Disable your ad blocker to enjoy the full interactive features of this document.
Explains
Protecting against arc flash: Encouraging the use of PPE
The risk of injury from arc flash is drastically reduced when personal protective clothing is worn properly. Our report with Alsico examines how to encourage long-term use of PPE.
Protecting against arc flash: Encouraging the use of PPE
The risk of injury from arc flash is drastically reduced when personal protective clothing is worn properly. Our report examines how to encourage long-term use of PPE.
It happens in milliseconds.
Two engineers, working at height above an energised switchboard.
One engineer fumbles and drops a screwdriver, which falls onto the equipment below, hitting a live terminal.
In a split second, there is a bright flash, a loud bang, and fireball.
That’s an arc flash – a sudden explosive release of electrical energy caused by electricity jumping through the air (in an arc, hence the name) between conductors.
The release of energy is so quick and powerful that the electrical arc generates heat hotter than the surface of the Sun, producing a bright light and vaporising metal, turning it into hot plasma.
In this case the engineers are protected by the PPE they are wearing and escape largely unscathed.
But not everyone is as fortunate.
Business fined after worker is seriously injured
Injuries from arc flash are not always reported, but they do happen. Late in 2025, a wind farm services company was fined £80,000 following a worker being seriously injured by an electrical flashover (another term for arc flash).
The company involved sent the then 38-year-old to carry out maintenance work in an electrical substation near Inverness in the summer of 2020.
His injuries from arc flash resulted in him sustained life-changing injuries that have required multiple surgeries.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the incident happened following a departure from the prepared switching programme.
This meant work was allowed to be carried out on one of the two electrical cabinets while the other remained live, allowing part of the electrical system to be energised during the maintenance work.
The HSE investigation found that had the initial switching programme prepared been correctly followed, the incident would not have occurred. The company involved pleaded guilty to breaching Sections 3(1) and Section 33(1)(a) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.
Speaking after the hearing, an HSE spokesperson said: “This was a wholly avoidable incident caused by the failure of the company to implement a safe system of work.”
It happens in milliseconds.
Two engineers, working at height above an energised switchboard.
One engineer fumbles and drops a screwdriver, which falls onto the equipment below, hitting a live terminal.
In a split second, there is a bright flash, a loud bang, and fireball.
That’s an arc flash – a sudden explosive release of electrical energy caused by electricity jumping through the air (in an arc, hence the name) between conductors.
The release of energy is so quick and powerful that the electrical arc generates heat hotter than the surface of the Sun, producing a bright light and vaporising metal, turning it into hot plasma.
In this case the engineers are protected by the PPE they are wearing and escape largely unscathed.
But not everyone is as fortunate.
Business fined after worker is seriously injured
Injuries from arc flash are not always reported, but they do happen. Late in 2025, a wind farm services company was fined £80,000 following a worker being seriously injured by an electrical flashover (another term for arc flash).
The company involved sent the then 38-year-old to carry out maintenance work in an electrical substation near Inverness in the summer of 2020.
His injuries from arc flash resulted in him sustained life-changing injuries that have required multiple surgeries.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the incident happened following a departure from the prepared switching programme.
This meant work was allowed to be carried out on one of the two electrical cabinets while the other remained live, allowing part of the electrical system to be energised during the maintenance work.
The HSE investigation found that had the initial switching programme prepared been correctly followed, the incident would not have occurred. The company involved pleaded guilty to breaching Sections 3(1) and Section 33(1)(a) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.
