Controlling Hazardous Energy with Lockout/Tagout—Common Challenges and Best Practices

Controlling-Hazardous-Energy

We have found that only about 10 percent of companies run effective lockout programs. In fact, we have observed that up to three-out-of-ten employers have no lockout program at all.

Workers began to specialize in operating and maintaining machinery in the Industrial Revolution. And quickly, consequences occurred: Those workers were increasingly injured or killed while servicing this equipment. This spurred improvement in the design of machinery to shield people from the dangerous work they performed.

The early efforts of the National Safety Council and similar organizations to raise awareness of the importance of machine guarding reduced the rate of accidents that were suffered while machinery was operating. But when these machine guards were removed to repair or service that equipment, a disturbingly high number of incidents continued to take place as equipment suddenly started up or released dangerous flows of energy, taking operators and other personnel by surprise. The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) began looking at these causes of injuries and fatalities in the 1970s and published its first guidance on controlling hazardous energy with the practice of lockout or tagout in 1982. The ANSI Z244.1 lockout standard became the inspiration for the OSHA regulation of 1989 requiring employers to put procedures in place to protect their workers by fully isolating machinery from the energy sources that drive them.

Despite the requirements of OSHA 29 CFR 1910.147 and other related federal and state regulations, incidents continue to occur at a pace that makes violations of the lockout/tagout requirements perennially one of OSHA’s most frequently cited regulations, as well as one of the costliest.

What Makes Lockout Compliance So Difficult?

Twenty-eight years after the OSHA lockout regulation went into effect, the law remains one of the most challenging for employers to successfully facilitate in their workplaces. From our years of field experience at facilities in many industries, we at The Master Lock Company have found that only about 10 percent of companies run effective lockout programs – defined as meeting or exceeding compliance requirements with lockout being practiced routinely each time it is indicated by the hazards of the tasks being performed. In fact, we have observed that up to three-out-of-ten employers have no lockout program at all.

Purchase NASP’s Certified Safety Manager Course

Related Posts

When Invisible Danger Strikes: The Perils of Hydrogen Sulfide in Confined Spaces

When Invisible Danger Strikes: The Perils of Hydrogen Sulfide in Confined Spaces

09.11.2025 Current Events
The Trinity County Tragedy On August 27, 2025, three workers in Trinity County, Texas, lost their lives while responding to…
Read More
Rethinking the Safety Triangle: From Heinrich and Bird to a New Era

Rethinking the Safety Triangle: From Heinrich and Bird to a New Era

09.11.2025 Editorial
“The Bird Triangle was wrong, but it changed safety forever.” For nearly a century, the Heinrich/Bird Safety Triangle has been…
Read More
Expanding the Scope of Safety: NASP Services You Might Not Know About

Expanding the Scope of Safety: NASP Services You Might Not Know About

09.11.2025 Safety Culture
At the National Association of Safety Professionals (NASP), our mission has always been to provide safety professionals with the tools…
Read More
cta1-img

See our available Live and online cOURSES