COVER STORY Lockout/Tagout: Don’t Flip Out over LOTO Compliance Update your understanding of this life- and limb-saving standard.

By Evelyn Sacks

welder was crushed to death by a hydraulic door on a scrap met- al shredder. He was trying to remove a jammed piece of metal from the door. "e ’s energy had not been released, and the door had not been blocked open. A mechanic was fatally crushed in an escalator while per- forming maintenance. He had removed the escalator stairs and crawled inside the escalator mechanism. When a coworker Adropped the escalator’s electrical circuit box, it triggered a relay that sent power to the escalator. "e stairs began moving, and the mechanic could not escape. "e escalator had no locks or tags on any power controls. "ese grizzly examples are typical of the estimated 150–200 fatalities (and 50,000 or so injuries) that occur each year due to a failure to control the release of hazardous energy. Lockout/tagout (LOTO) 1910.147 refers to the Occupa- tional and Health Administration (OSHA)-required practices and proce- dures to protect workers from unexpected start-up of machinery or from haz- ardous energy released during service or maintenance. "e standard is based on the fact that simply turning equipment o# is not enough to block stored energy. Lockout devices hold energy-isolating equipment in a safe or o# position. "ey prevent equipment from becoming energized because the lockout devices cannot be removed without a key or other unlocking mechanism. Tagout devices, by contrast, are prominent warning devices that are fastened to energy-isolating devices to warn employees not to reenergize the machine while they are being serviced or maintained. Tagout devices are easier to remove and, alone, provide

less protection than lockout devices. ©ISTOCK.COM

10 Safety Decisions | Winter/Spring 2016 SafetyDecisionsMagazine.com SafetyDecisionsMagazine.com Safety Decisions | Winter/Spring 2016 11 LOCKOUT/TAGOUT

If You’ve Got Equipment, the issue of “who’s covered” can be confusing. LOTO cov- You’re Probably Covered ers servicing and maintenance of machines and equipment According to OSHA, “If your employees service or main- where release of stored energy or unexpected startup could tain machines where the unexpected startup, energiza- harm employees. tion, or the release of stored energy could cause injury, She explains, “Normal production operations are not the standard likely applies to you. "e standard applies covered by the LOTO standard. However, servicing and/or to all sources of energy including, but not limited to me- maintenance activities that take place during normal oper- chanical, electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, chemical, and ations are covered if an employee is required (1) to remove thermal energy.” or bypass a guard or other safety device or (2) if an em- Incidents related to the control of hazardous energy are ployee is required to place any part of his or her body into perennially on OSHA’s top 10 list, but there seems to have an area on a machine or piece of equipment where work been an uptick in cases in recent months. “One of the rea- is actually performed on the material being processed, or sons we’re noticing so many amputations and related cita- where an associated danger zone exists during a machine tions is OSHA’s new reporting rules that, since January, have operating cycle.” required employers to notify the agency of all work-related amputations,” explains Nickole Winnett, shareholder in the Understand the Exemptions Washington, D.C., o$ce of Jackson Lewis. "e reporting LOTO does not apply to work on cord- or plug-connect- serves as a red %ag and is triggering more inspections. "e ed electric equipment and certain hot tapping operations. culprit behind amputations is o&en a failure to lock out or (Hot tapping refers to the installation of connections to tag out hazardous energy when employees are working on pipelines while they remain in service.) Minor servicing or near a machine, or a failure to use machine guarding. activities that take place during production are also not Winnett says that although the standard is fairly straight- covered as long as the employer provides e#ective alterna- forward and relatively easy for employers to understand, tive protection from hazardous energy, such as guards.

• Exposure to electrical from Compliant (and work on equipment in electric utilization installations; • Oil and gas well drilling and servicing; Inquiring) Employers • Work on cord and plug-connected equipment if it is unplugged and the Want to Know … authorized employee has exclusive control of the plug; and There are, to say the least, many moving Q. What is not covered? • Certain hot tap operations. parts when it comes to protecting employ- A. Servicing and maintenance performed ees from hazardous energy. The following during normal production operations are Q. What are the basic elements of an are OSHA’s answers to several key ques- not covered, but only if the safeguarding energy control program? tions about LOTO compliance. provisions and other standards are effective A. There are three: energy control proce- in preventing worker exposure to hazards dures (with specific information an autho- Q. Who is covered by the standard? created by the unexpected energization rized employee must know), employee A. The standard applies to general industry or startup, or the release of energy. Also, training, and periodic inspections. workers performing service and mainte- minor tool changes and adjustments that nance on machines and equipment, and are routine, repetitive, and integral to the Q. Can I develop my own program, who are exposed to unexpected startup, en- use of the equipment are not covered as or does OSHA dictate what should ergization, or release of hazardous energy. long as workers are effectively protected by be included? alternate measures. Also not covered are: A. Yes. In fact, employers are expected to Q. What activities or operations are • Construction, agriculture, and maritime develop programs and procedures, training, covered? work; and inspections that meet their particular A. Any source of energy, which can include • Installations under the exclusive control needs and the types of equipment in use mechanical, hydraulic, pneumatic, chemi- of electric utilities for power generation, as long as they meet the of cal, thermal, or others. transmission, and distribution; the standard.

12 Safety Decisions | Winter/Spring 2016 SafetyDecisionsMagazine.com OSHA requires that in order to be exempted, the minor servicing exemption applies only to activities that are: “IN MOST INSTANCES, • Routine—part of a regular procedure. • Repetitive—repeated regularly as part of the production UNLESS IT’S WORKING ON process or cycle. • Integral—inherent to and performed as part of the A CORD OR REALLY MINOR production process. SERVICING, OSHA WILL SAY Watch Out for Small Changes OSHA applies a broad interpretation of servicing and THAT LOTO APPLIES AND maintaining, according to Winnett. “In most instances, unless it’s working on a cord or really minor servicing, THE SYSTEM NEEDS TO OSHA will say that LOTO applies and the system needs BE DE-ENERGIZED.” to be de-energized. But many employers don’t understand this and tend to stretch their understanding of servicing and maintaining.” • "e service or maintenance does not create hazards for She o#ers the example of a pizza box manufacturer other employees. making a small change to the line in order to produce a box of a di#erent size. It’s not enough to hit the stop or o# In order to apply this exception, the employer must have button, Winnett emphasizes. “If the system is not de-ener- had no involving unexpected activation or reen- gized, it could cycle on and injure someone. But the em- ergizing of the equipment during service or maintenance. ployer may wrongly believe that turning o# the machine If the above conditions are not met, written procedures was enough.” In fact, the system needs to be fully de-ener- must be developed for each piece of equipment. gized in OSHA’s view, and that status must be veri*ed by an authorized individual. Advice for Avoiding Citations Veri*cation varies by machine, but essentially involves Another area of regulatory concern is businesses that op- reviewing the equipment to understand how it will be shut erate out of more than one location. “If you have multiple down, then shutting it down and isolating the energy by worksites, OSHA looks at the history of the company to putting a lock or tag on it so that it cannot be restarted. determine whether to issue serious, repeat, or willful viola- Once de-energization has taken place, the next step is to tions,” says Winnett. cycle the equipment through and test the system by trying She adds, “If you have a LOTO citation at a plant in one to start it up to ensure that it is de-energized. city, but have not made and veri*ed the *xes, OSHA could issue a repeat violation with penalties up to $70,000 (and Will Your Efforts Stand up to Scrutiny? higher a&er August 2016) for the same problem at another What gets employers into trouble with OSHA when it comes location.” For that reason, employers should communicate to LOTO? Winnett points to a variety of causes, including OSHA citations received at one location to other sites so failure to ensure that energy control procedures have been they can review their practices and make any necessary developed, documented, and are in use for each piece of changes. equipment where service and maintenance occur. Excep- Winnett urges employers to be mindful of the federal tions are situations in which the following are all in place: government’s practice of issuing contracts to employers • "e equipment has no potential for stored or residual with a strong record in safety and other compliance areas. energy or reaccumulation of stored energy a&er shut “If you’ve received a citation, the government is going to down, which poses a risk for employees. weigh that in determining who gets contracts.” Winnett • "e equipment has a single energy source, which can be also reminds employers that they must provide equipment- readily identi*ed and isolated. and program-speci*c training to employees and must not • Isolating and locking out the energy source will com- rely solely on o#-the-shelf LOTO safety videos. pletely de-energize the equipment. Winnett recommends creating a worksheet or an ap- • "e machine or equipment is isolated from the energy pendix (paper or digital) for the LOTO program for fore- source and is locked out during service or maintenance. men and crew members to ensure they complete all steps. • A single lockout device will achieve a lockout condition. "e appendix walks personnel through every step of lock- • "e lockout device is under the exclusive control of the ing and tagging out each piece of equipment and trains authorized employee. them on speci*c expectations.

SafetyDecisionsMagazine.com Safety Decisions | Winter/Spring 2016 13 LOCKOUT/TAGOUT

compliance o$cers on the agency’s interpretation of the NIOSH Serves up relevant standards and its procedures for enforcing them. As such, it contains important insights for employers. Food for Thought When asked what’s missing in programs he inspects, Schlumper points to the for periodic inspections. “One of the main requirements is that employers perform pe- on LOTO Hazards riodic—at least annual—inspections of each procedure. But, many companies I’ve dealt with are not meeting the require- The National Institute for violation in 2012–2013 for ments.” OSHA requires that the inspection be performed by Occupational Safety and Health food manufacturing. an authorized employee not involved in the energy control (NIOSH) found that food man- What’s going on? NIOSH be- procedure being inspected. "e inspection includes identi*- ufacturing workers experience lieves the pressure to maintain cation and correction of any de*ciencies or deviations, review a higher rate of injuries and ill- a fast pace on assembly lines of each authorized employee’s responsibilities, review of au- nesses than workers in private could cause food-process- thorized and a#ected employees’ lockout duties, and certi*ca- industry overall. Their rate, 5.4 ing facilities to fall short on tion by the employer that the inspection has been performed. per 100 workers, is consider- hazardous energy control. The "e review must be equipment-speci*c. “If you have 50 ably higher than the 3.4 per 100 researchers state, “Given the pieces of equipment that are all di#erent from one another, workers for private industry. production pressures in this each procedure needs to be inspected,” advises Schlump- According to NIOSH research, industry, workers may feel that er. But if two or more pieces of equipment are the same, many machine-based injuries managers would rather have only one procedure needs to be written and inspected. An in the food business are related them risk injury than stop annual inspection should be the minimum, he suggests. to failure to use lockout/tagout production to properly apply “Don’t skimp on this step and just go through the motions. procedures. From 2003 to 2013, LOTO procedures.” "e goal is to ensure that your procedures are e#ective and 28 fatalities and 227 serious NIOSH encourages food that employees are actually following them.” injuries such as amputations manufacturers to follow all were related to LOTO, with the OSHA requirements for LOTO, largest number in meatpacking and to make sure workers “OSHA LOVES TO SEE THE SORT and poultry slaughtering and have a clear understanding processing. LOTO was also the of when hazardous energy OF SAFETY-FIRST CULTURE THAT most frequently cited OSHA control procedures apply. EMPOWERS EMPLOYEES AND COULD HOPEFULLY PREVENT A Business owners should be sure their company policies provide employee stop-work (or stop-equipment) author- SERIOUS .” ity. “OSHA loves to see the sort of safety-*rst culture that empowers employees and could hopefully prevent a seri- Another compliance problem Schlumper observes ous accident,” adds Winnett. “Having those sorts of poli- is LOTO programs that fail to provide su$cient detail. cies and programs in place can possibly a#ect the severity “OSHA’s CPL (compliance directive) document discusses or classi*cation of an OSHA penalty.” this at some length. Two words that come up frequently in the document are ‘speci*city’ and ‘detail.’” Hundreds of Inspections Under His Belt "e intent is to produce a document that is speci*c and Paul Schlumper is a safety supervisor with the Georgia detailed enough so that anyone could follow it, not just OSHA Consultation Program. A certi*ed safety professional someone who is intimately familiar with the equipment and engineer, Schlumper also heads the Safety and the process of de-energizing it. “You want to see a pro- Branch of the Human Integration Division at the cedure with lots of pictures, arrows, and accompanying Georgia Tech Research Institute. He has helped hundreds text that is somewhat technical and really describes what of organizations step up their compliance and safety perfor- people need to do,” Schlumper adds. mance and frequently advises on lockout/tagout. Schlumper o&en recommends that employers review Evelyn Sacks is a contributing editor of Safety Decisions . OSHA’s lengthy (130-page) but valuable compliance di- [email protected] rective on LOTO. "e document, CPL 02-00-147, advises Reprint: SD_0116-2

14 Safety Decisions | Winter/Spring 2016 SafetyDecisionsMagazine.com