Back to Federal guidance

Rollover structures on narrow tractors

Summary A tractor equipment company sought a variance for a rollover protective structure that could not meet the rule's 24-inch dimension. OSHA said the proposed design did not give equivalent protection and that the tractors needed modification to fit compliant protection. OSHA archives the letter.
Document
Federal opinion letter
Agency
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Document number
1977-11-30-0
Date issued
November 30, 1977
Status
Archived by the agency
OSHA labels this an archive document and warns that it may no longer represent OSHA policy.
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.

The current status of this document is unclear
OSHA labels this an archive document and warns that it may no longer represent OSHA policy. It may no longer reflect the agency's current position. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance, and verify current law before relying on anything here.
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.

NOTICE: This is an OSHA Archive Document, and may no longer represent OSHA Policy. It is presented here as historical content, for research and review purposes only.

November 30, 1977
Mr. J. B. Stucky
Vice President-Marketing
Full Vision Inc.
[Recipient address omitted]
Dear Mr. Stucky:
This is in response to your letters dated August 31, 1977, and September 1, 1977, concerning your request for a variance from Section 1926.1002(i)(1)(i) and Sections 1928.52 and 1928.53(e)(1)(i), Roll-over protection Structures (ROPS) of the safety and health regulations for construction and agriculture. Your letter was forwarded to this office for evaluation of the modified ROPS.
The purpose of the standards contained in Sections 1926.1002(i)(1)(i), 1928.52 and 1928.53(e)(1)(i) is to provide minimum requirements for structural frames in the protection of operators of wheel type agricultural and industrial tractors, to minimize the possibility of operator injury resulting from accidental upsets during normal operation. That the 24 inch minimum dimension required by the aforementioned standards cannot be met throughout a portion of the vertical distance defined by the subject standards due to the locations of the rear tire, rear fenders, and seat is clearly indicated by the pictures attached to your letter.
Your proposed ROPS design for tractor models 240 and 330 does not provide the equivalent protection for operators as required by the existing standards. It cannot comply with the required 24 inch dimensions because of the narrowness of the tractors. The construction standards section 1926.1001 ROPS are required with dozer-loader attachments to be used in construction and the 1926.1002 type design criteria will not be acceptable.
I realize that you are not in a position to control the production of the tractors but modification of the equipment appears necessary to install ROPS as illustrated by the figures contained in the construction and agricultural standards.
If I may be of any further assistance, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
John K. Barto, Chief
Division of Occupational
Safety Programming

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