Electrical Safety in the Workplace - Term Paper Example

Occupational Safety-Electrical Safety in the Workplace 1. Recognition of a Hazard In 2006, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) published a report that showed that between 1992 and 2002, 3,378 workers perished as a result of electrical injuries suffered in the workplace (NIOSH 21). It is important to note that this figure represents 4.7 of all deaths suffered in American workplaces, and translates to almost 1 death each day. This figure also propels electricity to fourth on the list of leading causes of occupational deaths stemming from injuries. Power lines were the leading causes of electrocutions, which in turn resulted in 42% of all electrical deaths in the workplace. Second on the list was poorly de-energized electrical equipment, at position three was contact with electrical parts that were mistakenly assumed to be de-energized as a result of errors in wiring, misplaced wiring, or re-wiring. Contact with buried power lines came in fourth, having caused 1% of total fatalities. In addition to this, the period between 1992 and 2002 saw 46,598 personnel suffer non-fatal injuries caused by electricity (NIOSH 25). 36% of those injuries were as a result of contact with light fixtures, machines, appliances and tools bearing electric current, while 34% were caused by workers coming into contact with transformers, wiring, or other electrical parts. Buried power lines were responsible for approximately 3% of non-fatal injuries. According to 2010 statistics released by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), people who work on or around electricity suffer about 4,700 non-fatal injuries annually. Worryingly, this figure is for the United States only. Workplace electrical accidents or accidental contact with systems that are energized are also responsible for averagely one death each day. As a matter of fact, workplace hazards associated with electricity or electrical operations occupy three of the top ten spots in the list of leading workplace violations prepared by OSHA (NIOSH 34). Arc Flash, Arc Blast and Electrical Shock Safety from arc flash and arc blast is an area of great emphasis for both NFPA and OSHA (Hurley 15). NFPA 70E lists not only measures to take to prevent and evaluate arc flash dangers, but also offers recommendations on how to determine the PPE level that must be worn when handling hazardous parts, carry out arc flash studies, and work out incident energy so as to know flash boundaries (Curtis & Steven 19). In addition to this, NFPA provides a list of consultants specializing in electrical safety. These consultants are able to conduct comprehensive arc flash examination in the workplace. OSHA warns that arc flash dangers must never be underestimated, and with good reasons. Firstly, arc flashes are instantly capable of reaching temperatures as high as 36,000°F. In essence, a 6 cycles (one-tenth-of-a-second) exposure to this degree of heat is capable of rendering the skin incurable, and causing third-degree burns (Keller 53). To make matters worse, arc flash can spark an explosion of air surrounding the arc; this can vaporize or ignite metal, wood and other flammable things, hence killing or critically injuring anybody nearby. Walls can also be shattered by the explosion or blast emanating from an arc flash. NFPA says pressure differences from a 10Kv, 100kA arc flash can easily damage a normal wall located 33 feet away (Keller 36). As if this is not enough, arc flashes are capable of igniting natural gas leaking from damaged lines (for instance, after a storm) or other dangerous materials in close proximity to the source of the blast. According to OSHA, arc flash can also generate extremely high noise levels that are capable of damaging human hearing. According to the National Fire Protection Association, an arc blast is a dangerous situation in which energy is released explosively as a result of a phase to ground/phase fault which leads to an electrical arc. NFPA 70E-2004 stipulates the following with regards to arc blasts: arc blast hazard evaluation should be carried out on all electrical exposure sections, personal protective equipment (PPE) should be determined in line with potential levels of energy exposure (cal/cm2), all authorized employees should be trained on how to handle arc blasts, all electrical sources should be labeled for their specific arc blast levels, all arc blast hazard sections must be delineated. This allows organizations to prevent, and in case they occur, minimize the impact of arc blasts. According to OSHA, there are two types of electrical shocks. These are direct contact and indirect contact. Direct contact is defined as contact with a conductive section or conductor that can be defined as ‘live in usual service’. Direct contact electrical shock can be avoided by insulation, using obstacles to prevent accidental contact with live parts, placing accessible parts with different voltage ratings out of reach, and using enclosures and barriers to protect employees from direct contact with live parts. On the other hand, indirect contact is contact with conductive parts which are usually live but have become live due to faulty conditions (insulation mistakes or other causes). Indirect contact can be prevented by doing the following: using class two equipment that do not just depend on basic insulation in order to guarantee safety; disconnecting supply automatically whenever a fault occurs between naked conductive parts and live parts or protective earth conductors; and carrying out electrical separation by using supply obtained from isolating transformers that comply with appropriate standards. Hazardous Locations According to OSHA 1910.307 and NFPA, there are 3 classes of hazardous locations, and each class is further subdivided into 2 divisions. Class 1 (i) Class I, Division 1. This is a location: a) In which hazardous levels of flammable vapors or gases may abound under normal operating circumstances (Petersen 35). b) In which hazardous levels of flammable vapors or gases may abound frequently due to repair or maintenance activities or due to leakage. c) In which failure of processes and/or breakdown of equipment may release hazardous levels of flammable vapors or gases, and may also result in simultaneous breakdown of electrical equipment (Petersen 56). ii) Class 1, Division 2 A location: (a) In which volatile and flammable gases or liquids are processed, used, or handled, but in which the hazardous vapors, gases or liquids will usually be kept in closed systems or containers from which they cannot escape unless there is a breakdown or rapture of such systems or containers, or in case of unusual operation of equipment (Petersen 18) (b) In which hazardous levels of vapors or gases are usually avoided by good mechanical ventilation, and which may become dangerous through failure or unusual handling of ventilating equipment. (c) That is close to a Class I, Division 1 location, and to which dangerous levels of vapors or gases may occasionally be relayed unless such relay is prevented by sufficient ventilation from a source of fresh (clean) air, and effective protection against ventilation breakdown is provided (Petersen 49). Class 2 (i) Class II, Division 1. A location: (a) In which flammable dust is or could be in suspension in the air under common operating circumstances, in amounts enough to generate ignitable or explosive mixtures (b) Where unusual operation or mechanical failure of equipment or machinery may cause such ignitable or explosive mixtures to be generated, and may also be an ignition source (as a result of simultaneous breakdown of electric machinery, handling of protection devices, or from some other conditions (Petersen 62). (c) In which flammable dusts whose nature is electrically conductive are present. (ii) Class II, Division 2. A location in which: (a) Flammable dust will not always be in suspension in the air in amounts enough to generate ignitable or explosive mixtures, and accumulations of dust are not normally sufficient enough to affect normal operation of electrical machinery or other equipment (Petersen 23). (b) Dust can be in suspension in the air due to occasional breakdown of processing or handling equipment, and accumulations of dust may be combustible by failure or unusual operation of electrical machinery or other equipment. CLASS 3 (i) Class III, Division 1. A location in which highly flammable materials or fibers generating ignitable flyings are used, manufactured, or handle (Petersen 65). (ii) Class III, Division 2. A location in which highly flammable fibers are handled or stored, except where manufacturing is involved. 2. Elimination or Control of Hazard The NFPA says that arc flash can be best avoided by identifying the components that bear the hazard, evaluating the hazard, and then abiding by NFPA recommendations concerning personal protective equipment and flash boundaries (NFPA 27). OSHA 1910.333(a) states that safety-related work practices must be used in order to avoid electric shock and some other injuries caused by direct or indirect contact with electricity when work is done close to or on circuits or equipment which are or might be energized. Clear safety-related best practices must be in line with the extent and nature of related electrical hazards. OSHA 1910.333(a)(1) requires that live parts which may endanger employees should be de-energized before any work is done on or close to them, except in cases where the employer can show that de-energizing come with new or more hazards or is not applicable because of operational setbacks or equipment design. It is however accepted that live parts that can be grounded with less than 50 volts do not need to be de-energized if exposure to electrical burns or explosion because of electric cars shall not increase. OSHA 1910.333(b) (2) requires that employers must implement effective lockout/tagout procedures and train workers on those procedures. Employer should also provide locking and tagging devices, and any other necessary equipment employees need during training. OSHA 1910.332(b) (1) calls for the implementation of safety-related work practices so as to avoid electric shock and other injuries (Hurley 44). Employees should be trained on how to how to follow those practices and all training should be recorded. OSHA 1910.335(a) (1) (i) stipulates that workers in areas where there are potential electrical dangers should be provided with protective gear that is suited for the protection of specific body parts and duties to be performed. More importantly, all workers must use the protective equipment provided. 3. Why an injury took place or was prevented? Injury cases were a direct result of failure (by employers and employees alike) to comply with OSHA, NFPA, and ANSI requirements. This left workers vulnerable to electrical-related injuries. In cases where employers and employees followed the necessary regulations there were little or no injuries reported. The NIOSH compiled a list of workplace hazards based on the number of violations that are cited for each hazard, and those related to electricity appear thrice in the top ten. Lockout/tagout violations occupy top spot in the electrical category with in excess of 3,000 cited violations, but violations of electrical wiring techniques and common electrical violations were almost frequently cited (NIOSH 45). Safety violations related to electrical installations (examples include scaffolding and fall protection violations) were also made it to the list. In order to resolve urgent health and safety problems faced by American people in the workplace, OSHA developed a new program in May 2010 that raises the amount of civil fines for violators (especially frequent violators) (Keller 31). This was instrumental in curbing violations of OSHA, ANSI, and NFPA regulations. 4. What was learned from the situation, etc? The lesson is very simple: following regulations significantly reduces the chances of injuries or deaths occurring in the workplace. Some employers think that the costs associated with making workplaces fully compliant with existing regulations are too high. The truth is that the costs resulting from injuries or death of workers due to negligence on the part of the employer are many times higher, and this is without considering possible civil fines and penalties. To be on the safer side, employers have to make workplaces safer and workers have to respect and follow the right procedures when performing their duties. Another lesson learnt is that OSHA, ANSI and NFPA have done a commendable job in making the workplace safer for all American workers. The number of people who have died between 2000 and 2012 as a result of violations of regulations is much lower than that recorded in previous decades, will continue to drop. In essence, American workplaces are safer than they have ever been. Works Cited Curtis, Martha H., and Steven F. Sawyer. NFPA 1 Uniform Fire Code handbook. Quincy, Mass.: National Fire Protection Association, 2006. Print. Hurley, Michael. General industry: OSHA safety and health standards (29 CFR 1910). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 2003. Print. Keller, K. J. Electrical safety code manual a plain language guide to National Electrical Code, OSHA, and NFPA 70E. Amsterdam: Elsevier/BH, 2010. Print. National Fire Protection Association. Electrical inspection code for existing dwellings. 2006 ed. Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association, 2005. Print. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. NIOSH pocket guide to chemical hazards. Cincinnati, Ohio: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, National Institute for OSHA. 1910 OSHA general industry regulations book. London: Mangan Communications Inc., 2009. Print. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. 1910 OSHA Guide. Neenah: J.J. Keller & Associates, 2010. Print. Petersen, Dan. The OSHA compliance manual. Rev. ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2009. Print. Read More