FR clothing

[watzamta]

Hey guys i know weve had this thread before but i need a refersher and i got some personal questions.............. First does OSHA require employers to pay 100% of uniform cost for lineman or just pay for FR clothing???? Second did OSHA ever rule on the FR cold weather gear??? Third What is everyones opion of the BEST FR pant out there we are requierd to wear a class 2 pant and shirt so tell me waht yall think...............>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Thanks for the help as always.......

As you do we are required to wear cat 2 clothing when ever working on energized equipment. OSHA actually ( the last I looked) did not require a company to supply clothing up too cat 2. Anything above that cat 3 or 4 they are required to pay 100% of the cost. However most companies do supply some kind of alotment. We started a vendor managed program 2 years ago. Clothing is supplied through Tyndale. They sell all brands of FR but most guys go with theirs because they are made right here in the US. We negotiated a $1300 start up and a $500 a year account to maintain the clothes that wear out. Laundry is on your own. We feel good about it and so far it has been working well. Tyndale has been a great company to work with with good service and product. Cold weather gear? I'm not sure about that one. I do know that most of the winter clothing is either cat 3 or 4, don't know if that makes a difference. As far as the pants go try Tyndale premium jeans. They wear well and are comfortable. You can PM me if you need any contact info. BE SAFE

[saftgeek]

At this time, FR clothing is not required by the federal OSHA regs. That could all change soon, but for now they don't.
Our Cooperative was forced to comply with the FR regs by borrowing money from RUS (Dept. of Agriculture). When we use their money we have to follow their rules. One of which is agreeing to abide by NESC. Inside of this volume of safety rules is a requirement to abide by the NFPA70E, Fire Retardant Clothing reg. This is a clothing reg for inside wiremen, not linemen.
Because the NESC was kind enough to include this note in their last revision we must apply an inside wireman reg to outside linework. This applies to electric cooperatives who borrow funds. If they don't, then this does not apply. I know nothing about investor owned, contractors, or muni's. If they are making their guys wear FR head to toe they must know something I don't.
Most folks don't really care where this stuff comes from, but if you do, then read on. Located at the very beginning of the proposed new OSHA regs is mention of the current rule and it's ineffectiveness. Basically, it says OSHA gave utilities guidance on what clothing to wear and everyone pretty much ignored it. There are fatalities occuring because of heat/burn related injuries, not electrocutions. There are way too many words to say it but in a nutshell they are saying, "we told you what to do and you didn't do it. Now we're going to be real assholes and make you protect your employees from sustaining a 2nd degree burn." Faceshields, yup... if your system's assessment places a level 2 requirement on you, then faceshields are part of that requirement. Long sleeves, yup... it's gonna be there too. There will be a % allowable to be unprotected and short sleeves will not work. I know there are arguements about using rubber sleeves but the regulations don't recognize the heat insulation values from rubber sleeves. If the garment/article doesn't have an ATPV value it cannot be used in the calculations.
I hate this stuff. Everybody's pissed off and the only folks happy are the FR clothing manufacturers. Instead of focussing on the root cause and prevention we are throwing money at uniforms which are too hot/cumbersome/expensive etc... Maybe this will all work out, but I'm afraid the new regs will make this FR thing even worse. Keep your fingers crossed.

[Trbl639]

I think most major utilities started the FR use when OSHA suggested it, but like recently, Entergy just started the Class 2 Fr requirement...when I retired in 09, it was never mentioned whether we wore Class 1 or 2 FR...and I understand they are talking about the face shield...now I see where it is coming from.........

Don't keep up with OSHA crap since I retired......Thanks for the info saftgeek!

As Hot as it is here now....Temp of 100 and HI of 116 ( was 118 HI yesterday)the thought of FR, gloves and sleeves makes me glad I retired!

[thrasher]

I agree with most of what you said including that the current requirement is from following the NESC, specifically section 41 A 3 and the associated tables. However I do NOT find a requirement to follow NFPA 70E in the NESC. That is a cop-out being advocated by many consultants because then they don't have to do any work, just refer to the NFPA 70E. The NESC requires that the company calculate arc-flash energies on thier systems and if the value exceeds 2 calories/sq. cm then a clothing system of equal or greater APTV value than the arc flash value must be worn. I do not see a requirement in the NESC for hoods, unlike the NFPA 70E. Furthermore the NFPA 70E specifically says it does not apply to utility employees working on the source side of the demarkation point.
Now if we work past the meterbase then and only then NFPA 70E applies, and we follow it.

[electriklady]

First Energy has been making us wear head to toe fr for about 5 years(and I mean strictly enforcing it). We were also just told recently that many neighboring companies(meter dept) are required to wear arc resistant face shield whenever they are in an open meter box.......At FE we wear an arc resistant face shield whenever we are working 3 phase self contained..............My bitch from day one is you cant see out of the damn things.......there is no carrying case that prevents them from scratching and they are super dark due to the arc resistant properties.....so what is the bigger threat, not wearing the faceshield(of course wearing your safety glasses) and being able to see what the hell you are doing in a meter cabinet, or wearing the arc resistant face shield that you cant see out of, which raises the chance of going phase to phase and causing a flash due to poor visability.

At FE, if you are working in any energized situation, you MUST have long sleeve fr on, sleeves rolled down. No Tshirts with decals on them as they can melt to the skin. If you wear a tshirt only to work it must be 100% cotton.
We were just told today about a guy(in the winter) who had fr bibs and coat on, but his sweat shirt was only partially cotton, and underneath he had on a tshirt with a decal on it, also he had an acrylic knit hat on, dont know the voltage he was working but he had a flash and received 2nd degree thermal burns to over 40% of his body....Mainly from his torso up. The fr bibs and coat were barely scorched but the tshirt with the decal melted to his body. That is what we were told in a safety meeting this morning.

I cannot remember a year where the head to toe fr clothing has bothered me as much as this year......with this heat and humidity.....add the rubber and leather gloves and the hardhat and I feel like a walking furnace. I cannot even imagine you guys with the sleeves also. I actually am looking forward to fall.

[Trbl639]

We were supposed to wear a face shield working on 3 phase meter cans, especially 480V..but couldn't plug in a meter into an energized 480v can.....the customers loop had to have either overcurrent protection under the can or a solid blade disconnect above the can........unless it was the only service/loop on a bank..........

We didn't have the head to toe FR when I retired, but it's coming to it from what I hear from the guys...........long before FR came along, we had to wear a minimum of 12 ounce 100% cotton outer garments when working HOT.........it was in the contract, and a Supv, could check you...all clothes, drawers, socks, everything....and if you weren't in compliance, you were sent home and pay was docked, until you were in compliance............but I don't recall anybody getting checked or sent home for not being in compliance.........

Was working trouble one day...by myself, was in the air removing source grounds at the line switches, and had my Green vest on.....a Supv pulled up and watched me...when I crawled out of the bucket, he checked my switching order/clearance order, pulling a safety audit, then he proceeded to tell me .he had to write me up, cause I had a non Fr traffic vest on while in the zone.........asked him if he had his glasses, and he wanted to know why.............as soon as I got my harness off and took the vest off, I shoved my FR traffic vest up under his nose and asked if he could read the label that said FR................I didn't get written up and he learned something..................we had 2 traffic vests....Non Fr and FR, but the manual said we weren't supposed to be worn while in the air........but the book he had didn't have the change, where an FR vest was legal in the air.......Hated them vests too...on top of FR shirt, them things were hot!!

[ViceTop]

I would wear this over my FR clothing to keep all the penetrox and dirt off them. When they get dirty just throw'em away and get a new one

[thrasher]

I know what you mean about the hood. We occasionially work past the meter when we are tracking down a problem and proving that is not on the utility side. For a 3 phase service our guys wear a 32 cal ATPV blast suit with a class 3 hood. For those who haven't seen one these, it has a DARK yellow faceplate mounted in a full wrap around hood. While wearing it you can't see to the sides or back unless you turn your whole head and body, also if you use standard color coded tape on your conductors (yellow, orange, brown) thru the dark yellow faceplate they all look alike.
I can't imagine the number of accidents the hood could cause if OSHA is stupid enough to require using a full hood in the air out of a bucket.
Just a clear faceshield hanging from the front of your hard hat is bad enough between scratches and it trying to fog up in the right weather.
We have been full FR shirt and pants for years because we do so much work out of padmount transformers and your legs are often as close as your chest. So the uniforms are full FR with an ATPV value high enough for everything except the main bus in the stations. Then we add a second shirt overtop of the first one to meet the higher station requirement, the pants are heavy enough they meet the station requirement in one layer.

[saftgeek]

IF Osha is stupid enough... I like that one. That is truly hilarious.

Since 1991 this beauty has been on the books:

"1910.335(a)(1)(v)
Employees shall wear protective equipment for the eyes or face wherever there is danger of injury to the eyes or face from electric arcs or flashes or from flying objects resulting from electrical explosion."

All these regs mixing together, and the areas where they do and don't apply, make it hard enough for saftgeeks, let alone the workers who are held accountable for them. I would hope all these different regulators could actually combine resources to clarify and simplify, but to me, it seems like they compete with one another to see who can make life more miserable for the worker. I know this isn't the case, but it sure seems that way.

We have had so many older linemen leave just to escape the ridiculessness. I try to sell them on all this stuff, but it's challenging, to say the least.

Thanks for correcting my NESC post. You are absolutely correct. There is no reference to NFPA 70E in the NESC. I was putting many different things together and didn't do a very good job explaining.

The following text is an example of how I was brainwashed into thinking so:

OSHA has not “adopted” NFPA 70E simply because adoption would require the lengthy and expensive process outlined in Section 6(b) of the Act. OSHA has instead referenced compliance to NFPA 70E using Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, commonly referred to as the “general duty clause,” as their basis for implementation. The general duty clause states that employers “shall furnish to each of its employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees.” This methodology for “implementing” potentially new requirements through the use of industrial consensus standards, like NFPA 70E, is common practice by OSHA. In a recent standard interpretation letter dated 7/25/03, OSHA’s Russell Swanson stated: “Industry consensus standards, such as NFPA 70E, can be used by employers as guides to
making the assessments and equipment selections required by the standard. Similarly, in OSHA enforcement actions, they can be used as evidence of whether the employer acted reasonably.”

Livin the dream...
Saftgeek