Shouldn't a fire marshall....

Reply

  #1  
Old 01-13-09, 03:30 PM
nightowlpunk's Avatar
Banned. Rule And/Or Policy Violation
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Connectitax
Posts: 456
Shouldn't a fire marshall....

Shouldn't a fire marshall be more concerned about aerosol cans than latex paint? The theater I clean has its annual fire marshall inspection tomorrow morning. For some reason, he has no issue of aerosol cans which are extremely flammable but latex paint which might melt instead of explode is not allowed in the building. This same guy has issues about boxes along the wall of a 6 foot wide hallway in a projection booth when at most there are maybe 5 people in the projection booth at any one time. This isn't meant to be a complaint just a HUHism.
 
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 01-13-09, 04:08 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Shenandoah Valley VA
Posts: 6
The stories I could tell you...

In many cases you are dealing with an individual with little or no practical experience, who is regulating your business environment from a three ring binder. You are at their mercy and they have the power to make your life very difficult, and they know this. At best you can request a different inspector, but this can backfire on you in many different ways.

Just nod your head, make a note, fix it to their specs for a re-inspection, and hope you get a different cat next time.

Generally if you are making an effort to maintain a safe environment reasonable inspectors will acknowledge your efforts. They are restricted to enforcement of code. Their own understanding of that code in all situations, under all likely conditions is limited by intelligence and experience as well as their comprehension of their own limitations.
 
  #3  
Old 01-13-09, 04:22 PM
Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Jersey
Posts: 526
He's just being prudent and following written policy that he MUST follow through with...........not common sense.

Common sense and written policy don't ever mix well.

As I grow older I am learning that things just "are" and not to try to find the practical reasoning behind everything.

My motto: "It is what it is"........that doesn't mean have to conform to b.s.........just pick my battles wisley......I guess some would call that wisdom.
 
  #4  
Old 01-14-09, 10:15 AM
nightowlpunk's Avatar
Banned. Rule And/Or Policy Violation
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Connectitax
Posts: 456
I'm very surprised the fire marshall showed up since he is notorious for canceling at the last second. The building didn't pass but it was only a couple minor things that had nothing to do with my job.
 
  #5  
Old 01-15-09, 06:16 AM
the_tow_guy's Avatar
Group Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: SW Fla USA
Posts: 11,571
Fire inspections can be pretty interesting. In my uniformed service days (aircraft maintenance) the hangar got an inspection monthly and we were always at odds with the inspector for one thing or another. One of the big items was fire escape doors that were secured in a manner not to his liking. I happened to be in the Avionics section one time (restricted area) talking to my counterpart when the inspector came by. We were standing next to one of the designated escape doors that was bolted from the inside and the inspector reached over and unbolted it while scolding the Avionics Chief that it had to remain unbolted. The Avionics Chief put the bolt back in place and flatly told the inspector (I'm paraphrasing somewhat to keep it clean), "I've got COMSEC [communications security] gear in here, everything else is secondary". The inspector frowned and walked off.
 
  #6  
Old 01-16-09, 05:27 PM
HotxxxxxxxOKC's Avatar
Banned. Rule And/Or Policy Violation
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 8,044
John, you were avionics, eh? I was a tank rat (fuels).

I won't comment on the inspections, since that is the job I do on a daily basis now.....(Occupational Safety & Health).

Workers run when they see me coming...
 
  #7  
Old 01-16-09, 05:42 PM
chandler's Avatar
Banned. Rule And/Or Policy Violation
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 39,968
Like the old sign says: "If you think OSHA is a small town in Wisconsin, you're in trouble".
 
  #8  
Old 01-17-09, 05:36 AM
the_tow_guy's Avatar
Group Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: SW Fla USA
Posts: 11,571
I was Power Plants/Fuel Systems earlier in life; I've been inside my share of fuel cells. This was after ascending to the Maintenance Chief job ("Superintendant" in the AF?). The Avionics Chief was subordinate to me in administrative, personnel, and logistics matters.

In between turning wrenches and being the Top Dog I was in Quality Assurance for about 6 years which included the safety program for the Maintenance Department. I can relate to people running the other way when they see you coming.

Osha, Wisconsin? That's right down the road from Kenosha, right? On Lake Michigan?
 
  #9  
Old 01-17-09, 02:32 PM
nightowlpunk's Avatar
Banned. Rule And/Or Policy Violation
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Connectitax
Posts: 456
The funny thing is that he didn't say anything about the 5 gallon pail of FRP (fiberglass reinforcement paneling i think)adhesive which says highly flammable in huge letters on the bucket which was in the janitor closet. I have heard that siccing OSHA on a former employer is one of the worst things you can do them since the reports are anonymous.
 
  #10  
Old 01-17-09, 05:36 PM
ray2047's Avatar
Group Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 32,989
Back in the early 80's an OSHA inspector came by to inspect the company I was working for. In the employee lounge was a refrigerator (household) some employees had scrounged up. Best guess from the top curve manufactured before 1950. Company was cited for having an ungrounded piece of equipment.

Navy inspections during the Viet Nam era could be even more interesting because I was on support ships that started out as merchant ships before WWII. A lot of the equipment if listed at all in Navy repairs manual were simply listed as obsolete, no longer used on ships.

Now imagine a civilian inspector trained on modern Navy ships doing an inspection. I remember one time during an engine room inspection he reached over to trip the main generator. The Chief intervened but the inspector shook him off saying he wanted to see how quick we could shift to the generators in the aft engine room. The Chief hastily informed him there were no generators in the aft engine room.

We did have a diesel backup generator but that was a bit of a catch 22. The generator was air started and the air compressor was electric. If you were lucky it would start first try on the air in the compressors tank if you weren't and at sea you'd be floating cold iron with no electric to restart the ship.

This fact created an impromptu response from the sinipes any time the lights started flickering. A-DIV would rush to start the diesel generator. bforre the load was dropped while there was still electric. M-Div and B-Div would rush below to help keep the load on line. This was really a silent response. No horn no 1MC announcement. Boatswain Mates and other non snipe crew were use to the mad dash and ignored it.

It could be funny though the first time it was observed by newbies. I remember one time it was evening mess, we'd been at sea only a day or two, there were several new crew members on the mess deck. The flickering of the lights was subtle but for us snipes obvious. Suddenly people were jumping up throwing their trays at the scullery or just dropping them and running out, seemingly for no reason. Meanwhile others were just calmly continuing to eat their meals. The expressions on the new peoples faces was priceless.

Oh and a tid bit for you electricians. The first ship I was on (not the one above) was so old the main generators were DC. Because they need 120v AC and maybe 240VAC they had added AC generators run by DC motors.
 

Last edited by ray2047; 01-17-09 at 05:57 PM.
  #11  
Old 01-17-09, 06:58 PM
chandler's Avatar
Banned. Rule And/Or Policy Violation
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 39,968
In the early 70's I worked for a trucking company and had over 50 loading door areas for trucks to back into. OSHA rules at that time stated any vertical distance over 3' from the edge of the dock to the ground must be gated. You can imagine the cost and inconvenience of doing such a thing, especially since we had been using the dock for 40 years without an incident. Soooo, we poured a 1' x 1' berm against the wall all the way around the dock, bringing the vertical distance to 32". Didn't bother the trailers since the wheels were further forward. Boy, they got really mad at us!
 
  #12  
Old 01-17-09, 07:56 PM
HotxxxxxxxOKC's Avatar
Banned. Rule And/Or Policy Violation
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 8,044
It can be tricky citing contractors.

Chandler,

I'm pretty sure there is an exemption about loading dock areas, but without my books, it's hard to say. Here is the general requirement for fall protection:

1926.501(b)(1)

"Unprotected sides and edges." Each employee on a walking/working surface (horizontal and vertical surface) with an unprotected side or edge which is 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above a lower level shall be protected from falling by the use of guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems.
 
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes