NOTE: I totally disagree with this ALJ decision; however, I give him much credit as I listened to the witnesses and followed the evidence he had presented. This amputation injury was a LOTO violation in my eyes, and I would have argued this case differently. But here are the facts presented to the Judge: what […]
In the year 2023, we still get the old questioning of the intent of LOTO. It never fails; in our LOTO training, we will get operators repeating the application of LOTO to their jobs, word for word, as I have stated it, and then comes the $60,000 question… Does my boss know about this? Another
A cleaning crew member, with no electrical qualifications, switched on a high voltage (2200V 3Ph) electrical switch for a piece of equipment after it had been locked out. The worker’s hand was burnt by escaping arc gasses and flames coming through a damaged door gasket. The equipment has a 2100-volt ac synchronous motor that is
Without a doubt, the biggest LOTO failure for businesses with a LOTO program is the application of the “minor servicing” exception. (emphasis by me) 1910.147(a)(2)(i) This standard applies to the control of energy during servicing and/or maintenance of machines and equipment.1910.147(a)(2)(ii) Normal production operations are not covered by this standard (See subpart 0 of this
I promise you; these are written in the blood of many who have perished – THEY ARE LOTO FACTS, and they are not wrong. If employers could grasp these simple facts, many limbs and lives could be saved yearly. The standard is called “The Control of Hazardous Energy”. It is NOT Lockout AND Tagout; it
On January 20, 2017, Employee #1, 45, was tasked with removing a “Victaulic Blind Flange” on the inlet section of a 400-ton chiller held in place with a split collar. The machine had been idle for over four (4) months as it was winterized, with all electrical connections removed and locked out. The employee began
At 1:30 p.m. on July 24, 2020, two employees were reconnecting two (2) 2″ flanged pipes after cleaning the 4″ header. The employees were beginning to unbolt the blind on the last pipe to reconnect it to the header when…
At 1:15 p.m. on November 3, 2020, Employee #1, employed by an HVAC company, was working at a customer’s commercial facility. He was in the process of removing a coupler and blind from the intake header of an air dryer. The employee did not first relieve the air pressure from the header.
OSHA answers the following questions regarding maintenance and servicing tasks where Cathodic Protection (CP) rectifiers protect pipes against corrosion. Question 1: Is LOTO of a CP rectifier required when working on a pipeline? Question 2: Is the use of a metallic bonding cable an acceptable practice in lieu of CP rectifier lockout/tagout? Background: Cathodic Protection
Nowadays, most machines/equipment come equipped with a digital HMI screen(s) rather than the old-fashioned “Start/Stop” buttons. Most see this as an improvement in using technology. However, for those with “machine specific” LOTO procedures, these HMI screens pose a challenge regarding “verifying ZES” for the electrical energy sources. In the old days, we returned to the
As we have discussed, the “note and exception” that goes with 1910.147(c)(4)(i) is what I call “simple lockout”; however, I have always stated it was intended for simple electrical lockouts, seeing how one of the hurdles to using the exception was that there could be no “stored energy.” So, when we look at the eight
Once we get to the place where we can agree that fluids and gases are “stored energy” and that those “stored energies” have to be bled/drained to achieve a Zero Energy State (ZES), we can then discuss the potential hazards these necessary actions can create. I have written a lot about using 1/4 turn ball
