Please base your response on the following scenario:

Case Study 1: Printing Press Roll Cleaning A printing press produces printed materials as its normal production function. The printing press's rollers have to be cleaned periodically during the work shift to ensure quality control. In this scenario, the press is not shut down for the cleaning operation. The printing press is energized and its rollers continue to spin at a very high speed. In order for employees to clean the rollers they must bypass the printing press's machine guards, and use rags to clean the rollers. This exposes them to serious, in going nip point hazards created by the rollers.

Severe laceration or amputated fingers could result if the rag or an employee's hand were to get caught in the rollers or in an area between the rollers and a fixed part of the machine. Although the employer has a lockout/tagout program for servicing and/or maintenance of the printing presses, for this particular cleaning operation the employer believes that lockout/tagout procedures do not need to be implemented.

According to the employer, this cleaning operation is exempt from lockout/tagout requirements because it falls under the minor servicing exemption and therefore the employer allows the equipment to remain operating during the cleaning operation. Remember, as stated above, the employees are still exposed to the hazardous energy of the printing press' during the cleaning operation.

Question 1 - Is this roll cleaning activity covered by the Lockout/Tagout standard?

Question 2 - The employer argues that the roll cleaning activity is routine, repetitive, and integral to the production operation and that lockout is not required because the minor servicing exception described in 29 CFR 1910.147(a)(2)(ii) is applicable.

Is the employer correct?