Back to Federal guidance

Withdrawal of belt-loader handrail opinion

Summary An airline was told OSHA had withdrawn an earlier opinion on mobile aircraft belt-loader handrails. OSHA said no specific standard covered the described condition, but a recognized serious fall hazard could trigger the general duty clause. For workers crouching on a belt loader where a railing was required, it said an 18- to 24-inch rail would normally provide protection.
Document
Federal opinion letter
Agency
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Document number
1977-03-01
Date issued
March 1, 1977
Status
Active
Status last verified October 10, 2026

Apply this to your situation

This page explains the general guidance. Ask about your specific situation and see what current federal labor law says, with citations.

About this page: The full text below is the official document from Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Ezel adds the plain-English summary and tracks the document's status. The official source linked on this page is authoritative for any reliance.

March 1, 1977

Glen Walker, Esq.
American Airlines, Inc.
[Recipient address omitted]
Dear Mr. Walker:

This is to confirm the notice given to you from Francis V. LaRuffa, Regional Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, New York, in a letter dated September 20, 1976, that the opinion letter dated December 4, 1972, from Gerald F. Scannell to M. W. Eastburn is being withdrawn.

We have reviewed that opinion letter, dated December 4, 1972, which concerns the installation of certain handrails on mobile belt loader conveyors for aircraft, when employees are walking on those conveyors and wish to clarify some of the statements made therein.

While there are no OSHA standards to cover the situation you describe, you should note that an employer would be in violation of section 5(a)(1) of the Act if he failed to provide adequate protection to employees where the height of the belt loader together with other conditions creates a situation which constitutes a recognized hazard likely to cause death or serious physical harm. Support for the assertion that failure to guard conveyor belts in this situation constitutes a recognized hazard is derived from the fact that ANSI B20.1-1957, Section 10d, incorporated by reference at 29 CFR [1910.261(a)(3)(v)], Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills; 29 CFR 1910.265(c)(18) Sawmills; and 29 CFR 1926.555(a)(8), Conveyors, recognizes that employees are exposed to hazardous conditions when working on conveyors. Thus the ANSI standard states:

No riding shall be permitted on a conveyor at any time, unless it is specifically designed to convey passengers or the operator.

Finally we wish to note that where employees utilizing the mobile belt loading equipment are not generally walking in an upright position but in a crouched position, and are exposed to a recognized hazard so that railings are required, the installation of a handrail approximately 18 inches to 24 inches above the belt would normally provide adequate employee protection.

Thank you for your concern and continuing interest in occupational safety and health.

Sincerely,

Richard P. Wilson
Deputy Director,
Federal Compliance and State Programs

What does federal law require in your situation?

Ezel checks current federal labor law against your facts and answers with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace