First, describe the work and worksite
A retrofit crew will cold-drill engineer-released connection holes in an existing stabilized building steel member from a protected stationary work platform. The selected magnetic-base drill, annular cutter and secondary retention must be suitable for the actual surface and operating orientation. This fictional learning example describes planned controls; it records no actual inspection or work authorization.
- The structural alteration release identifies the permitted hole locations, dimensions, sequence and any load/support restrictions.
- The actual steel thickness, surface condition, coatings and drill orientation must satisfy the selected equipment instructions; coating disturbance is released separately.
- This is partial coverage of steel modification/retrofit. Anchor-rod alteration, hot cutting, active welding on the member, unknown coatings and unapproved structural changes are excluded.
Questions before work
- Who releases the hole layout and maintains any structural load/support restrictions during drilling?
- Does this member surface and thickness meet the drill’s adhesion and secondary-retention criteria?
- How will people be excluded from chips, the ejected slug and the opposite side of the hole?
Build the analysis one step at a time
What will the worker do? How could someone be harmed? What prevents or reduces that exposure? Who checks the control, and when?
1. Release the structural alteration
Hazard: A wrongly placed hole or changed load path can weaken the member or disturb the supported structure.
Control: Retrofit lead compares the marked holes with the current engineer-released alteration and sequence. Confirm required support/load restrictions and coating condition; hold unmarked changes, unknown coatings or unresolved structural findings.
Verification: Lead and operator check member identity and the approved marks before tool placement.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Permission to install a connection is not permission to drill anywhere convenient.
2. Control access and the exit side
Hazard: An ejected slug or hot sharp chips can strike another worker or enter adjacent work.
Control: Establish protected operator access and close the chip/slug path and opposite face to others. Select a compatible capture or exclusion arrangement without obstructing the cutter; coordinate other work and keep required platform protection intact.
Verification: Area lead checks both faces and the potential falling-object path before setup.
Why this belongs in the analysis: The person exposed by the hole may be on the other side of the steel.
3. Inspect the drill and verify adhesion suitability
Hazard: An unsuitable magnetic surface or damaged retention can let the tool shift or fall.
Control: Operator inspects the drill, guards, cutter, leads and required safety chain/strap. Compare actual material, contact area, thickness and surface condition with this model’s criteria; use only an approved clamping/retention solution and stop if suitability is uncertain.
Verification: Operator checks the model instructions, contact surface and secondary retention before motor use.
Why this belongs in the analysis: A magnet switching on does not prove adequate holding for the cut.
4. Set the tool in the permitted configuration
Hazard: Unplanned cutter or lubricant selection can cause tool failure; unsafe setup can expose hands to rotation.
Control: With the tool in its prescribed safe adjustment state, fit the approved cutter and arrange permitted lubricant/cooling for the operating orientation. Secure the tool and retention under instructions; route power and supplies away from access and rotating parts.
Verification: Operator verifies the setup and clears hands, loose clothing and accessories before starting.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Settings and accessories depend on the actual tool, cutter and workpiece.
5. Drill while monitoring stability
Hazard: Magnet lift, cutter binding or reaching into rotating swarf can cause entanglement and broken-tool injuries.
Control: Follow the selected model’s operating method from the protected position. Keep hands and loose items clear of rotation and never clear chips while running; stop for lift, movement, abnormal cutting or lost power and reassess before restart.
Verification: Operator monitors tool contact and cutter response; attendant maintains the chip/slug boundary.
Why this belongs in the analysis: An automatic safety feature supplements active observation and secondary retention.
6. Stop, collect residue and record the hole
Hazard: Residual rotation, hot chips or a loose slug can injure a worker during removal; an incorrect hole can be hidden by the next connection.
Control: Stop and isolate as required before clearing, changing or removing the tool, verifying rotation has ceased. Collect chips/slug with suitable tools and protection, document actual hole findings and refer discrepancies before connection installation.
Verification: Operator checks the cleared area; retrofit lead records hole acceptance actions and retained load restrictions.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Safe tool removal and structural acceptance are separate closeout tasks.
What does a useful control look like?
| Needs improvement | More useful for this scenario |
|---|---|
| The magnet is on, so drill. | Operator verifies actual thickness, surface, full contact and model-specific retention criteria before motor use and monitors contact throughout the cut. |
| Brush off the chips while cutting. | Operator stops and establishes the prescribed safe adjustment condition before using suitable tools to collect chips; hands remain clear of rotating parts. |
Decisions that change the analysis
Can the magnetic drill work while another crew welds on the same member?
That work is excluded here. Coordinate electrical and equipment interfaces and follow the actual drill instructions; do not assume magnetic adhesion and electronics remain suitable while welding occurs on the workpiece.
What must the crew record for actual use?
Record the engineer-released member/hole schedule, structural and coating restrictions, drill/cutter identity, actual adhesion/retention basis, operating orientation, both-side boundaries, observations and hole discrepancies. Do not invent feed speeds, thickness thresholds or structural acceptance.
Agree when the crew will pause
- Hole marks, member condition, coating identification or structural restrictions differ from the release.
- Magnet/retention suitability is uncertain or the tool lifts, shifts, binds or loses power.
- The protected platform, chip/slug boundary or stopped adjustment condition is lost.
After a pause, correct the condition, reassess the work, and obtain required authorization before restarting. Keep unresolved actions visible.
Download the worked example and free template
No account or paid membership required. The worked example contains planned controls. The blank template is for your own work; neither includes fabricated inspection results, signatures or approval.
Your editable working copy
Build and download your draft
Start blank or load the learning example. Replace its assumptions with your actual conditions and involve the people doing the work. Your entries stay in this browser tab; download a copy before leaving or refreshing.
1. Describe your work and site
2. Work through each task
Describe an observable step, how someone could be harmed, and the control that acts on that hazard. Identify who checks it and what evidence is needed.
3. Record changes, checks, and open actions
Walk the work area, review with the crew, and resolve missing controls. Follow the required approval process. This tool does not judge completeness, verify signatures or authorize work.
Open the downloaded file in a browser, then use Print → Save as PDF for a printable copy.
Training needs to confirm
- Selected magnetic drill/cutter instruction, secondary retention, stopped adjustment and response to loss of adhesion or power.
- Crew instruction in structural alteration limits, protected access, chip/slug boundaries and coating/exposure findings.
Confirm applicable qualifications, task instruction and actual training evidence for the people assigned. Related toolbox talks support crew discussion; they do not establish competence.
Common questions
Can this example be used as a JSA?
Adapt its Task | Hazard | Control analysis to the employer’s format and actual conditions. The example is a teaching aid, not evidence that controls were checked.
What changes if the project requires an AHA?
Use the governing AHA format, risk method, supporting records and acceptance process. The published formwork AHA demonstrates that additional structure; changing a JHA title does not supply it.
Are these resources part of a paid course?
This walkthrough, browser draft builder and downloads are free public resources, separate from Academy course enrollment.
References and source note
- Hougen Magnetic drill operator instructions
- Hougen Magnetic adhesion and secondary retention
- OSHA 1926.300 Tool condition and guarding
Original instructional scenario with planned controls. Primary references support hazard planning. Use actual equipment and product instructions, project design and employer requirements to establish field criteria. Use actual equipment instructions and site requirements alongside these references. Reference review: October 9, 2026.