OSHA Inspection: E.H. BAARE CORPORATION

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Oct 27, 2025

Penalty

Initial $5,628 · Current $3,095 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(b)(7)(iii): A means of selecting Off, "Inch," Single Stroke, and Continuous (when the continuous function is furnished) was not supplied with the clutch/brake control to select type of operation of the press. Fixing of selection was not by means capable of supervision by the employer.  On and before April 9, 2025, the following part revolution mechanical power presses did not have a mode of operation selection means capable of supervision:       1. The Heim 35-ton press, model 9GX, SN 3243, employer equipment #554.  The mode selector switch was not capable of, or were not being supervised.      2. The 35-ton press, employer equipment #588, mode selector switch was not capable of being supervised.      3. The Bliss press, employer equipment #586.  The mode selector switch keys were left in the press unsupervised.      4. The Verson press, employer equipment #520. The mode selector switch keys were left in the press unsupervised.      5. The Danly press, employer equipment #587.  The mode selector switch keys were left in the press unsupervised.

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Oct 27, 2025

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(b)(7)(ix): Mechanical power press(es) using part revolution clutches, with both foot and hand controls, were not designed so that selection between hand and foot control could be supervised:  On and before April 9,  2025, the following part revolution mechanical power presses did not have a hand/foot control selection means capable of, or were not being, supervised:       1.  The 35-ton press, employer equipment #588, hand/foot mode selector switch was not capable of being supervised.      2. The Verson press, employer equipment #520, hand/foot mode selector switch keys were left in the press unsupervised.      3. The Danly press, employer equipment #587, hand/foot mode selector switch was not capable of being supervised.

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Oct 27, 2025

Penalty

Initial $11,254 · Current $6,190 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(c)(1)(i):The employer did not provide and ensure the usage of point of operation guards or properly applied point of operation devices on every operation performed on mechanical power press(es):  On and before April 9, 2025, the Heim 35-ton part revolution mechanical power press, model 9GX, SN 3243, employer equipment #554, did not have a properly applied point of operation protective device, the two hand control station, in use to protect operators.

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Oct 27, 2025

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(c)(3)(vii)(d):Two hand controls used with mechanical power press(es) were not fixed in position so that only a supervisor or safety engineer was capable of relocating the controls:   On and before April 9, 2025, the two hand controls, used to cycle the Heim 35-ton part revolution mechanical power press, model 9GX, SN 3243, employer equipment #554, were not mounted in a fixed position but were mounted to a free-standing pedestal that could be relocated easily.

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Oct 27, 2025

Penalty

Initial $5,628 · Current $3,095 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(c)(3)(i)(e): Requiring application of both of the operator's hands to machine operating controls, the location of such controls were not set at a safety distance from the point of operation that the slide completes the downward travel or stops before the operator can reach into the point of operation with his hands:  The two hand controls, used to cycle the following part revolution mechanical power presses, were not located at such a safety distance from the point of operation that the slide would complete the downward travel or stop before the operator could reach into the point of operation.       1. On and before April 9, 2025, the Heim 35-ton press, model 9GX, SN 3243, employer equipment #554. The two hand controls were mounted to a pedestal positioned against the bolster plate.       2. On and before April 9, 2025, the 35-ton press, employer equipment #588.  The two hand controls were mounted to the press frame bolster plate.      3. On and before April 9, 2025, the Verson press, employer equipment #520. The two hand controls were mounted to the press frame below the bolster plate.      4. On and before April 9, 2025, the Danly press, employer equipment #587.  The two hand controls were mounted to the press frame bolster plate.

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Oct 27, 2025

Penalty

Initial $5,628 · Current $3,095 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(c)(5)(i): Mechanical power press(es) where the operator feeds or removes parts by placing one or both hands in the point of operation, and a two hand control, presence sensing device, or type B gate or movable barrier guard is used, did not use a control system and a brake monitor which complied with paragraphs (b) (13) and (14) of this section:   On and before April 9, 2025, the following part revolution mechanical power presses, utilizing a two hand control device for safeguarding, did not have a control reliable safety rated control system nor have a functioning brake monitoring system which complied with 29 CFR 1910.217 paragraphs (b)(13) and (b)(14):  1.	The Heim 35-ton press, model 9GX, SN 3243, employer equipment #554.  2.	The 35-ton press, employer equipment #588.   3.	The Verson press, employer equipment #520.  4.	The Danly press, employer equipment #587.

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Oct 27, 2025

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(c)(5)(iii):The control of air clutch(es) of mechanical power press(es) where the operator feeds or removes parts by placing one or both hands in the point of operation, and which is used with a two hand control, presence sensing device, Type B gate or movable barrier is used for safeguarding, was not designed to prevent a significant increase in the normal stopping time due to a failure within the operating valve mechanism, and to inhibit further operation if such failure does occur, where a part revolution clutch is employed.  On and before April 9, 2025, the air clutch operating valve mechanism, on the following part revolution mechanical power presses, was not a control reliable dual-solenoid safety rated pneumatic control valve and was not designed to prevent a significant increase in the normal stopping time due to a failure within the valve mechanism.  1.	The Heim 35-ton press, model 9GX, SN 3243, employer equipment #554.  2.	The 35-ton press, employer equipment #588.   3.	The Verson press, employer equipment #520.  4.	The Danly press, employer equipment #587.

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Oct 27, 2025

Penalty

Initial $5,628 · Current $3,095 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(d)(9)(i): The employer did not establish a die setting procedure for mechanical power press(es) that would ensure compliance with 29 CFR 1910.217(c):  On and before April 9, 2025, the employer did not establish any diesetting procedures to ensure employee protection in compliance with 29 CFR 1910.217(c) for employees engaged in diesetting operations.

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Oct 27, 2025

Penalty

Initial $5,628 · Current $3,095 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(e)(1)(i): A program of periodic and regular inspections of mechanical power press(es) was not established and followed to ensure that all parts, auxiliary equipment and safeguards were in a safe operating condition and adjustment:  On and before April 9, 2025, the employer did not establish a periodic and regular inspection program for the company's mechanical power presses.

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Oct 27, 2025

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(e)(1)(ii):Mechanical power press(es) were not inspected and tested at least weekly to determine the condition of the clutch/brake mechanism, antirepeat feature, and single-stroke mechanism:  On and before April 9,  2025, the employer did not perform weekly inspections or testing of the clutch/brake mechanism, antirepeat feature, and single-stroke mechanism on any mechanical power presses.

Issued

Sep 30, 2025

Abate by

Oct 27, 2025

Penalty

Initial $5,628 · Current $3,095 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.217(e)(3): Original and continuing competence of personnel maintaining mechanical power press(es) was not insured:  On and before April 9, 2025, the employer did not insure maintenance staff involved with the service and maintenance of the company's mechanical power presses were trained and competent.