This 2018 decision is a MUST read for all safety professionals who wish to question the requirement for “machine specific” isolation procedures for “complex processes” AND for those who want to understand the isolation expectation for entry into a PRCS. This business made two mistakes that run rampant in businesses when it comes to the “details” of our LOTO procedures and the LOTO for entry into a PRCS. The OSHRC confirmed both of the citations after an ALJ had vacated them.
On September 30, 2008, following an inspection of a commercial laundry facility, OSHA issued a citation that as amended, alleged violations under ten serious and four repeat items. Former Administrative Law Judge John H. Schumacher issued a decision affirming two of the serious items (Citation 1, Items 3 and 11) and vacating the remaining twelve items. The judge assessed a total penalty of $3,825 for the two affirmed items. A fifth repeat item, as well as a second citation alleging an other-than-serious violation, were withdrawn by the Secretary.
Pursuant to Commission Rule 61, the parties stipulated to the record and agreed to have the judge decide the case without a hearing. On review are two of the vacated citation items: Instances (b) and (c) of Item 2b, which allege repeat violations under 29 C.F.R. § 1910.146(d)(3) concerning the adequacy of isolation and verification procedures for a permit-required confined space (PRCS); and Item 8, which alleges a repeat violation under 29 C.F.R. § 1910.147(c)(4)(ii) concerning the specificity of lockout/tagout (LOTO) procedures. For the reasons that follow, we affirm both citation items, characterize them as serious, and assess a single grouped penalty of $7,000.