|
OSHA
[ Tutorial ]
[ Hot Topics ]
[ Case Studies ]
[ LOTO standard ]
[ LOTO preamble ]
[ Compliance directive ]
[ Selected case law ]
[ Selected letters of interpretation ]
Case Study 2: Automotive Component Lubrication Robotics
Correct.
The employer still has an obligation to provide the servicing and/or maintenance employees
protection if they are exposed to the unexpected energization, start-up, or release of
stored energy, which could cause injury. The standard provides no exemption
simply because an employer would be required to take additional steps or
implement additional controls to effectively protect employee engaged in
servicing and/or maintenance work. The robot could have been rewired to eliminate the problem of computer memory loss, or could be reprogrammed using a slave computer to transfer the necessary data and instructions to the robot's computer.
For more information: To better evaluate this specific case study, refer
to the October 30, 1996, memorandum for Regional
Administrators, and the 6th Circuit Court decision in the Secretary of Labor vs. General Motors Corporation, Delco
Chasis Division, OSHRC Docket numbers 91-2973, 91-3116, and 91-3117.
<<Return to Case Study Discussion
| Next Case Study>>
|
