Scrubbers Tank and Hopper Capacity RatingTECMTCS2

27-OCT-1999J1805_199304 01-APR-1993 Sound Power Level Measurements of Earthmoving Machinery— Static and

In-Place Dynamic MethodsTECMTCS2

01-APR-1993J1810_199301 01-JAN-1993 Electrical Indicating System Specification TECCTTS2

01-JAN-1993J1811_199501 01-JAN-1995 Power Cable Terminals TECCTTS2

01-JAN-1995J1814_199302 01-FEB-1993 Operator Controls—Off-Road Machines TECHFS1

01-FEB-1993J1823_199106 01-JUN-1991 Specification Definitions—Articulated Rubber-Tired Forwarder TECMTCS4

01-JUN-1991J1824_199807 21-JUL-1998 Specification Definitions—Clam Bunk Skidder TECMTCS4

21-JUL-1998J1908_199601 01-JAN-1996 Electrical Grounding Practice*HS-34/00* TECCTTS2

01-JAN-1996J1977_199704 01-APR-1997 Braking Performance-- Rubber-Tired, Self-Propelled Cranes TECOPTCS2

01-APR-1997J2022_200006 15-JUN-2000 Classification, Nomenclature, and Specification Definitions for Horizontal

Earthboring MachinesTECMTCS9

15-JUN-2000


Page 10


Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJ2023_200006 28-JUN-2000 Operating Precautions for Horizontal Earthboring Machines TECMTCS9

28-JUN-2000J2030_199411 01-NOV-1994 Heavy-Duty Electrical Connector Performance Standard TECORMS5G

01-NOV-199401-NOV-1994 TECCTTS201-NOV-1994

J2055_199606 01-JUN-1996 Identification Terminology and Component Nomenclature Knuckle BoomLog Loader

TECMTCS4

01-JUN-1996J2079_199205 01-MAY-1992 Location of Atomizer of Ether Systems for Diesel Engines TECCTTS4

01-MAY-1992J2101_199106 01-JUN-1991 Acoustics—Measurement of Airborne Noise Emitted by Construction

Equipment Intended for Outdoor Use—Method for Determining Compliancewith Noise Limits

TECSLS1

01-JUN-1991J2102_199106 01-JUN-1991 Acoustics--Measurement of Airborne Noise Emitted by earthmoving

machinery--Method for Determining Compliance with Limits for exteriornoise--Stationary Test Condition

TECSLS1

01-JUN-1991J2103_199106 01-JUN-1991 Acoustics--Measurement of Airborne Noise Emitted by Earthmoving

Machinery--Operator's Position--Stationary Testing ConditionTECSLS1

01-JUN-1991J2104_199106 01-JUN-1991 Acoustics--Measurement of Exterior Noise Emitted by Earthmoving

Machinery--Dynamic Test ConditionsTECSLS1

01-JUN-1991J2105_199106 01-JUN-1991 Acoustics -- Measurement of Noise Emitted by Earthmoving Machinery at

the Operator's Position -- Simulated Work Cycle Test ConditionsTECSLS1

01-JUN-1991J2118_199810 01-OCT-1998 Braking Performance--Rubber-Tired Asphalt Pavers TECOPTCS2

01-OCT-1998J2121_199504 01-APR-1995 Requirements for Composite Lighting Assemblies Use on Construction and

Industrial MachineryTECOPTCS3

01-APR-1995J2130_199710 01-OCT-1997 Self-Propelled Sweepers and Cleaning Equipment TECMTCS2

01-OCT-1997J2194_199709 01-SEP-1997 Roll-Over Protective Structures (ROPS) for Wheeled Agricultural Tractors TECATSC

01-SEP-1997J2204_199405 01-MAY-1994 Tire Size Differential—Articulated Wheel Loader TECMTCS8

01-MAY-1994J2292_200010 09-OCT-2000 Combination Pelvic/Upper Torso (Type 2) Operator Restraint Systems for

Off-Road Work MachinesTECHFS4

09-OCT-2000J2305_200201 31-JAN-2002 Safety for Horizontal Earthboring Machines TECMTCS9

31-JAN-2002J2330_199801 01-JAN-1998 Walk-Along Work Machines-Braking Systems-Performance Requirements

and Test ProceduresTECOPTCS2

01-JAN-1998J2331_199611 01-NOV-1996 Operator's Field Of View - Engineering Evaluation TECHFS5

01-NOV-1996J2393_199806 01-JUN-1998 Swing Performance and Rating Procedure, Material Handlers, Knuckle

Boom Log Loaders and Certain Forestry EquipmentTECMTCS4

01-JUN-1998J2417_199806 01-JUN-1998 Lift Capacity Calculation Method Knuckle-Boom Log Loaders and Certain

Forestry EquipmentTECMTCS4


Page 11


Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJ2417_199806 01-JUN-1998 Lift Capacity Calculation Method Knuckle-Boom Log Loaders and Certain

Forestry EquipmentTECMTCS4

J2473_200108 15-AUG-2001 Self-Propelled Sweepers and Scrubbers--Maximum Gradient RatingDuring Hopper Discharge

TECMTCS2

15-AUG-2001J2474_200008 01-AUG-2000 Self Propelled Sweepers and Scrubbers Battery Run-time TECMTCS2

01-AUG-2000J2506_200008 01-AUG-2000 Material Handler Nomenclature TECMTCS5

01-AUG-2000J2513_200006 28-JUN-2000 Earthmoving Machinery--Coupling of Attachments to Skid Steer Loaders TECMTCS1

28-JUN-2000J2542_200105 14-MAY-2001 Self-Propelled Sweepers and Scrubbers Fuel Consumption of

Non-Propulsion Auxiliary EnginesTECMTCS2

14-MAY-2001J2708_199304 01-APR-1993 Agricultural Tractor Test Code (OECD) TECATSC1

01-APR-1993JI3449_199804 01-APR-1998 Earthmoving Machinery--Falling-Object Protective Structures--Laboratory

Tests and Performance RequirementsTECSL

01-APR-1998JI3450_199801 02-JAN-1998 Earthmoving Machinery-Braking Systems of Rubber-Tired Machines -

Systems and Performance Requirements and Test ProceduresTECOPTCS2

02-JAN-1998JI6165_199905 20-MAY-1999 Earthmoving Machinery—Basic Types—Vocabulary TECMTCS1

20-MAY-1999JI6394_199807 01-JUL-1998 Acoustics-Measurement of Airborne Noise Emitted by Earthmoving

Machinery-Operator's Position-Stationary Testing ConditionTECSLS1

01-JUL-1998JI6747_199911 02-NOV-1999 Earth-moving Machinery -- Tractors -- Terminology and commercial

specificationsTECMTCS1

02-NOV-1999JI7132_199707 01-JUL-1997 Earthmoving Machinery-Dumpers-Terminology and Commercial

SpecificationsTECMTCS1

01-JUL-1997JI7133_199707 01-JUL-1997 Earthmoving Machinery-Tractor-Scrapers-Terminology and Commercial


01-JUL-1997JI7134_199707 01-JUL-1997 Earthmoving Machinery-Graders-Terminology and Commerical


01-JUL-1997JI7135_199801 01-JAN-1998 Earthmoving Machinery-Hydraulic Excavators-Terminology and

Commercial SpecificationsTECMTCS5

01-JAN-1998JI7451_199901 01-JAN-1999 Earthmoving Machinery—Volumetric Rating for Backhoe Buckets TECMTCS5

01-JAN-1999JI8813_199709 01-SEP-1997 Earthmoving Machinery--Lift Capacity of Pipelayers and Wheeled Tractors

or Loaders Equipped with Side BoomTECMTCS1

01-SEP-1997JI9614-1_200003 16-MAR-2000 Acoustics -- Determination of sound power levels of noise sources using

sound intensity -- Part 1: Measurement at discrete pointsTECSLS1

16-MAR-2000JI9614-2_200003 16-MAR-2000 Acoustics -- Determination of sound power levels of noise sources using

sound intensity -- Part 2: Measurement by scanningTECSLS1

16-MAR-2000


Page 12


Document Pub Date Title CommitteeJI10265_199903 30-MAR-1999 Earthmoving and other machinery - Crawler Machines - Performance

Requirements and Test Procedures for Braking SystesmTECOPTCS2

30-MAR-1999JI10567_199802 01-FEB-1998 Earth-Moving Machinery---Hydraulic Excavators - Lift Capacity TECMTCS5

01-FEB-1998JI11169_199902 02-FEB-1999 Machinery for Forestry--Wheeled Special Machines--Vocabulary,

Performance Test Methods, and Criteria for Brake SystemsTECOPTCS2

02-FEB-1999JI11512_199603 01-MAR-1996 Machinery for Forestry - Tracked Special Machines - Performance Criteria

for Brake SystemsTECMTCS4

01-MAR-1996JI13200_199806 01-JUN-1998 Cranes-Safety Signs and Hazard Pictorial--General Principles TECHFS2

01-JUN-1998JI13333_199709 01-SEP-1997 Earthmoving Machinery-Dumper body Support and Operators Cab Tilt

SupportTECOPTCS1

01-SEP-1997JI13539_200002 08-FEB-2000 Earthmoving Machinery--Trenchers--Definitions and Commercial


08-FEB-2000


AGENDA ITEM: 6.1.3 Preparation date: 11 March 2002 By: Gerald H. Ritterbusch Page 1 of 1

Title: Use of SAE J1166 – U.S. experiences

Statement of Issue: SAE J1166 is a noise measurement codecycle that is representative of the machine use for the determinan operator. Manufacturers use SAE J1166 to provide informaexposure of their machines.

Background: The OSHA and MSHA regulations require that ethat employees are not exposed to a time weighted noise expoeight hour workday. As employers look to the machine manufapotential noise exposure that can occur with the operation of a develop a standard that could be used to identify the noise exp

Alternatives/Options: The need to be able to specify the noisnecessary specification provided to the customer. As the noisedifferent operating conditions, the typical steady state noise mesufficient to determine the noise level during a working cycle ofusing one or more discreet operating conditions, SAE J 1166 clevel over a machine work cycle. This recorded noise history isrequirements of the OSHA/MSHA limits to determine the allowahour work shift. The optional approach would be for the custommeasurement and then extrapolate that value for the 8-hour wo

Pro’s and Con’s: The measurement over a work cycle provideof the noise level that will be experienced by an operator over acycle is a real working condition use of the machine under test reasonably achievable in many different locations. The con asrepresent all work applications, so that when the application vatest cycle, the customer must include those considerations in thexposure. In reality applications that are greatly different from the use of the machine and thus the test cycle overall providesnoise exposure. Proposed Resolution: As noise exposure becomes of more iworld, the JTLM needs to evaluate if there is merit in developinuse the test cycle from SAE J 1166.


Page 1 of 1

that uses a machine operating ation of the noise exposure of tion to customers on the noise

mployers meet the requirements sure exceeding 90 dB(A) over an cturers for information on the machine, there was a need to osure level from a machine.

e level of a machine is a of a machine can vary with asurement points are not really the machine. Thus, instead of ontinuously records the noise than analyzed according to the ble hours of operation per 8-er to take a discreet noise rk shift.

s a much better representation typical work shift. The test site conditions that are pect is that no test cycle can ries significantly from that in the e determination of the operator

the test cycle are intermittent in a representative evaluate of the

nterest in additional areas of the g an ISO standard that would


AGENDA ITEM: 6.2.1A Preparation date: 01 March 2002 By: R. Dressler & R. Hutchison Page 1 of 1

Page 1 of 1

Title: Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) Report Statement of Issue: This 2002 update is being provided for informational purposes and does not raise any specific issues that require action from this committee. Background:

ROPS For Roller/Compactors: Current OSHA Regulations, unchanged since 1971, do not specifically mandate ROPS on roller/compactors. AEM's Compaction and Paving Machinery Technical Committee (CPMTC) is addressing this issue and has met with the OSHA Construction Directorate to urge updating of the regulations and offer industry help in developing detailed requirements.

Noise and Crystalline Silica Exposure: OSHA has placed both hearing conservation and silica exposure limits on its 2002 agenda. A hearing conservation proposal is expected by mid-year, and a consensus based process should be initiated before year's end to modernize and standardize OSHA silica limits. OSHA Crane Regulations: The Crane Technical Committee of the Power Crane & Shovel Association (PCSA) has been active in expressing its concern, and that of the crane industry, regarding OSHA's reluctance to update the Code of Federal Regulations for cranes (29CFR1926.550). The latest version (2000) of the ANSI B30.5 Crane Standard covers hydraulic cranes and current safe work practices. The OSHA regulation currently references the 1968 ANSI B30.5 Crane Standard and does little to address many critical issues which could adversely impact workplace safety. OSHA has responded to the Technical Committee's concerns: In a recent letter to PCSA, OSHA's directorate of Construction stated that the Agency has included the updating of the Crane Standard as part of their agenda for 2002. Proposed Resolution: No specific resolutions are sought. Annex: For more information, visit the OSHA website at http://www.osha.gov/


http://www.osha.gov/


AGENDA ITEM: 6.2.1B Preparation date: 08 March 2002 By: R. Dressler/R. Hutchison Page 1 of 1

Page 1 of 1

Title: Crane Operator Certification

Statement of Issue: This 2002 update is being provided for informational purposes and does not raise any specific issues that require action from this committee. Background: The National Commission for the Certification of Crane Operators (CCO) was formed in January 1995 to develop effective performance standards for safe crane operation. Since the CCO began testing in April of 1996, the written exam has been administered to more than 14,000 crane operators in 46 states. The practical exam, which became a requirement of CCO certification in January 2000, has been offered to more than 12,000 candidates in 39 states. Their program is unique in that it is the only third-party testing program to be recognized by OSHA as meeting OSHA and ASME (ANSI) requirements for crane operator competency. The first group of crane operators certified by CCO in 1996, began preparing for 5-year re-certification in 2001. To comply with the requirements, the following components must be successfully completed:

• Pass a written examination in their specialty area. • Pass a practical examination in their specialty area. This requirement may be

waived if the candidate has previously passed the practical exam and has documentation of 1,000 hours of relevant crane operation in the last five years.)

• Meet CCO physical requirements in accordance with ANSI B30.5 physical qualifications as evidenced by a valid physical examination, or a DOT medical examiner's certificate.

Proposed Resolution: No specific resolutions are sought. Annexes: For additional information, visit the National Commission for the Certification of Crane Operators website at http://www.nccco.org/.


http://www.nccco.org/


AGENDA ITEM: 6.2.2 Preparation date: 08 March 2002 By: Dick Dressler/Russ Hutchison/Dan Moss Page 1 of 1

Page 1 of 1

Title: Mine Safety & Health Administration (MSHA) Report

Statement of Issue: Dust, noise and diesel particulate matter have been all recognized by MSHA as serious health hazards to miners because of their potential impact on lung diseases and acute hearing loss. An increase in mine fatalities has become a cause for concern throughout MSHA, with ten fatalities being reported for the month of January 2002, a significant increase over the single fatality that occurred during the same time period last year. Background: Within the U.S. Department of Labor, MSHA has taken a clear lead over its companion organization, OSHA, in the area of hearing conservation, hearing loss measurement and issuance of guidelines. Fatalities at mines in the United States had declined last year to a historic new low, according to MSHA statistics. The data indicates that 72 miners died in on-the-job accidents nationwide in 2001, the lowest figure on record and 13 fewer mine deaths than in calendar 2000. The nation's metal and non-metal mining sector had set a historic low record with 30 fatalities during 2001, compared with 47 in 2000. The previous metal and non-metal low fatality record was 40, in 1994. The metal and non-metal mining sector produces metals such as copper and gold, and non-metallic minerals such as salt, stone, sand and gravel. In the coal sector, mine fatalities increased by four to 42 in 2001.

Alternatives/Options: AEM will continue to monitor the actions of MSHA as it affects member companies' equipment.

Pro’s and Con’s: MSHA has implemented several new programs, including it's new Focus on Safe Work Program and the Accident Reduction Program, which is designed to address root causes of accidents and fatalities, with an emphasis toward providing engineering controls and solutions to reduce or eliminate future accidents and fatalities. Proposed Resolution: No resolution is sought. Additional information on MSHA mine safety programs and fatality statistics are available on the MSHA website: http://www.msha.gov/.


http://www.msha.gov/


AGENDA ITEM: 6.2.3 Preparation date: 27 February 2002 By: David B. Gamble Page 1 of 1

Page 1 of 1

Title: Oregon OSHA Operator Protection for Forestry Excavators – United States

Statement of Issue: The Oregon Occupational Safety & Health Agency (OSHA) Forestry Division requested recommendations from SAE Forestry Committee on 0perator Protection Structure for excavators used in forestry applications in the State of Oregon.

Background: Oregon OSHA conducted a review of accident information from the Pacific Northwest region of the United States in comparison with similar information from the Province of British Columbia. Base on the reduced injuries to machine operators in British Columbia, Oregon OSHA theorized that the operator protective requirements of the Workers Compensation Board (WCB) of British Columbia provided “benchmark” operator protection for forestry machines. Oregon asked the SAE Forestry Committee to advise as industry experts concerning the design of operator protective structures for forestry machines. Oregon OSHA requested SAE Forestry Committee to solicit manufacturers of forestry equipment to assist with a testing program to determine the strength of cabs built to WCB operator protection design criteria. It was believed testing to failure of two representative cabs and measuring the energy levels would provide performance-based criteria. These tests were conducted using the testing methodology of ISO 12117 EMM – Tip Over Protection Structure (TOPS) for compact excavators to determine the lateral and longitudinal energy capacity of WCB cabs. The results of these tests are given in this presentation including the SAE Forestry Committee’s recommended performance based criteria for cabs on excavators for forestry applications.

Alternatives/Options: Not applicable.

Pro’s and Con’s: While this testing approach made reasonable sense to quantify the capacity of WCB design criteria for cabs, there was much concern expressed by the SAE Forestry Committee on the Oregon OSHA comparison study. The data shared was incomplete in defining the specific configuration of the machines involved in accidents for incidents. Because of the significant differences in designs and guarding arrangements in use in the Pacific Northwest, it was not assured that injuries were related to inadequate protection or the lack of any protection. Another concern was the believe that WCB had better enforcement than Oregon OSHA and this would ensure the population of machines with appropriate protection would be higher in British Columbia than in the Pacific Northwest irrespective of the level of protection. Both of these factors could skew the accident data to inaccurately indicate that the WCB design criteria offered superior protection than the protection in use in the United States. Proposed Resolution: 1. Participants at the 12th JTL endorse the SAE recommendations. 2. Request AEM, CECE and CEMA to consider covering “Purpose Built Forestry Machinery”

(PBFM) within the scope of their technical activities.



AGENDA ITEM: 6.2.4 Preparation date: 02-03-19 By: Dan Taylor Page 1 of 2

Title: Requirements for operation of Off-road equipment o

(US) Statement of Issue: Off-road equipment is subject to marking, requirements defined by each state. In addition, local municipalighting equipment or rules of operation. Equipment manufactuconcerned about the ability to find this information and the levelUS. Background: In the United States there is no "Federal Regularequired on off-road machinery so that it can be legally driven oresponsibility to define these requirements in their State Transp There are standards that have been written for agricultural and may be considered as basic requirements. The following standards apply for Agricultural Equipment: ANSI/ASAE S279.11 APR01 Lighting and marking of agricu ANSI/ASAE S276.5 May98 Slow-moving vehicle identificatio ANSI/ASAE S277.2 Mar98 Mounting brackets and socket fo

moving vehicle (S MV) identification emblem. The following standards apply for Industrial Wheeled equipmen SAE J99 Lighting and marking of industrial equipment on hi SAE J94 Combination tail and flood lamps for industrial equ SAE J95 Headlamps for industrial equipment SAE J585 Tail lamps (Rear position lamps) SAE J594 Reflex reflectors SAE J943 Slow-moving vehicle (SMV) identification emblem SAE J725 Mounting brackets and sockets for warning lamp

identification emblem Currently, SAE is considering ISO2509 earthmoving machinery lights and reflex - reflector devices, for adoption. So, states andall the equipment listed and possibly more. For example, in therequiring lights, an amber flashing warning signal must be mounrear of the vehicle. Machine size and especially weight are also subject to control olocal municipalities. These laws apply to machines driven on-rotruck as well. These Laws originate from the old "Bridge Laws" to protect bridges from damage or collapse. Again, the jurisdictupon whether the machine is driven on a state road, county roatransport a wide, long, or heavy machine numerous state, countbe needed. Indications are that municipalities are also becominmachines crossing from one side of a street to the other at hous Although there is no federal regulation or federal rules it does nSimilar to operating any other type of motor vehicle on the road

Action x Information

Page 1 of 2

n road in the 50 United States

lighting, size and weight limit lities may require additional rers are becoming increasingly of variation that may exist in the

tion" defining the equipment n the road. Each state has the ortation Laws or Codes.

other off-road machines that

ltural equipment on highways. n emblem. r warning lamp and slow-

t: ghways ipment

and slow-moving vehicle (SMV)

- lighting, signaling and marking /or municipalities may require

State of Illinois, for equipment ted as high as possible on the

f the states, counties, and then ad and machines moved by where the primary concern was ion having authority depends d, or in a municipality. To y, and municipality permits may g very strict about track-type ing development job sites.

ot mean that there are no rules. , there is an expectation that the

http://www.jjkeller.com/



Page 2 of 2

Background: In the United States there is no "Federal Regulation" defining the equipment required on off-road machinery so that it can be legally driven on the road. Each state has the responsibility to define these requirements in their State Transportation Laws or Codes. There are standards that have been written for agricultural and other off-road machines that may be considered as basic requirements. The following standards apply for Agricultural Equipment: ANSI/ASAE S279.11 APR01 Lighting and marking of agricultural equipment on highways. ANSI/ASAE S276.5 May98 Slow-moving vehicle identification emblem. ANSI/ASAE S277.2 Mar98 Mounting brackets and socket for warning lamp and slow-

moving vehicle (S MV) identification emblem. The following standards apply for Industrial Wheeled equipment: SAE J99 Lighting and marking of industrial equipment on highways SAE J94 Combination tail and flood lamps for industrial equipment SAE J95 Headlamps for industrial equipment SAE J585 Tail lamps (Rear position lamps) SAE J594 Reflex reflectors SAE J943 Slow-moving vehicle (SMV) identification emblem SAE J725 Mounting brackets and sockets for warning lamp and slow-moving vehicle (SMV)

identification emblem Currently, SAE is considering ISO2509 earthmoving machinery - lighting, signaling and marking lights and reflex - reflector devices, for adoption. So, states and/or municipalities may require all the equipment listed and possibly more. For example, in the State of Illinois, for equipment requiring lights, an amber flashing warning signal must be mounted as high as possible on the rear of the vehicle. Machine size and especially weight are also subject to control of the states, counties, and then local municipalities. These laws apply to machines driven on-road and machines moved by truck as well. These Laws originate from the old "Bridge Laws" where the primary concern was to protect bridges from damage or collapse. Again, the jurisdiction having authority depends upon whether the machine is driven on a state road, county road, or in a municipality. To transport a wide, long, or heavy machine numerous state, county, and municipality permits may be needed. Indications are that municipalities are also becoming very strict about track-type machines crossing from one side of a street to the other at housing development job sites. Although there is no federal regulation or federal rules it does not mean that there are no rules. Similar to operating any other type of motor vehicle on the road, there is an expectation that the operator must exercise due care while driving on the road. Again, states may define this. In the State of Illinois, lane usage requires slower traffic to drive in the right-hand lane, noting that the left lane is for passing and turning. The consequences are fines and civil litigation based on joint and several liability. This means that an equipment manufacturer could be named as a defendant in a lawsuit also, especially if a case can be made about some piece of equipment that was missing or if not available or some machine defect was the cause of an accident. Alternatives/Options: Manufacturers may locate this information through various means. The standards are readily available from the ASAE and SAE Organizations. The equipment requirements for on-road operation for each state may be obtained in several ways. Manufacturers may purchase the information directly from AEM or can search the web sites of each state to locate the detailed information. Regional equipment dealers are also a source of information, especially for local municipality differences. Information concerning machine size



Page 3 of 2

and weight limitations is also available from J. J. Keller & Associates, Inc. (1-800-327-6868, www.jjkeller.com for email or fax to 1-800-727-7516). As an option, manufacturers may choose to provide more information in Operator's Manuals concerning the need to assure the machines meet all local equipment requirements and instruction concerning safe operation on the road. Pro’s and Con’s: (Pros) The existing standards for agricultural and construction equipment provide a minimum-level set of requirements for lighting and marking of machinery in the US. Meeting individual state and local requirements are not viewed as a major problem by the industry at this time. Equipment dealers are taking action to satisfy state and local requirements in the regions where they conduct business, providing back-up equipment manufacturers. (Cons) It can be both difficult and time consuming or costly to obtain the on-road requirements for off-road machinery for each state in the US. There is variation in the requirements between the states. Manufacturers that are not providing the required equipment or providing variations of on-road equipment could be subject to legal challenges. The amount of information provided in operator's manuals on this subject may not be adequate. Population/Urban Area expansion increases the chances that equipment will be exposed to greater vehicle and pedestrian traffic, resulting in more accidents. Thus, increasing the expectation that manufacturers provide on road equipment from the point of manufacture. Proposed Resolution: Manufacturers are encouraged to review how they meet the basic requirements in the standards, the per-state requirements and local requirements to be sure no gaps exist. Further, it is recommended that the manufacturers review the content of their operator's manuals to determine if there is sufficient content concerning required equipment and operating instruction for safe on-road operation. Finally, monitor ISO12509 for adoption in SAE and it's effects on the various machine types provided in North America. Annexes (if any) None


AGENDA ITEM: 6.3 Preparation date: 21 February 2002 By: Dan Roley Page 1 of 1

Page 1 of 2

Title: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Activities

Statement of Issue: The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Activities (NIOSH) in the USA is a research organization that supports the Mining Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). NIOSH is currently working with mining and road construction customers and with machine manufacturers to reduce lost time accidents. The current NIOSH research includes projects to: - reduce back pain complaints due to the vibrations and shock on mining trucks - evaluate hazard detection systems for mining machines - measure the visibility of road construction machines and evaluate the risks associated with the visibility maskings.

Background: The objective of most mining and earthmoving machinery customers in the USA is to achieve zero lost time accidents. To achieve this goal, customers are asking for the help of machine manufacturers and regulatory organizations. We have participated in three of the NIOSH research projects by providing test machines, testing facilities and data acquisition support.

Alternatives/Options: The three NIOSH research projects are: 1. A large USA mine ask NIOSH to help reduce the number of back pain complaints from dumper operators. NIOSH measured ride vibration data on dumpers and worked with a medical expert to evaluate the risks from the vibration exposure, especially from jars, jolts and shocks. Significant vibration and shock input to the operator was not found. 2. MSHA is considering a regulation to require hazard detection and visual aids on mining machines. NIOSH evaluated CCTV visual aids and ultrasound and radar hazard detection systems. Evaluations at mine sites are continuing. The preliminary results from mine operators are mixed on the value of hazard detection systems and visual aids. Many operators are annoyed by the false signals for the hazard detection systems. 3. NIOSH is starting a project to evaluate the risks from the visibility maskings of machines used on road construction sites, primarily trucks, motor graders and wheel loader, along with pavers and paving profilers. The current plan is to define when workers are in the masked areas and can hazard detection systems and visual aids be used effectively to minimize any risks. NIOSH would like to obtain visibility measurements from manufacturers to show the visibility maskings around machines.

Pro’s and Con’s: In general, NIOSH is very thorough in their research and by working directly with customers and machine manufacturers; they are realistic in addressing jobsite risks. Proposed Resolution: JTLM participants are requested to let Dan Roley know if they would be willing to provide visibility masking data to NIOSH for their machines.

Action X Information


AGENDA ITEM: 6.4 Preparation date: 01 March 2002 By: R. Hutchison Page 1 of 2

Page 1 of 3

Title: U.S. Labor-Driven Noise Activities

Statement of Issue: Following is a description of the Construction Noise Control Partnership (the "CNCP"). The CNCP is a broad-based coalition whose efforts are focused on improving hearing conservation practices and reducing hearing loss through voluntary measures in the American construction industry. Background: The CNCP was formed in July 2000 through the efforts of the Laborers Health and Safety Fund of North America (LHSFNA), led by Scott Schneider, the LHSFNA’s Director of Occupational Safety & Health and a certified industrial hygienist. Mr. Schneider has been actively involved with hearing loss issues for many years. The CNCP members include representatives from the following construction related groups:

1) Contractors - both individually and through trade associations 2) Equipment Manufacturers – both individually and through trade associations

(including AEM) 3) Labour Unions 4) Medical Professionals and Academics 5) A variety of Governmental Agencies

The CNCP is committed to strengthening hearing conservation programs in the construction industry in America through voluntary means. Construction sites are identified as characteristically noisy environments whose affects, in the absence of appropriate protective measures, have the potential to lead to premature and potentially significant hearing impairment for those who work there. Hearing loss is present in this employee population, in spite of the availability of effective personal protective equipment and relevant occupational safety and health regulations. Anecdotally, the presence of hearing loss in this group is attributed to a variety of causes, some of which are: Construction sites tend to be constantly changing work environments (as compared, for

example, with general industry) Noise is not an acute or life-threatening hazard Limited enforcement efforts by regulatory agencies Belief on the part of some employers that noise control efforts are difficult, costly and

produce limited results Failure to properly maintain noise producing construction equipment

Alternatives/Options: With this in mind, the CNCP is looking at the means and methods to change the construction site noise culture, with emphasis on educating:

♦ Construction Workers; ♦ Employers; and ♦ Site owners.

Education will include efforts to:



AGENDA ITEM: 6.4 Preparation date: 01 March 2002 By: R. Hutchison Page 2 of 2

Page 2 of 3

♦ Increase worker awareness of the significance and seriousness of construction site noise,

and encourage them to take appropriate steps to use available personal protection; ♦ Encourage employers to reduce equipment noise levels (engineering controls) and adopt

site practices that will reduce construction workers' exposure to existing noise levels (administrative controls);

♦ Motivate site owners to include the lowering of construction site noise levels as a condition in the contracting process; and,

♦ Encourage equipment manufacturers to continue noise reduction efforts for new equipment.

Proposed Resolution: The CNCP has established three working groups to implement the partnership’s focus. They include:

♦ A Best Practices Work Group, tasked with creating a best practices guide which will suggest methods employers can follow to control and reduce noise at the job site;

♦ A Communications Work Group, tasked with developing and implementing a communications strategy to effectively advance the CNCP's message and distribute the material in the Best Practices Guide; and,

♦ A Noise Measurement Work Group, tasked with gathering and organizing noise level measurements from a variety of construction activities and equipment, to be used as a resource to educate equipment users, and to develop and compare enhanced noise control solutions.

In addition, the LHSFNA has established a web page for the CNCP at the following web address: http://www.lhsfna.org/html/_noise_partnership.html. This site includes a description of the CNCP, a list of members, copies of meeting minutes, noise control presentations and related Internet links. Also, the LHSFNA is seeking grant support in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the CNCP communications strategies and their impact on the current construction industry noise culture. AEM will continue to monitor and report on CNCP activities. Observation: The CNCP leadership has concluded that efforts at worker education regarding the construction noise hazard and the importance of using personal protective equipment, while important, has so far met with only limited success. There continues to be what some have concluded is a significant hearing loss present in the construction industry employee population. Therefore, a major focus of the CNCP will be the mitigation of construction site noise levels by encouraging manufacturers to reduce equipment noise emissions and encouraging employers to buy or lease quiet equipment, follow up with proper and timely maintenance procedures, and adopt work site practices that reduce noise levels and worker exposure.


AGENDA ITEM: 6.5 Preparation date: 11 March 2002 By: Dan Moss Page 1 of 1

Page 1 of 1

Title: 2001 Product Safety Seminars and Future AEM Plans

Statement of Issue: The Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM) has scheduled the first AEM Product Safety Seminar for 22-23 January, 2002, in St. Louis, Missouri. A 25 member planning committee, co-chaired by Mr. Dan Taylor (CNH) and Mr. Joe Vig (Kolberg Pioneer) has been formed to discuss and develop the seminar format, evaluate possible session topics and speakers, and discuss general meeting logistical issues to best meet the needs of AEM members. The committee plans to hold its next planning meeting in late April 2002.

Background: For over ten years, the industry trade associations formerly known as EMI and CIMA, have held separate safety seminars. The EMI Safety Seminar had recently focused on educating engineers and product safety specialists on the fundamental principles of creating a successful product safety program. The CIMA Safety Seminar had significant focus on products liability and legal defense issues. In August 2001, CIMA held its Annual Safety Seminar in Milwaukee, Wisconsin with the theme: "What is Your Weakest Link?" Presenters offered strategies and advice on design and liability issues and other presentations covered subjects such as ergonomics, online training and service report communications. The two-day session was culminated by a well received "mock trial" held at the Milwaukee County Courthouse which featured interactive audience polling. In October 2001, EMI held its 12th Annual Product Safety Seminar in Orlando, Florida. The theme chosen for this seminar was "Effective Safety Solutions...Enhancing Value." The program began with an inspiring general session featuring Mr. Roger Boisjoly, an ethics lecturer and engineering manager, involved with the Challenger spacecraft explosion. This session was followed by a series of breakout sessions on operator training, effective safety signs, hazard analysis, along with several other topics. The closing exercise was titled "On the Horns of a Dilemma, which depicted an infighting scenario between two of the parties on the defense side and how this aids the plaintiff.

Alternatives/Options: In addition to an annual seminar, AEM is exploring holding a series of e-seminars to focus on specific product safety issues. A "Product Safety Fundamentals" e-seminar is tentatively scheduled to be held in 2002.

Pro’s and Con’s: Continuation of association safety and training efforts are believed to provide benefit to the entire off-road industry. Proposed Resolution: No resolution is sought. Additional information on the AEM Product Safety Seminar and other educational programs are available on the association's website: http://www.aem.org/. The 2003 seminar is open to all employees of manufacturing companies. International participation is encouraged.


http://www.aem.org/


AGENDA ITEM: 6.6 Preparation date: 22 February By: Dan Roley Page 1 of 1

Page 1 of 1

Title: Equipment Useful Life and Recycling Initiatives

Statement of Issue: Earthmoving machines generally have a long useful life, which means that machines manufactured today may have to meet the recycling expectations 20 years from now. Currently, there are few regulations and standards for recycling the materials that are used in earthmoving machines. The question for the earthmoving machinery industry needs to consider is “when should an ISO TC 127 standard be initiated to provide guidance for recycling earthmoving machines”.

Background: Useful life and recycling initiatives have been popular topics of discussion for many years. Europe recently implemented a new directive on end-of-life vehicles (2000/53/EC) aimed at the prevention of waste from vehicles and at the recycling of end-of-life vehicles. This directive asks manufacturers to limit the use of hazardous substances, to facilitate the dismantling, re-use and recycling of materials and to use component and material coding standards. It also requires that member states set up systems for collecting end-of-life vehicles and treatment facilities for removing recyclable materials. Two ISO standards already address material coding of plastic products (ISO 11469 and ISO 1043-1 to 4).

Alternatives/Options: With the EU directive for end-of-life vehicles already in place, there will probably be pressure in the future to have a similar directive for earthmoving machines. ISO TC 127 could be proactive and develop an international standard with end-of-life recommendations for earthmoving machines.

Pro’s and Con’s: Most of the materials for earthmoving machines can already be recycled. As more plastic materials are used on earthmoving machines, these materials could also be easily recycled if the materials are properly marked. An ISO TC 127 standard could be prepared to provide guidance for the use of materials in earthmoving machines, for labeling materials and for manufacturers to provide general recycling guidelines. Proposed Resolution: JTLM participants are requested to review the need to develop an ISO TC 127 standard to address end-of-life and recycling of earthmoving machines.

Action X Information


AGENDA ITEM: 6.7 Preparation date: 8 March 2002 By: Darrin Drollinger Page 1 of 2

Page 1 of 1

Title: U.S. Department of Commerce Committee on Standards and Regulations (IFAC 2)

Statement of Issue: In December 2001, Darrin Drollinger received word that he had been granted the security clearance required by the U.S. Department of Commerce to sit on the Industry Functional Advisory Committee on Standards (IFAC 2). This appointment provides the off road industry another “set of eyes and voice” on standards and trade issues impacting the U.S.

Background: IFAC 2 provides input on standards or technical barriers to trade matters related to proposed trade agreements and the operation of current U.S. trade agreements. Representatives serving on IFAC-2 provide advice on a broad range of trade policy matters covering a number of industries. Members offer advice on a range of issues including: the Second Triennial Review of the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Agreement, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Committee on Standards-Related Measures, Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) Negotiations, the Asia Pacific Economic Community (APEC) Subcommittee on Standards and Conformance, the Transatlantic Business Dialogue (TABD), and the Transatlantic Economic Partnership. IFAC-2 also provides guidance on bilateral standards measures and regional harmonization standards work that impact US industry. Most recently, this forum served as a useful tool to address Mexican product certification procedures. US input in the ongoing discussions in APEC on standards and conformance has been reportedly enhanced by IFAC-2 involvement.

Alternatives/Options: It is the author’s plans to participate in the IFAC 2 activities. Since I have only attended one meeting thus far, it is my expectation that I will have more to report in the coming months.

Pro’s and Con’s: It is anticipated that a number of issues and subjects will be reviewed and commented on at the IFAC 2 level, which will be of potential interest to JTL members. Although many of the documents are restricted from circulation, documents and issues that are believed to be of interest to JTL members, and are cleared for circulation, will be shared.

Proposed Resolution: Darrin Drollinger to circulate relevant IFAC-2 information to the JTL members as appropriate between JTL meetings and give future status reports.

Annex: The Department of Commerce’s Industry Consultation website at: http://www.ita.doc.gov/td/icp/ifac.html Technical and Safety\Joint Technical Liaison (CECE, CEMA, CIMA, EMI)\2002 Joint Technical Meeting\Reports\06.7 IFAC-2.doc


http://www.ita.doc.gov/td/icp/ifac.html


AGENDA ITEM: 6.8 Preparation date: 21February 2002 By: Dan Roley Page 1 of 1

Page 1 of 1

Title: Presentation of Products Liability and Its Impact on Business

Statement of Issue: The risk of products liability is an important consideration during the product development of earthmoving machines. The best way to minimize the risks of product liability is to design machines to comply with all of the applicable ISO standards, to evaluate and address the risks and then to provide the appropriate instructions and warnings. A short video will be shown on the products liability risks in the USA.

Background: The regulations in the USA are specific in some areas, such as for seat belts and for operator protective structures. However, many of the requirements for machines are only covered by the OSHA general duty clause, which states that “each employer shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees.” With this general requirement, it is a challenge for machine manufacturers to establish acceptable machine development criteria.

Alternatives/Options: The Video “When Products Harm – Product Liability Awareness” shows what can happen when a lawsuit strikes. It demonstrates the need for defensive thinking at every stage of product design, manufacturing, testing, marketing, recall, etc.

Pro’s and Con’s: Products liability defense experience in the USA has shown that machines that do not comply with all the applicable standards will probably lose lawsuit challenges, while machines that comply with the standards have a good chance of defending lawsuit challenges successfully. Proposed Resolution: It is essential to design machines to comply with the applicable standards to be able to defend lawsuit challenges in the USA.


1 AUG 00

SALEABILITYSALEABILITYEs

sent

ial

Req

uire

men

tsC

usto

mer

Req

uire

men

tsM

anda

tory

Reg

ulat

ions

Stan

dard

sDE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY

DE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY

Planning Design Verification Documentation Implementation Field Life

1 AUG 00


sent

ial

Req

uire

men

tsC

usto

mer

Req

uire

men

tsM

anda

tory

Reg

ulat

ions

Stan

dard

s

DE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY

DE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY


INDUSTRY CONSENSUS

1 AUG 00


sent

ial

Req

uire

men

tsC

usto

mer

Req

uire

men

tsM

anda

tory

Reg

ulat

ions

Stan

dard

s

DE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY

DE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY


INDUSTRY CONSENSUS

MANDATORY (EUROPE)

1 AUG 00


sent

ial

Req

uire

men

tsC

usto

mer

Req

uire

men

tsM

anda

tory

Reg

ulat

ions

Stan

dard

s

DE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY

DE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY


INDUSTRY CONSENSUS

MANDATORY (EUROPE)

REST OF WORLD

1 AUG 00


sent

ial

Req

uire

men

tsC

usto

mer

Req

uire

men

tsM

anda

tory

Reg

ulat

ions

Stan

dard

s

DE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY

DE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY


INDUSTRY CONSENSUS

MANDATORY (EUROPE)

REST OF WORLD

PRODUCT LITIGATION (USA)

1 AUG 00


sent

ial

Req

uire

men

tsC

usto

mer

Req

uire

men

tsM

anda

tory

Reg

ulat

ions

Stan

dard

s

DE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY

DE

FEN

DA

BIL

ITY


- Hazard List- Accident History Review- Define Use

- Competitive Bench Mark- Define Markets- Define Design Life

- Homologation Defined- Certification Identified-Declarations

-Review Policies & Procedures-Applicable Stds-Team Training

- State-of-the-Art Concepts- FMEA- Hazard Analysis

- Unresolved Issues Plan

- 3rd Party Selection-Technical File Outline

- Informative Standards- Normative Standards

- 3D Hazard Review- Measure Hazard Solution- FMEA Closure

- Draft User Instructions- Draft Repair Instructions- Hazard Message Effectiveness

- 3rd Party Review- Technical Construction File Start

- Review Stds Adequacy- Harmonized Standards Compliance

- Record Test Results- Record Hazard Resolution Effectiveness

- Final User Instructions- Final Repair Instructions- Advertising Review

- 3rd Party File- Incorporate into Technical File

- Record Stds Used

- Consistent Production- Verify Pilot Models

- Training

- Submit Certificates to Government- Incorporate ISO 9000 in Technical File

- Process Standards- Material Standards

- Warranty Review- Parts Movement- Modification Programs

- Reconcile Field Use- Reconcile Bench Mark

- Amendments for Running Changes

- Review Stds Updates

aem/cece/cema/kocema joint technical liaison meeting … · aem/cece/cema/kocema joint technical...

Documents