I know that CSA Z460 allows the worker to have up to three personal padlocks before moving to group lockout. But I cannot reference it within the CSA standard, any pointers as to where to find it?

[vickyp]

#102705

Forum: Community

I know that CSA Z460 allows the worker to have up to three personal padlocks before moving to group lockout. But I cannot find specific reference to this CSA standard, any pointers as to where to find it?

[vickyp]

#103113

Section 10.10(2) of the BC OHS Reg. (de-energization and lockout) says “Control system isolating devices and the procedures for using them must be approved in writing by the Board.” WorkSafeBC guidelines https://www.worksafebc.com/en/law-policy/occupational-health-safety/searchable-ohs-regulation/ohs-guidelines/guidelines-part-10#6241DD356B304E218388D79F05FA4AA5 then talk about which devices and procedures are approved, including a dual-channel safety interlock switch as a control system isolating device (pasted in below). The only other reference to Z460 also comes from the guidelines and deals with use of cryogenic systems to block piping and isolate equipment.
Hope this is what you were looking for and here’s the complete guideline passage I mentioned above: Glenn
A dual-channel safety interlock switch as a control system isolating device
A dual-channel safety interlock switch (SIS) that is (i) safety rated (as defined in CSA Z460-05 Control of Hazardous Energy — Lockout and other methods*), (ii) has a direct opening action, and that (iii) is used in the positive mode of operation can be an acceptable CSID.
*CSA Z460-05 states that safety-rated switches are tamper-resistant and mechanically actuated devices with positively driven multiple contacts. Magnetic switches can be safety rated if they are coded and have monitored contacts.
To be acceptable, the SIS needs to be installed as part of a control system that uses safety certified control components meeting design architecture of ISO 13849-1 Safety of Machinery category 3 or 4. These are called control reliable control systems and are described in CSA Z432-04 Safeguarding of Machinery.
The safety related parts of the control system (defined in ISO 13849: 2006 Safety of Machinery, referenced in Guideline G19.36(1)) need to provide acceptable risk-reduction for the task that is being performed under its protection. A SIS installed as above is excluded from fault of non-opening of the contact and/or non-actuation of the switch due to mechanical failure.

[vickyp]

#103114

One more thing. There are also multiple references to CSA 460 in WorkSafeBC’s new publication on lockouts–albeit none directly addressing group lockout. file:///C:/Users/glenn/Downloads/controlling-hazardous-energy-deenergization-lockout-bk21-pdf-en.pdf     Sorry I didn’t notice that sooner.

[vickyp]

#103115

Okay, I understand your Q now. Regrettably, I can’t find anything that addresses it, at least in BC. In fact, I don’t see anything in the Regs that mentions anything about how many padlocks a worker can have. The closest thing I could find was a guideline reference saying there’s no limit on the number of CONTROLLED DEVICES that may be secured at one time using a personal lock. But it doesn’t say anything about the number of workers that can use this method to secure multiple devices.
All in all, I feel pretty confident that a specific reference to padlocks per worker in official govt sources doesn’t exist in BC. But there may be something in other provinces.

[vickyp]

#103116

Okay, I understand your Q now. Regrettably, I can’t find anything that addresses it, at least in BC. In fact, I don’t see anything in the Regs that mentions anything about how many padlocks a worker can have. The closest thing I could find was a guideline reference saying there’s no limit on the number of CONTROLLED DEVICES that may be secured at one time using a personal lock. But it doesn’t say anything about the number of workers that can use this method to secure multiple devices.
All in all, I feel pretty confident that a specific reference to padlocks per worker in official govt sources doesn’t exist in BC. But there may be something in other provinces.

[vickyp]

#103117

Best practice versus regulation’ Regulation is the law, however when there is no specific regulation dealing with the subject matter at hand, the courts will side with the industry best practises and the CSA standard. If specific lockout/tag-out information cannot be found in the CSA standards, then make sure and be aware of the industry best practice. This also applies to any safety issue.

[vickyp]

#103118

Melvin’s point is a perfect sequel to this thread. 100% right. I think Gavin and I have established that there’s nothing specific in the BC OHS Reg on the topic. The Regs dig down only so far. In this situation, the legal standard becomes “reasonable” steps. And courts rely on industry standards, CSA, NFPA and other voluntary standards and best practices to determine what is reasonable in a particular situation. This analysis probably applies to something like 99.9% of all “real life” situations. Great conversation!

[vickyp]

#103119

This is a thread all OHSI members should read because it’s so typical of how the OHS rules work. The statute sets out a general duty, e.g., protect workers from equipment and machinery hazards. The Regs fill in the specifics, e.g., lockout requirements. But the Regs. go only so deep leaving gaps that get filled in by the standards and best practices. Great work, gentlemen.

[Author]

Posts