Currently in the process of writing LOTO procedures in our plant.  One area that has generated a lot of talk is the bandsaw.  Employees need to frequently change bandsaw blades. Employees feel they shouldn't have to lock out a bandsaw to make a blade change.  I'm struggling with it because every saw is different and some have more interlocks on them than they have teeth on the blades.  I know you can't relay on interlocks for LOTO.  Any thoughts on this subject would be good.  I would love to know if others are requiring lockouts for blade changes.  The bandsaws I'm dealing with are as big as they get. 

They need to be locked out.  If you can come up with alternative measures that provide protection equal to that of lockout, you could get around the lockout. As you note, the interlocks alone are not sufficient for that. They can be a component if you have a program to test and verify interlocks to make sure they are operating. Other possible components are posting a guard at the controls, pulling a breaker, etc. Make sure you are comfortable that the equipment cannot be energized during the blade change.

It takes several layers of lesser protection to equal lock out, and by the time you do all that, you might as well lock it out.

Just to clarify, I'm thinking about the exception under 1910.147(a)(2)(iii)(a):

"Work on cord and plug connected electric equipment for which exposure to the hazards of unexpected energization or start up of the equipment is controlled by the unplugging of the equipment from the energy source and by the plug being under the exclusive control of the employee performing the servicing or maintenance."

If the band saw is hard-wired (as opposed to a standard electrical plug and outlet), then lockout is required IMO.

I'm with the original response - it definately needs to be "locked out" but consider this.  If the band saw meets the requirements of the excerpt below, then their may be an easier alternative that still meets the requirements.  For example: if the band saw can be unplugged from the wall and that completely isolates all of the hazardous energy, the person replacing the blade could simply put the plug in his pocket instead of applying a lock.  This satisfies the requirement that he maintain exclusive control of the isolation and isn't quite the hassle of applying a locking device.

Also, you dont' have to write specific procedures for this machine provided that it meets these requirements:

1910.147(c)(4)(i)

Procedures shall be developed, documented and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees are engaged in the activities covered by this section.

Note: Exception: The employer need not document the required procedure for a particular machine or equipment, when all of the following elements exist: (1) The machine or equipment has no potential for stored or residual energy or reaccumulation of stored energy after shut down which could endanger employees; (2) the machine or equipment has a single energy source which can be readily identified and isolated; (3) the isolation and locking out of that energy source will completely deenergize and deactivate the machine or equipment; (4) the machine or equipment is isolated from that energy source and locked out during servicing or maintenance; (5) a single lockout device will achieve a locker-out condition; (6) the lockout device is under the exclusive control of the authorized employee performing the servicing or maintenance; (7) the servicing or maintenance does not create hazards for other employees; and (8) the employer, in utilizing this exception, has had no accidents involving the unexpected activation or reenergization of the machine or equipment during servicing or maintenance.

Hope I'm not too late!

They might seem pricey, but it's cheaper than a fine from OSHA.

safetyhawk...

I've learned that OSHA likes to look at the most extreme cases when their compliance officers are feeling like total a-wipes.  "Yeah... the plug is in his pocket and inaccessible.  But what if someone were to walk by and pull the plug out of his pocket?  What if the person were to take the saw away from him?  What if they got in a fight over it and someone lost a tooth?  Recordable!  All that could have been prevented, but now we're slapping you with a fine for improper LO/TO."

 See where I'm going with that?  I know it may sound ridiculous, but you have to look at the worst case scenario to do a total CYA.

-Justin

SPDSKTR:

Hope I'm not too late!

They might seem pricey, but it's cheaper than a fine from OSHA.

safetyhawk...

I've learned that OSHA likes to look at the most extreme cases when their compliance officers are feeling like total a-wipes.  "Yeah... the plug is in his pocket and inaccessible.  But what if someone were to walk by and pull the plug out of his pocket?  What if the person were to take the saw away from him?  What if they got in a fight over it and someone lost a tooth?  Recordable!  All that could have been prevented, but now we're slapping you with a fine for improper LO/TO."

 See where I'm going with that?  I know it may sound ridiculous, but you have to look at the worst case scenario to do a total CYA.

-Justin

He is 100% right. Just buy plug covers with a hasp and put your lock on. Problem solved. Took me longer to type this than to LO the cord.