Lockout/Tagout 
Overview 
Background 
Services 
Software 
Training 
Our Clients 
Lockouts Explained 
Lockout Samples 
Terms & Definitions 
F.A.Q. 
OSHA 
Request For Information 

 Products & Services 
Lockout/Tagout 
Arc Flash  
Evacuation Plans 
Preventive Maintenance 
Military Documentation 
Technical Writing 
Technical Training 
Visual Aids & Illustrations 
Software & Multimedia 
Industrial Signage 

 Other Options 
Contact Us 
EHS Insider 
HOME 





OSHA

[ Tutorial ] [ Hot Topics ] [ Case Studies ]
[ LOTO standard ] [ LOTO preamble ] [ Compliance directive ]
[ Selected case law ] [ Selected letters of interpretation ]

Case Study 1: Printing Press Roll Cleaning

Incorrect.  In this case, the employer is not correct.

The minor servicing exception does not apply. Even though the roll cleaning activity takes place during normal production operations and is routine, repetitive, and integral to the production operation, the employer has not implemented alternative measures which provide effective protection from the ingoing nip points of the press rolls. Employees instead are required to bypass a machine guard, which is required by Subpart O of 29 CFR 1910, and place their hands and cleaning rags into the press's danger zone. In the absence of alternative protective measures, this cleaning task is a servicing or maintenance activity that is covered by 1910.147.

In summary, for the minor servicing exception to apply, each and every element of the exception must be met. In this case, the work is not being performed using alternative measures that provide effective employee protection.

For more information: Read the September 16, 1992, letter of interpretation to Mr. John Runyan of the Printing Industries of America, Inc., for details on how to use safe alternative measures for printing presses.


<<Return to Case Study Discussion | Next Case Study>>

 

Call Toll Free 888.741.8252 | Español | Français | Deutsch | Português ©2024 St. Claire, inc.