ECN Forum
Lot's of people are confused as to what OSHA requires or how OSHA interprets regulations. Want to know what OSHA says?
Who decides when and how to work live? OSHA (actually the courts/legal system) has decided that question! Is the electrician responsible or the contractor? Does interrupting production qualify to wok live in OSHA eyes? What constitutes working live?
Could you be cited by OSHA? Under what circumstances?
OSHA senior electrical professor at OSHA's National Training Institute answers these questions and more in a short article which can be viewed at: http://www.oshazone.com/forums/showthread.php?s=4a66b9a20dbf2de6e5dac39af09d8ba7&threadid=7
I have not looked at the link, but I must add that first of all you need to check if you are in a state with it's own OSHA program. These states are required to have laws as effective as the OSHA standard. However they can be stricter. For instance Cal/OSHA does not have Lockout/Tagout, they have Lockout/Blockout. It is much different from the fed OSHA standard. You cannot just tagout a machine, also the cord under the control of one person does not apply in California.
Scott
A good 'no bull' thread OSHA Professor, i like that.

For many here, you may be our only opportunity to converse with 'da man', so please stick around

~sparky
Scott, you're absolutely right about state plan OSHA programs. As you pointed out they have to be at least as effective as Fed OSHA. The bottom line is that the hazards need to be controlled. Everyone needs to check to see if their State has more specific requirements above and beyond Fed OSHA. Like we teach, OSHA Standards are MINIMUM Standards for safety!

Sparky, Thanks for the vote of support. Like I tell all my students which include OSHA investigators, State plan investigators, State plan consultation inspectors, Other federal agencies, private sector and lots more-----I tell it like it is - no BS here. You may not like what you hear but its fact. Don't shoot the messenger.
For a Federal employee I'm not always perfectly politically correct but after all I'm in the business of saving lives not running for political office. I have an extremely demanding schedule traveling training (60 to 80% of the time on the road) and helping our OSHA investigators with particularly complex fatality or catastrophy investigations but I'll stick around and check in when I can, I think that my e-mail is also available for people to write me directly as well.
Anyway Thank you.
OSHA Professor "Grizzy"
https://www.electrical-contractor.net/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000182.html

WARNING!! ELECTRICAL BURN IMAGES HERE!!



[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 12-08-2002).]
True enough. Your article is too the point. As the safety guy at work I always stress that we (the company) can do all that we can but you (the employee) have to think safety at all times. After all we will be dinged with an incident, however you will be the one hurt. No one should go home hurt from work, maybe tired from working so hard, but not hurt.

Everytime I tell them that my goal is to go an entire year without an accident they usually laugh and say it cannot be done. I then tell them that it can and if anyone is planning on getting hurt at work to come talk to me.
Welcome to ECN, OSHA Professor!

We look forward to your input and hope to have some questions answered. We hope you'll have the time!

You won't be treated like "the enemy" or an outsider, most of us here are interested in safety and are very glad an "OSHA Rep" has come aboard.

Hope you like us!

[Linked Image]
Joe,

Let me begin with your post script. Do you have me confused with oshaman ? I’m OSHA Professor. You and I have never had any discussion regarding same. Perhaps the book you are referring to is “An Illustrated Guide to Electrical Safety” Fourth Edition, published by ASSE and edited by Thomas M. Kovacic.

You’re question “How does the revised 2002 NEC definition of "Qualified Person" sit with OSHA? “ I’m not sure with what you mean by “sit with OSHA” . Let me say that OSHA has no opinion whatsoever regarding the definition change in the 2002 NEC. Does this change, in any way impact OSHA or affect our enforcement in any way? No! I’ve seen all the endless discussions regarding this change on some board back when the 2002 NEC was published and I won’t go into all those pros and cons which you are aware.

From an OSHA perspective it is of no consequence for numerous reasons which I will elaborate on. First of all as a professional who trains electrical inspectors you are aware that AHJ’s can’t cite definitions. OSHA can’t cite definitions. We use them to clarify the requirements of standards (regulations). OSHA already defines qualified person in 1910.399 and it’s the same as NFPA 70-1999 (1999 NEC). Our definition has been there since we promulgated the electrical safety related work practices standard and even earlier in our construction standards. Legally we can’t go to a consensus organizations definition if we already defined the term. As a side note we can’t use a consensus organizations standard such as the NEC (using our 5 (a) (1) general duty clause if we (OSHA) already has a specific standard which addresses the hazard. OSHA always has to use / cite the most vertical (specific) standard. This is despite the fact the NEC may be more restrictive.

Now having said all that, does OSHA think training is important ? Absolutely ! So much so that OSHA has specific standards (have had for years) that require training. You are familiar with the OSHA web site at www.osha.gov Check out 1926.21 (b) (2) in the construction standards. This requires all employees to be trained to recognize and avoid hazards they are likely to encounter on a construction site (I’m paraphrasing it off the top of my head), 1910.332 is training under the electrical safety related work practice standard in the OSHA general industry standards. This also requires training for both qualified as well as unqualified electrical workers. These specific training requirements for qualified workers goes well beyond the current definition for qualified in the 2002 NEC.
Again, OSHA must use the most vertical standards even when using consensus organization standards. The NEC is not the place we would use to reference electrical work practices, because it isn’t a work practice standard it is more appropriately characterized or categorized as an installation specification standard.

There are four primary types or categories of electrical standards for safety. The first category deals with how do we install electrical equipment, devices, etc so its safe or more specifically the premises wiring system introduces no hazards? We go to the NEC and OSHA installation specification standards 1910.301 - .308 for that information. However is it possible to install a device or equipment according to these installation specification standards and still have an unsafe or hazardous condition ? Yes if someone made the equipment or device in their garage. Enter the second category of standards. Standards that insure that any product is manufactured to do it’s intended function safely such as U.L. standards or product listing. OSHA has an NRTL (Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory) program and requires all electrical equipment in the workplace to be listed or labeled by an OSHA NRTL. OSHA NRTL’s include U.L., FM, CSA, ETL and others. OSHA Standards 1910.303(a) & .303 (b) (1) i & 1926.401(a)& (b,).
Since it’s possible to install safely and have a listed piece of equipment and still introduce hazards such as brewing gasoline through an electric coffee maker or misuse relocatable power taps (LOL) enter the third category of standards. Installation and use OSHA 1910.303(b)(2), 1926.403(b)(2), NEC Article 110.3 These all state that listed and labeled equipment shall be used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing and labeling.
Finally the last category is for when we work on or near electrical installations and equipment, the electrical safety related work practices standards, OSHA 1910.331-.335 and NFPA 70 E. These are the two standards that OSHA would use for qualified worker training requirements and actual work practices including some PPE requirements.

I do recognize that there is some overlap in these standards categories such as Article 110.2 , 110.3b and some other overlap. Remember, I’m categorizing generally.

The final point I’d like to make is that the NFPA 70 E “Standard for Electrical Safety Requirements for Employee Workplaces” contains both safe work practices in it’s part II, and also contains installation specification standards from the NEC in it’s part I. This has been a valuable tool for OSHA because in the past, lawyers have submitted the argument that since the NEC has it’s roots in 1897 hazards considerations which are primarily for property protection it is not directly nor was it intended when adopted to address people protection. Since NFPA 70 E has taken all the installation specification standards that pertain to people protection and included them in 70 E Part I, it solves lots of enforcement issues. Lastly since OSHA construction standards in the 1926 have very little for electrical safety related work practices (found in 1926.416) OSHA has the option to use NFPA 70 E on any electrically related construction activities. Such as qualified person either testing or racking in or out breakers on a 120/240v panel which is a hazard addressed in 70 E. I wonder how many qualified persons de-energize the panel to do that or are wearing insulated gloves, FR clothing, face shield and have insulated (not wrapped with electrical tape but real insulated) tools.

Try not to ask such a lengthy or detailed question next time Joe. Thanks to everyone for allowing me this forum. Thus endith the OSHA lesson.

OSHA Professor - Grizzy
After reading the linked article:

Wow... [Linked Image]

My helper Jimmy will be trained far differently than I was!!!!

Yikes... (Pardon my ignorance) I'm one of those that owns a hardhat, perscription safety glasses, steel-toed boots and steel-toed mud boots, and that's about it. I've got "rubber gloves" that aren't listed for anything, but I only use them in thngs like ground fault conditions while troubleshooting.

Otherwise, I have no other PPE and only a few cheap 1000V screwdrivers.

I guess I have to get 1000V torque wrenches and a 1000V torque screwdriver too?!?!? Do they even make one?!?!
<panicking>

*slowly breathe in... slowly breathe out...*

[Linked Image]

[This message has been edited by sparky66wv (edited 12-07-2002).]
sparky66wv,

Don't panic buddy ! It's OK.
Your PPE and insulated tools are important. There are suppliers of insulated hand tools out there. Search the net for insulated hand tools. I'm a little partial to cementex insulated hand tools because they have a double layer of insulation consisting of two different colors. When the inner color begins to show through and becomes visible it's time to replace the tool. There are socket wrenches and all kinds of tools available. There is also a line of tools which are insulating and meet the ASTM (American Society of Testing Materials) standard for insulated tools. Just when you thought you were getting a handle on all these standards some new ones show up. The composite tools except for the screwdriver tip for example the rest of the shaft is a nonmetallic composite material. No insulation to wear out. They are super light in weight. About 1/4 the weight of other tools. Imagine carrying a tool belt around that only 1/4 of the weight of your present load. I've actually had electricians in class tell me they don't like those tools at all because they say when they strike the tool with a hammer the tool breaks. I generally tell them that I don't like fluke meters for the same reason. As soon as you hit them with a hammer they break. Certainly a sign of a poor product (LOL). Just be sure that any insulated / insulating tools you acquire meet the ASTM - 1505 standard. BTW all hand tools are rated for 1000 volts. Not like gloves where you can get them at different voltages.
Gloves as well as other insulating PPE or "cover up" can be purchased in 6 different voltage classes from 500 volts (the newest ASTM category) through 40Kv. Don't get way more than you need for your work because the discomfort of wearing extra heavy gloves will limit dexterity and discourage you from wearing them when needed. Also they have to be worn with the leather protectors. If you think, like I do that the class 00 (500 volt gloves) are a little on the flimsy side for 480 work certainly don't go beyond the next class (0) 1Kv glove. BTW gloves can be purchased with a two color construction different inner color than the outer color. That's an option that makes it easier to inspect for damage / wear etc. All the OSHA requirements for insulated PPE are at: http://osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp...S&p_id=9787&p_text_version=FALSE

They have to be "proof tested every 6 months to insure that they will still withstand the voltage they are rated for. There are companies that do this testing for anywhere between about $5 and $20 per pair of gloves and certify that they were tested to the ASTM standards. The glove is then either stamped with the test date on the cuff or the date due for testing (6 months). What is the last test date on your gloves?

Your life rests in the integrity of your gloves so don't loan them, don't abuse them.

They have to be daily inspected before use which includes an air inflation test to be sure there are no pin holes etc. Also the daily inspection must include examining for : (excerpts of the OSHA Standard)
1910.137(b)(2)(ii)
Insulating equipment shall be inspected for damage before each day's use and immediately following any incident that can reasonably be suspected of having caused damage. Insulating gloves shall be given an air test, along with the inspection.

1910.137(b)(2)(iii)
Insulating equipment with any of the following defects may not be used:

1910.137(b)(2)(iii)(A)
A hole, tear, puncture, or cut;

1910.137(b)(2)(iii)(B)
Ozone cutting or ozone checking (the cutting action produced by ozone on rubber under mechanical stress into a series of interlacing cracks);

1910.137(b)(2)(iii)(C)
An embedded foreign object;

1910.137(b)(2)(iii)(D)
Any of the following texture changes: swelling, softening, hardening, or becoming sticky or inelastic.

1910.137(b)(2)(iii)(E)
Any other defect that damages the insulating properties.
..1910.137(b)(2)(iv)
1910.137(b)(2)(iv)
Insulating equipment found to have other defects that might affect its insulating properties shall be removed from service and returned for testing under paragraphs (b)(2)(viii) and (b)(2)(ix) of this section.

1910.137(b)(2)(v)
Insulating equipment shall be cleaned as needed to remove foreign substances.

1910.137(b)(2)(vi)
Insulating equipment shall be stored in such a location and in such a manner as to protect it from light, temperature extremes, excessive humidity, ozone, and other injurious substances and conditions.

It looks like a lot of regulations but its pretty basic. Proof test twice a year and do the daily (when you use the gloves) inflation test and visually inspect for the defects listed in the standard.
As an OSHA investigator, I don't recall having interviewed an electrician yet who is aware of these requirements. As an OSHA Professor / trainer I'm trying to change that.

If you take a deep breath it should be because you are glad that your gloves and tools have protected you so long without having received the TLC that they need.

OSHA Professor - Grizzy
Scotts,

Kudos on your work & safety ethics buddy. No one said this was an easy job. I am always perplexed as to where this mind set comes from where people expect to be injured or expect accidents and think it's an uncontrollable event.
I frequently ask such sceptics in my class some questions like:
How many automobile accidents do you expect to have this year, your spouse?
Do you tell your children that they will certainly get hit by an automobile at least once during the year while on the way to school or at play ?
People manage their household, they manage their family (children), they manage their finances and living expenses and a whole lot more. They can and in fact do manage safety in the households when it comes to family members but they suggest that safety is unmanageable at the worksite....what bull*&%#. I get really sick and tired at times for having to pick up all those dead bodies. Who said this job wasn't an easy one. Keep the faith my friend we will make a difference and perhaps as a result, at least one more of our brothers or sisters will return home at the end of the workday safe and sound to their loved ones.

OSHA Professor - Grizzy
Quote
I generally tell them that I don't like fluke meters for the same reason. As soon as you hit them with a hammer they break.

LOL! That's one of the best comebacks I've ever heard. I'm going to add that to the list!
Quote
hazards such as brewing gasoline through an electric coffee maker

[Linked Image] ROFLMAO! [Linked Image]

they are most certainly out there....
How does OSHA select jobsites for inspection?

As a medium sized contractor in central Nebraska I have experienced one OSHA visit in the past seven years. Is it based on job size? Contractor size?

GJ
Golf Junkie,

Excellent question ! Actually it’s like you hit the lottery, so to speak. If people are waiting for OSHA to show up on site for the purpose of insuring safety –don’t hold your breath. You have to take a proactive approach, More on this latter.
How many members do you suppose NECA or IBEW has ?
How many OSHA inspectors / investigators do you suppose OSHA has?

Excerpt from Fact sheet titled “common sense at work”
Today federal OSHA, with a staff of 2,209 including 1,113 inspectors and a budget of $336.5 million, covers more than 100 million Americans at more than 6 million workplaces. Sharing that responsibility are 25 states that run their own OSHA programs with more than 2,625 employees, including 1,216 inspectors.
This document lists total annual inspections and penalties issued from both Federal and State plan OSHA. It’s a little dated bit gives a pretty good overview. http://osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=FACT_SHEETS&p_id=183
2001 inspection data is here: http://osha.gov/as/opa/oshafacts.html

1,216 inspectors / investigators ! That’s quite something isn’t it. In all fairness I should mention that the OSHA State Plan States also have about the same number of inspectors / investigators. Some one did the math once and figured that if we inspected every work site in the US we could accomplish that in something like every 95 years or so.

“The New OSHA is committed to a common sense of strategy of forming partnerships with employers and employees; conducting fair but firm inspections; developing sensible, easy-to-understand regulations and eliminating unnecessary rules; and assisting employers in developing topnotch safety and health programs. “ excerpt from news release, URL above.

We are also developing new approaches like “partnerships” (like NECA / IBEW / OSHA on electrical safety related work practices implementation in Ohio) as well a leveraging strategies whereby we focus on workplaces with the highest workers comp rates (data obtained from the State Workers Compensation agencies and we have in the past sent letters directly to those employers with the highest injuries / workers comp claims telling them either clean up you act and implement good safety and health programs (and of course we will assist you proactively in an purely advisory role without penalty) or else if you don’t want to take that approach we will drop by and visit you in a purely enforcement role. Take your choice. Of course the letters are much more diplomatic and politically correct but that’s kind of the gist of it.

More OSHA news release stuff:
During fiscal year 2002, which ended on Sept. 30, 2002, the agency inspected 37,493 workplaces in the United States. That is 1,093 inspections more than the fiscal year target of 36,400 inspections. In addition, the average penalty for serious violations rose from $930 in FY-2001 to $977 in FY-2002, indicating that the violations OSHA found were more serious, with higher penalties attached. Serious violations of workplace safety and health laws accounted for 70% of all OSHA violations found. This figure, the highest ever, shows that the agency is directing its resources to the establishments most in need of enforcement action.

"No worker should be injured or killed on the job," said Assistant Secretary for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration John Henshaw. "While there are fewer workplace fatalities each year, we still have more to do. We will continue to work with employers and employees to drive down injury and fatality rates even lower. A safe and healthful workplace, free from recognized hazards, is the right of every worker in America."

The entire news release can be seen at: http://osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp...& p_id=9863&p_text_version=FALSE

OK golf junkie, now that I’ve painted a picture of the magnitude of our mission and task let me get more to the point of your question.
The short answer is that we take the high hazard industry (construction and general industry) workplaces, feed them into a computer to come up with a computer generated RANDOM list, so we can’t be accused of discrimination against anyone.
The specific details of how that’s generated is rather complex and I will tell you where to get all those nitty gritty details should you be inclined to further examine it.
First off, we have a priority or hierarchy of inspections.
Priority / Category

First / Imminent Danger

Second Fatality / Catastrophe Investigations

Third Complaints / Referrals Investigation

Fourth / Programmed Inspections

This prioritization comes from the OSHA Field Inspection Reference Manual CPL 2.103
We could respond to an imminent danger from various ways. We drive by and see it, we could get a referral, from another federal state, or local agency or sometimes a local newspaper calls us, or a complaint from an employee or union (could be a formal or informal complaint).

Second or FAT/CAT’s as we call them is either a fatality or a catastrophe. OSHA defines a catastrophe as the hospitalization of 3 or more employees. The employer is required by law to notify OSHA within 8 hours of such an event. We have an 800 number for that and if an employer calls any OSHA office after hours the employer will hear an announcement on the phone to call that 800 number in case of such an event.

Third is the referral or complaint process. I briefly touched on that above. Formal complaints take a higher priority than nonformal / informal complaints. Formal complaints are signed by the complainant who must be an employee or union on behalf of it’s members. OSHA is bound by law not to divulge the name of the complainant when we investigate the complaint unless the complainant says it’s OK to do so. Usually the Union says this. However having said that be careful. If you work for a small company or you happen to very vociferous regarding safety and health issues within your company it’s can be very easy for an employer to put 1 + 1 together and figure out who called OSHA.

Fourth is the lowest priority which are programmed inspections. That’s the random computer list thing.

The following are excerpts from OSHA directive on Inspection Scheduling Procedures.
Full document at: http://osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp...&p_id=1 594&p_text_version=FALSE

Excerpts from:

CPL 2.25I - Scheduling System for Programmed Inspections

1 For Federal Agencies, the priority is based on the Lost Time Claims Rate (LTCR) List based on the Office of Worker Compensation Programs LTCR and a list of targeted agencies will be supplied by the National Office after consultations with the Regional Administrator and the agency DASHO. (See Chapter XIII of OSHA Instruction CPL 2.45B, or superseding directive.)

2 For General Industry safety, the priority is based on the Lost Workday Injury and Illness Rate by industry and the list of establishments within these industries will be provided by the National Office. Establishments on the list are those within the top 200 industries and are placed in random order with weighing factor applied so that establishments in the top 100 are twice as likely to place high on the random ordered list. The list is provided by the National Office in four sublists

3 For General Industry health, the priority is based on the number of serious health violations per health inspection by industry and the list of establishments within these industries will be provided by the National Office. Establishments on the list are those within the top 200 industries and are placed in random order with weighing factor applied so that establishments in the top 100 are twice as likely to place high on the random ordered list. The list is provided by the National Office in four sublists.

4 For Construction, the universe of active construction sites is maintained by the Construction Resource Analysis (CRA) group at the University of Tennessee. Each month CRA randomly selects active worksites for inspection. Each area office receives the list from CRA and the OSHA Construction Inspection Reports for each site from F. W. Dodge.
5 For Low Rate Manufacturing and Nonmanufacturing safety, the National Office supplies a list of establishments randomly selected from those available in each category and the Planning Guide software randomly selects the number needed from this list based on a 90/5/5 split among high rate manufacturing/low rate manufacturing/ non-manufacturing.
Inspection List. OSHA has contracted with F.W. Dodge and the Construction Resources Analysis (CRA) group of the University of Tennessee. Each month F.W. Dodge will provide to CRA information on construction projects which are expected to start in the next 60 days. CRA adds to the Dodge data a time period when each project is active and maintains a file containing all active construction projects. From active construction projects, CRA will generate monthly for each Area Office a randomly selected construction inspection list based upon:

By the way golf junkie, some of OSHA’s area offices in major metropolitan areas such as Manhattan, New York have not been able to conduct a programmed inspection for decades because the are handling so many imminent dangers and FAT/CAT investigations (dozens weekly) that there is no time left for programmed inspections (routine inspections). Don’t forget the number of inspectors/investigators we have.
That’s why we at OSHA are always pushing proactive approaches. Everyone has to take responsibility for safety and health in the workplace. Not just OSHA. Not just employers. Not just employees. But everyone. Together we can make it work.
Check out some OSHA publications. The entire list of publications is linked below. Tons of great information and remember it’s all FREE ! Knowledge is power ! Happy reading !

I should mention one more approach OSHA uses which is a “local emphasis program” where the local OSHA area office identifies industry with a lot of activity (high hazard of course) in it’s jurisdictional area for a comprehensive approach to reduce fatalities, injuries and illnesses. The comprehensive multi pronged approach would in addition to inspection scheduling also includes what we call “outreach activities”. These are training, sessions conducted by OSHA, materials produced by OSHA and disseminated to the local industry etc. to assist with the implementation of safety and health programs on / at the work site.

Job Safety and Health (more fact sheet publications)
Why should everyone be concerned about job safety and health?
Each year, approximately 6,000 employees in this country die from workplace injuries while another 50,000 die from illnesses caused by exposure to workplace hazards. In addition, 6 million workers suffer non-fatal workplace injuries at an annual cost to U.S. businesses of more than $125 billion.
Want to see a list of Rights and responsibilities of both employers as well as employees and OSHA’s role.
The entire fact sheet can be viewed at: http://osha.gov/OshDoc/data_General_Facts/jobsafetyandhealth-factsheet.html

OSHA Inspections http://www.osha.gov/Publications/osha2098.pdf

Publication list with many free downloadable publications: http://www.osha.gov/pls/publications/pubindex.list

Thank you golf junkie for the great question and your interest in safety and health.
With permission I would like to thank all the member here for their questions, support, warm welcome and interest in OSHA as well as safety and health in the workplace. I / OSHA need all your help to further OSHA's mission of insuring a safe and healthful workplace where every worker has a right to go home at the end of the workday safe and sound to their loved ones.

Sincerely
OSHA Professor - Grizzy

[This message has been edited by OSHA Professor (edited 12-08-2002).]
OSHA Professor;
my observations on electrical safety during my apprenticeship were that they simply are non-existent, save for what i gained from linesmen here.

i won't bore you with stories here, let's just say i had no idea of any standard, and simply took live work for granted.

as time went on i became more educated to my erroneous ways, but in hindsight i'm rather frustrated with a 'system' that does not reach all it is intended to.


sparky ~ older is better than bolder ~ Steve



[This message has been edited by sparky (edited 12-08-2002).]
sparky,

It is frustrating at times! The whole system! I've personally "beat up" verbally that is, both apprecntice trainers as well as journeymen trainers. They DON'T teach safety. They have little or no knowledge of NFPA 70 E although the NEC (NFPA 70) is their bible and they are certainly expert in that. They have less knowledge of OSHA standards and requirements and they have addmitted to me that they in fact demonstrate (shall we say questionable workpractices) while teaching.

The good news is that it's changing and there are OSHA partnerships with various organizations to assist in addressing safety training in their respective electrical programs.

Sometimes we just "don't know what we don't know"!

OSHA Professor - Grizzy
Grizzy;
Several years ago I was working for an independent small electrician. Long story short he argued with me about connecting street line to weather head on homes. I taped up my allen wrench and wore rubber gloves. He basically told me I was ridiculous and to tie it in bare handed. I said look, I'll tie in all your street connections, just want my gloves. He looked at the helper and said, why don't you and him trade your wages and I'll have you do the tie ins.
W-nut, you might refer your antagonist to this article: http://ecmweb.com/ar/electric_dangers_working_hot/index.htm Lately, the “tough-guy” image is getting too expensive for most employers. I believe a minimum of class-0 gloves {and protectors!} are root-level PPE for virtually all utility “low-voltage” jobs these days

"If your client balks at shutdowns, ask him if he's willing to be responsible for the death of an electrician. Then ask if he thinks the client's employees in this case were less disrupted by the death of a worker and the resultant presence of police, paramedics, and numerous investigators than they would have been by a brief disruption in production had the electrician performed the task with the power off."

Regardless of the “status quo,” in an incident followup the utility would invoke their printed rules—effectively stating that they have never permitted non-utility personnel to work on their [energized] cables or equipment.


1.800..989.6161

[This message has been edited by Bjarney (edited 12-08-2002).]
Thanks OSHA Professor for your time in these rather lengthy and great answers. I have been monitoring this sight for a year or more and at many been tempted to reply (especially in defense or condemnation of us Electrical Engineers). I could not just sit by and not thank you for your time on this thread.

Thanks, Shane
Shane,

grab a mit & git in the game.....
It's so refreshing to hear such positive and safety conscious comments from all of you qualified workers. My contact with qualified workers over the past several years has been a result of accidents and fatality investigations. I expect the employer / contractor / utility etc. to view me / us / OSHA as the enemy but I am constantly surprised and perplexed as to why the employees / qualified worker / electricians / linemen view us as the “enemy” when were on their side. I can’t thank you all enough for all your support and comments of appreciation. Thanks for the warm welcome and best wishes to all for a safe and happy holiday season and a prosperous new year. I will be monitoring and checking in between my training, our office move, vacation etc. BTW our OSHA National Training Institute is in the process of moving from Des Plaines Illinois to Arlington Heights Illinois (6 miles away) in a brand new facility (suburbs of Chicago) . If anyone is ever in the grater Chicago area and would like a tour of the facility drop me an e-mail. I’ll be delighted to give you the full tour.

OSHA Professor - Grizzy
© ECN Electrical Forums