Near Miss

[Leitmotif]

Re: Near Miss

I have read thru this entire thread.
I have 20 years experience in safety and health. I did my master thesis on welding arc and pothential hazard from them. I often advised electrical crews in shipyard and other industry.
I have in that career field investigatd a fatality were a kid got killed on 277 because a forklift broke a conduit connection. No ground was pulled.

I have seen 3 severe flash burns - 3rd degree.

I learned the trade on board a nuc submarine.
I have seen switchboard fires and meltdown both on the sub and at Trojan Nuclear Plant.

I have had people tell me a house panel is no big deal it is 120 only. What I explain to them is that it is 120 true BUT the transformer supplying the other 4houses has a rating of 25 (50?) Kw and who knows what the fuse rating is. I don't want to be around if that panel (worse yet meter socket or input to main breaker)is shorted.

I now hold an 07 (maintenance) card in Washington State.

This stuff aint nothn to mess with.

I am glad to see NFPA come out with something to guide. I NEED to read it and get a good understanding of it.

Some thoughts
Will it cost more to do the job YOU BET.
Will it take more time PROBABLY.
Is it worth it for the employer / owner
- hard argument to deal with especially when no one gets hurt.
HOWEVER I did not see management around nor the owner when we pulled Bill Friend out of the blown out switchgear at Trojan Nuclear.
What was the cost of that - only 3 days in the hospital and Bill had to wear welding goggles for a few days at work.

I think it is ALWAYS best to work deenergized.
It is MUCH safer than working hot.
I admit there are times when there is almost no choice but to work hot
batteries for one
major distribution gear
vital circuits in hospitals
trouble shooting or measuring

There is a saying on chemicals
There are no safe chemicals
There are safe ways to work with them.

We can easily paraphrase to electrical I think.

Cash is tite (looking for job) so where can I get low cost (better yet free of course) version of NFPA to study.

I need to clean up my act also and stop taking some of those dumb risks.

Dan Bentler

 

[peter d]

Re: Near Miss

Originally posted by charlie tuna:

what would have prevented my co-worker from being killed on the job???? we were working at a bank building and he was checking the wattage of a light fixture.... if we turned the building's main "off" before he touched the fixture which would be required to be done after hours or on satruday. or maybe require the installer of the light fixture to be licensed and understand "grounding and bonding"! these rules are allowing unqualified people to work in our trade and install things that don't kill someone that same day -- but maybe a year or two later.

Charlie, I don't follow you at all. I still can't see the how OSHA regs contribute to unqualified work. Furthermore, weeding out unqualified workers and contractors is the job of AHJ's, licensing boards, or fire marshalls, not OSHA.

Was this ungrounded fixture live at the time your coworker was checking it?

 

[charlie tuna]

Re: Near Miss

d,
the bank manager asked us to install some matching fixtures to those existing along a roof parapit. my coworker was leaning on the roof flashing (grounded) with the fixture open as he attempted to read the wattage off the top of the bulb. a time clock came "on" at 2:45 pm and energized the fixture which locked him onto it! the time clock was set at the wrong time due to some electrical storms we had the week before.
the other contractor's attorney asked me during a deposition "don't you think your employee should have known better to place himself in situation of getting electricuted?". i answered him by asking him the question "when you get home from work and you are thirsty, and you go to your refrigerator for a cold drink --- do you unplug it before touching the door handle?"....

i also am nuclear trained and a submariner -- the work i am talking about is related to construction and electrical service and maintainance. a qualified electrician "should" know enough to balance the risk at hand! when it is against the law to open a junction box with energized -- but insulated conductors -- i believe the law is out of line! many circuit problems can only be found by troubleshooting with energized surfaces exposed to the electrician. and a balance of what is at risk should be made by the "qualified" electrician! repulling a 20 amp circuit in a 3/4" pipe that has only six or seven energized conductors in it is alot different than trying to pull a second feeder into a 4" raceway with energized 350 mcm conductors feeding an airport control tower.

 

[iwire]

Re: Near Miss

Charlie I am certainly sad to hear about the loss of your friend. I do not see how it relates to this thread.

It was certainly not your friends fault some else did not ground the fixture.

But it certainly illustrates the point that every time you open up a live panel you are counting on the previous guys work.

Did they leave tools or hardware ready to fall in there?

when it is against the law to open a junction box with energized -- but insulated conductors -- i believe the law is out of line!

That is not the law, there would be no exposed energized parts in what you describe.

many circuit problems can only be found by troubleshooting with energized surfaces exposed to the electrician.

1) OSHA allows live troubleshooting with PPE.

2)IMO you should rephrase your statement.
You can troubleshoot dead with a continuity tester it just takes longer and is less convenient.

repulling a 20 amp circuit in a 3/4" pipe that has only six or seven energized conductors in it is alot different than trying to pull a second feeder into a 4" raceway with energized 350 mcm conductors

Yes there are, but both can kill you.

There is no good reason to do it live.

Only two reasons to do it live that I can think of and both are poor reasons.

1)Money

2)It's Cool, Macho, Manly etc.

Don't get me wrong I still have to clean up my own act, I break the rules less all the time but old habits die hard.

Our new employees do not work live, they have been trained in the rules and have not gotten into bad habits.

Now who is the stupid one?

The new guys that do not work live and will very likely never be hurt or us that do break the rules and may well get hurt.

The extra cost to the customer does not concern me in the least.

You would not save the customer money by using smaller conductors than the NEC requires why put employees at risk to save the customer money?

I think the rules are good ones and as time goes on attitudes will change, equipment will be designed with service in mind and less workers trained, green or veteran will be injured.

 

[realolman]

Re: Near Miss

I just can't buy your notion that companies are going to be ushering in hordes of unskilled workers to maintain and troubleshoot complex machinery because OSHA regs require PPE.

I don't expect "ushering hordes of unskilled workers." As with the OSHA reg. that is overreacting.

I expect a lowering of regard for the job from everyone, including the workers. As glamorous as it is , even my job will be hell on earth if I have to start wearing PPE every day.

I think American manufacturing is in fact more screwed than you thought. Not necessarily from OSHA regs, but this reg sure "ain't gonna help". It goes too far.

As more American jobs are lost to globalization, workers are going to be forced to take crummy jobs wearing moon suits for less money.

I think OEM's have management convinced that all that's neccessary to troubleshoot their machines is to pick up the phone and call. They even have modems and ethernet installed in the machine. I spend a good bit of time on hold every week to get info that should have been included with the machine in the first place. How much are you going to pay a guy to be on hold? Just make sure when he actually has to go out there and look in the cabinet he is wearing a moon suit.

There is a name for this ... De-Skilling.

The chances of a "cabinet exploding in a worker's face as he is taking a few measurements" is just about nil. I hope whoever thinks I should wear PPE to do that, is wearing a crash suit for the drive home.

[ October 09, 2005, 08:32 AM: Message edited by: realolman ]

 

[iwire]

Re: Near Miss

Originally posted by realolman:
The chances of a "cabinet exploding in a worker's face as he is taking a few measurements" is just about nil.

But it does happen and is the injury to the employee worth it?

Originally posted by realolman:
Whoever thinks I should wear PPE to do that, but he and his family are not wearing crash suits for the drive home, is a hypocrite.

I agree we are MUCH more likely to be injured driving to work than performing our job.

Not a doubt in my mind about that.

I have a large vehicle with airbags, anti loc brakes and we always wear our seat belts. We do what we can to protect ourselves.

There is also a problem with that analogy, unless you have a Star Trek 'transporter' you have no choice but to drive to work.

There are alternatives to working unprotected live.

You have a few choices Realolman.

1) Deal with it, I imagine you are paid by the hour.

2)Ignore the rules and if you continue to be lucky you will only be fired.

3)Lobby Congress to change OSHA mission.

OSHA's Mission

OSHA's mission is to assure the safety and health of America's workers by setting and enforcing standards; providing training, outreach, and education; establishing partnerships; and encouraging continual improvement in workplace safety and health.

No where in OHSAs mission is anything about helping reduce costs so we do not lose jobs to overseas.

JMO, I know I won't change yours.

Bob

 

[realolman]

Re: Near Miss

Originally posted by iwire:

There is also a problem with that analogy, unless you have a Star Trek 'transporter' you have no choice but to drive to work.

The fact is if you are concerned about nothing else but protecting yourself from accidents, you do not have to drive to work. Surely you're not going for the money!?!

[ October 09, 2005, 09:13 AM: Message edited by: realolman ]

 

[iwire]

Re: Near Miss

Originally posted by realolman:
The fact is if you are concerned about nothing else but protecting yourself from accidents, you do not have to drive to work. Surely you're not going for the money!?!

 

[realolman]

Re: Near Miss

I agree completely... except where to draw, and who draws the line. The balance is the essence of this discussion.

I think the decision should be mine.

I will have to abide by OSHA, but that doesn't make OSHA correct.

 

[charlie tuna]

Re: Near Miss

as i read the early portions of this subject, there are many people who believe opening a junction box with energized insulated conductors is against the rules of osha... this is the problem -- interpitation!!!

ever troubleshoot a six color printing press that has a intermittent problem in the coating section?? can't !!! so i guess the next thing to do since we can't trace the problem to a $30.00 relay is replace sections of the controls until the problem goes away.

this rule is similar to the safety belt rule they came up with about 12 years ago. not alot of thought went into it -- and today -- the safety belt thing is back to common sense approuch..

and since it's inseption -- osha from what i have seen is a joke! it has done some good for the industry---but most of the time it arrives on jobsites "after" the accident. and i have seen where a worker calls about unsafe conditions on a jobsite and only his trade gets the citation. almost like saying "next time don't bother us"! and when you need them--really need them -- they look you straight in the eye and tell you "their hands are tied" as was the case in the death of my employee..................

 

[peter d]

Re: Near Miss

Charlie and Realolman, the bottom line is that we are not going to agree on this issue.

 

[peter d]

Re: Near Miss

I will by close saying that I would rather spend a day in a sweaty, uncomfotable "moon suit" than the rest of my life with 3rd degree burns. The choice is pretty clear to me.

(Edit missing word)

[ October 09, 2005, 04:28 PM: Message edited by: peter d ]

 

[iwire]

Re: Near Miss

Originally posted by peter d:
I will close saying that I would rather spend a day in a sweaty, uncomfotable "moon suit" than the rest of my life with 3rd degree burns. The choice is pretty clear to me.

Pete you might want to try the suit first.

I am just kidding around but it really is a pain to work in.

There is darn little air in this suit, this is my buddy getting ready to work, it is about 95 to 100 F in this room. He is not a happy guy.

The thing is the proper PPE does not mean always the moon suit, in many instances it can be much less than a full suit. I have some 600 Volt gloves that are ease to work with.

 

[peter d]

Re: Near Miss

Originally posted by iwire:

I am just kidding around but it really is a pain to work in.

Oh, you mean it's not air conditioned? I thought all moon suits had climate control. Darn! Well, I guess chugging a few gallons of water afterward will have to suffice.

Of of curiosity, what type of work is your coworker doing to require this level of PPE? If I remember this is for doing thermal imaging, right?

 

[iwire]

Re: Near Miss

Originally posted by peter d:
Of of curiosity, what type of work is your coworker doing to require this level of PPE? If I remember this is for doing thermal imaging, right?

You got it, all he has to do is open the covers and shoot the interior with the thermal imaging camera, then close the gear up again.

I was not there but if I remember what I was told this was 13 KV switchgear at a large software company campus.

 

[peter d]

Re: Near Miss

 

[Leitmotif]

Re: Near Miss

And all he is doing is taking infra red readings?
From the front face of the gear (13Kv)I hope cause I dont see a hot stick in the photo. If I had to reach into the gear I would surely do it with a hot stick.
Sure seems like a lot of protection for non contact work to me.

I don't think line men (at least in my memory) ever wore this much gear and they are doing connnect disconnect at much higher voltage.
Man I just gotta read that NFPA 70.

Dan Bentler

 

[iwire]

Re: Near Miss

Hi Dan, A couple of points, the linemen are not subject to the same rules as we electricians.

That suit may well be overkill in this instance, I really do not know. We have a limited amount of protection levels, call them light, medium and extreme. My buddy may have felt the medium protection was to little so his only choice from there was this suit.

I have not seen this switch gear but once the covers where removed if there where exposed live parts flash protection would be required even for hot stick work.

Bob

 

[realolman]

Re: Near Miss

Originally posted by peter d:
Charlie and Realolman, the bottom line is that we are not going to agree on this issue.

I agree

 

[realolman]

Re: Near Miss

moderator please delete this post.

thanks

Real, but dumb sometimes, olman

[ October 10, 2005, 04:34 PM: Message edited by: realolman ]