Archive for October, 2009

What will they think of next?

Friday, October 30th, 2009
Jobsite trying to do the right thing by getting electrical power in early.  (Photo: Jan Thomas)

Jobsite trying to do the right thing by getting electrical power in early. (Photo: Jan Thomas)

Sometimes you just have to stand back and see the humor in a situation.  Laugh a little and then go talk to someone about the dangers.  In this case, the GC asked the electrical contractor to provide the main panel and some GFCI outlets early in the job (that’s good).  The concrete guys hadn’t gotten there yet, but were on their way (that’s typical).  What to do with the panel box set on the ground already wired and running the temporary lights?  Here is one solution – not so typical.

After checking out the unusual suspension system, I found that there was no strain on the actual wiring although the height of the service entrance cable and its installation needed to be improved.  The ladder access to reach the main breaker might be a little short but that depended upon who was using the ladder.  Framing and other construction exposures were going to be a little tricky around this whole installation.

The pad got laid and cured, the electricians came back and reset the panel, the superintendent was asked not to be so creative next time, and I got a funny picture.

  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Ping
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Share/Bookmark

Safety for Volunteers

Friday, October 23rd, 2009
A volunteer at the 2009 Richmond, Virginia Folk Festival helping keep the public safe at a crosswalk while being safely identified with high visibility vest. (Photo: Jan Thomas)

A volunteer at the 2009 Richmond, Virginia Folk Festival helping keep the public safe at a crosswalk while being safely identified with high visibility vest. (Photo: Jan Thomas)

I attended the recent folk festival in Richmond.  Good time, great music, world cuisine and wonderful photo opportunities.  The large crowds were being assisted by people identified by their “Volunteer” t-shirts. Of course, I noticed the “behind the scenes” details and started thinking once again about the safety of this special group of “workers.”  It’s a topic I’ve been aware of for a long time.

In the early 80’s, when I was the VOSH Administrator, I had to sort through the jurisdictional issues involving the fatality of a volunteer.   On a more personal level, in 1985, I joined my local volunteer rescue squad where my EMT training emphasized the safety and health of the emergency responder. 

I can tell you from these early experiences and years of following this issue that volunteers are normally exempt from OSHA regulations due to a lack of employer/employee relationship.  The one clear exception to this rule was created by the U.S. Congress in 1989 through EPA and directed at fire departments (career, volunteer or combination services).  That focus remains on hazardous materials emergency response.

But what about unpaid student interns, hospital, hospice or disaster volunteers, animal shelter or food bank unpaid assistants, fund raiser and community activity helpers?  Who protects or watches out for the safety of these populations in the U.S.

Sad to say, promotion of safety for U.S. volunteers is only happening at the individual organizational level.  There are few incentives other than tort liability, some insurance industry awareness, and the professionalism of volunteer-rich organizations such as the American Red Cross or my local music festival organizers.

This is not necessarily the case in other developed nations.  For example, in the UK, the Health and Safety Executive mandates that employers and the self-employed protect their employees and their volunteers.  An independent organization – Volunteer England – provides a “good practice” bank of safety suggestions to assist.  Hmm…. a national, cooperative model to consider when next we smile at a volunteer.

  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Ping
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Share/Bookmark

Ban the Wire!

Tuesday, October 20th, 2009
Good example of “gambling with wire” while stringing up temporary lights (Photo: Jan Thomas).

Good example of “gambling with wire” while stringing up temporary lights (Photo: Jan Thomas).

 

While teaching electrical safety in our OSHA 10/30 classes I like to throw out the question “Who thinks putting metal and potentially exposed electrical together is a good idea?”  On all worksites I’ve seen a slow evolution to the use of nonconductive tools and equipment.  For example, the replacement of metal ladders for fiberglass, the repair of extension cords with molded plastic replacement plugs, the use of plastic cages on temporary light strings instead of metal guards.  All good, but in today’s photo we have short lengths of wire being used to hang the sting lights.

Is this a problem?  The string lights are from a reputable manufacturer.  Built-in molded plastic hanger eyes are provided.  But, check the manufacturers’ literature- the plastic hanger eye is provided for use with “messenger cable or hooks.”    Messenger cable???  Why bother with that when we can just hang the lamps using some bits of wire?

Look closely – this is not a usual case – the lamp assembly is pulled over and tied off to a metal stud with a spare length of wire pointing into the aisle, ready to catch a worker or hit the bulb. Then there is a small twist of wire being used to lock the clam shell type cage.  Why is wire being used when plastic zip ties and bits of string are readily available in the workplace?

The installation shown above might pass OSHA inspection since the wire is passing through the manufacturer’s establish plastic eye (reference OSHA 1926.405(a)(2)(ii)(F) Temporary lights shall not be suspended by their electric cords unless cords and light are designed for this means of suspension).

My suggestions – stop arguing about OSHA compliance.  Instead, fool proof everyone’s safety by setting up a worksite rule that says “ NO wires” when setting up temporary lighting or extension cords,  that keeps everyone from making a random mistake that could lead to electrical shock.

  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Ping
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Share/Bookmark

Beware the “Fresh Breeze”

Friday, October 9th, 2009
Roofers several stories up, trying to batten down their materials during high gusts. (Photo: Jan Thomas)

Roofers several stories up, trying to batten down their materials during high gusts. (Photo: Jan Thomas)

The trees outside my office window are being blown by a “fresh breeze,” fall leaves whipping off.  The local weather station reports 18 to 20 mph gusts.  Last night I watched a Weather Channel report on workers in Japan being blown about by typhoon-generated winds of more than 85 mph.  All this reminds me that I’ve been meaning to write a blog on how to determine when windy conditions are safe for workers, cranes, and other outdoor material handling.  I’ve seen plenty of guys trying to carry sheets of plywood during high wind.  And, I really get concerned when the unloaded crane hook is swinging in the breeze.

I’m always being asked, “What’s OSHA’s rule on wind speed?”  That’s easy – there is NO general rule.  In fact, current OSHA General Industry and Construction standards say very little other than a few minor mentions in outdated crane standards.  That will change when OSHA finally adopts the new Subpart CCCranes and Derricks in Construction. (You saw that right – OSHA’s going into double alpha for their subparts.)

For example, proposed §1926.1417(h) states “when a local storm warning has been issued, the competent person shall determine whether it is necessary to implement manufacturer recommendations for securing the equipment.”  Suddenly, we have at least 3 entities that can help us make a decision – the National Weather Service, the on-site competent person, and the crane manufacturer!   The conditions of each crane pick are different and do depend upon on-site decisions.  Several sources, too numerous to list here, indicated that by the time wind gets to 20 – 25 mph it is getting too risky to operate cranes.

And, what about those workers lifting plywood and other materials on the roof?  When should they be concerned?  This should be obvious, but sometimes not to the supervisor tucked away in the office.  Check out the Beaufort Scale for land wind conditions.

  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Ping
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Share/Bookmark

Researching the “Parapet Rule”

Monday, October 5th, 2009
Great example of guarding the parapet edge when its dimensions don’t add up to the “parapet rule.”  And, note the professional carpentry!  This is a Taylor & Parrish job where the guardrails are always the best. (Photo: Jan Thomas)

Great example of guarding the parapet edge when its dimensions don’t add up to the “parapet rule.” And, note the professional carpentry! This is a Taylor & Parrish job where the guardrails are always the best. (Photo: Jan Thomas)

I think all professionals have a tendency to pass-on answers based upon “rules” they have been told about but have not researched for themselves.  Such is the case with a “flat roof/parapet height rule” I was told to use back in my OSHA compliance days (hint – it’s not in the OSHA standards).

Yet, when I started consulting, I also started to check my advice to clients, being ready to pull out the necessary documents supporting my statements.  It’s so much easier to do this today with a robust internet but still some of the provenances of these “rules” are obscure.  And, not only are they hard to trace but many are not regulatory rules, only guidelines.  For example, if you have a flat roof with a parapet that is at least 30 inches tall and at least 18 inches wide, you may have sufficient protection, if you have limited exposure.  I added the part about limited exposure as I’m not truly comfortable with this “parapet rule.”

I believe this formula started as an architectural guideline.  Fall protection expert Dr. Nigel Ellis has discussed the parapet solution through all 3 editions of his Introduction to Fall Protection book (1988, 1993, 2001).  On May 2, 2003, OSHA published a proposed rule change for Subparts D and I of 29CFR1910.  At proposed Appendix A –  Fall Protection Systems,   you will find the following schematic with formula: 

parapet rule

I emailed Dr. Ellis recently to see if he still used this 30-inch + 18-inch rule – he calls it a flopguard.  He advocates that we all start using a 45-inch minimum high guardrail system – people around the world are getting taller!   Thanks, Dr. Ellis. It is great being able to converse with an expert.

So, to wrap up this blog, I want to say that I really do enjoy researching these fine points for our clients and I’ve got a list of them – almost all of which will make great future blog topics!  If you have an obscure “rule,” let me know and I’ll add it to the list!

  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Ping
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Share/Bookmark

Please Note: Analysis and opinions expressed are specific to the current discussion only. Different facts, changes in standards and codes, or other circumstances may lead to different results.