By Ken Stanford Editor
click to enlarge
FLOWERY BRANCH – A worker at the Hall County (Georgia) wastewater treatment plant on Spout Springs Road suffered severe burns in an electrical accident Tuesday (3/29/11) morning.

“A subcontractor’s electrician at the county-owned Spout Springs Water Reclamation Facility was working on an electrical panel when it exploded just before noon,” Hall County spokeswoman Nikki Young said.

Young said he was badly burned and was flown to the burn unit at Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta at 12:15. “The worker was a subcontractor employee, not a county employee, and was performing maintenance on the plant.”

Hall County Fire and EMS Chief David Kimbrell said the worker was trying to locate some blown fuses. Kimbrell says the flash fire caused some “second- and third-degree burns to his arms and hands (and) due to the severity of the buns about the hands, he was flown to the Grady burn center for further treatment.”

Ken Rearden, Hall County Public Works & Utilities Director, said the subcontractor is MacArthur Electric, the county’s contract electrician, and was working on the panel again at mid-afternoon Tuesday.

Young said the plant is working fine. “We are not able to pump reuse water today but with the recent rain, that’s not a problem.”

The treatment plant is located near the Reunion Subdivision.

By: Simon Fridlyand

Every single day, it is estimated that between five and 10 arc flash explosions occur in electrical equipment in the U. S. A., according to statistics compiled by Cap- Schell Inc. of Chicago, IL. That means arcing faults could send more than 2,000 workers to burn centres in the next year (Canadian statistics represent roughly 10% of these numbers). Here are four examples of actual arc flash incidents:

Example #1: A journeyman electrician was working on an electrical panel when an arc flash/blast occurred. He was pushed back by the force of the blast and his shirt caught fire. He sustained burns to 20% of his body, including deep burns to his wrists and hands.

Example #2: An electrical foreman with over 20 years experience was working on a high-voltage circuit that he thought was de-energized. Unfortunately, he had de-energized the wrong circuit. While working on the circuit, he was thrown back by an arc flash/blast and received burns to his arm, neck and face.

Example #3: A journeyman lineman was holding an energized 2,200-volt wire when it grounded out through his leg. He sustained electric shock burns to his trunk and leg and associated flash burns to his hands.

Example #4: A journeyman electrician was installing a high-voltage panel when an arc blast occurred for unknown reasons. The explosion caused the worker to lose consciousness. He sustained burns to his hands, wrists and face.

In a recent arc flash test by an electrical equipment supplier, the amount of heat measured at 18 in. from the test box was capable of causing third-degree burns on exposed flesh and igniting conventional clothing; impulse sound levels were above 140 dB, meaning that without protection, permanent hearing impairment would be expected; light levels were intense enough to cause immediate vision impairment and increased chance of future cataract development; toxic gases such as copper oxide dust were forced out of the enclosure; shrapnel was ejected at high velocities; and molten metal projectiles contained enough heat to ignite conventional clothing.

Obviously, this is a dangerous hazard. So what is arc flash and what causes it?

An arc flash (also known as an arc blast) is a voltage breakdown of the resistance of air, resulting in an arc. With arcing faults, current actually flows through ionized air, causing an arc and releasing energy into the surrounding environment.

This can occur where there is sufficient voltage in an electrical system and a path to ground or to a lower voltage. An arc flash where there is a high level of current — in the range 1,000 amps or more — can cause substantial damage, fire or injury. Arcs can produce radiant energy four times hotter than the temperature on the surface of the sun.

Whether caused by a dropped tool, an accidental contact with a live circuit or build-up of dust, dirt, corrosion or particles that can act as a conductor, arcing faults release dangerous levels of radiant energy.

The massive energy released in the fault instantly vaporizes the metal conductors involved, blasting molten metal and expanding plasma outward with extreme force. A typical arc flash incident can be inconsequential but could conceivably easily produce a more severe explosion. The result of the violent event can cause destruction of equipment involved, fire, and injury not only to workers but also to people nearby.

In addition to the explosive blast of such a fault, destruction also arises from the intense radiant heat produced by the arc. The metal plasma arc produces tremendous amounts of light energy from far-infrared to ultraviolet. Surfaces of nearby people and objects absorb this energy and are instantly heated to vaporizing temperatures. The effects of this can be seen on adjacent walls and equipment — they are often ablated and eroded from the radiant effects.

The Canadian Standards Association is working on developing the CSA Z462 Arc Flash Standard. This document is Canada’s version of the U. S. NFPA 70E standard and is scheduled to be released at the end of 2008. This document provides guidance on implementing appropriate work practices that are required to safeguard workers from injury while working on or near exposed electrical conductors or circuit parts that could become energized.

The standard provides a method on how to evaluate exposure to potential arc flash/blast hazard. This includes determining Incident Energy, PPE Requirements, Flash Hazard Boundary, Shock Hazard and the Limited, Restricted and Prohibited Approach Boundaries for Shock Hazard.

Three key factors determine the intensity of an arc flash event on personnel. These factors are the quantity of fault current available in a system, the time fault until an arc flash is cleared, and the distance an individual is from an arc. Various design and equipment configuration choices can be made to affect these factors and in turn reduce the arc flash hazard.

Fault current: Fault current can be limited by using current-limiting devices such as grounding resistors or fuses. If the fault current is limited to five amps or less, then many ground faults self-extinguish and do not propagate into phase-to-phase faults.

Arcing time: Arcing time can be reduced by temporarily setting upstream protective devices to lower set points during maintenance periods or by employing zone interlocking.

Distance: Remote operators or robots can be used to perform activities that are of high risk for arc flash incidents, such as racking breakers on a live electrical bus.

Choosing the right PPE

Selection of appropriate PPE is normally handled by one of two possible ways. The first method is to consult a hazard category classification table, as can be found in the description of the Standard. The table lists a number of typical electrical tasks and various voltage levels, and recommends the category of PPE that should be worn.

For example, when working on 600-volt switchgear and performing a removal of bolted covers to expose bare, energized parts, the table recommends a Category 3 Protective Clothing System. The Category 3 system corresponds to an ensemble of PPE that together offers protection up to 25 cal/cm2. The arc rating is normally expressed in cal/cm2 (or calories of heat energy per square centimetre).

The minimum rating of PPE necessary for any category is the maximum available energy for that category.

The second method of selecting PPE is to perform an arc flash hazard calculation to determine the available incident arc energy. The Standard provides a guide to perform this calculation, given that the bolted fault current, duration of faults and other general equipment information is known. Once the incident energy is calculated, the appropriate ensemble of PPE that offers protection greater than the energy available can be selected.

PPE provides protection after an arc flash incident has occurred and should be viewed as the last line of protection. Reducing the frequency and severity of incidents should be the first option. This can be achieved through a complete arc flash hazard assessment and through the application of technology such as high-resistance grounding, which has been proven to reduce the frequency and severity of incidents.

The standard also requires that each piece of equipment (switchboard, motor control centre, etc.), where arc flash may take place, must have a label identifying the worst-case conditions. Figure 1 shows an example of such label.

The Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) of the U. S. Department of Labor states that workers shall use rubber gloves, mats, shields or other protective equipment and procedures that are adequate to ensure protection from electrical shock and burns while performing the work. As well, a general duty clause makes it clear that the employer has an obligation to protect workers from known hazards. The arc flash hazard is real and requires proper evaluation in all workplaces.

Simon Fridlyand, P. Eng., is president of S. A. F. E. Engineering Inc., a Toronto-based company specializing in industrial health and safety issues and PSR compliance. He can be reached 416-447-9757 or simonf@safeengineering.ca.For more information, visit www.safeengineering.ca.

PPE and Personal Freedom

The argument that individuals should be free to decide for themselves whether to wear Personal Protection Equipment isn’t a new one. For example, it’s been raised in Canada in challenges to laws requiring motorcycle riders to wear helmets.

And it was recently raised in a new context—the elite world of dressage, a competitive event in which horse and rider are judged on the elegance, precision and discipline of the horse’s movements.

PPE in Dressage: Tradition v. Safety

According to a recent New York Times article, helmets are required in equestrian sports that involve jumping. But in the highest levels of dressage, riders wear a top hat. You can imagine how much protection a top hat provides! And because serious falls aren’t common in competitive dressage, many riders never wear a helmet—even while practicing.

But falls do happen in dressage—and the results can be devastating. Take the case of Courtney King Dye. When her horse slipped and fell, she went down with it, fracturing her skull. She was in a coma for weeks. After months in rehab, she’s finally regaining her speech and the use of her right side.

The tide may be turning, however, when it comes to wearing helmets. At the current World Equestrian Games, a few prominent riders wore helmets at practice. The entire Canadian dressage team wears helmets during practice. But still, the vast majority of riders don’t wear helmets while practicing. And even those who do wear helmets to practice don’t wear them to compete.

The article also notes that riders who wear helmets in practice still seem to believe that doing so is a matter of personal choice and don’t necessarily think that a helmet requirement should be imposed on all riders.

The Indirect Consequences of Personal Choice

It’s highly unlikely that the OSHA or Canadian OHS laws will be changed any time soon to make wearing PPE optional. But don’t be surprised if workers at construction or industrial sites play the freedom card to avoid having to wear PPE. In fact, religious objections to PPE, such as by a Sikh worker who objects to shaving to effect a facial seal for a respirator or removing a turban to wear a hardhat, are common.

Should workers have the freedom to refuse to wear PPE? The argument is more compelling when the worker’s refusal to use PPE endangers only the worker. But that’s hardly ever the case. For example, a worker entrusted with shutting down the power in the event of a gas leak carries the safety of many others in his hands. So allowing that individual to choose to expose himself to harmful gases without a respirator would be sheer lunacy.

In addition, even if the worker is the only one at risk of physical injury, when a workplace injury occurs the company incurs indirect costs, such as increased workers’ comp premiums, costs of replacing the injured worker while he’s out, reduced production, etc.

Bottom line: No matter how you cut it, workers should be required to wear PPE—not only because it’s required by law but also because it’s the responsible thing to do.

Robin L. Barton, Esq.

ST. LOUIS, Mo.

The order for incarceration stems from Mr. Andre and Ms. Shaw’s failure to comply with sanctions ordered by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, following the court’s initial ruling of contempt against Andre and Shaw in January 2010.

“Employers who expose workers to hazards and blatantly ignore OSHA citations will not be allowed to escape their responsibility of keeping workers safe – or sanctions levied against them for failing to do so,” said Charles E. Adkins, OSHA’s regional administrator in Kansas City, Mo.

OSHA issued numerous citations from June 2003 to the present, to both the original company and its successor, for willful, repeat and serious violations related to fall hazards, scaffolding erection deficiencies, power tool guarding and other hazards in connection with multiple St. Louis-area projects. When the companies failed to comply with the court’s 11(b) order enforcing the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission’s final orders, the Labor Department’s Office of the Solicitor filed petitions for contempt.

As a result, a special master of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals found Brian Andre, Andre Stone & Mason Work Inc. and Regina Shaw in contempt, and ordered various sanctions including requiring them to pay outstanding penalties, continually accruing interest and other miscellaneous fees in the current amount of $258,582. Andre Stone & Mason Work Inc. and Regina Shaw must pay a $100 daily penalty, calculated from the time of default in early 2008 on the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission’s final orders. Andre Stone & Mason Work Inc. must provide OSHA weekly notification of all current jobs and known future jobs at least 72 hours prior to commencement of work for a period of three years. The company also must provide training to all persons currently and subsequently designated as jobsite “competent persons” prior to beginning any work and provide the department with records of such training.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA’s role is to assure these conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov.

DULUTH, Ga.

The Postal Service is being cited with five repeat violations carrying proposed penalties of $75,000. The violations include deficiencies involving lockout/tagout to prevent accidental start-up of machinery; permitting material to be stored in front of the electrical and circuit breaker panel; having unused openings on electrical, fire and receptacle boxes; using flexible cords instead of fixed wiring; and missing the electrical strain prevention clamp on the dock lights. A repeat violation is issued when an employer previously has been cited for the same or a similar violation of a standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facility in federal enforcement states within the last five years.

The Postal Service is also being cited with two serious violations with proposed penalties of $5,000 for failing to mark exits visibly and having broken dock lights that exposed electrical wiring. A serious citation is issued when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

“This inspection points to the need for employers to develop, implement and maintain programs that ensure hazards such as were noted here are corrected, and that employee exposure to these hazards is eliminated,” said Bill Fulcher, director of OSHA’s Atlanta-East Area Office.

The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations and proposed penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s area director or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. The site was inspected by staff from OSHA’s Atlanta-East Area Office, 2183 Northlake Parkway, Building 7, Suite 110, Tucker, GA 30084; telephone 770-493-6644. To report workplace incidents, fatalities or situations posing imminent danger to workers, call OSHA’s toll-free hotline at 800-321-6742.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA’s role is to assure these conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov

BOSTON

“These sizable fines reflect the Postal Service’s knowledge of and failure to address these hazards,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. “For years, the Postal Service knew that allowing untrained employees to work on electrical equipment exposed workers to serious injury or worse. Despite this knowledge, the Postal Service did not take the necessary steps to change its practices and eliminate the hazards.”

OSHA’s inspection, which began June 29 in response to a worker complaint, found that unqualified employees at the Shrewsbury location were allowed to work on and test energized electrical circuits and equipment. In addition, electrical equipment had not been de-energized prior to maintenance being performed, and employees were not supplied with insulated tools and equipment.

These conditions resulted in the issuance of three willful citations, with $210,000 in proposed fines. OSHA defines a willful violation as one committed with intentional knowing or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirements, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health.

OSHA also issued the Postal Service four serious citations, with $28,000 in fines, for lack of employee training in safety-related electrical work practices, lack of personal protective equipment, inadequate voltage meters and failing to perform periodic inspections of the Shrewsbury facility’s energy control procedures. OSHA issues serious citations when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

The Postal Service has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and proposed penalties to comply, meet with the OSHA area director or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. This latest inspection was conducted by OSHA’s Springfield Area Office in Massachusetts; telephone 413-785-0123. To report workplace accidents, fatalities or situations posing imminent danger to workers, call OSHA’s toll-free hotline number at 800-321-OSHA (6742).

The U.S. Department of Labor has filed an enterprise-wide complaint against the U.S. Postal Service for electrical work safety violations. The complaint asks the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission to order the USPS to correct electrical violations at all its facilities nationwide. This complaint marks the first time OSHA has sought enterprise-wide relief as a remedy.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA’s role is to assure these conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov.

OSHA’s Houston South Area Office in Texas began its investigation on June 30 at the company’s facility on Red Bluff Road as part of the agency’s national emphasis program on process safety management of refineries.

The serious violations include failing to provide properly constructed scaffolds, provide supports to hold piping, provide controls to prevent valves from closing, conduct annual confined space audits, ensure guard rails are adequate, and ensure that operating procedures are up-to-date and accurate. A serious violation is one in which there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

“OSHA’s National Emphasis Program is designed to comprehensively evaluate the petroleum refining industry,” said Mark Briggs, OSHA’s area director for the Houston South Area Office. “An employer’s lack of compliance with OSHA’s standards will not be tolerated.”

Pasadena Refining Services is an independent refinery which employs about 363 employees in Pasadena.

The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s Houston South Area Office or contest the citations and penalties before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Employers and employees with questions regarding workplace safety and health standards can call the agency’s Houston South Area Office at 281-286-0583, its Houston North Area Office at 281-591-2438 or OSHA’s toll-free hotline at 800-321-OSHA (6742) to report workplace accidents, fatalities or situations posing imminent danger to workers.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA’s role is to assure these conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov.

Police say the men were working on an 11,000 volt underground cable and power was reported to be out in the area after the cable exploded. A Vector spokeswoman says one of the men is soon to be discharged from North Shore Hospital after being treated for burns to his stomach. The second had minor burns to his hand and is at Auckland Hospital.

“The guys were both sitting up in hospital with their wives and families,” White said.

“We’re relieved this isn’t serious, but nevertheless it’s always a shocking thing when something like this happens to staff within the network.”

The incident occurred at about 1.30pm on Trig Road, Whenuapai. Vector is launching a thorough investigation to determine the full cause of the incident.

Click here to read more

Click here to read more about Edmonton farming electrocution

Click here to read more about the OSU arc-flash incident

In 2007, ICE Engineering and Construction Pty Ltd had engaged the then 17-year-old man as a trainee. Sometime around April of that year, the trainee was assigned to a local business to help with work on a circuit distribution board.

He was using an insulated copper to touch a circuit breaker’s live part when an arc flash resulted.

The young man was knocked to the ground and suffered burns to his neck, face, and arms.

In his decision, Industrial Magistrate Michael Ardlie said, “The defendant failed in its obligations to a very junior worker. Whilst it had safety systems in place, those safety systems were not utilised.”

The company pleaded guilty to violating section 19(1) of the Occupational Health, Safety and Welfare Act 1986 in failing to provide a safe system of work and appropriate supervision,  information, instruction and training.

The court heard that the trainee was supervised by a third year apprentice,  who was not qualified for the task. There was also no job safety analysis made on the tasks the trainee was supposed to do. Finally, the trainee had no understanding of the operation and design of the board and its components.

Magistrate Ardlie fined the company $15,000. He denied the company’s application….

Click here to read the rest of the story.

Asokan has developed a device that can contain the arc flash before it spreads. That and other technologies were discussed on the first day of a two-day conference titled EmTech India 2010, organised by Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Technology Review.

Asokan works at Bangalore’s GE John F Welch Technology Centre (JFWTC) as its chief scientist in the power conversion systems division. “A big challenge was to control the arc very quickly,” he said. “With this technology, the arc can be detected and contained in 6-8 milliseconds.”

Typically, electric arcs can occur in switchgear panels found in the control room of any building with electrical fittings. The Carlton Towers fire originated in its wiring, and claimed nine lives a week ago.

Click, send, earn Dr Ramesh Raskar, associate professor, MIT Media Lab and co-director, Centre of Future Storytelling, spoke of imaging in developing countries.

He said useful information could be gathered though ‘human power’, beyond language barriers, by using mobile photos. He called this ‘crowdsourcing’. Information from phone photos can help understand local conditions. People who post photos can be paid if their photos are used, he suggested.

Read more on this article in the Bangalore Mirror.

The newspaper link calls this a “pure accident” indicating that they DO NOT understand these incidents are completely preventable by proper lockout/tagout techniques.  NFPA 70E calls this creating an “electrically safe work condition”.  That did not exist in this incident.  Pure accident?  No. Purely preventable by a quality electrical safety program. Yes!  The laws in his country are very strick on lockout/tagout procedures.  Someone did not follow those procedures.  Electrical lockout requires testing circuit and the tester to assure there is NO power

Click here to read more about the arc flash fatality

Click here to read more about the cruise line arc flash explosion

Industrial Training University is committed to providing Business Owners, Employers, Educators, and Maintenance Workers free information about the importance of electrical safety, industrial safety, arc flash analysis (power distribution study, arc flash study, ground fault study, or arc flash hazard study), and the dangers associated with an electrical arc flash or arc flash hazard.
This year approximately 30,000 people will be injured due to some sort of electrical accident and at least 1000 or more will be killed. More than half of these fatalities will occur while servicing energized equipment that are less than 600 volts. Electrocution is the fourth highest cause of industrial fatalities. Electrical accident and arc flash hazard statistics provided by Industrial Training University.
OSHA has made many requirements for companies and industrial facilities to follow in an attempt to prevent injuries or deaths due to arc flash hazards and other electrical related accidents. Many of our free downloads help to inform you and your staff about these requirements.
Such as the PPE (personal protection equipment) poster. The use of Personal Protection Equipment and the application of the correct ppe for any electrical related work is required and does save lives if used correctly. Properly identifying the correct ppe for the job can be confusing. This PPE poster tells exactly what you need and shows a picture of how it should be properly applied.
Properly identifying the electrical panel approach boundaries is also another OSHA requirement. See the Electrical Panel Approach Boundaries free downloads and learn about safe electrical panel approach boundaries. Without this information the maintenance worker with the proper ppe may not be at risk but the other employee without ppe that is within the arc blast radius of the panel could be in serious danger.

Other helpful downloads include:

• ITU’s Arc Flash service packages
• Information about Arc Flash Warning Labels
• The risk of ignoring NFPA’s 70E requirements
• NFPA 70E arc flash requirements word for word, including ITU’s OSHA compliance checklist

ITU also offers several training classes and includes downloadable posters for several of the more popular courses. Downloads Include:

• National Electrical Code (NEC)
• NFPA 70E Electrical Safety
• Industrial and Commercial Electricity
• Electrical Troubleshooting
• Electrical Symbols
• PLC Troubleshooting
• Electrical Print Reading
• Air Conditioning and Refrigeration
• and many more!

Plus Quiz your next electrical worker. Name the electrical components on the ITU training panel.

• Programmable Controls
• Electrical Controls
• Electrical Wiring