480/277. Arc flash

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fulthrotl said:
nor will you.

there are federal laws against divulging medical information
to almost anyone. an offshoot of the AIDS disease, and nobody
being able to talk about the medical history of any employee, at all.

the vice president of my wife's corporation was injured
while bicycle riding last year. over the bars, neck injury,
and he became a quadrapalegic one sunny saturday.

legally, the ONLY thing that could be said, was that he was
out of the office until further notice. and that was all that
was said. no updates, no location for visitors, no place to
send flowers, nada.

for 8 months, until he returned to work, in a motorized wheelchair.

nobody knew squat about it. HR couldn't say anything to anyone.
the president of the company didn't know much more, until the
vice president called him at home and told him.

there is also the civil, and criminal aspects of violating NFPA 70E.
long before it became verboten to work stuff hot, an apprentice
was shoving a fish tape thru pvc, underground, got into the wrong
pipe, and ended up in a 480 volt panel, hot. it killed him.

this was in the late 70's, when you were only allowed to work stuff
hot in the last six months of your apprenticeship. that actually was
the law in calif.

he was a second year apprentice. the fine, back then, to the electrical
contractor, was $1.5 million. then there was the civil suit, by his family.

no person from your company will say squat about this after the general
counsel sits everyone down in a room, and explains the rules.

it's not just money. there is a civil aspect of this that could merit jail time
for the person responsible for directing this employee's actions.

the ONLY time you can work stuff hot, is when it's more dangerous to NOT
work it hot.
Click to expand...

Nice post but I bet he'll get the whole story sooner than later. One way or another, but again, great post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Great post thanks

yea now the gf said that the buss duct was not live but the nuetral was live and it was labeled downstream .

it sounds like complete bs

im shure the man that was injured will have diff story
 
ADub said:
Nice post but I bet he'll get the whole story sooner than later. One way or another, but again, great post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Without more information, the thing that makes the most sense is that the disconnect for that section of bus duct opened two out of three hots and the neutral rather than three hots.
Even then a meter or even a non-contact tester applied to ALL of the bus conductors would have detected the problem.
 
If the bus duct was supposed to be dead, then sounds like there was a failure to confirm it was dead and/or failure to secure the non powered status (no LOTO possibly and it got turned it back on) before proceeding with work.
 
liquidtite said:
...
the next day gf wouldn't tell us anything about the inscodent just told everyone no
one works on live circuits and that oshsa will be coming by all jobs so wear safety gear. ...

seems like their tryin to cover their ass. ...
.
Click to expand...

You bet they are covering their ass. If the foreman had to TELL everyone to not work on live circuits and wear safety gear, that implies you were not following an established safety procedure, so it sounds to me like the problem is widespread in your company.
 
Fulthrotl said:
nor will you.

there are federal laws against divulging medical information
to almost anyone. an offshoot of the AIDS disease, and nobody
being able to talk about the medical history of any employee, at all.
Click to expand...

Those HIPPA rules are for medical conditions only, and can be given with the consent of the patient.

As far as employer related things, I don't see why they can't talk about what happened, how it could have been prevented, maybe even talk about injuries incurred, things of that nature with other employees, it is just that the hospital can not release updates on the medical condition of the patient. I don't know the laws relating to employment but it maybe possible in the case of worker's compensation paid claims, that the employer can obtain at least some of the patient information but has to otherwise keep it confidential unless the patient gives their consent.
 
Lots of good arguments here about who is responsible. But, having worked in the utility power industry for over 40 years, (where the REALLY big faults can happen), when it all is said and done, the guy doing the work is the guy who's going to get hurt. Nobody wants to be the one whose car is still in the lot at the end of the day. Going home with all of your body parts intact is what we all want. If your safety rules allow you do do things that could get you hurt, or if you're being pressured to break the rules to get a job done, nobody is going to take the blame. It'll always be on the guy who got hurt. We owe it to ourselves to INSURE our own safety. Identify, isolate, test and ground. Do this every time and you'll be fine. Cut the corners and it's on you. Hot work is necessary, of course, but a pre-job "tailboard briefing," correct PPE, safety observers, coverup of live parts, etc. will keep you alive. OK..sermon is over....get back to work!
 
kwired: If the unlucky electrician in question was outsourced, he is also responsible for all the safety checks. But if he is part of maintenance department of company, then the entire maintenance department is at fault.
 
kwired said:
Believe it or not OSHA doesn't really directly tell you what you are supposed to do from what I understand. Your company does needs a safety policy and procedures for different employee hazards - including hazards created by the use/presence of electrical items/equipment. Suitability of that policy and procedures can come under scrutiny of OSHA though, which is why most just choose to utilize third party standards like NFPA 70e, which will require most of the things you mentioned if it is implemented as written.
Click to expand...

...so I guess they don't fine companies millions of dollars for violating safety procedures ?
 
OSHA
1910.333(a)(1)

"Deenergized parts." Live parts to which an employee may be exposed shall be deenergized before the employee works on or near them, unless the employer can demonstrate that deenergizing introduces additional or increased hazards or is infeasible due to equipment design or operational limitations. Live parts that operate at less than 50 volts to ground need not be deenergized if there will be no increased exposure to electrical burns or to explosion due to electric arcs.

Note 1: Examples of increased or additional hazards include interruption of life support equipment, deactivation of emergency alarm systems, shutdown of hazardous location ventilation equipment, or removal of illumination for an area.

Note 2: Examples of work that may be performed on or near energized circuit parts because of infeasibility due to equipment design or operational limitations include testing of electric circuits that can only be performed with the circuit energized and work on circuits that form an integral part of a continuous industrial process in a chemical plant that would otherwise need to be completely shut down in order to permit work on one circuit or piece of equipment.

Note 3: Work on or near deenergized parts is covered by paragraph (b) of this section.
 
Haji said:
kwired: If the unlucky electrician in question was outsourced, he is also responsible for all the safety checks. But if he is part of maintenance department of company, then the entire maintenance department is at fault.
Click to expand...

He wa not part of maintance he is just mechanic for a ec
 
jusme123 said:
...so I guess they don't fine companies millions of dollars for violating safety procedures ?
Click to expand...


Yea I thought oshsa would come down on these guys for the clear violations .

Even like was stated that the worker could have tested to avoided the injury .
 
liquidtite said:
Yea I thought oshsa would come down on these guys for the clear violations .
Click to expand...

They still may, but it will not be until investigation of the incident is over.

The facility owner/operator isn't completely out of the woods either, this is part of why many places still want to see outside contractors follow their internal policies.
 
liquidtite said:
He wa not part of maintance he is just mechanic for a ec
Click to expand...
If the company hired the EC just to fix and wire disco to bus duct without checking any thing due to availability of in house maintenance staff to do that, then maintenance department of company would be responsible for the mishap. But if the EC was asked and he agreed to do checking also, he is responsible.
 
Haji said:
If the company hired the EC just to fix and wire disco to bus duct without checking any thing due to availability of in house maintenance staff to do that, then maintenance department of company would be responsible for the mishap. But if the EC was asked and he agreed to do checking also, he is responsible.
Click to expand...
Actually here, you cannot subordinate responsibility for safety. In other words, a company is NOT let off the hook for safety of the facility or tasks and processes just because they outsourced it to someone else. OSHA can fine them all and even have the managers / supervisors in charge put under arrest by Law Enforcement if it finds there was willful disregard. Responsibility in an outsourced situation can have civil implications after OSHA is done, sure, but the facility owner's team might be fighting over than from behind bars or without benefit of company paid lawyers after a bankruptcy.
 
Jraef said:
In other words, a company is NOT let off the hook for safety of the facility or tasks and processes just because they outsourced it to someone else....
Click to expand...
Agreed. Such a practice would seriously cripple the ability to enforce effective worker protection. But it's a common misunderstanding: I've seen quite a few instances where subcontractors were hired to do work in violation of safety policies because managers were under the mistaken impression that absolved them of responsibility.
 
big john said:
Agreed. Such a practice would seriously cripple the ability to enforce effective worker protection. But it's a common misunderstanding: I've seen quite a few instances where subcontractors were hired to do work in violation of safety policies because managers were under the mistaken impression that absolved them of responsibility.
Click to expand...

it's not just in the industrial environment that has occurred here.
let's think back to the '08 sub prime bubble, when folks were
called in to "approve" loan documents.

they don't usually jail the financial folks who hire minions to
sign on the dotted line.... maybe they should start doing that....

but, to the topic at hand, if you operate in either bad faith, or
gross negligence, and a person dies as a result of it, it is commonly
called manslaughter.

and you don't have to be a trained professional to be liable. i
watched firsthand as a fellow who was not an electrician, but a
landlord, lost almost everything he had, and went to prison for two
years, in an electrically related death.
 
I read article online regarding accident .

sAys oshsa and port athority police are investigating the accident that occured.

also had a article from victims layers office stating what happened and condition of the victim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top