Federal agency decisions, searchable in plain English.
Workplace-safety cases from the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) and mine-safety cases from the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (FMSHRC), each with a plain-English summary, the standards it cites, and whether it counts as precedent. More agencies are coming.
No decisions match these filters
Try a different search term or clear the filters.
Matsu Ohio, Inc.
Lockout and power-press citation items vacated
Matsu Ohio manufactured stamped automotive parts using partial-revolution mechanical power presses. OSHA alleged several lockout/tagout and power-press violations involving servicing procedures, employee training, lock identification, die-setting procedures, and operating-mode selectors. The judge…
Kaspar Wire Works, Inc.
Commission upholds most willful recordkeeping violations but vacates unsupported items
Kaspar Wire Works manufactured formed wire products at a Shiner, Texas facility with roughly 850 to 900 employees. After a 1990 inspection, OSHA cited more than 400 alleged violations and proposed $1,236,000 in penalties; the ALJ affirmed most items and assessed $257,700. The Commission found that…
S.K. Wellman Friction Company
Press guarding, training, inspection, and lockout items affirmed
An employee lost a fingertip while clearing a frequently jammed turntable on a Toledo 250-ton press. Judge Ann Z. Cook found an obvious unguarded nip point, inadequate operator training before first use, and no documented program of periodic press inspections, although setup personnel performed…
Turnbull Metal Products, Inc.
Press and facility violations produce $9,450 penalty
Turnbull Metal Products manufactured metal furniture and other products at a Mississippi facility using press brakes and mechanical power presses. OSHA cited missing platform and stair midrails, an inadequate lockout program, unguarded machine parts, deficient press inspections, and electrical…
Eyelematic Manufacturing Company, Inc.
Power-press, chain, cylinder, and electrical items produce $5,300
Eyelematic Manufacturing Company, Inc. made small metal parts at its Connecticut facility. Administrative Law Judge Richard DeBenedetto vacated a flammable-container item because the Secretary's amendment shifted the theory from approved container design to liquid transfer without evidence fitting…
Trinity Industries, Inc.
Noise and press items affirmed with other items vacated
Trinity Industries manufactured liquid propane gas cylinders at a Jacksonville, Florida facility and contested consolidated health and safety citations. The Commission declined to dismiss the cases over the Secretary's refusal to comply with discovery orders because Trinity had litigated the…
Green Duck Corporation
Machine-safety settlement reduces penalties to $660
Green Duck, a novelty-products manufacturer, was cited for machine guarding, an unguarded belt drive, a repeat power-press violation, posting, and hazard communication conditions. OSHA initially proposed $1,730, and the judge assessed $1,600. In settlement, one machine-guarding sub-item was…
Kaspar Wire Works, Inc.
Power-press case remanded for unresolved defenses
Kaspar Wire Works challenged citations arising from an OSHA inspection of its manufacturing plant. The judge affirmed a serious item alleging that a mechanical power press was operated without using its point-of-operation protection and assessed $160. He also affirmed, without a penalty, an item…
Davis Metal Stamping, Inc.
Evidence admitted despite invalid ex parte warrant
OSHA obtained an ex parte warrant to inspect Davis Metal’s plant after company officers refused entry and stated that mechanical power presses were unguarded. Applying Fifth Circuit precedent, the Commission treated the warrant as invalid under OSHA’s inspection regulation then in effect. It…
Marmon Group, d/b/a Darling Store Fixtures, Inc.
Serious press-guarding violation affirmed as not willful
Marmon Group used pull-out devices to keep power-press operators' hands away from points of operation. After an operator's fingers were injured, testimony showed that an assistant foreman had not consistently checked whether the device was properly adjusted for each operator, despite records…
Blocksom and Company
Lockout, cord, and machine items affirmed in part
The Commission reviewed citations involving emergency respirator training, electrical grounding and cord splices, lockout procedures, and guarding on several machines at Blocksom's stuffing-material plant. It vacated the respirator-training item because the company no longer intended employees to…
Metal-Fab, Inc.
Recordkeeping and press-guarding settlement approved
The Secretary withdrew the request to classify three mechanical-power-press guarding violations as willful and accepted the judge's serious classification. Metal-Fab withdrew its contest to an injury-recordkeeping item and agreed that the judge's vacation of that item should be set aside. The…
Geisler Ganz Corporation
Power-press guarding case remanded under Commission burden-of-proof rule
OSHA cited Geisler Ganz Corporation for failing to guard the point of operation on mechanical power presses. The judge vacated the citation because he placed the burden on the Secretary of Labor to prove that a particular guarding method was feasible and useful. Relying on its decision in F.H…
Alliance Enclosures, Inc.
Machine-guarding decision affirmed without substantive Commission review
OSHA cited Alliance Enclosures for missing guards on a radial arm saw, a power brake, a power shear, and four power presses. The judge found that the saw had an adjustable travel stop and vacated that part of the first citation, but affirmed the missing blade guard and the point-of-operation…
"AH" Metal Fabricators, Inc.
Ironworker point-of-operation citation affirmed with a $300 penalty
"AH" Metal Fabricators performed custom metal fabrication using a Mubea Ironworker with notching and hole-punching stations. Operators manually positioned metal close to the unguarded points of operation, creating a risk of finger or hand amputation. The judge rejected the employer's impossibility…
Hedges Neon Sales, Inc.
Steelworker guarding violation affirmed with reduced penalty
Hedges Neon Sales used a multipurpose steelworker with flat shears, a V-notcher, and a punch. OSHA originally cited a mechanical-power-press rule, then amended the charge without objection to the general point-of-operation guarding standard. The machine had movable guards, but operators could…
Kennedy Houseboats, Inc.
Machine-guarding citation affirmed without penalties
Kennedy Houseboats contested point-of-operation guarding allegations involving double-angle saws, a Pexto shear, and the shear and punch on a Dvorak Iron Worker, while several other electrical and machine-guarding items remained contested only as to penalty. The judge found that employees’ hands…
C. A. Spalding Company
Mechanical-press guarding violation affirmed
C. A. Spalding’s tool-and-die shop used mechanical power presses for slow, experimental forming work without point-of-operation devices that kept both of an operator’s hands outside the press. Employees sometimes adjusted material by hand or with a push stick while inching the press. Although no…
Stevens Equipment Co.
Old power-press guarding item vacated
Stevens Equipment fabricated and sold metal products at an Oregon plant. OSHA cited an unguarded mechanical power press and an unguarded chain-and-sprocket drive as serious, along with eight other conditions that the company admitted. The Commission agreed that the press lacked a point-of-operation…
What these documents are
- Commission decisions: Rulings by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission itself, the highest level of agency review. These are citable as Commission precedent, though a decision may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance.
- ALJ decisions: Rulings by OSHRC Administrative Law Judges after a hearing. When no Commissioner directs review, an ALJ decision becomes a final order under 29 U.S.C. § 661(j): it binds the parties in that case but is not binding precedent in other cases.
- Why finality matters: Every page here says which kind of decision you are reading, so you know whether it is precedent you can cite or a final order that only shows how one judge ruled on one set of facts.
- Where they come from: Every page links the official OSHRC public release, and the full text on the page is that release. The plain-English summaries are written by Ezel.