Never remove the LBR for Safety reasons as well as liability issues. If necessary, cut down the height to match the customer load size or get another LBR to match various sized loads.
hiloman, NY

Brass Tacks, Some info for you - part of OSHA/ANSI/SAE design stnadards for the manufactuerer to help the end-user to be safer -a DOG is design to protect the operator in a normal seated poistion (vs. leaning forward or either side) from falling objects (aka FOPS - Falling Object Protection System) in including their hands both on the steering wheel or hydraulic control valve levers in any position. Further, the Drivers OHG shall not have openings between top horizontal members no greater than 6" betwen members. Bottlers are famous for requested expanded metal tops to be instaledd onteh DOHG. Most every one I have know - manufacturers & or distributors will not condone the removal of the OHG for any reason. This why you'll see most lift truck designs in the last 10-15 years, maybe longer, with the OHG welded as intergal part of the frame or a side member. I once was a a very large glass plant in Ohio in the mid 70's & in their gullet room (a low overhead @ 8' high area, place below ground where melted old glass is collected as it dropped down from an above furnance via a forklift with a fork mounted bucket). The cullet was scopped up, lift and dumped in a hopper. Well, this lift had no LBR or overhead. But in various places there were metal I-Beam type structure extending straight down from the sealing - can you day a decapitation wainting to happen. Thsi truck was part of a 40 truck fleet that we were bidding on & they wanted to replace it with a new one on a FMV lease w/ Fill Maintence program. Our legal council advised us to bid on 39 units because of PL concerns. I understand OSHA shut this operation down & the company revised this operation to be compliant.
Thse exact standards may have been updated since 2007 as that is when I retired after 41 years of lift truck stuff.

I am glad this discussion came up. I've never found an exact answer or direct interpretation letter for this one. I try to read the letters to infer on how OSHA might approach these ambiguous issues. If you read the interpretation letter on overhead guard removal you will see they allow the guard to be removed in areas it is necessary, but require re-installation in areas where it is not necessary.

CYA approach: I always advise that if you remove the LBR due to stacking in trucks you should keep it on-hand and close for reinstallation in other parts of the warehouse where that tight stacking isn't an issue. I find this a more common question/concern with 83/189 TSU masts, as those with truckers masts usually know the deal. I doubt many companies are actually re-installing the LBR's, but at least the LBRs are on-site and the facility manager prepared for an explaination of the operational plan in the case of an inspection... I feel like this plan would allow immediate compliance.

OHG interpretation letter: w w w.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=18402

The truckers mast is designed - for two purposes 1. the 78"- 80" lift mast with lo or 0" free lift does not " generally present a danger of the load being tilted and falling backwards into the operators compartment or on his/her head & the fork carraige bars can serve as a load back rest. Of couse, there those " faux cowboys" or "NACAR driver wannabees" may want to try two loads high in one trip into the trailer. So what most manufacturers do - is request a letter of "indemnification" from the end-user to help protect them from PL suits when a truck is requesed (via written specifications) to be built & shipped without an LBRE & forks stops are provide on the carraige bar ends either by standard design or an approvided factory modification. After these fleet user retires these units after they have been very well used, they are sold into the second hand market hand are sold a few here & there - the seller should request a similar letter from their customer.
2. The other reason the large trucking companies use a truckers special mast is to reduce duce costs. Companies like Roadway, ABF ,etc. do not want to have closed van/trailers turning into a "sun roof" version - cost avoidance measure - they have a lot of those "cowboys & NASCAR driver wandabees"at their bulk break terminals. Of course, there are many more units sold with 189/83/ Full Free Triple or even up to a 89 -91" OAL triple (like a 216" lift) that are used to load & unload trailers (door openings of OTR trailers or containers can be 95" - 97" high) - but not in where roll-up doors are used or some 20' containers.

It just makes sense to me that if your moving an elevated load that is above the mast limit so the only protection you have is the backrest and is not high enough this violates the standard. How high does the backrest need to be and who determines this? On the previous post About stacking in the trailer I am assuming the mast would prevent the load falling rearward because it is not being elevated

I agree with the interpretation but I also have freight companies that use trucker type masts and due to double stacking inside trailers, they have to remove the LBR's. What recourse does that company have in that situation and still try to follow the rules of OSHA?

My interpretation is YES per OSHA 29CFR 1910.178(e)(2): If the type of load presents a hazard, the user shall equip fork trucks with a vertical load backrest extension manufactured in accordance with paragraph (a) (2) of this section.