Industrial Lighting Safety, Can You See The Problem?

Copyright Material IEEEPaper No. PCIC-2006-37

Tim DriscollSenior Member, IEEEShell Canada Limited3655 - 36 Street N.W.Calgary, Alberta T2L 1Y8Canadatim.driscoll@shell.com

Richard LoiselleMember, IEEESuncor Energy Inc.PO Box 4001Fort McMurray, Alberta T9H 3E3Canadarloiselle@suncor.com

Mick Walton C.E.T.Member, IEEEBJ Electric Supplies4143 - 97 Street NWEdmonton, Alberta T6E 6E9Canadamickwalton@bjelectricsupplies.com

George BradyMember, IEEESyncrude Canada Ltd.#101, 9405-50 StreetEdmonton, Alberta T6B-2T4Canadabrady.george@syncrude.com

Abstract - This paper will demonstrate that an improvedunderstanding of the industrial lighting environment, and thetasks that workers have to perform in these environments, mayimprove safety and health performance. It will show howOccupational Health & Safety and the Illumination EngineeringSociety (IES) safe lighting conditions and standards are oftenmisinterpreted or ignored and the effects this may have. Thepaper will describe how industrial lighting systems are designedand built and maintained. Statistical data from actual work siteswill be discussed to illustrate the issues associated with poorlighting. Safety issues with regard to maintaining lightingsystems will also be explored. A case study involving many ofthe above elements will be outlined. Conclusions andrecommendations will be presented to further the understandingof industrial lighting and safety.

Index terms - Lighting, Industrial Lighting, Safety, Lumen,Illumination, Energized and De-energized Work

I Introduction

Every year, millions of dollars are spent in researching theeffects of artificial lighting on the human body and mind.Industrial safety experts continually strive to improve their ownsite safety records and countless initiatives are driven by adesire to keep our workers safe. Rarely, if ever is lightingconsidered to be a key safety and health consideration.

In many large industrial facilities, lighting is generally givena low priority at the design stage. This often translates into theuse of junior designers who are not provided adequateguidance in design considerations by facility owners orengineering companies. Factors, which are often notconsidered adequately, are sufficient illumination levels,lumen degradation, maintainability and fixture quantities andlocations. Circuit arrangements and documentation are notgiven the same consideration as more directly profit-relatedproduction loads.

This paper is focused on fixed plant facilities, rather thanmobile systems such as mining and material transportequipment. There are additional considerations for thesemobile equipment environments.

The authors believe illumination levels as causal factors insafety performance and incident investigations, is significantlyunder-appreciated. A review of safety statistics of a few majoroperating companies has been undertaken to obtain ameasure of these issues. Incident data does indicate thatlighting is rarely considered as a causal factor in incidentssuch as slips, trips and falls. Surveys of plant electricalpersonnel in several industrial petro-chemical facilities indicatethat lighting specifications are not well understood andfacilities are often considered poorly illuminated.

Lighting maintenance practices are just beginning to beappreciated for the hazards they present to the maintenanceworker. Consideration for issues such as voltage levels, livework, circuit design, fixture accessibility and specificmaintenance tasks need to be addressed in design,construction and maintenance. Industrial survey data confirmsthat many fixture installations are considered quite hazardousto access and maintain.

Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) regulatoryagencies govern workplace safety, and generally state thatemployers identify hazards and protect employees from thosehazards. The Alberta, Canada OH&S Code 186(1) [1] states;"An employer must ensure that lighting at the worksite issufficient to enable work to be done safely". The AlbertaOH&S Code provides little more than this statement forgeneral guidance in the area of workplace lightingrequirements. OH&S codes also require that employersidentify all hazards to persons and protect employees fromthose hazards.

There are new technologies and tools that can beimplemented to improve the lighting design process. More

1-4244-0559-9/06/$20.00 ©2006 IEEE

work is required to recognize the importance of lighting in thearea of industrial safety.The references to codes and standards are not intended to

be an inclusive list. Rather, they are just some examples inspecific jurisdictions or areas, and may or may not be typicalfor other jurisdictions.

11 Lighting Design & Principles

Lighting is a critical element of industrial safety and healthperformance. There is sufficient data, circumstantial andpersonal testimonies to substantiate this claim. Research intoincident data bases show us that poor lighting and lightingdesigns have resulted in accidents and even deaths.

Figure 1 illustrates that increased illumination can significantlyreduce incidents [2].

20

40

60

1000 o30 50 70 X 0

Goo&d lihti iccs thX nuibnri of kcidnst Dih pOeta* o6faLu&dnts dec Iniiff signiAptnly {Is ihe iIuminance in the wxorkihg

environcMt is macasced

Fig. 1 Illumination vs. Incident Reduction

In 2002, David M. Berson of Brown University [3] detected aganglion in the retina of mammals that appears to be directlyconnected to the brain. The layman's interpretation of thisdiscovery is that the application of light to the eye can turn thebody on and off.

Corroborating this assertion, incident reporting databasesoften show a disproportionate number of accidents occurringduring the dark hours of the 24 hour day (see Figure 2). Theillustration from one large Canadian petrochemical site showsthat despite there being only a small fraction of workers andactivity in non-daylight hours, there are almost half as manyincidents reported during these hours as there is duringdaylight hours. The statistics could be worse as there may beunder reporting of incidents in night time hours.

The key documents that designers should refer to whendesigning industrial lighting systems are the IlluminatingEngineering Society of North America ANSI/IESNA RP-7-01 [4]and IESNA Lighting Handbook [5]. In these documents thereare several tables that can be used as guidelines to helpdetermine what the correct illumination level for specific areasand tasks should be. RP-7 makes several statements thatsuggest quality and quantity of light has a significant bearing on

the comfort, productivity and safety of workers Annex A2 ofRP-7 shows actual values of lux and foot-candles for specificlocations in industrial facilities. One factor generally not includedin designs is that these levels are maintained minimums, whichmeans taking into account lumen degradation factors (seeFigures 4 and 5). RP-7 Annex Al shows how to weight otherfactors such as age (see Figure 3) and specific task viewing.

IIncidents by Time of Day

TIiiI I 1 l 1 IrI filL

Fig. 1992 21993b 1994 D

Fig. 2 Incidents by Time of Day

i U Years 'l_ l20Years 1.530 Years 240 Years 350 Years l 660 Years 15

Fig. 3 Seeing Ability with Age

While the basic principles from RP-7 are usually applied,there are key statements that are often not considered duringthe design process. One of the more important suggestions isthat a minimum of 30 foot-candles is needed on all industrialtasks where there is a "sustained seeing requirement". Otherfactors often not considered that RP-7 refers to include;. Glare,* Quality of light,. Contrast,. Shadows,* View-ability on all planes,* Minimum to maximum ratios,* Lamp and dirt degradation, and* Age of workers.

Figures 4 and 5 indicate typical life and lumen output curvesfor different lamp technologies in varying applications [2]. Notethat output depreciation after a significant portion of a lamp'slife in a dirty environment can be as high as 50%. Inadequate

milillillill milillillill milli III III III III III III III III III III III lill imiiuiI i-111

consideration of these key criteria will lead to substandardlighting installations.

Fig. 4 Lamp Lumen Degradation over Time

Fig. 5 Lumen Degradation Due to Environment

While the design of industrial facility lighting may targetappropriate lighting levels for infrequent work, it rarelyaccommodates sustained task requirements such as repair ofa piece of equipment which requires intensive multi-disciplinelabour for extended periods. A related technical consideration,particularly in cold northern climates, is the effect of hoardingin equipment with tarps, and therefore the need for additionalfixtures. In many industrial plants, utility systems have bleedand drain valves partially open either intentionally orunintentionally, and with cold temperatures, significant steamvapours also reduce visibility and effectiveness of lightingsystems. These and other temporary obstructions such asscaffolding are only recently becoming a consideration inlighting system design. One example of a designimprovement is to provide permanent extra circuits in theseareas that are available for seasonal additions of lightingloads. Designers need to pay particular attention to changesin the mechanical and civil design throughout the installationto ensure the effectiveness of the lighting design is notcompromised. For example, if a pipe rack or even a cable

tray routing is changed to run underneath a light fixture, it willnegate the effectiveness of that fixture.

Designers will generally use their own (engineeringcompany) or the owner's specifications or standards. Thesespecifications are often outdated and need to be regularlymonitored for new developments in the lighting market.Engineering companies' specifications are sometimes carriedover from the last project and may be similarly outdated.

In industrial capital projects, lighting is generally among thelowest priority areas within the electrical discipline to beconsidered. A result of this is that less seasoned designersoften are assigned the responsibility of providing lightingdesigns for the facility. The more experienced practitionersoften tackle the higher visibility areas such as powerdistribution, rotating equipment and controls. Further, it iscommon that items such as structural elements, vessels,piping and electrical raceway needs take precedence overlighting, and as a result light fixtures may become ineffectiveor are relocated on a frequent and often detrimental basis.

Although there are now several sophisticated lightingmodeling software packages on the market which can aid inlighting design, they are still not able to function well within theconfines of the popular new 3D design modeling packages. Asa result of this lack of compatibility there is a considerableamount of guesswork and assumptions required to completethe design.

Sample design considerations typically considered in thecontext of operating costs are in the areas of minimizingfixture count to minimize maintenance, efficient fixturetechnology, lamp life and smart lighting controllers. Theseconsiderations are generally focused on minimizing energyconsumption and simultaneously maximizing lamp life, whichreduces maintenance. Examples of the above are double arc-tube lamps and micro-processor based controllers whichprovide not only intelligent controls but also maintenanceinformation such as lamp life used. Technologies such asphotocells and simple hand-off-auto control schemes haveobvious drawbacks in that they are often left in 'hand' mode,so energy or lamp life is not saved.

It is important to measure the performance of lightingsystems to verify that the final installed system meets thedesign objectives. Many owners write such provisions intospecifications or project standards, however in typical capitalprojects, these evaluations are rarely carried out due toresourcing and / or project timing issues, and the lack ofapparent impact on production.

A survey of electrical maintenance staff at several largepetrochemical companies covering questions of design,maintenance and safety was performed. The results areshown in figure 7. An overwhelming 96% of surveyrespondents believe that illumination levels are inadequate,although only 25% claim to understand lighting andillumination level specifications (4th and 5th Questions /Responses).

Fig. 6 Lighting Survey of Industrial Electricians

The survey results illustrates that lighting systems aregenerally not designed well, considering economics andongoing safety and maintenance.

A survey of industrial facility safety and loss preventionpersonnel in industrial facilities results are shown in figure 7.These results further indicate that illumination is generallyperceived as an issue although not adequately considered inincident investigations. The majority of safety professionalsexpressed a desire to learn more about lighting and safety.

Safety Personnel Positive Responses

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Feel that illumination is an issue intheir facilities

Feel that illumination is consideredadequately in investigationsWould like to learn more about

lighting and safety

Fig. 7 Lighting Survey of Safety and Loss PreventionPersonnel

III Lighting Operations and Maintenance

Once the lighting design is complete and the facility isconstructed, it is turned over to Operations and Maintenance.When the facility is in operation, the key focus is production,which, in the electrical discipline, is power distribution, motors,heat tracing and process controls.

On an ongoing operating basis, many facilities are increasingthe use of lighting surveys, which is a key tool in effectivelighting system performance measurement and input tomaintenance planning.

When lighting related work orders are initiated in the workqueue, they are generally relegated to a lower priority ascompared with the more directly profit / production relatedwork. Another effect of this lower priority assignment forlighting is that lighting work may not be assigned to theseasoned technicians.

In practice, it is common that the electrical work planningprocess will not trigger a work order until several lightingfixtures require attention. Another way to look at this is thatuntil the illumination level becomes very poor in an area, thepriority on maintenance is low. This approach appearspractical in some respects, however it still represents a fixture-by-fixture (or small number of fixtures) approach, whichmeans that considerable overhead is attached to themaintenance of each fixture. Considering work permits,sourcing parts / materials, hazardous area work, circuitidentification and isolation, and often most significantly,physical access to the fixture, it is not uncommon to havemore than 2 hours of 'overhead' effort associated with the 15minutes of work directly at the fixture.

An approach which can minimize the per-fixturemaintenance effort is commonly known as 'group re-lamping',where wholesale maintenance is planned and executed in amuch more orderly fashion. Several approaches are usedincluding an example where a facility replaces 50% (everysecond) lamp upon their reaching 75% of their statistical life.The alternate fixtures are replaced in a subsequent cycle,which yields several benefits including:

Minimizing maintenance overhead per fixture,Maintaining reasonable lighting levels by always havinga large portion of lamps operating near peak efficacy,andAllowing work planning including identifying andaddressing hazards to be done most effectively

The low priority placed on lighting maintenance results inpoor overall illumination and high per unit maintenance costs.

IV Maintenance and Safe Work Practices

Traditional lighting designs and installation details do notpay adequate attention to maintenance considerations. Workpractices and worker attitude are also major factors inaddressing safety in lighting maintenance. There are severalkey points that need to be considered:

De-energized vs energized,* Accessibility,* Re-lamping,

Protective equipment,Drawings / documentation,Isolation,Controlling variety of equipment, andAttitude of electrical maintenance workers.

A. De-energized Work

Virtually all electrical hazards can be eliminated byperforming work de-energized. The Canadian Electrical Code[6] Rule 2-304(1) states; "No repairs or alterations shall be

Industrial Electrician Positive Responses

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Aware of incidents related tolighting

Reluctant to change some lampsdue to location

Lighting maintenance seen as lowprio rity

Feel that facility lighting isinadequate

Understand lighting levels andspecs

carried out on any live electrical equipment except wherecomplete disconnection of the equipment is not practicable".NFPA 70E 110.8(1) [7] states; "Live parts to which anemployee might be exposed shall be put into an electricallysafe work condition before an employee works on or nearthem, unless work on energized components can be justifiedaccording to 130.1". The Alberta OH&S Code [1] states in theLocking Out section; "A worker must not perform work onequipment to be serviced, repaired or adjusted until (a) theequipment is tested to ensure it is inoperative, and (b) theworker is assured that it is inoperative." Further, the abovestandards/codes go on to say in other sections that any workon energized (or operating) equipment needs to be performedwith appropriate hazard assessments, procedures andprotective equipment.

In summary, maintenance of lighting (as with other) systemsshould be performed de-energized if at all possible. However,a large percentage of lighting maintenance work is performedenergized.

B. Practical Considerations for Isolation

In order to execute work de-energized, the lighting fixture orcircuit to be worked on must be isolated, and preferably alsolocked and tagged out. There are many reasons and barriersthat contribute to causing maintenance work to continue to beperformed energized. There are several issues or barriers,which make it difficult to isolate lighting circuits formaintenance work.

Design and DocumentationThe isolation device or disconnect is usually a circuit

breaker in a distribution panel that is generally quite difficult tolocate. Since lighting has a low priority and is done near theend of engineering, drawings and documentation is poorlydone, and in many cases may not be done at all. Conduit andcable routings are normally field run, and as-builts of circuitarrangements, and panel drawings and schedules are almostalways not completed. It is rare to find accurate schedules indistribution panels, drawings showing panel locations andcircuit details for those panels. After a facility has been inoperation for a period of time, additions and modifications thatare not properly recorded aggravate the condition of poordocumentation, especially if it's in poor shape from thebeginning. If the isolation device is difficult to find, it tends notto be used, and if it's very difficult to find, it won't be used.

If the documentation of the location of the isolation device isin good shape, but it's located a distance away from the workarea, again it may not be used. This could be due to poordesign, or in some cases may be due to the nature of the areabeen lighted. An example of the latter is lighting for a processvessel or column. The fixtures are located on platforms,ladders, stairways, etc. up the sides of the vessel, where thedistribution panel would normally be located at grade level.

Many lighting installations have one isolation device forseveral fixtures in an area. If other work is being performed inan area, it is undesirable to turn off the lights affecting thatwork, just so that a maintenance job on a light fixture can bedone. So even if the isolation device is found and the

electrician wanted to turn it off, this type of situation wouldoften not allow the lighting circuit to be de-energized.Therefore the lighting job gets deferred or is done energized.This situation is becoming worse as there is trend for costreasons to go to higher voltages, thereby being able to servicemore fixtures from one disconnect.

Attitude and PerceptionLighting is generally considered low voltage, and therefore

associated with low risk/hazard. After all, everyone hasreceived a minor "poke" from 120 VAC, which just serves topromote caution when doing the work energized. This is aprevalent attitude that the authors have experienced withmany maintenance electricians. This attitude continues toexist even though there are many voltage levels for lightingsystems in industrial facilities, such as 120, 208, 240, 277,347, 480 and even 600 volts. The higher voltages are seen inareas where a significant amount of lighting is to be powered,for cost savings in the distribution and lighting equipment.480 and 600 V circuits feeding motors are considered low

voltage, but high risk to work on. Work on lighting systemswith similar voltages should be considered equally hazardousfrom a shock potential. Lighting systems with lower voltagesare also hazardous.

There is also an attitude among some maintenanceelectricians, that they've been trained and experienced inperforming energized electrical work. Being able to do thiswork sets them apart from other trades, and other electricianswho won't do it. This attitude is becoming less prevalent, butstill exists. A secondary issue is that a seasoned electriciandemonstrating this attitude to younger workers tends to makeit very difficult to change the "culture".

Many electricians believe, either from experience or thatwas the way they were taught, that troubleshooting a problemcircuit is easier if it's energized. Bench checking of fixturesand troubleshooting circuits de-energized have not beencommon methods for finding and repairing a lighting circuit.

Work on lighting systems does not have the profile orpriority as compared with electrical systems required forproduction, such as pump motors and related controls. Thishas two effects:. Lighting maintenance is not performed until some

particular issue arises such as inadequate lighting causesan incident or delays another job, and,

* Seldom are appropriate Hazard Task Analyses (HTA), JobSafety Analyses (JSA) or detailed procedures developed.

Individual lighting jobs, e.g. repairing a single fixture thatisn't working, are generally small and routine tasks. Tackingon all the appropriate controls to do it safety including an HTA,getting safety and / or personal protective equipment, trackingdown the disconnect and isolating, etc., is onerous and timeconsuming. As a result it is very easy to take shortcuts on thistype of work.

C. Accessibility

Appropriate location of fixtures and circuit components suchas remote ballasts, is a critical factor in safety for performing

maintenance on this equipment. By the nature of lighting, thelamp sources are generally elevated above the work areasand walkways. Therefore, access for any maintenanceactivity involves getting to those elevated locations.Numerous rules and codes generated by agencies such asOccupational Health and Safety exist to require hazardassessments and the use of fall protection and arrestequipment to protect the worker. Appropriate use oftemporary elevating devices such as ladders and man-lifts iscritical. Mistakes and short cuts are often taken in using thisequipment.

Another issue is that many fixtures are mounted so thatafter getting access to the location, to work on the fixtureinvolves poor body position, which can be exacerbated byhaving to deal with heavy parts such as with hazardouslocation fixtures.

D. Additional Hazards

There are additional hazards present that contribute to therisks of lighting maintenance. The common issues that needto be considered are burns due to hot surfaces, cuts andlacerations due to sharp edges or broken glass, and non-passive failure of some types of lamps. Hazard warning signsare provided on the fixtures, and recommendations should befollowed.

Operating fixtures have many components that run at hightemperatures. For example, HID ballasts can run at 185°Cand lamp surfaces can be as high as 4000C. A good practiceis to wait 10-15 minutes after de-energization prior totouching.

Many types of fixtures have sharp edges, such as heatshields, and of course glass is always present in lamps andrefractors/globes. The best practice is to wear leather gloves,safety glasses, and use care when working on thesecomponents.

Some lighting technologies such as metal halide are knownto have a possible failure mode, called Non-Passive Failure,where the lamp may rupture (energized or de-energized). Themanufacturer's warnings and instructions need to be followed.Protected and plastic coated lamps that can minimize thishazard are available.

In industrial facilities there are other hazards that may bepresent with lighting maintenance. A significant portion of thelighting fixtures are located outdoors. Wherever moisture ispresent, due to precipitation, condensation, steam emissionsor other, while energized work is being performed, the shockhazard becomes much higher.

In petrochemical facilities, the processing areas of theplants are generally classified as hazardous locations, andtherefore the fixtures need to be certified for those areas.These fixtures are larger and heavier than other types, andmore difficult to handle manually. When this is combined withelevated heights and poor access due to mounting positions,the falling hazard increases and the risk of strain injuries alsoincreases. For any work that is performed energized, hot

work permits and procedures need to be implemented.Additional hazards to be addressed under hot workprocedures include arcing and hot surfaces (lamp and othercomponents) in the light fixture and wiring compartments. Hotwork procedures are not always adhered to when performingmaintenance work on lighting systems in hazardous locations.

There are some lighting systems or parts of lighting systemsthat use common neutrals. With these systems, even if theline conductors are opened, the neutrals may still beenergized due to the unbalanced currents in the other circuits.

E. High Hazard Work

Since lighting maintenance work is usually done energized,is often at elevated locations and uses poor body positioning,and involves additional hazards identified above, it is veryhazardous work from a personal safety perspective. If thecodes and standards strongly suggest that work be performedde-energized and it's recognized that the overall tasks arevery hazardous, why is so much lighting maintenance workperformed energized? Furthermore, can lighting systems bebetter engineered for inherent safety in ongoing operationsand maintenance? The answer to these questions is ofcourse "yes", and will be discussed later in the paper.

There is emerging statistical evidence illustrating thatmaintenance work on lighting systems is one of the mosthazardous electrical tasks performed in an industrial facility.This confirms the belief of many experts that lighting work ishazardous. In many respects, it is even more of an issue insome commercial facilities due to higher exposure hours.Wolfman and Capelli-schellpfeffer [8] present some statisticsfor nonfatal construction injuries from the US bureau of LaborStatistics, that strongly suggests lighting incidents are a highpercentage of the overall electrical incidents in construction.

The Ontario Electrical Safety Authority (ESA) has beentracking serious electrical incidents for the past several years.It was reported in an article in Electrical Business magazine[8], that at least 11 serious incidents have occurred in Ontariobetween 2000 and 2004 working on energized 347 Venergized lighting circuits. Three of these incidents resulted infatalities. In the analysis, two common themes were found:* Existing lighting circuits were being modified, and* Work was being performed in areas where others would

be affected if the lights were out.

V Lighting Maintenance Incident Case Study

In this section, an incident that occurred in a petroleumfacility in the late 1990's will be described. It illustrates someof the issues that were described in the previous section, andas a result the worker ended up paying the ultimate penaltypart way through the job.

A fixture in an "off-site" part of the plant was not working. Ingeneral, the maintenance department was very busy during aplant turnaround and partial shutdown. An experiencedelectrician from the contract maintenance workforce wasdispatched to repair the light. The plant was in a shut downcondition, and a fixture in a remote area needed to be

repaired. It was considered a routine job that could behandled by the electrician without an HTA or JSA.

The electrician surveyed the job site, and then selected analuminum ladder to erect for access to the fixture. It was along ways back to the electrical shop to gather up a heavyfiberglass ladder and carry back to the jobsite. He leaned theladder up against the conduit and secured it with rope to theconduit and checked the bulb. He then found the disconnect,turned it off, went back to the fixture where he opened thejunction box to check the wiring connections. Since the wiringappeared to be OK, he made the decision to re-energize thecircuit to troubleshoot. It can be seen on the mock up picture,Figure 8, that the fixture was disconnected from the conduit,therefore, so was the ground return path. When the fixturewas lowered and secured by rope, a broken wire at the lampterminals was pulled against the fixture frame and conduitstub, effectively energizing these components, and without theground return, the fault protection would not trip the circuit.He proceeded to check that there was voltage leaving theremote ballasts, and then returned to the fixture to check ifthere was voltage at the junction box. It should also be notedthat there was no permit written for the job, and there were nofall arrest equipment or work gloves being used. As theelectrician proceeded to check the connections, he eitherreceived a shock from the energized fixture frame (most likely)or was startled by arcing in front of his face (ladder-conduit),and fell off the ladder. He received a fatal impact to his headon an I-beam at the base of the ladder, and his bodycontinued through a gap in the platform another 6m to thefloor below. Evidence of arcing inside the fixture and betweenthe ladder and the conduit was found.

There are a number of learnings that can be gleaned fromthis incident;* A HTA or JSA should be performed. The hazards could

have been identified on this job, which were shock, arcand fall in this case.

* A formal permit requirement would force the HTA and/or arequirement for a good procedure.

* The HTA would then proceed to identify the steps neededto mitigate the hazards. For the fall hazard, it would be aplace to tie off to and use of fall protection/arrestequipment. For the energized electrical hazards of shockand potentially arc, the main protection is "De-Energize".Troubleshoot the fixture on the bench, and if necessary,check continuity of wire rather than checking voltage.

* If the job must be done energized (in this case it couldhave been de-energized), then the HTA should alsoidentify what can go wrong and have a detailed procedureto deal with those instances. In this incident, the fixturecase could become energized but not trip the circuit.Insulating boots, gloves and ladder needed to be used.

There needs to be a major change in the awareness,knowledge and attitude of electrical workers of the significanthazards associated with maintenance of lighting systems. Acase for change has to be put forward, and education andtraining are key components.

VI Safety Design Recommendations

There are many improvements that can be engineered intolighting systems to enhance safety for maintenance workers.

A. Design Documentation

Engineering needs to provide a well thought out design withcomplete documentation. The design needs to be followedthrough to the end of construction including the installersdocumenting changes on as-built drawings for handover tooperations and maintenance. Manufacturers should carefullyconsider the safety warnings on their products, includingwarning content and placement on the fixture.

B. Disconnection / Isolation

Provide easy means to de-energize the lighting circuit orparts of it that are to be worked on. With appropriatelydocumented circuits, the disconnect can be found, switchedoff and locked out. There are several suppliers of positivelock out devices for lighting distribution panels that can beretrofitted. Integral disconnects or ones located at or onlighting fixtures can be supplied. One method being currentlyemployed at some Canadian petroleum facilities aredisconnect plugs located on or near individual fixtures. Thisallows the power to be disconnected by unplugging followingwhich the fixture can be taken to the bench for troubleshootingand repair. The plug and receptacle technology is beingoptimized currently. This technique, in combination with theuse of cables makes for not only a safer system to maintain,but an easier and less costly installation as well.

Fig. 8 Re-enactment of Incident Conditions

A rule has been installed in the 2006 Canadian ElectricalCode [6] to require integral disconnects on fluorescent lightingfixtures operating above 150 V L-N. Why is this only above150 V, and why only on fluorescent fixtures? This is such amajor change, that it needed to be introduced slowly, i.e. bymanageable bites. The main safety issues identified bystatistics on incidents, primarily from Ontario, have been withfluorescent fixtures and higher voltages. Product certificationstandard development is now being initiated to support thisrule. NEC article 410 also contains some provisions forrequiring disconnecting means for lighting fixtures. These aregood first steps, and further development of code rules andproduct standards to enhance safety needs to take place.

C. Accessibility

The engineering designer needs to be more aware of themechanical issues of locating and mounting fixtures for easeof access to the worker. An important concept is that it ismuch better to bring the fixture to the worker rather than havethe worker move to the elevated fixture. Several methods arecurrently available, such as winch poles, stanchion mounts onsliders, and rotating/swivel poles. Figure 9 shows a swivelpole, where the flange is loosened and then rotated down tothe worker.

For fixtures that need to be mounted at elevated locations,consideration needs to be made for using existing elevatedplatforms or walkways. If these are not available, then accessis by ladder or temporary scaffolding, where tie off points forsecuring fall arrest equipment should be included in thedesign. It is better to try and reduce the mounting heights sothat small ladders are adequate, which may also reduce thewattage and size/weight of fixtures for handling.

Mounting arrangements should be such that the workerdoes not have to be in a poor body position to access, such asreaching out over the side of walkways.

Fig. 9 Rotating/Swivel Light Pole

VIl Lighting and Safety Statistics

Some data is collected by operating companies where anincident is directly involved with lighting itself. As indicated inthe Wolfman and Capelli-Schellpfeffer paper [8], there aresome industry statistics available, again with some specificreferences to lighting work, however there has not been muchanalysis completed to draw conclusions.As part of the analysis of why there have been so many

serious incidents involving lighting in Ontario [9], the ElectricalSafety Authority surveyed a large number of electricalcontractors with respect to working on 347 V lighting systems.Some of the key findings are;* 80-90% believed that the work was high hazard and that

the work should be performed de-energized* 70% confirmed that they have worked on 347 V lighting

energized, and almost 50% believe that they could worksafely on these systems. The latter point confirms that theattitude of electrical workers needs to be changed withrespect to working on higher voltage systems. If theattitude is such on 347 V, what is the attitude with respectto lower voltages? It is assumed that an even higherpercentage would believe they could work on lower voltagesystems energized.

Lighting is not generally considered a causal factor forincidents such as slips, trips and falls. Three major Canadianpetroleum companies were surveyed for how they trackeddata in this area, and what the results were. One of thecompanies has a system in place to track lighting as a causalfactor on incidents, however overall there is very little dataindicating lighting as a cause. This survey data was analyzedand other data such as work order requests, industrial hygienecomplaints and incidents during low ambient light hours. Eventhough there is little hard data to indicate that poor lighting is acausal factor in incidents, there is a great deal ofcircumstantial evidence that confirms it is.

It was identified by a large majority in the survey of electricalmaintenance workers (see Figure 7) that they did notunderstand lighting level standards, but they still felt theirfacility had inadequate lighting. Most, however, were notaware of incidents that were due or partly due to poorillumination.

There appears to be a deficiency in being able to identify,record, trend and analyze data with respect to recognizinginadequate lighting as a causal factor in incidents such asslips, trips and falls. In addition, there needs to be betterawareness that lighting is a factor, and that the learnings fromthe analysis be acted upon.

Vil Conclusions

Lighting is usually left towards the end of the design, has alower priority than the rest of electrical engineering, and is notfully understood by designers. The result is often a sub-optimal installation that is both difficult to maintain and givesrise to safety concerns due to inadequate lighting. Severalfactors need to be included in the design to ensure maintainedminimum lumen levels over the life of a facility, such as

degradation of lamp output. ANSI/IESNA RP-7 providesguidance for designers on all aspects of industrial lighting.High maintenance areas need to be considered, such as forlarge rotating equipment where spare circuits for temporarysupplemental lighting may be required.

In addition to providing a design for effective illumination, anumber of improvements need to be made to current designsto assist electrical maintenance staff in performance of lightingmaintenance safely. Some of these are; provide completeand as-built documentation/drawings, reduced voltages,easily located circuit disconnects with lock out provisions,individual fixture disconnects or plugs, improved mountingpositions of fixtures, and use of mounting arrangements tobring the fixture down to the worker.

The profile and priority on lighting design needs to beraised. This will have a significant effect on the quality oflighting and therefore productivity, and on the overall safety ofworkers.

Lighting safety can be broken down into two major areas:* A better focus on understanding and addressing

illumination levels as a causal factor for incidents suchas slips/trips/falls and performing work tasks correctly,and

* Maintenance work on lighting systems.

There appear to be very few systems for identifying,tracking and analyzing if inadequate lighting is a causal factoron incidents. There are shortcomings in understanding oflighting requirements in general, and how they affect plantsafety overall. Reviewing circumstantial data indicates thatlighting is a potential major cause factor on incidents.

Improvements need to be made in several areas such as;recognition of lighting as an incident causal factor, reportingsystems to capture incident data, general understanding oflighting requirements, and use of lighting surveys as a keyelement in maintaining adequate plant illumination.

As a significant amount of maintenance work is currentlyperformed energized and much of it is at inaccessible orelevated locations, it must be recognized that it is veryhazardous work. This fact needs to be understood by allstakeholders such as designers, installers, operations andmaintenance management, and most importantly by thelighting maintenance workers themselves. Education of theworker and the other stakeholders is the key. The biggestsingle improvement for safety can be made by de-energizinglighting circuits prior to working on them. An HTA or JSAprocess should be used for identification and mitigation of allhazards. The prime hazards are working energized and atelevated locations, but there are other considerations such ashazardous locations, burns and sharp edges.

Lighting maintenance, operation and safety is generallyunder-appreciated, and a higher priority must be placed onlighting in these areas.

IX References

[1] Alberta Occupational Health and Safety Code, October2003

[2] A 'major lighting manufacturer'[3] Berson, D.M., Dunn, F.A. and Takao, M. (2002)

"Phototransduction by retinial ganglion cells that set thecircadianl clock". Science, 295

[4] ANSI/IESNA RP-7-01 Recommended Practice forLighting Industrial Facilities, Illumination EngineeringSociety of North America

[5] IESNA Lighting Handbook Reference 2000, gth Edition[6] Canadian Electrical Code, Part 1, 2002, C22.1-02,

Safety Standard for Electrical Installations[7] NFPA 70E, 2004 Edition, Standard for Electrical Safety

in the Workplace[8] H. Wolfman P.E., Dr. M.Capelli-Schellpfeffer M.D., IEEE

ICPS-02-5, 277V Safety Issues: Recognition andPrevention of Lighting Related Electrical Injuries andFatalities

[9] T. Olechna, P.Eng., Electrical Business, December 2004Issue, CLB Media Inc., Code File column

X Vita

Tim Driscoll (B.Sc.'76) received his Bachelor of Science,Electrical Engineering degree in 1976 from the University ofCalgary, Calgary, Alberta Canada. Since graduation he hasbeen employed at Shell Canada in various positions includingcontrol engineering, project management and electricalengineering. Current responsibilities include electricalengineering support for all Shell Canada's facilities in the areasof operations, maintenance, safety, energy and capital projects.He has co-authored several papers at the IEEE PCIC and PCICEurope Conferences. He is a member of the Association ofProfessional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists ofAlberta.

Mick Walton Is an electrical technician with certification fromthe U.K. He has worked extensively in the field of industriallighting, specializing in the area of safety. He is a member of theIEEE for the past 7 years and has co-authored several papers inthe area of lighting and lighting safety.

Richard Loiselle (B.Sc. '89) received his Bachelor ofScience, Electrical Engineering degree in 1989 from theUniversity of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan,Canada. Since graduation he has been employed with ImperialOil and currently Suncor, in various positions including siteengineer with responsibilities for maintenance, design andsafety in operations and capital projects. He is an IEEE memberand has co-authored IEEE PCIC papers. He is a member of theAssociation of Professional Engineers, Geologists andGeophysicists of Alberta.

George Brady (R.E.T. 1999) George is presently a ProjectManager with Syncrude Canada Ltd, in Fort McMurray, AlbertaHe has over 35 years in the Electrical Industry starting with anElectrical Apprenticeship from College of Technology in DublinIreland. Since arriving in Canada in 1974 he has worked for15 years in the Industrial field as an electrician and the next

20 in Engineering. After gaining his diploma in ElectricalEngineering Technology in 1988 he has worked in designengineering, maintenance and field engineering for Syncrudewhere he became an electrical specialist in the fields ofLighting and Electrical Heat Tracing. He has co-authored fourPCIC IEEE papers. Current responsibilities include the ProjectManagement on large capital project.