Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server

10
United Airlines Fatality

Transcript of Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server

Page 1: Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server

United  Airlines  Fatality  

Page 2: Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server

Case  Study  �  UAL  IL  (Will  &  Tim)  crew  is  called  to  repair  a  seal  leak  in  a  dry  bay  at  Dulles  

airport,  and  train  VA  crew.  �  Prior  to  arrival,  fuel  is  removed  from  wet  and  dry  bay  and  fuel  cell  was  

venFlated  �  Atmosphere  is  measured  for  explosive  levels  �  IL  crew  requests  compressed  air  (from  VA  crew)  to  determine  where  the  leak  is  

located  �  Will  enters  dry  bay  and  VA  member  enters  wet  bay  and  quickly  idenFfied  leak  

locaFons  �   Both  crews  go  to  break        

Page 3: Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server

Case  Study  �  Upon  return,  area  is  prepared  for  

repair  work      �  Will  is  “tank  watch”  while  VA  crew  

enters  wet  bay  to  begin  repair  work  �  Tim  works  with  VA  crew  on  dry  bay  �  Direct  read  for  explosives  is  placed  

in  dry  bay  and  VA  crew  goes  to  get  gas  for  heater  to  cure  seal  

�  Tim  enters  dry  bay  with  half  mask  organic  vapor  respirator,  MEK  and  vacuum  and  begins  scrapping  seal  

�  Hand  vacuum  is  powered  with  compressed  air  to  clean  up  seal  

         

Page 4: Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server

Case  Study  �  Will  hears  silence  in  dry  bay  2  

minutes  aRer  Tim  enters  the  space  

�  Will  looks  in  dry  bay  and  is  immediately  overcome  and  passes  out  

�  911  is  called  and  mulFple  aUempts  are  made  to  remove  the  body  

�  Air  monitor  is  found  on  floor  and  atmosphere  is  test  

�  ARer  1  hour  of  rescue  aUempts,  five  mechanics  removed  the  body  

 WHAT  WENT  WRONG?  

Page 5: Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server

Root  Causes  �  All  UAL  mechanics  were  trained  to  enter  the  fuel  cell  

�  Regardless  of  frequency  they  performed  the  work  �  Monitoring  VOC  levels  by  measuring  flammable  levels  

�  At  lower  levels  a  meaningful  conversion  cannot  be  made  �  Did  not  measure  O2,  and  air  contaminant  levels  �  Tim  had  no  aUendant  

�  UAL  policy  was  one  aUendant  per  space  �  Was  not  in  contact  with  anyone  while  in  the  space,  and  Will  was  not  noFfied  he  had  entered  

�  Minimal  plan  for  rescue  �  No  usable  supplied  air  �  Unsure  of  points  of  entry  �  Unsure  of  atmospheric  condiFon  

�  Mechanic  entered  space  mulFple  Fmes  �  Not  trained  rescuers  �  Lacked  proper  equipment  �  Lacked  understanding  of  hazards  upon  entering  for  rescue  

�  Hand  vacuum  was  powered  with  N2,  not  compressed  air  �  Vacuum  exhausts  air  at  handle  �  Dry  bay  was  quickly  flooded  with  N2,  displacing  the  O2  

Page 6: Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server

CorrecFve  AcFons  �  Limit  who  could  perform  fuel  cell  work  

�  Only  two  staFons    �  Only  specific  crews    �  Consistent  training  for  all  performing  the  work  

�  Purchase  PIDs  �  Use  prior  to  and  during  entry  to  monitor  flammability,  O2,  and  air  contaminant  levels  

�  Use  supplied  air  respirators  �  Treat  fuel  cells  as  permit  required  confined  spaces  �  Align  wriUen  program  with  OSHA  

�  Used  OSHA  language-­‐i.e.  confined  space,  aUendant  etc  �  Use  Push/Pull  venFlaFon  system  

�  Defined  locaFons  for  venFlaFon  � More  effecFve  method  of  venFlaFng  space  

�  Best  pracFce  procedures  developed  by  NaFonal  Safety  Council  for  fuel  cell  entry:  Safety  Handbook  AviaFon  Ground  OperaFons    

Page 7: Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server

Best  PracFce  Controls  •  Best  pracFce  controls  for  confined  space  entry  can  be  found  in  ANSI  Z117.1-­‐2009,  Safety  

Handbook  AviaFon  Ground  OperaFons  and  through  NIOSH.    Hazards  to  consider:      •  Physical:  

–  Head  strikes,  cuts  and  laceraFons  –  Eye  protecFon  

•  Goggles  for  overhead  work  or  splash  potenFal  –  Electrical  and  igniFon  sources  

•  All  electrical  equipment  (lights  and  tools)  cerFfied  for  hazardous  environment  •  StaFc  discharge  must  be  controlled-­‐clothing,  vent  ducts,  plasFc  bags  and  rags  •  Prohibit  food,  drinks,  metal  clothing,  jewelry  and  electronics  

–  Working  at  heights  –  Noise  exposure  

•  Ensure  hearing  protecFon  does  not  prevent  communicaFon  with  aUendant  –  Heat  exposure  caused  by  space,  clothing  or  work  –  Engulfment/Drowning    

•  Blind,  disconnect,  remove  or  double  block  and  bleed  

Page 8: Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server

Best  PracFce  Controls  �  Ergonomic:  

�  Restricted  entrance/exit  or  workspace  �  RepeFFve  moFon-­‐especially  in  rework  �  Tool  vibraFons  �  Task  lighFng  

�  Atmospheric:  �  RepresentaFve  test  of  space  

�  Test  space  a  mulFple  levels  �  InhalaFon  Hazard  

�  TLVs  of  the  chemicals  being  used  �  Account  for  surrounding  work  with  chemicals  or  vehicles  

�  CombusFbility  of  atmospheric  �  Account  for  surrounding  acFviFes  

�  Oxygen  Deficiency    �  Inert  gas  such  as  N2  and  Ar  should  only  be  used  with  special  procedures  �  Oxygen  enrichment  should  never  be  used  

Page 9: Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server

Best  PracFce  Controls  �  Emergency  Response  Plan  

�  Consider  response  Fme  and  available  equipment:  �  SCBAs  or  supplied,  fire  exFnguishing  equipment,  tools  to  cut  the  space  and  life  

supporFng/first  aid  equipment.      �  Responders  must  be  physically  capable  of  entering  the  space.    �  Familiarize  rescuers  with  restricFons  of  the  space  and  physical  and  atmospheric  

hazards  and  pracFce  rescue  entry  �  Simulate  actual  rescue  condiFons  

�  CommunicaFon:    �  AUendants  and  entrants  must  be  capable  of  constant  communicaFon  

�  Tapping  or  pulling  on  lifelines/air  hoses-­‐limitaFons  in  the  amount  of  informaFon  portrayed  

�  Electronic  communicaFon  through  two-­‐way  radios  or  hard-­‐wired  intercoms  equipped  for  tone,  flasher  or  vibrate  alert-­‐  voice  capability  is  desirable.      

�  If  an  electronic  system  is  used  it  must  be  cerFfied  for  use  in  a  flammable/combusFble  environment.  

�  Test  equipment    �  Bump  test  direct  read  instruments  prior  to  use  �  Test  venFlaFon  and  supplied  air  for  effecFveness  

 

Page 10: Confined Space Case study 2012 - UW Courses Web Server