1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. Electrical Shock Occurrences Compared to Total Electrical Occurrences The percentage of electrical shocks has steadily increased from 2009 (20%) to 2011 (27%). 5

6. Comparison by Calendar Quarter 6

7. Comparison by Secretarial Office 7

8. Comparison by Contractor 8

9. (Continued) 9

10. Comparison by Facility Function 10

11. Comparison by Activity 11

12. 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

13. 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

14. Subcontractors (continued) The following chart shows a comparison of Subcontractors versus Non- Subcontractors. 14

15. Work Activity (Electrical vs. Non-Electrical) The following charts show the distribution of shocks for less than adequate planning and hazardous energy control. 15

16. 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

17. Work Activity (Human Error vs. Faulty Equipment) Human error was a causal factor in the majority of the shocks that involved electrical work. 17

18. 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

19. Work Activity Unsafe Conditions The chart shows the comparison between electrical work and non-electrical work with regard to unsafe conditions. 19

20. Equipment 20

21. Equipment (continued) 21

22. 22 Equipment (continued)

23. ORPS Cause Codes 23

24. 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

25. 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

26. QUESTIONS 26

27. Contact Information 27 Glenn “Skip” Searfoss Program Analyst Office of Analysis HS-24  Glenn.Searfoss@hq.doe.gov Glenn.Searfoss@hq.doe.gov  Office: 301-903-8085  Fax: 301-903-8403