Preliminary Analysis Results of Electrical Shocks Reported in the Occurrence Reporting

and Processing System

(2008 – August 2012)

October 2, 2012

2012 EFCOG Electrical Safety Workshop and Meeting

Los Alamos National Laboratory

By :

Skip Searfoss

Office of Analysis (HS-24)

Office of Health, Safety and Security 1

Purpose

Review and analyze the reported electrical shock occurrences from 2008 through August 2012.

Discuss the observations from this review with the Electrical Safety Subgroup (ESSG).

Help to identify potential ESSG workshop action items, best practices, and corrective actions.

2

Introduction

Electrical accidents rank sixth among all causes of work-related deaths in the United States. Based on Bureau of Labor Statistics, 52% of occupational electrical fatalities occurred in the construction industry.

Electricians sustained 47% of the electrical fatalities in construction followed by construction laborers (23%), and painters, roofers, and carpenters with 6% in each occupation.

The electrical utility industry has the highest rate of electrical shock injuries at 0.7 per 10,000 workers (2009). Contact with overhead power lines is the leading category of on-the-job electrical death.

DOE has had only one electrical fatality in the past seven years.

Note This does not include the death of a worker seriously injured back in 1996 when his jackhammer contacted 13.2 kV.3

Electrical Shock Occurrences (2008 - August 2012)

There were 139 electrical shocks included in the analysis. The chart shows an increase in the number of reported electrical shocks from 2009 through 2011.

4

Electrical Shock Occurrences Compared to Total Electrical Occurrences

The percentage of electrical shocks has steadily increased from 2009 (20%) to 2011 (27%).

5

Comparison by Calendar Quarter

6

Comparison by Secretarial Office

7

Comparison by Contractor

8

Comparison by Contractor

(Continued)

9

Comparison by Facility Function

10

Comparison by Activity

11

Worker Types

The following charts show a comparison of Electrical Workers versus Non-Electrical Workers. A higher percentage of Non-Electrical Workers received electrical shocks than Electrical Workers, which underscores the need for more or improved awareness training for all workers.

12

Subcontractors

The following charts show a comparison of Subcontractor Electrical Workers versus Subcontractor Non-Electrical Workers. The percentage of shocks for subcontractors performing electrical work is higher than for all worker types.

13

Subcontractors(continued)

The following chart shows a comparison of Subcontractors versus Non-Subcontractors.

14

Work Activity (Electrical vs. Non-Electrical)

The following charts show the distribution of shocks for less than adequate planning and hazardous energy control.

15

Work Activity (Electrical vs. Non-Electrical)

The following charts show the distribution of shocks for less than adequate training and for electrical wiring issues.

16

Work Activity (Human Error vs. Faulty Equipment)

Human error was a causal factor in the majority of the shocks that involved electrical work.

17

Work Activity (Human Error vs. Faulty Equipment)

Contact with faulty equipment was a causal factor in the majority of the shocks that involved non-electrical work.

18

Work Activity Unsafe Conditions

The chart shows the comparison between electrical work and non-electrical work with regard to unsafe conditions.

19

Equipment

20

Equipment (continued)

21

22

Equipment (continued)

ORPS Cause Codes

23

September 2012 Shocks

LANL – a post-doc experienced a minor shock when he grazed his left arm against a clamp on a metal mounting rod while moving the tip of a ultrasonicator.

LANL – two electricians felt a tingle while installing a new grill/oven in the kitchen of the cafeteria in Building 3, Technical Area 55.

SNL - a computer support unit employee felt a shock to their right middle finger and thumb while unplugging a computer speaker power cord from the power strip.

SNL - a controls subcontractor received an electrical shock between the fingers on the right hand while installing a jumper in a controls cabinet.

LBNL - a LLNL employee was shocked while unplugging her laptop power supply when her finger inadvertently touched the metal prong.

24

What’s Next?

Develop Prevention Strategies:

Improve electrical safety awareness training for non-electrical workers (e.g., videos, lessons learned, etc.)

Ensure subcontractors understand and follow site electrical safety procedures and work practices

Ensure proper air-gapping/isolation of abandoned electrical circuits

Enforce strict adherence to hazardous energy control procedures

Ensure electrical equipment inspections and corrective/preventive maintenance are being performed

Provide methods for reporting potential electrical hazards

25

QUESTIONS

26

Contact Information

27

Glenn “Skip” Searfoss

Program Analyst

Office of Analysis HS-24

Glenn.Searfoss@hq.doe.gov

Office: 301-903-8085

Fax: 301-903-8403