|
|
|
|
Shutting It Down Is Not Enough:
Avoid Disaster With Lockout/Tagout
By Mark Micheles
In Minnesota in 1996, two employees of a commercial steam heat supplier died of injuries they sustained when a steam line connecting two underground vaults was re-energized while they were inside it doing repairs. They had shut down but not locked out or tagged out either of the control valves that were isolating the leak. A maintenance engineer who thought the work was finished opened both control valves and released the deadly steam into the interconnect line where the victims were working. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) fatality assessment program investigated the accident and made two recommendations: that employers should (1) develop, implement, and enforce a written safety program that includes task-specific training and lockout/tagout procedures, and (2) ensure that when more than one employee is exposed to hazardous energy, a group lockout/tagout procedure is in place and enforced.
In another NIOSH case from 2005, a facility maintenance mechanic in California died when he was crushed against a light standard by a gantry crane. The victim had gone to the roof of the building without informing his supervisor and had not implemented the company’s lockout/tagout program before he went. He leaned over the gantry crane rail on the roof and was struck by the moving crane. The crane operator, watching the load, had not noticed the mechanic on the roof.
In this case, the employer had an updated safety program and a written Illness and Injury Prevention Program. Safety meetings were held monthly, and training was given and documented. According to documentation, the victim had received safety training, including the company’s lockout/tagout program.
The victim may have been on the roof to inspect some light fixtures that needed rewiring. However, the rewiring work had not yet been scheduled because any electrical work requiring access to the roof would have also required the activation of the company’s lockout/tagout program.
Turning Off Versus Locking Out
A U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics survey on injuries related to servicing equipment showed that 80 percent of workers surveyed failed to turn off the equipment before performing service work.
Simply turning off a machine or unplugging equipment while it is being worked on does not offer adequate protection against accidents like the examples above. It’s not enough that someone “thinks” the machine or energy source is turned off. A prescribed lockout/tagout procedure must be followed to ensure that any energy source is disengaged or blocked or de-energized and locked. “Lockout” refers to a device that physically prevents access to the energy source. “Tagout” refers to a written or printed warning tag affixed to the machine or energy source. Lockout and tagout devices include but are not limited to lock boxes, lockout storage, locks, blocking devices, labels, and tags.
The “Fatal Five” main causes of lockout/tagout injuries are:
- Failure to stop equipment
- Failure to disconnect from power source
- Failure to dissipate (bleed, neutralize) residual energy
- Accidental restarting of equipment
- Failure to clear work areas before restarting
(from Vermont Safety Information Resources, Inc.)
Disengaging the Energy Source
To prevent unintended energization, you must be able to identify a machine’s power source, know the proper way to disengage or de-energize it, and then verify the lockout. Hazardous energy sources found in the workplace include electrical (generated or static); mechanical (transitional or rotational); thermal (machines, equipment, or chemical reactions); and potential (hydraulic, pneumatic, or vacuum pressure, springs, or gravity).
So, why is turning off a machine not enough? In an electrical example, when the control switch is turned off, the circuit is opened; however, there is still electrical energy at the switch. A short could develop, causing a circuit to bypass the breaker or fuse.
Workers can be electrocuted, lose fingers or limbs, or suffer severe injuries because someone bypasses a lockout or doesn’t verify the lockout. Maybe the company doesn’t enforce the program it already has. Devastating injuries, missed work days, OSHA fines, and rising insurance costs can be prevented or greatly reduced through an effective lockout program.
The OSHA Lockout/Tagout Standard
The term lockout/tagout refers to the process used to implement elements of OSHA standard 29 CFR 1910.147, the control of hazardous energy. The standard mandates “specific practices and procedures to protect employees from the unexpected energization or startup of machinery and equipment or the release of hazardous energy during service or maintenance activities. This requires that a designated individual turns off and disconnects the machinery or equipment from its energy source(s) before performing service or maintenance and that the authorized employee(s) either lock or tag the energy-isolating device(s) to prevent the release of hazardous energy and take steps to verify that the energy has been isolated effectively.” Once the energy isolation is complete, it should be verified visually or using test instruments and then tried again to ensure that the equipment is truly locked out.
According to OSHA, approximately 3 million workers perform service or maintenance on equipment. They face great risk of injury if lockout/tagout is not properly implemented. Compliance with the OSHA lockout/tagout standard prevents an estimated 120 fatalities and 50,000 injuries each year, not to mention lost work days (workers injured on the job by exposure to hazardous energy lose an average of 24 workdays for recuperation).
Although the lockout standard is one of the most important of all OSHA standards in preventing serious injuries, it is often ignored because it can be seen as too time consuming or burdensome. Not a good idea: the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics in its annual survey of occupational injuries and illnesses found that in FY 2000, Federal OSHA cited employers for 4,149 violations of this standard, the fifth most frequently cited standard. Because 78% of such violations were in manufacturing, lockout/tagout is probably the leading method for preventing traumatic injury in the entire manufacturing sector.
Establishing a LOTO Program
Ideally, workplace hazards should be “engineered out.” Unfortunately, all machinery runs by means of potentially hazardous energy. Although it’s nearly impossible to attain “zero risk,” every workplace has a responsibility to minimize risk by making sure that all hazardous energy sources are accounted for and safeguarded by lockout/tagout procedures.
OSHA requires three basic elements in a lockout/tagout program: written procedures, training, and inspections. Training is required for “authorized employees” and “affected employees.” Authorized employees are those who actually lock out machines or equipment to perform the maintenance or service. Affected employees are those who do not perform service or maintenance work, but operate the equipment or perform other work in an area where the servicing or maintenance work is being performed.
Your first task in setting up a lockout/tagout program is to develop written procedures that employees can easily understand and perform. To be most effective, your program should be created with input from both management and employees, ensuring better cooperation and a feeling of ownership of safety. Next, training should be required and documented. The program should mandate regular inspection of equipment by an authorized person who is thoroughly familiar with the equipment, its operation, and associated hazards. Lockout materials and hardware should be made available near machinery that requires frequent maintenance so hurried employees aren’t tempted to bypass the requirement. Other good practices include assigning locks, tags, and appliances to authorized employees (see case study below on one company’s solution). Finally, written lockout/tagout procedures should be posted conveniently near the machines.
Case study: Innovating the Lockout/Tagout Procedure
Sometimes an unfortunate incident causes a company to reexamine their lockout/tagout program from a new perspective.
After the death of an employee who squeezed past a gate in an area she didn’t know was locked out, Owens Corning management responded by going “out of the box” to analyze their current lockout/tagout program. They decided to forego the OSHA machine-based procedures and developed an entirely new program with a task-based approach.
Called Lock-Tag-Try (LTT), the program took nearly two years to develop. The program’s slogan, “One Employee, One Lock,” means that every employee must take ownership of safety. All employees who regularly come in contact with an energized source will have a lock to that source, and the employee will be responsible for locking out and then removing the lock from the machine every time they service or use it. It differs from the OSHA program in that all employees, not just “authorized” employees, have the ability to lock out or tag out an energy source.
In the year since the LTT program’s introduction, hazardous energy-related accidents have been reduced by ________ percent, and no fatalities have occurred. Michael Dupont, Owens Corning’s vice president of global safety, says one of the keys to the program’s smooth rollout was the close involvement of their safety product distributor. The distributor was involved in making recommendations for, and then drawing up, a standardized list of lockout devices and providing the expertise of its safety specialists.
An involved safety distributor will work with a company’s safety director to help them reduce risk, injury, and liability. In this case, the distributor itself gained new insight into the lockout/tagout process that they can use to help other customers.
Lock Out Your Losses
Lockout/tagout may be viewed as a bothersome process that slows production. But companies that do not recognize and control energy-source hazards not only risk regulatory fines but also could expose themselves to serious legal problems. Carefully designed lockout programs can prevent these types of losses.
There is no loss greater than that of a human life. Your employees are your company’s most valuable asset. They trust you to send them home to their families every night after a safe day at work. Can you say you’ve done everything you can to earn that trust?
About the author: Mark Micheles
Mark Micheles is Senior Vice President, Sales and Marketing, for Safety Today, a provider of personal protective equipment and safety-related services to industrial, commercial, government, and construction customers throughout North America. Safety Today currently represents the leading North American manufacturers of safety products for the utilities, steel, automotive, food processing, consumer products, and manufacturing markets. Mark has 33 years of experience as a sales and marketing executive, the last 10 of them at Safety Today. Before joining Safety Today, Mark served as the Director of International Sales and Military, Regional Market Manager and Zone Manager at the Keebler Company.
Contact information for Mark Micheles:
Safety Today
2425 Spiegel Drive
Groveport, OH 43125
614-409-7338 [phone]
614-409-7339 [fax]
MMicheles@safetytoday.com
|
|
|
|
|
