# Presentation: 390587

## History of Electrical Safety in the United States: An Overview 

**Ray A. Jones, PE**
- Gaithersburg, MD
- March 18, 2002

**Notes:**

This discussion is intended to provide a brief overview of the history of electrical safety in the US. 

We will identify milestone events. 

There is no intent to suggest that many other important events are a part of the history. However, the events that are covered in this presentation seem to have a high degree of importance. 

## Introduction

**Electricity came into general use ****in the late 1800s and early 1900s**
**Pioneers were George Westinghouse and Thomas Edison**
**Lighting was the primary use ****in major cities in the North East**

**Notes:**
George Westinghouse’s alternating current became the selection for transmitting electrical energy in the late 1800s. For the most part, people were enamored with the concept of flipping a switch for light. 

George Westinghouse and Tom Edison disagreed about whether alternating current or direct current would be best for distributing the electrical energy. Westinghouse preferring alternating current and Edison preferring direct current. Due to the difficulty of changing voltage with direct current, alternating current became the methodology selected.

Little was known about how to install an electrical system. Few “electrical” materials were available. Neither training nor experienced was available.

In the major cities across the northeast, electric lights were installed in buildings. Of course, few people understood that this new source of energy was associated with new and different hazards.

## Introduction (cont’d)

**The first generally recognized hazard was fire**
**The next generally recognized hazard was shock or electrocution**
**General overview of milestones associated with electrical safety**

**Notes:**
George Westinghouse’s alternating current became the selection for transmitting electrical energy in the late 1800s. For the most part, people were enamored with the concept of flipping a switch for light. 

In the major cities across the northeast, electric lights were installed in buildings. Of course, few people understood that this new source of energy was associated with new and different hazards.

Fire was the first recognized hazard that was labeled as an electrical hazard. 

The State on New York understood that electrocution was a possible result of electrical current passed through a person’s body. That state initiated the use of the electric chair as the use of electricity was expanding.

This discussion will d

## Slide 4

## Milestones in the Past 20 Years

**Incident energy consensus – 2000**

**Milestones in the Past 20 Years**

**2000**

**1980**

**1990**

**Burn Center –1980**

**Lee’s Paper – 1982**

**NFPA 70E – 1988**

**Subpart S – 1989**

**PCIC Safety Sub. – 1990**

**Elect. Safety Workshop – 1992**

**NESF – 1994**

**NFPA 70E – 1995**

**Arc-resistant swgr. – 1997**

**ASTM F-1506 – 1998**

**Wkshop. SE Asia – 1998**

***IEEE Yellow Book***** – 1998**

## Milestones in the Past 5 Years

## Recognition of Hazards

**Fires – resulted in large economic losses**
**Shock and electrocution**
**Before 1995, no other hazards were recognized**
**Now – arc flash and arc blast ****are considered**

**Notes:**
As the use of electricity expanded, the number of fires in buildings grew. Economic losses were high. The number of lives that lost from building fires also grew.

Of course, people knew that electrocution was one possible result from electrical current flowing through a person’s body. The New York prison system installed an electric chair in 1890.

No one knew that electrical shock was a real hazard as well.

These hazards, fire-shock-electrocution, were the only generally recognized hazards associated with electrical energy before 1995.

Arc flash and arc blast are two hazards that are now considered to be electrical hazards. 

## Addressed fires and shock
Exposure to hazards was generally accepted as a cost of doing business
Electricians were paid more that other crafts
Most standards addressed equipment

**Exposure to hazards was generally accepted as a cost ****of doing business**
**Electricians were paid more that other crafts**
**Most standards addressed equipment**

**Initial Standards**

**Notes:**
It was generally recognized that fire and shock were electrical hazards. In the late 1800s no installation or safety standards existed. 
Electricians and managers generally accepted exposure to those hazards as the cost of doing business. Building managers made certain that each building was covered by an insurance policy just in case.
Since electricians were expected to have higher exposure to electrical shock, they were paid more than other crafts. Electricians accepted that condition as the status quo.
Standards covering equipment and installations were beginning to be produced. 

## The NEC® (cont’d)

**Insurance, electrical, ****architectural ****with common interest**
**Fires attributed ****to electrical installation**
**No standard existed**
**The NEC was the standard ****that resulted**

**Notes:**
In 1897, representatives of various insurance, electrical, and architectural interests met in Boston to discuss the expanding problem of major economic losses associated with fire.
A substantial portion of the fire problem was attributed to be the result of the electrical installations.
No installation standard existed.
A commonly held belief was that each installation was essentially developed on the job as the building was constructed. Electricians had little experience and virtually no training. A standard simply had to be developed.
The National Electrical Code was the result of that meeting. The NEC was intended to reduce the number of fires. It would reduce the number of injuries that resulted from the fires, but the primary driving force was economic.

## The NEC® (cont’d)

**NFPA became sponsor ****in 1911**
**Purpose is practical safeguarding of people and property**
**Voluntary standard (ANSI)**
**Adopted by governmental units ****in building codes**
**Review/revision cycle is 3 years**

**Notes:**
In 1911, the National Fire Protection Association became the steward of the National Electrical Code. The NFPA has reviewed the standard and revised it routinely since that date. 
The current purpose of the NEC is the practical safeguarding of people and property. The standard is known as NFPA 70 and commonly called the NEC, or simply as “the Code.”
Although the NEC is published by the NFPA, it is written entirely by voluntary participation. 
Although the NEC is published as a voluntary standard, it has been adopted by various governmental units as the definition of generally accepted good engineering practice. 
Since 1970, the NEC has been revised and published on a three year interval. In order to ensure that the standard represents a consensus, a rigorous process is defined by NFPA. 

## The NEC® (cont’d)

**Is an American National ****Standard**
**Defines generally accepted requirements for a safe installation**
**Is NOT a design standard**
**Does NOT cover maintenance**

**Notes:**
An American National Standard is one which has been adopted by ANSI as representing the consensus views of the US constituency.
The NEC covers utilization conductors in buildings. However, it does not cover conductors providing energy to the premises. 
The NEC defines generally accepted requirements for a safe installation. The standard is used by contractors, insurers and regulators to define installation requirements. An installation which meets NEC requirements is generally accepted as a safe installation when the equipment is running normally. 
It is important to understand that when equipment is not running normally, an unsafe condition might exist.
The NEC addresses only installation and does not attempt to cover design or maintenance.

## Current State

**Other hazards are recognized**
**Many people are working ****to reduce exposure ****to electrical hazards**
**Employees have an obligation ****to themselves and to others**
**Managers accept their responsibility**
**Employees accept their responsibility and duty**

**Notes:**
Now several other hazards are recognized. Standards exist which address maintenance. Standards now cover work practices; i.e. when equipment is not running normally or otherwise requiring service.
The number of people working to reduce exposure to electrical hazards has increased significantly. We will talk about how some of those people influence the electrical safety environment.
Employees and workers are beginning to understand their responsibility to themselves and to others.
Employers and managers are also beginning to understand their responsibility and duty. 

## Current State (cont’d)

**Ultimate safety depends ****upon both employers and employees acting on their duty**
**Recognition of arc flash has changed the state of industrial electrical safety**
**The GFCI has provided significant protection in home environment**
**The AFCI is currently recognized**
**New understanding is being developed**

**Notes:**
In the final analysis, my experience says that a person’s ultimate safety depends upon both employees and employers acting on their duty to themselves and to each other.
Recognizing the existence of the arc flash hazard is changing the state of industrial electrical safety. This recognition is very recent. We will talk about that a little more later this morning.
The increased number of people working to improve the state of electrical safety is resulting in developing new understanding. New information is being generated about how injuries occur and how to protect people from these hazards.

## The NESC

**The NESC**

**Companion to the NEC**
**Initially produced ****by the NBS in 1913 ****as *****Circular Number 49***
**Initially covered all aspects **
**	****of the use of electricity**
**In 1970, the NBS eliminated utilization from scope**

**Notes:**
The National Electrical Safety Code is a companion document to the NEC. Where the NEC covers utilization and premises conductors, the NESC covers generation transmission and distribution conductors.
This standard was initially published as a product of the National Bureau of 
Standards in 1913 as Circular Number 49.
At first, Circular Number 49 covered all aspects of the use of electricity. 
In 1970, utilization was eliminated from the scope of the standard since utilization was adequately addressed by the NEC. 

## The NESC (cont’d)

**In 1973, ANSI appointed ****the IEEE as the secretariat ****for the standard**
**IEEE assumed all functions ****of the NBS for ANSI C2**
**IEEE publishes the NESC**

**Notes:**
In 1973, the American National Standards Institute appointed the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers as the secretariat for the standard. 
What this means is that IEEE assumed all functions of the NBS for this standard. Currently, the IEEE publishes the standard as ANSI C-2.
The NESC is to generation, transmission and distribution as the NEC is to buildings and utilization installations. 

## The NESC (cont’d)

**Contains four parts**
- Electric supply systems
- Overhead electric and communication lines
- Underground electric and communication lines
- Work rules
**Excludes utilization systems, rolling stock, ships, and mines**
**Essentially achieves objective ****by defining installation requirements**

**Notes:**
The NESC is divided into four parts. They are 
Electric supply systems
Overhead electric and communication lines
Underground electric and communication lines
Work rules
Like the NEC, the NESC does not try to cover everything. It has some exclusions which are itemized in the standard.
The NESC achieves its objective by defining acceptable installation requirements. The general purpose of the NESC is:

Change slide

## NESC Purpose

**Practical safeguarding ****of persons during the installation, operation, ****or maintenance of electric ****supply and communication lines and associated equipment**

**Notes:**
You will note that the purpose of the NESC is somewhat different from the NEC. In addition to installation, this standard defines some requirements related to operation and maintenance of electrical equipment. 
The initial NBS Circular Number 49 covered these aspects of the installation as well. 
Like the NEC, Utilities and utility contractors tend to accept this standard as the definition of  an acceptable installation.
The graphic on this slide illustrates the document which served as the basic reference standard for current OSHA rules contained in 1910.269.

## The Yellow Book

**The Yellow Book**

**Working group was formed ****in 1981**
**To provide guidance ****for complying with the newly published OSHA rules **
**The provide guidance ****for operating and maintaining electrical equipment and systems**
**Published in 1998 as IEEE Standard 902-1998**

**Notes:**
Another milestone was reached when the IEEE published 902-1998. This standard is one of the color book series of IEEE standards. It covers maintenance, operation and safety of power systems.
A working group was formed in 1981. The initial purpose of the working group and their product was to provide guidance for complying with the newly promulgated US OSHA rules. The working group was also charged to provide consensus guidance for operating and maintaining electrical power equipment and systems. 

## The Yellow Book (cont’d)

**Covers: **
**System design**
**Maintenance strategies **
**Operation strategies **
**Documentation **
**Testing and inspection **
**Auditing**** **

**Notes:**
The Yellow Book offers suggestions and ideas covering these general topics. 

## OSHA (cont’d)

**In 1970:**
**14,000 deaths ****from job-related accidents**
**2.5 million additional injuries from job-related accidents**
**10 times more lost workdays ****from injuries than ****from labor strikes**

**Notes:**
In 1970, US industry was experiencing 14,000 fatalities from job related accidents. Two and one half million additional non-fatal injuries were also occurring.
Although labor strikes were relatively commonplace, injuries were the cause of ten time more lost workdays than strikes. 

## OSHA (cont’d)

**In 1970:**
**Many accidents ****were caused by unsafe equipment and unsafe conditions **
**Most were caused ****by unsafe acts**

**Notes:**
An analysis of the accidents and injuries, shows that although many injuries were the result of unsafe conditions or unsafe equipment, most injuries were the result of unsafe acts.
This is still the case today. In fact, 2/3 of all injuries occur as a result of unsafe acts, people performing some action that should not be done.

## OSHA (cont’d)

**Williams-Steiger act was introduced in both Houses****of Congress in 1970**
**Signed into public law ****in December, 1970**
**Purpose of the law was**
**Safe and healthful working conditions**** for every person ****and to preserve human resources**

**Notes:**
Something needed to be done. The Williams-Steiger act was introduced into both US houses of Congress in the fall of 1970. The milestone was reached when the act passed both houses and was signed into law in December 1970
The purpose of the law was (and is) to provide safe and healthful working conditions for every person and to preserve human resources. 
Establishing OSHA was a significant milestone in the evolution of electrical safety concerns.

## Initial Issue–Electrical

**Section 6(b) identifies the process for promulgating standards**
**Embraced the 1968 NEC first, ****then the 1971 NEC**
**NEC was revised every three years**
**Quickly became outdated**
**6(b) process was burdensome**

**Notes:**
Section 6(b) of the Act defines the process that OSHA must implement when promulgating a standard. 
No existing consensus standard effectively covered work practices. The NESC contained some “work rules” but scope limitations precluded this standard from being used for general industry.
The initial issue of the 1910 Subpart S of the OSHA rules embraced the 1968 edition of the NEC. When the NEC was reissued in 1971, OSHA followed the 6(b) revision process to adopt the 1971 NEC. 
The NEC continued to be revised every three years. OSHA rules based on the NEC quickly become outdated.
Revising OSHA rules was (and is) burdensome.

## OSHA

**Section 6(b) suggested that consensus standards be the prime source for OSHA standards**
**The NEC contained ****no work practices**
**Although the NESC contained ****work rules, utilization installations were exempted**
**No consensus standard covering work practices existed at that time**

**Notes:**
The Act suggests that consensus standards should be the primary source for OSHA regulations. Relying upon consensus standards would help to ensure that the rules would be considered reasonable.
The NEC contained no work practices. This document covered installation.
The NESC contained some work rules but the scope of the standard limited its application all across the industry. Using the NESC work rules would be OK for the Utility Industry but not the industry in general.
There were no broad consensus standards covering work practices in the early 70s.

## Current OSHA Standards

**Subpart S****–“****Electrical” became effective on Jan. 2, 1990**
**Subpart S was based on NFPA 70E-1988**
**Subpart K has no primary basis**
**Subpart Q – Arc welding**
**Subpart R****–****“Generation, transmission, and distribution” based on ANSI C2****–****1993**
**Subpart V****–****Currently being revised**

**Notes:**
Of course, OSHA has “standards” which addresses all types of industrial processes. In this discussion, we are focusing on only electrical standards.
Subpart S of the general industry standards covers electrical concerns in that business segment. The current standard was promulgated in 1989 and became effective in 1990. The standard is based on NFPA 70E-1988. Although the edition was 1988, information contained in that standard was even older. The point is that regulatory standards rapidly become outdated.
Subpart K of the construction standards has consensus standard basis. Instead, the current OSHA standard is founded on regulations which already existed.
The section of 1910-Subpart R which covers utility type installations is based upon the 1993 NESC. The edition that was used.
1926 Subpart V was based on a much earlier edition of the NESC and is currently being revised.

## OSHA StandardsGenerally organized on the basis of industry segment

**1910 covers general industry**
**1910.301****–**** 399 covers general industry utilization**
**1926.401****–**** 450 covers general industry construction**
**1910.269 covers utility industry**
**1926.950 ****–**** 960 covers utility industry construction**

**Notes:**
The OSHA standards are generally organized on the basis of industry segment. For instance, Part 1910 covers general industry and Part 1926 covers the construction industry. 
This slide shows the applicable OSHA standards for both construction and general industry. I will not try to defend or explain the logic of organizing a safety document in this fashion. However, in my mind the “standards” would be more effective if the regulatory standards were written and organized on the basis of exposure to hazards.

## NFPA 70E

**OSHA asked for a new standard ****in 1975**
**NFPA appointed the Committee ****on Electrical Safety Requirements for Employee Workplaces**
**To cover work practices**
**To include installation requirements necessary for personnel safety**

**Notes:**
OSHA had some experience in revising General industry subpart S from the 1968 NEC to the 1971 NEC.
They recognized that the NEC contained no work practices. 
OSHA approached NFPA and asked for a new standard to be written covering work practices. NFPA accepted the challenge and appointed the Committee on Electrical Safety Related Work Practices, NFPA 70E.
OSHA asked that the new standard include all requirements necessary to protect a worker in the workplace. It was to identify any requirement in the NEC that were associated with employee safety. 

## NFPA 70E

**Part I was issued in 1979**
**Part II was added in 1981**
**Part III was added in 1983**
**Reviewed and reissued in 1988 with minor revisions**
**Became the basis for the current OSHA standard for general industry**

**Notes:**
The new committee met and began work. The committee recognized an urgency and began to produce the document. This slide illustrates that NFPA began to publish the standard as soon as a new part was completed. 
Part I of the standard was issued in 1979 and covers installation requirements
Part I was updated and Part II covering work practices was added in 1981.
Part III covering maintenance practices was added in 1983.
70E was review and reissued with minor revisions in 1988. This became the standard upon which the current OSHA rules are based.

## NFPA 70E–1995

**Reviewed and revised ****all content**
**Was first consensus ****standard to address arc flash**
**Contains requirements ****for protective clothing **
**Added the concept ****of electrically safe work condition**
**Added a requirement for a ****person-in-charge for lockout/tagout**

**Notes:**
NFPA began a complete review of the standard. New information was available. Several IEEE papers had been published addressing electrical safety issues. One paper actually was a milestone event. This paper explored the existence of a “new” hazard called arc flash. The 1995 edition of 70E accepted the premise that arc flash is a unique hazard. The standard began to establish requirements to protect workers from this hazard.
Lockout and tagout had been a significant issue. The 95 edition of 70E contained a concept of an electrically safe work condition with lockout being only one step in establishing this condition.
This edition of the standard added a new requirement, a person in charge. In all reviewed instances, a person in charge would likely have prevented the lockout failure. 

## NFPA 70E–1995

**NFPA 70E****–****1995**

**Was organized to address ****exposure to electrical hazards instead of industry segment**
**Covers all actions necessary ****for protection of people ****from exposure to electrical hazards**

**Notes:**
Although the standard has some exclusionary language, the basis idea is that 70E contains protective practices that will prevent injury from all electrical hazards. In other words, the standard is written to address hazards, not industry segment.
The standard covers all actions necessary to prevent injury from electrical hazards. 

## NFPA 70E–2000

**NFPA 70E****–****2000**

**Focused arc flash protection requirements**
**Embraced incident-energy ****concepts**
**Aligned with OSHA regulations**
**Added Part IV **
**Electrolytic cells**
**Batteries and battery rooms**
**Lasers**
**Power electronic equipment**

**Notes:**
As experience was gained with the concepts contained in 70E-95, it was apparent that the standard needed to be revised to include newly learned information. 
One issue with the 95 edition was some misalignment with current OSHA regulation. The 2000 edition corrected that misalignment.
New information about how to evaluate clothing to protect people from arc flash were included.
A new section (part IV) was added in 2000. The new section contains chapters covering the bullets at the bottom of this slide.

## NFPA 70E–2003 (Currently being revised)

**Will contain more detailed analysis ****of arc flash hazard**
**Will cover employer-to-employer relationships**
**Will be more specific in scope**
**Will result in wider agreement within ****and among industry segments**
**Will be increasingly accepted by regulators**
**Will improve readability**

## Electrical Trauma Center

**Founded by Dr. Raphael Lee in 1990**
**Essential purpose is to advance ****the ability to treat victims ****of electrical trauma**
**Established a multidisciplinary research team**
**Dr. Mary Capelli-Schellpfeffer serves as liaison with the IEEE-IAS-PCIC**

**Notes:**
In another milestone event, Dr. Raphael Lee founded the electrical trauma center at the University of Chicago in 1990. Dr. Lee is both a surgeon and an electrical engineer. Dr. Lee had been working with many organizations in the utility industry. He recognized that an electrical burn injury was significantly different from other thermal burns. The rapid rate of temperature rise apparently had a bearing on the injury. The burn center was intended to study these injuries with an eye toward improving treatment and preventing the injury in the first place.
His basic concept is that a multidisciplinary team approach will develop a better understanding and result in some incremental improvements.
Dr. Mary is a physician on the staff. She also serves as a liaison with the PCIC committee of the IEEE where she serves as Vice Chair of the safety subcommittee.

## Electrical Trauma Center (cont’d)

**Investigates all aspects **
**	****of electrical injury**
**Generated new information ****about treating victims**
**Shares all learning with colleagues ****in the medical community**

**Notes:**
The trauma center investigates all aspects of electrical injury. For instance, electrical contact injuries are influenced by the thermal characteristics of the arc flash as well as the magnetic field in which the injured person’s body part is exposed as well.
The trauma center is generating new information that is shared generally through the medical and engineering communities.

## Gathering Data

**Electrical burns recorded ****with other burn injuries**
**Only anecdotal information existed**
**FAX-back program initiated**
**Designed to get around legal issues**

**Notes:**
In order to understand exposure to a hazard, it is generally important to gather and analyze data associated with the hazard. Since the community did not recognize a difference between electrical burns and other thermal burns, very little historical information is available. 
Generally, only anecdotal information was (and is) available for analysis.
Dr. Mary of the Electrical Trauma Center initiated an anonymous program. Any person can report an electrical injury with complete anonymity. This program  is designed to avoid legal issues associated with accidents and injuries. The idea is that more information will be available for review.

## NIOSH

**Created by the OSH Act of 1970**
**Currently a part of the CDC**
**Charged with research ****into job-related injuries ****and occupational health**
**Charged to make recommendations ****to OSHA on standards**

**Notes:**
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health was created by the OSH Act of 1970. NIOSH is currently a part of the Center for Disease Control. 
NIOSH is charged with research into job related injuries (NOT just electrical) and occupational health.
The organization is also intended to provide information and recommendations to OSHA in order to enhance the scientific basis for OSHA standards.

## NIOSH (cont’d)

**Research example:**
**Develop voltage-detecting equipment that automatically senses the presence of electrical energy. In concept, when the equipment is worn by a person, the device will sense when ****a person is getting too close ****to a source of electrical energy and provide a warning.**

**Notes:**
One research example.

## NIOSH (cont’d)

**The CDC maintains the primary recording mechanism for injury records**
**The CDC shares injury record data with OSHA and the public**
**However, only fatal injuries ****are recorded**

**Notes:**
The CDC is the primary organization for injury records. As a part of the CDC, NIOSH has these data bases available.
All NIOSH information is considered public information. Its reports are available to any US citizen.
One problem, however, is that recorded data does not cover all injuries. In fact, only a major accidents and injuries are recorded. 

## Electrical Safety Subcommittee of the PCIC 

**Industry Application Society**
**Sponsors an annual technical conference**
**Chartered the Electrical Safety Subcommittee in 1990**
**Three papers are published annually**
**Technical papers provide significant body of electrical safety information**

**Notes:**
The IEEE is a large worldwide technical association. The large IEEE is divided into societies that are associated with a segment of the engineering sector. The Industry Applications Society is one of those engineering sectors. Each society is further segmented into committees comprising like businesses. Each year, the Petroleum and Chemical Industry Committee sponsors a conference that is widely attended. Basic work is carried out in subcommittees. 
In 1990, the PCIC chartered an Electrical Safety Subcommittee. Each year, the safety subcommittee sponsors three technical papers that cover the general subject of electrical safety. The papers are available from the IEEE. 

## PCIC Safety Subcommittee

**Safety papers previously were ****in the general program**
**Generally, safety was related ****to equipment and installation**
**Since 1990, thirty-four safety papers ****have been published**
**Significant body of information**
**Established an electrical safety workshop**

**Notes:**
Prior to the Safety Subcommittee, safety papers were offered as a part of the general program. Generally, before the safety subcommittee existed electrical safety was thought of as a matter of installation and equipment.
Since 1990, 31 technical papers covering electrical safety concerns have been published in the PCIC conference record. 
One of the first acts taken by the Safety Subcommittee was to initiate an annual workshop that is held in the interim months between conference meetings. The basic idea was to increase the amount of available time for discussing electrical safety concerns. 

## Electrical Safety Workshop

**Held annually between ****PCIC conferences**
**Was first held in Dallas ****in 1992**
**Was initially attended by 37 people**
**Attendees concerned ****with competitive advantage**
**Attendees reluctant to discuss incidents ****and injuries**

**Notes:**
The workshop is held at the mid-point between annual PCIC conferences. The first workshop was held in Dallas in 1992. It was attended by 37 professionals. Each attendee at the first workshop had some concern about losing some competitive advantage by sharing information that previously had been guarded internal information.
There was concern about discussion incidents and injuries in a public forum in the litigious US society.

## Attendees recognize that safety information should not be proprietary
Attendees freely share safety information
Location varies each year
January 2002 workshop attended by 220 people

**Attendees freely share ****safety information**
**Location varies each year**
**January 2002 workshop ****attended by 220 people**

**Electrical Safety Workshop ****(cont’d)**

**Notes:**
However, the attendees soon began to realize that electrical safety information is not proprietary information.
Attendees share information freely with each other.
The last workshop was held in Toronto, Ontario and was attended by over 150 people.
The workshop location varies each year in order to provide the opportunity for people to attend who would be otherwise unable due to travel restrictions.

## Electrical Safety Workshop – Discussions

**Enjoys informal environment ****and paper presentations**
**Focuses on human interaction ****with electrical energy**
**Equipment discussions center ****on how people are involved**
**Includes regulations ****and consensus standards**

**Notes:**
The workshop provides an informal environment where papers are presented and discussed. The focus of the subject matter at the workshop is the interaction of people with electrical energy.
Discussions involving equipment or installations generally involve how people are involved with the equipment or installation, either from an operating or maintaining point of view.
Much of the discussion at the workshop is associated with understanding regulatory and consensus standards.

## Electrical Safety Workshop (cont’d)

**Days are long**** and packed ****with information**** **
**No formal conference record ****is maintained**
**Attendees are exposed ****to focused learning on how to avoid exposure to electrical hazards**
**In excess of thirty “papers” are presented ****at each workshop**

**Notes:**
Days at the workshop are long and packed with information. Generally the day begins at 0700 in the morning and ends at about 2100 hours. No formal conference record is maintained, although attendees are provided with a copy of all presentations.
In excess of 30 papers are presented at each workshop.
Lets see, 9 years, 30 papers per year, that makes about 270 different presentations have been provided at the workshop since it began in 1992.
The body of available information is rapidly growing.

## Electrical Safety Workshop (cont’d)

**Workshop held in Madras, India, in 1998**
**Attended by 43 people**
**Second workshop held in Delhi, India, ****in 2000**
**Attended by 60 people**
**Workshop held in Mumbai, India, in 2002**
**Attended by 59 people**
**Direct outgrowth of the PCIC workshop**

**Notes:**
The success of the electrical safety workshop in the US directly lead to the creation of an electrical safety workshop in SE Asia. The SE Asia workshop is organized by PCIC members who work in that area. 
The first workshop was held in Madras, India in 1998. 43 people attended. A second workshop was held in Delhi in 2000 with an attendance of 60 people.

## National Electrical Safety Foundation (NESF)

**National Electrical Safety Foundation (NESF)**

**Established in 1994**
**Consumer Product Safety Commission**
**National Electrical ****Manufacturers Association**
**Underwriters Laboratory**

**Notes:**
The National Electrical Safety Foundation was established in 1994. The organization was initially sponsored by 
CPSC
NEMA 
UL
Those organizations remain the primary drivers for the NESF. The organization is a public service.

## NESF (cont’d)

**Mission is to promote electrical safety awareness in the home environment**
**Also targets schools ****and workplaces**
**Provides educational information and materials for public use**
**Sponsors electrical safety month celebrations**

**Notes:**
The mission of the NESF is to promote electrical safety awareness in the home environment.
The organization also targets schools and provides information and materials for public use. The NESF sponsors electrical safety month celebrations each year.

## Electrical Safety Month

**Month-long focus on electrical safety**
**Provides information and ideas ****for industrial celebrations**
**Number of information packets has grown from a few hundred to several thousand**

**Notes:**
The Electrical Safety Month celebration is a month long focus on electrical safety.
The NESF provides information and ideas that an industrial organization can use for its own internal celebration of electrical safety.
The number of information packets provided by the NESF has grown from a few hundred in the early days to several thousand last year.
Typically, the month of May is selected for the celebration. However, the concept is applicable to any month.

## Electrical Safety Month – Celebration

**In one major company, voltage sensors were exchanged ****for approved digital voltmeters**
**Brings awareness to employees who take the increased awareness home**
**Proven to be popular ****among employees**

**Notes:**
An example of a typical celebration involves voltmeters. As you know, there are many different voltage detecting devices produced. Some a excellent devices and some are not intended for industrial use. 
One major company encouraged employees to exchange voltage sensors for approved digital voltmeters. 
The month long celebration brings awareness to employees who, in turn, elevate awareness in the home environment.
The month long celebration has proven to be popular among employees.

## Continuing Change

**Proactive in the public sector**
**Change focus to include ****industrial sector**
**Change name to Electrical Safety Foundation International**

## Technical Advances in a Competitive Society 

**Profit and cost drive****technology changes**
**Safety products are like other products**
**Manufacturer must make money**

**Notes:**
It is generally accepted that profit and cost drive technology changes and innovation. Products associated with electrical safety are no different from any other product. Manufacturers must make money. 
You can’t really sell a product at a loss and then make it up in volume.
This axiom says that the using community is really in the drivers seat. If a product is demanded in the user community, then a manufacturer will take the initiative to produce the product.
However, if the technological change does not produce a recognizable benefit, the user community will not likely request the product. If a specific idea is embraced as a regulatory or consensus  standard as a requirement, there will likely be demand for a product.

## Arc-Resistant Switchgear (an example)

**Some customers require it**
**Some manufacturers produce it**
**Codes and standards permit it**
**Costs more**
**Employers do not understand advantage**

**Notes:**
An example is arc resistant switchgear. 
Some customers require it. These customers generally recognize that there is a significant benefit to reducing injuries on the job site.
Some manufacturers produce the product. Typically, these manufacturers are progressive organizations that have a real interest in preventing injury form a human perspective
Codes and standards permit this equipment but do not require it. 
Typically arc resistant equipment costs slightly more due to the increased engineering and testing. However, increase is only slight.
Typically, users do not understand the direct economic benefit of reducing injuries. Some available information suggests that money spent to avoid injury produces an economic return of 400 to 800 percent.

## PPE (another example)

**Resulted from injury experience**
**PPE must absorb incident energy**
**Typically rated in ATPV**
**Standard ratings are ****15, 31, 50, and 100 cal/cm****2**
**Upper limit of current knowledge**

**Notes:**
Another example is arc flash PPE. 
NFPA 70E defined a requirement for clothing to protect from the effects of arc flash before such a product existed. In fact, the requirement existed before a test for the product existed.
Recent learning indicates that the PPE must absorb incident energy. Therefore, a need exists to determine the amount of energy that is available where a person is working.
Clothing is now available that has an established Arc Thermal Protective Value (ATPV) rating.
These standard ratings now exist.
Information is currently being learned for the first time about the nature of the injury and how to control exposure to the hazard.

## Slide 54

## Milestones in the Past 20 Years

**Incident energy consensus – 2000**

**Milestones in the Past 20 Years**

**2000**

**1980**

**1990**

**Burn Center –1980**

**Lee’s Paper – 1982**

**NFPA 70E – 1988**

**Subpart S – 1989**

**PCIC Safety Sub. – 1990**

**Elect. Safety Workshop – 1992**

**NESF – 1994**

**NFPA 70E – 1995**

**Arc-resistant swgr. – 1997**

**ASTM F-1506 – 1998**

**Wkshop. SE Asia – 1998**

***IEEE Yellow Book***** – 1998**

## Milestones in the Past 5 Years

## Conclusion

**Understanding is increasing. **
**People are becoming involved.**
**Partnerships among regulators, employers, employees, ****and manufacturers are growing. **
**Many injuries have been prevented.**
**The community has much more ****to learn.**

**Notes:**
The rate of learning is increasing. The amount of available information is rapidly growing. More people are becoming interested. Milestones are closer together.
Partnerships among regulators, employers, users and manufacturers are becoming the norm.
Many injuries are prevented by this growing body of information. However, there is much more to learn.
If there is any way that I can help you with further understanding of how injuries can be prevented, just let me know and I will try.

## Questions ??

**Notes:**
Thanks for your kindness over the last hour.
If you have any question on this material, I will try to answer it. If I cannot answer it, perhaps someone else in the room can help.