1、AmericAn nAtionAl StAndArdANSI/ASSE Z244.1 2016 The Control of Hazardous Energy Lockout, Tagout and Alternative MethodsAmericAn Society of SAfety engineerS4Casselogo-1200dpi_vector-1c-outline.pdf 1 1/20/2012 1:31:55 PMANSI/ASSE Z244.1 2016ANSI/ASSE Z244.1 2016The information and materials contained
2、in this publication have been developed from sources believed to be reliable. However, the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) as secretariat of the ANSI accredited Z244 committee or individual committee members accept no legal responsibility for the correctness or completeness of this mater
3、ial or its application to specific factual situations. By publication of this standard, ASSE or the Z244 committee does not ensure that adherence to these recommendations will protect the safety or health of any persons or preserve property. ANSI ANSI/ASSE Z244.1 2016 American National Standard The
4、Control of Hazardous Energy Lockout, Tagout and Alternative Methods Secretariat American Society of Safety Engineers 520 N. Northwest Hwy Park Ridge, IL 60068 (847) 699-2929 Approved October 13, 2016 American National Standards Institute, Inc. Approval of an American National Standard requires verif
5、ication by ANSI that the requirements for due process, consensus and other criteria for approval have been met by the standards developer. Consensus is established when, in the judgment of the ANSI Board of Standards Review, substantial agreement has been reached by directly and materially affected
6、interests. Substantial agreement means much more than a simple majority, but not necessarily unanimity. Consensus requires that all views and objections be considered, and that a concerted effort be made toward their resolution. The use of American National Standards is completely voluntary; their e
7、xistence does not in any respect preclude anyone, whether he/she has approved the standards or not, from manufacturing, marketing, purchasing, or using products, processes, or procedures not conforming to the standards. The American National Standards Institute does not develop standards and will in
8、 no circumstance give an interpretation of any American National Standard. Moreover, no person shall have the right or authority to issue an interpretation of an American National Standard in the name of the American National Standards Institute. Requests for interpretation should be addressed to th
9、e secretariat or sponsor whose name appears on the title page of this standard. Caution Notice: This American National Standard may be revised or withdrawn at any time. The procedures of the American National Standards Institute require that action be taken periodically to reaffirm, revise or withdr
10、aw this standard. Purchasers of American National Standards may receive current information on all standards by calling or writing the American National Standards Institute. Published December 2016 by American Society of Safety Engineers 520 N. Northwest Hwy Park Ridge, IL 60068 (847) 699-2929 www.a
11、sse.org Copyright 2016 by American Society of Safety Engineers All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America American Natio
12、nal Standard Foreword (This Foreword is not a part of American National Standard Z244.1-2016.) History In March 1973, the Accredited Standards Committee Z244 held its first organizational meeting in New York to develop a standard on lockout/tagout. The National Safety Council functioned as the initi
13、al secretariat and provided a draft document “Guidelines for a Lockout Program“ dated November 1971 that was used as a reference for the committees deliberations. By the end of 1975, the standard work was complete and public review and balloting was finished. However, various administrative and proc
14、edural problems precluded the standard from being officially released. In March 1982, the American National Standard for Personnel Protection - Lockout/Tagout of Energy Sources - Minimum Safety Requirements Z244.1 was finally approved and published. In 1987, the standard was re-affirmed without any
15、changes in content. In April 1988, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) released a proposed rule “The Control of Hazardous Energy Sources (Lockout/Tagout)“ 29 CFR1910.147 which used ANSI Z244.1 as a principal reference source. The committee believed no consequential action should
16、 be taken on the Z244.1 standard while federal rulemaking was underway. In September 1989, OSHA promulgated its final rule 29 CFR1910.147, “The Control of Hazardous Energy Sources (lockout/tagout).“ Again in 1992, the ANSI standard was reaffirmed without change. During 1997, the committee was recons
17、tituted and voted to revise the existing 1982 standard after over 20 years without change. Consequential meetings began in 1998 and the revision process began with writing task groups being formed and continued through 2003. The American Society of Safety Engineers became the secretariat of the Z244
18、 Lockout/Tagout committee in 2003. The title of the standard was modified to recognize the broader universe of hazardous energy control. The standard more effectively addressed the need for greater flexibility through the use of alternative methods based on risk assessment and application of the haz
19、ard control hierarchy. In addition, the standard emphasized managements responsibility for protection of personnel against the release of hazardous energy. The standard was processed and approved for submittal to ANSI by the Accredited Standards Committee (Z244) on Control of Hazardous Energy, Locko
20、ut/Tagout and Alternative Methods. The standard was approved by ANSI on July 29, 2003 with a publication date of April 14, 2004. The Z244 committee and ANSI reaffirmed the standard without technical change in 2008 and again in 2014 with the stipulation that the ASC (Z244) committee begin meeting to
21、revise the Z244 standard since no changes had been made since 2003. The ASC (Z244) committee agreed and began the revision process in July 2014. Need for a Standard A wealth of casualty data exists in the private, public and governmental sectors related to the unexpected release of hazardous energy.
22、 In fact, the issue is of global concern since all of the major industrialized countries of the world are actively addressing the problem in various ways. The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration provided persuasive injury data in its justification for a lockout/tagout standard for gen
23、eral industry in 1989. In spite of substantial efforts by employers, unions, trade associations and government during the past 50 years, the annual toll of injury and death related to hazardous energy release incidents remains unacceptable. We now know that all forms of energy must be addressed; tha
24、t operational personnel are injured as often as maintenance workers; that often thermal and gravitational forces and trapped materials under pressure are overlooked; that complex equipment and processes frequently demand unique approaches to energy isolation or control; and that employers need to co
25、mmit resources and substantial effort in planning, training, procedure development and infrastructure before lockout/tagout application ever occurs. The rapid growth of technology continues to require different methods and techniques for safeguarding workers from the unexpected release of hazardous
26、energy. Each business sector is actively changing the way traditional work is done, which then requires employers to develop new equally effective responses for hazardous energy control. Protective standards need to be improved continually to provide guidance for current conditions as well as evolvi
27、ng technical developments. Advanced control systems provide new opportunities for addressing energy control where conventional lockout is not feasible, where energy is required to perform a task, where repetitive cycling of an energy-isolating device increases risk, and where energy is required to m
28、aintain equipment in a safe state, etc. Standard Perspective The content of this standard was approached from a business and industry perspective. However, the principles, methods and guidance are applicable to a variety of other settings and circumstances where unexpected release of hazardous energ
29、y can occur. The procedures, techniques, methods and design guidance contained in this standard are recommended for use by all those whose activities fall within its scope and purpose. The standard recognizes that zero risk is only a theoretical possibility, but is not an operative reality - zero ri
30、sk does not exist. The concept of feasible risk reduction to achieve acceptable or tolerable risk is emphasized whether using conventional lockout, tagout or alternative methods. With regard to hazardous energy control the term “safe” suggests the absence of risk. More accurately, “safe” should be v
31、iewed as the acceptability of risk to those who may be exposed. There are numerous terms that reflect the circumstances under which servicing and maintenance is done routinely today. Terms such as AFARP (as far as reasonably practical), ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable), or ALARP (as low as re
32、asonably practicable) convey a more realistic approach to risk reduction and in particular the use of alternative methods. The standards committee and the secretariat have made a concerted effort to produce a standard that represents the best practice regarding the control of hazardous energy. All c
33、ircumstances or situations where personnel are exposed to unexpected energy release may not have been anticipated and adequately addressed with respect to the standards content. New developments are to be expected, and revisions of the standard will be necessary as the state of the art progresses an
34、d further experience is gained. However, uniform requirements are needed and the standard in its present form provides performance requirements that are necessary when developing and implementing a system for protecting personnel from unexpected hazardous energy. Current Status The committee held it
35、s first meeting in July 2014 for purposes of revision of the Z244 standard with an expanded membership. Several meetings were held to update the standard to include current best practices and technology learned over the past 40 years of controlling hazardous energy. Interest in participating on the
36、Z244.1 revision committee was high and from diverse industries, reflecting the impacts that lockout/tagout has on companies. With the increased use of risk assessment and advancing technologies, there are now conflicting views on the requirements for how and when to control hazardous energy. The cur
37、rent requirements for the control of hazardous energy appear in 29 CFR 1910.147 under OSHA, and in this American National Standard ANSI/ASSE Z244.1. A thorough discussion of the similarities and differences between OSHA 29 CFR 1910.147 and the ANSI/ASSE Z244.1 standard can be found in other document
38、s (see Bibliography). ANSI procedures require that a standard be revised or reapproved every five years or the standard is subject to being withdrawn after a complete ten-year cycle following approval. As technology advances, better alternative methods can be developed to keep employees from harm. I
39、f the static standard is followed, the employees may be exposed to greater risks than if more current standards or technology is used as alternative methods of protection. There is no disagreement on the basic principle that workers should be protected from the unexpected startup or release of hazar
40、dous energy. There continues to be disagreements over how, when and which requirements apply. The committee concentrated on how to control hazardous energy using methods based on current knowledge. The committee discussions focused on what was the right thing to do given current technology and indus
41、try best practices to protect workers from harm due to the unexpected release of hazardous energy. This revised standard presents distinct requirements for controlling hazardous energy through three different approaches: lockout (the primary approach), tagout and alternative methods. Alternative met
42、hods and risk assessment have received additional attention to emphasize their importance in the energy control process. The revision better clarifies the necessary elements for a policy, program and procedures for controlling hazardous energy. The intent of the committee has been to write a standar
43、d that enables readers to effectively control hazardous energy based on current knowledge. The Service and Maintenance Construct With the 2016 revision, the committee has rejected the normal production operations versus service and maintenance construct as an artificial distinction without real worl
44、d application. More specifically, the committee realized that work gets done based upon the tasks to be performed without regard to a characterization of whether the task is normal production operations, service or maintenance. Hazards associated with the unexpected release of hazardous energy need
45、to be addressed regardless of any labels or characterization attached to it. Alternative Methods The committee developed updated requirements for alternative methods for hazardous energy control. New requirements were written and new guidance was provided to assist readers to determine when lockout
46、is required and when an alternative method may be used. Text was also developed that describes the parameters for what constitutes an acceptable alternative method. The committee believes the new ANSI/ASSE Z244.1-2016 provides greater clarity and direction to companies seeking to control the release
47、 of hazardous energy. In particular, better guidance is provided for if, when and how alternative methods may be used to provide effective protection. These improvements should enable companies to use modern technology and innovative solutions to improve the safety and productivity of operations in
48、the workplace. Standard Guidance Conformance language in the standard consists of the words “shall” and “should.” In this standard the word “shall” is intended to be prescriptive, specifying mandatory requirements for compliance with the standard. The word “should” specifies non-mandatory recommenda
49、tions and good practices that have been found to be helpful. “May” is used to indicate that something is permitted, while “can” is used to indicate that something is possible or as a statement of fact. The notation forward slash (/) is intended to mean and/or when used in the standard. It indicates that two words or expressions are to be taken together or individually. Normative Requirements This standard uses the single column format common to many international standards. The normative requirements appear aligned to the left margin. To meet the requirements of this standa
