OSHA 29 CFR 1910 Subpart O — Machinery and Machine Guarding (incl. 1910.212) — Compliance Brief
Records covered: mechanical-reg-001 · manufacturing-reg-001 Merge note: these two records describe the same federal rule from two discipline angles — Subpart O is the section, and 1910.212 is its anchor provision. One brief covers both; no material difference in obligations. Issuing body / enforcer: US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Department of Labor. Jurisdiction: US federal general industry; state-plan states enforce equivalent standards. Status: Longstanding regulation; actively enforced. Per catalogue notes, 1910.212(a)(1) remains among OSHA's most-cited manufacturing violations in 2026 enforcement data.
1. What it is
Subpart O (§§1910.211–1910.219) is OSHA's general-industry machine-safety rule. Its core is 1910.212, "General requirements for all machines" — the provision cited when any machine exposes workers to unguarded hazards. Around it sit machine-specific companion rules: 1910.213 (woodworking machinery), 1910.215 (abrasive wheel machinery), 1910.216 (mills and calenders), 1910.217 (mechanical power presses), 1910.218 (forging machines), and 1910.219 (mechanical power-transmission apparatus). The structure is deliberate: 1910.212 states the universal duty, and the companion sections add detail for historically high-amputation machine types.
2. Scope — who and what it applies to
Every general-industry employer with machines in the workplace — which in practice means every manufacturing plant, machine shop, and maintenance operation in the country. "Machines" is read broadly: rotating shafts, belts, gears, points of operation, ingoing nip points, and any place where flying chips or sparks endanger workers. 1910.212 applies to all machines; the companion sections add requirements for the named machine families. Construction has a parallel (1926 Subpart I and others); agriculture another. Designers and integrators aren't directly regulated, but their machines are judged against this rule the moment they're installed — building an unguarded machine is building your customer a citation.
3. Key requirements and compliance obligations
- Guard the point of operation, ingoing nip points, rotating parts, and flying-chip/spark zones — 1910.212(a)(1). The guard must prevent contact; barrier guards, presence-sensing devices, pullbacks, and two-hand controls are recognized methods, selected per the machine's risk assessment (ANSI B11 series is the consensus guidance OSHA measures against).
- Anchor machines designed for a fixed location to prevent walking or tipping — 1910.212(a)(3); keep floors around machines in good repair.
- Power-transmission apparatus (shafts, belts, pulleys, gears under 1910.219) must be guarded when within 7 feet of the floor or working platform.
- Mechanical power presses (1910.217) carry the heaviest sub-requirements: point-of-operation guarding or devices, regular inspections, and die-setting procedures — press injuries drive a disproportionate share of amputations.
- Abrasive wheels (1910.215): work rests, tongue guards, maximum exposure angles, ring-testing wheels before mounting.
- Maintenance of guards: guards must be kept in place and functional; removing a guard for maintenance triggers lockout/tagout (1910.147) obligations — see the companion LOTO brief.
4. Penalties / consequences (2026 figures, verified)
OSHA maximums assessable after 15 January 2026: $16,550 per violation for serious/other-than-serious; $165,514 per violation for willful or repeated. (No inflation increase for 2026 — the October 2025 funding lapse blocked the CPI data; see the shared General Duty Clause brief.) Machine-guarding citations are among the most frequently issued in manufacturing, and amputations routinely produce willful or repeat characterizations when prior citations or known hazards exist. Beyond fines: abatement orders (guard the machine now), Severe Violator Enforcement Program placement for egregious cases, and citation history that plaintiffs' attorneys use in injury litigation.
5. Version and edition status — live changes
Subpart O is a mature rule — its text changes rarely. What moves is enforcement posture and consensus guidance: OSHA's National Emphasis Programs (e.g. on amputations in manufacturing) periodically surge inspections; the ANSI B11 series (B11.0, B11.19, etc.) evolves and OSHA treats current consensus practice as the benchmark for "adequate" guarding in contested cases. Employers should track the current B11 editions alongside the regulation text. Flag: no rulemaking to revise Subpart O's core text was identified as of September 2026.
6. Related certifications
- Industrial/Systems — PE Industrial & Systems (industrial-systems-cert-010); Manufacturing — PE Industrial and Systems (manufacturing-cert-012): licensed engineers who own plant machine-safety programs and sign off on guarding designs.
- Manufacturing — SME Certified Manufacturing Engineer (CMfgE) (manufacturing-cert-001): tests manufacturing safety and equipment knowledge including guarding concepts.
- Industrial/Systems — Lean Bronze/Silver/Gold (industrial-systems-cert-006): lean practitioners redesigning cells must re-validate guarding after every layout change.
3b. The risk-assessment layer OSHA expects behind the guards
1910.212 states the duty in performance language — "guard to prevent contact" — which means the adequacy of a guard is judged against recognized practice, principally the ANSI B11 series (B11.0 safety of machinery — general requirements and risk assessment; B11.19 performance requirements for safeguarding). The defensible compliance file for a machine therefore contains: a task-based risk assessment per B11.0 (identify every task — operation, setup, jam clearing, maintenance — and its hazards), the safeguarding method selected for each (barrier guard, interlocked guard, presence-sensing device, two-hand control, pullback/restraint), and validation that the safeguard achieves its required performance (stopping-time measurements for presence-sensing devices, safety-distance calculations). Jam clearing and setup are where most amputations happen and where guards are most often defeated — your assessment must cover them explicitly, and administrative controls ("don't reach in") are never an acceptable substitute for a safeguarding method where the standard's hierarchy applies.
7. Flags and honest caveats
- "Most-cited in 2026" comes from the catalogue record's notes (osha.gov enforcement data); the underlying citation counts were not re-pulled for this brief.
- Guarding adequacy is judged against both the regulation's performance language and current ANSI B11 consensus — meeting the 1970s-era text literally is not a safe harbor if industry practice has moved on.
Original ETS reference writing, verified against public sources on 2026-09-30. Thin sourcing is flagged inline. Not legal advice — confirm current editions with the issuing body.