Risk Control Hierarchy Clarifies Electrical Safety

A REAL LIFE APPLICATION

Let's apply the RCH to the Department of Energy (DOE). In 2005, the DOE had an average per month of 14.1 electrical-related shocks, burns and the like. Electrical safety — those procedures and practices meant to prevent injury and damage — also had the highest percentage of near misses of any other recordable safety events in DOE.3 If we keep in mind that reducing risk increases safety, this means that electrical safety, as it was being applied, didn't succeed in its intent. DOE cited the following primary causes for these incidents:

• Lack of hazard identification
• Lack of training
• Lockout/tagout (LO/TO) violations (shortcuts or lack of energy verification)
• Failure to stop work to perform safe energy checks
• 33+ Electrical Shocks in 2005 (Increasing yearly)
• Poor planning

Do we increase electrical safety at DOE by more training, better LO/TO rules or better hazard identification? Absolutely! Can we be exponentially better by using the RCH to uncover even newer and better ways to reduce risk? Absolutely!

The RCH opens our eyes to see newer and better ways to reduce risks so we don't settle for minor improvements that may have little effect on risk reduction. In other words, an airbag is better than an improved seatbelt for reducing head injuries.

Most of the causes listed above take root in the administrative level of the RCH. Now our questions become: How can we eliminate the hazards? Can we find ways to substitute or engineer to reduce hazards? How do we make personnel more aware of the hazard? So let's ask some hard questions and increase electrical safety by moving up the RCH.

Today's competitive business environment demands we invest our safety resources in areas that will reduce risks and increase safety. Financial measurements like cash flow, ROI and ROA are the tools used to prioritize and quantify other budgets within an enterprise. The RCH principles discussed here can be applied to electrical safety to identify the goals and measure the effectiveness of electrical safety expenditures and the overall success of electrical safety.

Fierce competition for capital dictates that projects with the best return on investment become top priorities. Therefore, if electrical safety projects are budgeted and evaluated in the same way based upon the RCH, then we would be able to prioritize specific objectives and see higher safety and productivity dividends. Furthermore, as we apply the RCH to more and more electrical safety risks, it will open our eyes to see more practical ways to reduce those risks. Most importantly, the RCH will help us find new “air bags” for electrical safety!

Phil Allen is president of Grace Engineered Products Inc.

References:

1. ANSI-Z10 Appendix G

2. Plant Services

3. Department of Energy 2005 Electrical Safety Meeting, Las Vegas, National Electrical Safety Incidents and Trends, Nov. 29, 2005