This is pretty much practice here anyway. Anything an employer can do to cut down on work-place injuries and lower his L&I bill is money in the bank.

Now, if I could just get the boss to buy real dust respirators instead of those flimsy disposable masks that do nothing - that would be fantastic!

I hope this works. There are some employers who do NOT want to pay for this. They may HAVE to pay for it, but what of the case where there is an AF injury & no PPE was provided, but no one asked for any PPE in the first place. Who's responsible for "requesting" PPE? Another thing to think about is that electricians, engineers, architects, maintenance people, etc., etc. routinely enter electric rooms & remove covers, do testing, etc.--all WITHOUT any PPE. They've been doing it for years (me, too)--what or who is going to change this? OK, so you enter an electric room & you see an AF/PPE label. What do you do? Presuming you even know enough to read the PPE label, will you take the time to go find the PPE (wherever it is) per the label & put it on? How will you explain to your employer who asks: "What took you so long"..................?

The bad thing about this rule is it still doesn't have any teeth. If you were to be in a arch flash accident you would be covered by the employers workmen’s comp (L&I) to get you somewhat healed. Even though they don't follow the rules, they will pay there fine to OSHA (which may be less than the cost of the proper cal. flash suit, but you will be stuck with the scares if you survive. Ideally, a worker refuses to work with out the proper safety equipment, training and a through knowledge of the parameters of the job. Really what happens is that if you were to do this most states (and union agreements) allow the contractors the right to fire you. If you turn out to be right they have to hire you back. They do not have to pay you the lost time though. So after you finally get a hearing the job is done and you get laid off the day after you return. To get the attention of the bad contractors (because most are safety minded), we as workers should have the right to sue them. Weather we know the job is dangerous or not, they bid the jobs, they send us out to do the work and they use ruthless insurance companies to discredit us and our injuries in order to keep there loses down. Risk management: This is part of the NFPA 70E safety program. Why? If they used the same rules for safety that they uses for properly sizing electrical equipment we would be covered. When I look at a job for safety, I look at the worst case possible and prepare for it. The same way I look at short circuit capability of my equipment. I don’t try to guess what part of the cycle it will fault. All of us have known someone that has been in this kind of situation or maybe even you have. Look at any of the states compensation charts and see how that matches up with the loss of a lifetime of wages, or God forbid the loss of a parent or spouse. Personally; I had always taken the layoff, then (once) by my own thought of invincibility, stupidly attempted something I should not have. Justifying it with “it had to be done” Without the proper safety equipment, procedures and personnel to help, as the safety rules would have stated. Now again I will take the layoff.

Would this also include pull over rubber boots for electrical inspectors safety. Do you know if an electrical safety inspector is required to wear PPE during inspections? If so how would they know what type to where and when?

Just out of curiousity, what is the reason for waiting 4 months to send this info? The article was written in November, 2007.

Shortly after the ruling came down, NECA petitioned OSHA that the employer not be held responsible for clothing suggested by NFPA 70 E. Saying it has not been determined the feasibility,from OSHA, of the clothing.Mabey they should check into the many films of people who have been killed by arc flash incidents and the advatages of arc flash clothing before they make the final ruling!

Wow, reading through all of the comments I see there are a lot of excuses used for not protecting ourselves. As far as I'm concerned, if you knowingly put yourself in harm's way, you can't really complain if you get injured. You owe it to yourself and your family to do whatever is necessary to make it home safely at the end of the workday. Stop using your employer as a whipping boy. If everyone that is told to do something that is blatently unsafe were to just say no, things would change. I agree, it can be difficult, but it is a must. As an inspector, one of my responsibilities is to assure OSHA compliance. This helps protect all parties. As an aside, I find great humor in all of the whining of jobsite safety and the attitude that it is someone else's responsibility (the employer's) to protect them from harm, and then see some of the stupid, irresponsible,unsafe things that these very people do on their own time. Come on folks, stop blaming everyone else; Grow up and be responsible for your own actions.

The employer should supply the PPE in most circumstances. The employee should be responsible to maintain the equipment. If the equipment is damaged due to neglect or mis-use, the employee should replace the equipment at his/her cost. There needs to be some responsiblity placed on the user.

29 CFR 1910.34(f) requires fit testing only for tight-fitting respirators, not dust masks. And, fit testing is not required when respirator use is voluntary, rather than because of overexposure to a hazardous material. http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=25342

Medical evaluation requires only evaluation of a questionnaire, provided at Appendix C of 1910.134. Often, no follow-up medical exam is required. The clinic we use evaluates questionnaires for $65.

No medical evaluation is required for voluntary use of dust masks.