Leather protectors should always be worn with rubber insulating gloves. ASTM F696 provides the specification for the manufacture of Leather Protectors. Leather protectors are sized to be worn on the same size rubber insulating glove so if you wear a size 10 rubber insulating glove you should order a size 10 leather protector.
Our Hard Hats meet either the ANSI Z89.1 or CSA Z94.1 Standard (Canadian Caps only) along with meeting the Edison Electrical Institute:
- Class E Tested to 20,000 volts
- Class G Tested to 2,200 volts
- Class C No electrical protection
Oberon’s hard caps are tested to the ANSI Z89.1—2009 which tests head protection from 0 degrees F to 120 degrees F.
NFPA 70E has not been adopted by OSHA as a regulation. NFPA 70E is generally referenced, in the event of an incident, under the General Duty Clause since it is an industry recognized best practice standard.
The NFPA 70E Standard requires workers wear hearing protection any time an arc flash incident is likely to occur. This requirement is the same for either arc flash PPE selection method; incident energy analysis or arc flash PPE categories. The Standard states hearing protection required and points to ear canal inserts. Other types of hearing protection are permitted to be used in lieu of or in addition to ear canal inserts provided they are worn under an arc-rated arc flash suit hood.Oberon conducted Acoustical testing on its products in February of 2004. The results indicate that an arc-rated hood can significantly attenuate the sound hazard, but since the sound level for an arc flash event is so high, the worker using an arc-rated hood still needs to use hearing protection. The arc-rated hood, tested under ASTM 2178, would not allow enough energy to be transmitted through the hood to ignite or melt ear canal inserts or earmuff type hearing protective devices.
There are some companies in the market that promote “arc flash protective safety spectacles”. Even if the spectacles were manufactured with a material that absorbed the thermal energy of an Arc Flash incident (like Oberon’s arc flash face shields and hood windows) the limited surface area of the user’s face that a spectacle would cover would make the product ineffective at best! Much of the users face would be severely injured/burned by the thermal energy of the arc flash. Further, there would be limited protection to the face against injury from shrapnel created by the arc by a simple spectacle. It is important to note that the standards do not recognize the use of safety spectacles or “arc flash” goggles as suitable/ recognized arc flash protection.NFPA 70E references the use of ANSI Z87.1 safety spectacles under a face shield or hood because the ANSI Z87.1 Standard (Practice for Occupational and Educational Eye & Face Protection) obligates the user to wear a safety spectacle or safety goggles under a face shield or hood window. Ultimately, a face shield is considered to be a secondary eye protective devise even though it covers your eyes and your face you still need to wear a primary eye protective device under the face shield such as a safety spectacle or cover goggle. Many users may be tempted to wear a face shield without safety spectacles beneath because it may not seem to make sense, but that is in the standard and that is what OSHA is looking for. NFPA 70E is not referencing any specific safety spectacle, nor one with any enhanced thermal protection. It is only calling for a safety spectacle (a simple clear lens safety spectacle such as Oberon T788-30).It is important to note that one should be cautioned against wearing metal framed spectacles, either safety or prescription. If the spectacles were to fall from your face, into an energized system, the metal could initiate the arcing fault, which could cause an arc flash.If the user or his employer have conducted an incident energy analysis and determined the level of suitable arc flash protection for the task to be performed, the standard is not calling for the use of a safety spectacle with enhanced protection. They simply want a safety spectacle per ANSI Z87.1. The face shield or hood window is providing the protection against the thermal incident energy.Legal:Always conduct a task based risk assessment procedure to determine the proper PPE. The statements made here are for informational purposes only. This and Oberon’s marketing material does not recommend specific solutions for specific tasks but provides recommendations based upon its customer’s input. This and Oberon’s marketing material are in no way a substitution for the actual safety standards referenced or implied. Please refer to the actual standards or consult your supervisor, safety officer or human resources with any questions you have regarding the standards or the proper personal protective equipment (PPE) for your task.
According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.137(c)(2)(viii), all electrical gloves must be tested periodically and prior to being placed into service. All glove manufacturers incorporate some form of production code or date coding to indicate the date of initial testing. Rubber insulating gloves must be tested before first issue and every six months thereafter or upon indication that the insulating value is suspect; after repair; and after use without protectors. Also, if the insulating equipment has been electrically tested but not issued for service, the insulating equipment may not be placed into service unless it has been electrically tested within the previous 12 months. For additional information on in-service care of electrical gloves reference ASTM F496-14a. These testing requirements can sometimes be a little confusing to interpret. Here's an example: You're considering using your electrical gloves for the first time on January 1, 2017, and notice the date stamp is November 1, 2016. Would you need to get the gloves retested before use? No, because you will be putting the gloves into service within the allowable 12 month window.
This is highly unlikely. Workers need the fresh air provided by an Oberon hood ventilation system to properly function during a work task execution. The risk of heat stress causing disorientation and dizziness is far more severe than the likelihood of the fan unit pulling in toxic fumes from an arc flash. Oberon has tested its hood ventilation system and made no observations of the fan causing any increased harm to the worker. When the fan unit is directly exposed to an arc flash incident the motor was rendered inoperable.
Oberon promotes the use of LED headlamps on all arc flash faceshields and suit hoods to enhance the workers ability to properly see the work task. Oberon has performed limited testing of the products we support. The arc flash exposures were relevant to the protection provided by the arc flash PPE. During testing none of the LED lamps exploded and we observed no signs of concern regarding melting, dripping or continued ignition/after flame.