by , on May 28, 2010
This is another older citation from December 2003 to show how OSHA has been incorporating NFPA 70E into the precedents.  The HVAC worker was burned badly in an arc flash.  No clothing ignition so the energy level was fairly low but I understand he received second and third degree burns on his arms. Click Here to...
by , on May 27, 2010
Three primary causes for “manhole explosions” are 1. Ignition of combustible or flammable gases or dusts in the manhole 2. Arc Flash 3. A combination of the two. By law, gases are monitored and these explosions are fairly rare.  Arc flashes are more common when gases are being monitored.  Click here to read the report.
by , on May 27, 2010
In This Issue Arc Test Dates Honeywell Offers to Buy Sperian ASTM F1506 Adds Disposable and Limited Use Wear to Arc Ratings ASTM Proposed Glove Test Method Blocked NFPA 70E-2012 ROC Meeting Updated NFPA 70B-2010 Out ASTM F819 Terminology Updated ArcFlash Blaster Seeks Partner or Sale Burn Up the Myth: Wet suit and Sizing NEW...
by , on May 26, 2010
"OSHA's policy for citing the general industry standard for personal protective equipment (PPE), 29 CFR 1910.132(a), for the failure to provide and use flame-resistant clothing (FRC) in oil and gas well drilling, servicing, and production-related operations. For the purpose of this memo, FRC includes both flame-resistant and fire retardant treated clothing. Clarification of the need to provide and use FRC during certain drilling, servicing, and production-related operations is necessary to resolve its inconsistent use among drilling contractors, well servicing contractors, and oil and gas companies that employ thousands of workers in these operations. OSHA inspection history and current information, including consensus standards, scientific evidence, and accident and injury data, indicate a potential for flash fires during certain well drilling, servicing, and production-related operations.... Citation Guidance for 29 CFR 1910.132(a) Where appropriate, CSHOs shall cite 29 CFR 1910.132(a) for the failure to provide and ensure the use of FRC in oil and gas drilling, well servicing, or production-related operations when there is a potential for flash fire hazards as discussed below. Drilling Operations FRC is usually not needed during initial rig up and normal drilling operations prior to reaching active hydrocarbon zones, unless other activities warrant their use; e.g., fracing a previously drilled well while rigging a well in close proximity. A potential for flash fire exists once active gas or hydrocarbon zones are reached. Appropriate FRC shall be worn by exposed employees working on the well site prior to drilling into identified gas or hydrocarbon zones. CSHOs should verify that employees are wearing FRC in advance of reaching such zones. Appropriate FRC should also be worn when there is a history of fluid or gas kicks from underground producing zones. Once FRC is identified for use as provided above, employees should wear appropriate FRC until the final casing is cemented and the well is effectively closed. Well Servicing Operations CSHOs shall determine whether FRC is provided and worn during well servicing or workover operations, such as: Pulling wet string tubing Snubbing tubing Swabbing operations Fracturing or perforating the well Using bridge plugs or packers Open hole work Flow testing, blowing down or venting the well Plugging an abandoned well Flowback operations Cementing Stimulation Wireline operations Any operation working with wellhead or wellbore under pressure Production-Related Operations In OSHA's experience, the potential for flash fire also exists in production-related operations that fall outside of drilling and well servicing. CSHOs shall determine whether FRC is provided and worn during production-related operations, such as: Equipment openings (e.g., line breaking or valve changes) Gauging Transfer of hydrocarbons Maintenance operations on production equipment Hot work operations Tank heating Using open flame Start-up operations"
by , on May 26, 2010
Normally these types of fatalities are caused during maintenance but in some of these high speed processes there can be static electricity build up which is normally managed by processes in the machine.  No word yet on the cause. If this was a maintence work situation NFPA 70E and OSHA standards would apply and can...
by , on May 12, 2010
"Question: Under what circumstances may an employer located in Minnesota repair a damaged extension cord under 29 CFR 1926, Subpart K? Answer: Paragraph 1926.405(g)(2)(iii) provides: Flexible cords shall be used only in continuous lengths without splice or tap. Hard service flexible cords No. 12 or larger may be repaired if spliced so that the splice retains the insulation, outer sheath properties, and usage characteristics of the cord being spliced. This standard permits you to repair an extension cord, under the conditions set forth, provided the cord is a flexible cord that is No. 12 or larger. Additionally, 1926.403(a) requires all electrical conductors used by employers on a construction site to be "approved." Section 1926.449 defines "approved" as: Acceptable to the authority enforcing this subpart. The authority enforcing this subpart is the Assistant Secretary of Labor for the Occupational Safety and Health. The definition of "acceptable" indicates what is acceptable to the Assistant Secretary of Labor, and therefore approved within the meaning of this subpart. Section 1926.449 defines "acceptable" as: An installation or equipment is acceptable to the Assistant Secretary of Labor, and approved within the meaning of this subpart K: (a) If it is accepted, or certified, or listed, or labeled, or otherwise determined to be safe by a qualified testing laboratory capable of determining the suitability of materials and equipment for installation and use in accordance with this standard; or (b) With respect to an installation or equipment of a kind which no qualified testing laboratory accepts, certifies, lists, labels, or determines to be safe, if it is inspected or tested by another Federal agency, or by a State, municipal, or other local authority responsible for enforcing occupational safety provisions of the National Electrical Code, and found in compliance with those provisions; or (c) With respect to custom-made equipment or related installations which are designed, fabricated for, and intended for use by a particular customer, if it is determined to be safe for its intended use by its manufacturer on the basis of test data which the employer keeps and makes available for inspection to the Assistant Secretary and his authorized representatives. Assuming the extension cord you are repairing was initially "acceptable," §1926.403(a) precludes you from using a repaired cord if the cord is significantly altered as a result of the repair. For example, you are precluded from using a repaired cord if the repair changes the cord's original flexibility.1 As you may be aware, the State of Minnesota operates its own occupational safety and health program under a plan approved by Federal OSHA. Under this plan, the Minnesota Department of Labor promulgates and enforces occupational safety and health standards under authority of State law, and posts them on its website at http://www.dli.mn.gov/mnosha.asp. Although some of Minnesota's standards are different, both its standards and interpretations must be at least as effective as Federal OSHA's. For information on Minnesota's Electrical standard and its enforcement, we suggest that you contact: James Krueger, Compliance Director 443 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4307 PH: (651) 284-5050 TOLL FREE: (877) 470-6742 FAX: (651) 284-5741"
by , on May 11, 2010
OSHA has gotten more and more agressive on arc flash and electrical safety training.  In this $210,000 fine, the lack of electrical safety training is specifically listed.  I have had MANY USPS folks in our classes at the NSC and other venues.  They were all interested in safety.  Hopefully this is a fluke and most...
by , on May 10, 2010
The story says this worker was alive, burned but incoherent.  This is possibly a sign of an arc flash rather than a contact with a powerline.  Many companies and workers don’t really understand the hazards of working near electrical parts or powerlines. The article calls this an electrocution (which is most commonly defined as fatal electrical...
by , on April 27, 2010
Electric Arc & Safety Newsletter The Most Authoritative Source for Electrical & Arc Flash Safety News In This Issue Arc Test Dates NFPA 70E Thinks De-energized United Relay Patent on Arc Flash Energy Reduction Articles Accidents & Videos Chicago Electrical Trauma Research Program now an Institute Fines by OSHA & OHSA on Electrical Hazards New 5.5 oz...
by , on April 27, 2010
OSHA has become serious about preventing electrical injuries.  They are citing NFPA 70E in their interpretation letters which are making it clear that the old idea of “OSHA Minimum” is dying.  OSHA minimum is not following the OSHA standards but keeping workers safe and healthy in the workplace from workplace exposures and injuries.  Read this...