I am no longer surprised when I teach a PRCS or an Emergency Response course and the students who have been doing entries into PRCSs and responding to emergencies but are unaware of primary atmospheric conditions. This is how I explain it… We have 100% volume of air in the space. That 100% volume is […]
On August 28, 2023, at 7:30 a.m., a worker was welding in a confined space on a ship under construction. The victim was found unresponsive inside of the confined space. Per the medical examiner’s report, the employee was killed as a result of suffocation in an oxygen-deficient environment. NOTE: this is likely due to a
August 18, 2022, at 3:00 p.m., an employee entered an empty liquid propane gas (LPG) tank for servicing at an industrial equipment wholesaler facility. Earlier in the day, the employee approached a supervisor and said he wanted to enter the tank to spray Torq CB III penetrating oil product on an internal valve to loosen
1910.146(d)(14) does not specify how many or what percentage of entry permits must be reviewed annually. Would it be compliant if an employer reviews a representative sample of the entry permits during the one-year review? The easy answer is NO, ALL CANCELED ENTRY PERMITS AND NOT A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF THE ENTRY PERMITS must
Although this question has been discussed before, OSHA issued a new Letter of Interpretation (LOI) late in 2023 (posted in 2024), answering the following question and has ARCHIVED their previous LOI from November 26, 1996. Does OSHA consider the initial monitoring data and subsequent re-testing data to constitute employee exposure records subject to the record
This is another example of entrants not recognizing the space they are entering is a CONFINED SPACE and the actions/work they did turned the confined space into a PERMIT-REQUIRED CONFINED SPACE. Both entrants died and two (2) volunteer FF’s were injured in their attempts to perform rescues at this residential incident. On May 26, 2010,
OR-OSHA has fined a Portland environmental and emergency services company $118,800 for violating job safety standards designed to protect workers from the potentially deadly hazards of confined spaces. The division cited the employer following an inspection of an incident reported by Portland Fire & Rescue. Oregon OSHA’s July 14, 2023 incident inspection found that two
At 8:00 a.m. on June 26, 2022, two (2) employees emptied and cleaned an open-topped frack tank (Tank #4) at an oil and gas services site. There were no eyewitnesses, and the employees were working at a remote site alone, so few details are known about what occurred. At the time of the investigation, hydrogen
The men were helping to build a new sewage pumping facility. They were in a concrete foundation, a trench-like part of the structure about 40 feet deep. Sources said giant intakes five feet in diameter are inside the structure. Inflatable plugs secured with chains are used to keep the water out. Some sort of catastrophic
At 5:15 p.m. on October 27, 2013, three (3) employees and a supervisor were working on the deck of three (3) barges to ready them for delivery. The supervisor and one of the employees entered the #1 cargo tank of barges #1 and #2 to check the deep well blind on the deep well inspection
At approximately 4:00 a.m. on March 29, 2020, an employee, 30, was installing a full face blind on a flange on a reactor. Then, the probe stem fell inside of the reactor, and the employee tried to fish it out. Using a Jacobs ladder, the employee entered the unprepared reactor that was not cleared for
There is NO exception in either 1910.146 or 1926.1201-.1213 for NOT having a rescue plan for “permitted entries” into a PRCS. There is an exception for the “Non-Entry rescue method,” BUT there is NOT one for having a rescue service readily available when the space being entered is a PRCS and the entry method is
