OSHA Accident Investigation · Summary #14497127
DAYCO PRODUCTS, INC.
SPRINGDALE, AR·
Event description
ELECTRIC SHOCK - DIRECT CONTACT WITH ENERGIZED CONDUCTOR
Investigation abstract
A maintenance supervisor and a senior maintenance worker were installing a 120-v he parts room for wire nuts. When he returned, he found his coworker slumped ove r the ceiling joist, electrocuted. It was later determined that the junction box the employees were working on contained 480-volt conductors supplying power to a machine below and did not contain the wiring for the 120-volt lights. From the floor, it appeared as if the conduit from the junction box led to the lights, b ut it did not. The employees had not tested the circuit even though they had a v oltmeter with them. olt receptacle. They opened and tested one junction box. They found the voltage in that box to be 480 volts. They searched for a 120-volt circuit and located tw o lights used for signaling purposes. They knew these lights operated at 120 vol ts. They followed a conduit, which was located overhead, 5.5 meters to a junctio n box. They installed another conduit and pulled conductors through it. One of t he two employees turned on the two lights, went to a panelboard, and started ope ning circuit breakers. When the lights went off, the employee at the junction bo x yelled, "That's it." The employee who had opened the circuit breaker went to t
Victim
-
#1 Fatality Age 33 Male
- Nature of injury
- Electric Shock (10)
- Part of body
- BODYSYSTEM (4)
- Accident type
- SHOCK (13)
- Source of injury
- ELEC APPARAT/WIRING (15)
- Occupation
- Not specified mechanics and repairers (549)
- Human factor
- MISJUDGMENT, HAZ. SITUATION (1)
- Environmental factor
- OTHER (18)
- Task assigned
- Task not regularly assigned (2)
Labels are OSHA's own, from the code dictionary published with the accident-investigation file. The raw code is shown beside each one so this page can be reconciled against OSHA's bulk data. OSHA notes that nature of injury, part of body, source of injury and accident type in this file are not coded to the Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System, and that the occupation titles are not standardised — so these values are not directly comparable with the OIICS-coded severe injury reports.