Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 19 February 2003 15:27:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Antony Ferguson I work for an organisation which produced large volume of flammable hydrocarbons. Over the years I've had difficulty in convincing mgt about the need for FR PPE, based on the obvious risk assessment justification, not having had a serious fire in 25 years! (Top tier CoMAH site, multi-national oil company). Are we the odd ones out in not providing such garments in such a hazardous environment? From my checks with other oil operators, they all seem to be FR and have been for many years. Does anyone know different and has anyone got some good tried and tested PPE specifications from a similar work environment?
Admin  
#2 Posted : 19 February 2003 15:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul Mahoney Antony, I've got some photographs of what was left of a pair of Nomex overalls following a HV switching incident. If the individual concerned had not been wearing FR PPE he would be short of a few bits and bobs. The Dupont standard for high risk activities of this type is double or even triple layer Nomex. I'll try sending them to you via e mail Best regards, Paul
Admin  
#3 Posted : 20 February 2003 08:16:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Antony Ferguson Thank you for that Paul. Do you have a written policy/ procedure for FR PPE and other forms on site? What PPE specs/products/ manufacturers do you use and why nomex, not proban.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 20 February 2003 08:29:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By George Wedgwood Antony, I was involved for several years with a leading energy company and explored the case for FR PPE for workers exposed to risks from electric arc. As our other correspondent said, Dupont Nomex is the leader in the field but there are others, equally good. What makes the difference is the polyaramid fibre, which only melts or burns if the oxygen content rises above about 26%, making it very difficult to burn in normal circumstances. The company I worked for, changed many of its PPE requirements after a considerable management awareness campaign and even locations in India and Asia took up the new standards. So to sell the idea to managers (i.e. the budget holders, you need a convincing awareness campaign, backed with supporting film and experience from external sources - DuPont is very cooperative here and I can give you some contact names. If you email me, I will send you some Powerpoint slides, which will help sell the case. Just be sure that your risk assessment is convincing and has explored the exposure factors for each 'at risk' task. Looking at other FR materials, Proban is also good but it is not a polyaramid and is simply a heavy proofed (phosphate FR treated) cotton, which needs careful laundering, unlike Nomex. The higher cost of Nomex is offset against the harder wear characteristics and longer life of the garments. You can now get waterproof and high viz in Nomex and DuPont label each one to guarantee its authenticity. I hope this helps a bit, George (07836 718908)
Admin  
#5 Posted : 20 February 2003 14:01:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul Mahoney Antony, We are a Dupont site so it makes sense to purchase DuPont products, and it helps push the share price up a bit. I'll send you an extract(PPE requirements) from a rather lengthy DuPont guidance document on electric arc flash hazard control. Paul.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.