Product Liability for Defective Conveyor Belt Guarding

Moving machine parts have the potential to cause severe workplace injuries, such as crushed fingers or hands, amputations, burns, or blindness. The U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that workers who operate and maintain machinery suffer approximately 18,000 amputations, lacerations, crushing injuries, abrasions, and over 800 deaths per year.

The requirements for guarding dangerous moving parts of equipment has been long established and well defined. As early as 1946, the National Safety Council advised as follows with regard to power driven conveyors: “Belts, gears, sprocket wheels, pulleys and chains, located less than 7 feet above the floor or working level should be effectively guarded.” In 1947, the American Standard Safety Code for Conveyors, Cableways, and Related Equipment ASA B20.1-1947 was approved and issued. The standard at section 602 states “Pulleys, Sprockets, Sheaves, Drums, Blocks. All mountings for pulleys, etc., when located in a working area where operators (other than maintenance men) are present shall be arranged to prevent the possibility of injury due to hands or parts of clothing being caught between the belt and the pulley, or chain and sprocket…”

By 1958, the National Safety Council advised: A hazardous mechanical condition or exposure is one which has caused or could cause an injury. If a method of guarding such a condition or exposure is known, there is no valid reason for not using it. Absence of injury from operating an unguarded or partially guarded machine for a period of time is no proof that the moving parts of the machine are not dangerous.

It has been long known to industry that a guard must deny access to hazardous moving parts. As early as 1969, the National Safety Council provided guidelines for effective guards as follows: Any guard should have the following characteristics if it is to be fully effective: 3. Afford maximum positive protection. 4. Prevent access to the danger zone during operation.

The American National Standard Safety Standard for Conveyors and Related Equipment (AWSME B20.1-2000) was confirmed in 2000, and states in relevant part “Where necessary for the protection of personnel from hazards, all exposed moving machinery parts that present a hazard to personnel at work stations…shall be mechanically or electrically guarded, or guarded by location or position….In general, nip and shear points shall be guarded unless other means to assure safety are provided.” See Equipment (AWSME B20.1-2000) Sections 5.9 to 5.9.3. Even Federal regulations require conveyor “danger zones” to be guarded. 29 C.F.R. § 1917.48(a).

It is well-settled that a manufacturer may be found liable for introducing an unreasonably dangerous product into the stream of commerce based on design defect:

The New York standard for determining the existence of a design defect requires an assessment of whether "if the design defect were known at the time of manufacture, a reasonable person would conclude that the utility of the product did not outweigh the risk inherent in marketing a product designed in that manner" (Voss v Black & Decker Mfg. Co., 59 NY2d 102, 108; see, Denny v Ford Motor Co., 87 NY2d 248, 257). "This standard demands an inquiry into such factors as (1) the product's utility to the public as a whole, (2) its utility to the individual user, (3) the likelihood that the product will cause injury, (4) the availability of a safer design, (5) the possibility of designing and manufacturing the product so that it is safer but remains functional and reasonably priced, (6) the degree of awareness of the product's potential danger that can reasonably be attributed to the injured user, and (7) the manufacturer's ability to spread the cost of any safety-related design changes" (Denny v Ford Motor Co., supra, at 257; see, Voss v Black & Decker Mfg. Co., supra, at 109). Searle v. Suburban Propane, 700 N.Y.S.2d 588; 263 A.D.2d 335 (3d Dept. 2000).

In New York, “Manufacturers of defective products may be held strictly liable for injury caused by their products meaning that they may be liable regardless of privity, foreseeability or reasonable care.” El Sheikh v. Chem Tainer Industries, 816 N.Y.S.2d 701; 11 Misc. 3d 1062A (2006), quoting Sprung v. MTR Ravensburg, Inc., 99 N.Y.2d 468, 472 (2003); Codling v. Paglia, 32 N.Y.2d 330 (1973). Further, the “elements of proof necessary to make out a case under strict liability are (1) that the product was in a defective condition on delivery, (2) that the product was unreasonably dangerous to the consumer, and (3) that the product was the cause of the injuries sustained [citations omitted].” Jerry v. Borden Company, 45 A.D.2d 344; 358 N.Y.S.2d 426 (1974). Section 402 A of Torts of the Restatement of Law (2d) defines the scope of strict liability as applicable to one "who sells any product in a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user". Comment i of section 402 A defines "unreasonably dangerous" as "dangerous to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary consumer who purchases it, with the ordinary knowledge common to the community as to its characteristics." Also see Jerry v. Borden, supra.

Warnings are also necessary. “A product may be defective when it contains a manufacturing flaw, is defectively designed, or is not accompanied by adequate warnings for the use of the product”, see El Sheikh, supra, quoting Liriano v. Hobart Corp., 92 N.Y.2d 232, 237, (1998); Robinson v. Reed-Prentice Div. of Package Mach. Co., 49 N.Y.2d 471, 478-479, (1980).

A manufacturer may not be relieved of liability even if it relies on the specifications of its purchaser. In New York, a “Manufacturer of a conveyor was not relieved of liability in products liability action brought by inspector for purchaser, who suffered injuries while inspecting a conveyor, on the basis that conveyor was produced in accordance with specifications of purchaser.” See Czerniejewski v. Steward-Glapat Corp., 653 N.Y.S.2d 742, 236 A.D.2d 795 (1997).

See Accident Prevention Manual for Industrial Operations, National Safety Council, 1st Edition, 1946.