Do you really have to be a QW ?

[jimbo123]

This is a question on electrical safety . What requirements are there for replacing batteries and bulbs in e- lights or bulbs in exits signs? Company said that they don't want untrained people to do that task and not to turn power off that they want qw to do that task and to do it without turning off power. Will energize permit be required?
Told them the requirements for the permit but doesnot matter to them. I say train the worker for the task. Any other ideas. Some small task has gotten out of hand.

 

[pfalcon]

Cost vs Risk conflict.

Changing a battery is to most people a mundane, risk-free task. To them voltage and current levels are not relevant. Batteries are considered safe. Remind them that you're concerned not about the battery but the contacts that charge the battery. Have them take a page from the NEC for retail store lighting: Have a local disconnect appliance at each location (410.130.G.1).

The push for a QW performing a battery change live is usually because turning the power off disables huge areas. Hence 410.130.G.1 provides a solution that would allow minimal training to qualify a worker to change the battery and to do it without power.

 

[jim dungar]

Are you using the term QW to mean some one equal to a licensed electrician?

In the world of NFPA70E and the NEC, a QW is any person trained in the risks of a specific task. So as soon as you take a high school kid and instruct them fully in the dangers and PPE requirements for changing batteries and light bulbs, they become a QW for these tasks. If you use a journeyman electrician with 40years of experience, that has not been trained in the dangers of replacing batteries, you have an unqualified worker.

 

[jimbo123]

QW= is one who has been trained in electrical safety only we do have QW who are electricians
Anyone believe these tasks require a energised permit? They cannot be shut off independly and they don't want any power to be turned off.

 

[pfalcon]

QW= is one who has been trained in electrical safety only we do have QW who are electricians
Anyone believe these tasks require a energised permit? They cannot be shut off independly and they don't want any power to be turned off.

Determine the voltage, amperage, and exposure available at the battery contact points. Without that information then NO, no one can form a valid opinion.

 

[jimbo123]

I Don't think it has anything to do with power at the batteries it is more about the worker being exposed to ac for the fixtures 120 or 277 either on terminals or maybe spliced inside.

 

[zog]

Even Zog the safety nazi thinks this is overkill.

Training: Wear rubber gloves and don't touch the 277V terminals
EEWP: Not required for <50V, could be required depending on how the lights are configured but even if it applies just issue a standing permit.

 

[pfalcon]

I Don't think it has anything to do with power at the batteries it is more about the worker being exposed to ac for the fixtures 120 or 277 either on terminals or maybe spliced inside.

Are you suggesting they bought a system with a replaceable battery that doesn't isolate the power system from the battery compartment? Shameful.

 

[jimbo123]

Bird, I am not suggesting anything , just trying to explain the situation and the companys stand on this. I am talking about a 277v power supply to a 6volt twin head emergency light or a exit sign.
Just trying to get differrent opinuns about job task and why they think the task is dangerous to the average worker replacing batteries or bulb.

Thanks to all help with this.

 

[tom baker]

When the cover is removed to replace the battery - are not the 277 V supply wires exposed inside the unit? Isn't this working hot?
I don't know, just asking.

 

[pfalcon]

Even Zog the safety nazi thinks this is overkill.

Training: Wear rubber gloves and don't touch the 277V terminals
EEWP: Not required for <50V, could be required depending on how the lights are configured but even if it applies just issue a standing permit.

Do this.

Bird, I am not suggesting anything , just trying to explain the situation and the companys stand on this. I am talking about a 277v power supply to a 6volt twin head emergency light or a exit sign.
Just trying to get differrent opinuns about job task and why they think the task is dangerous to the average worker replacing batteries or bulb.

Thanks to all help with this.

It's rare that contacts are not exposed when changing a battery. An unqualified employee might decide to pop the battery free using a nice screwdriver made of tool steel. If the terminals are 277V then that might have bad results. Since yours are 6V then probably only possible equipment damage rather than personal hazard. Remember that "qualified" does not mean electrician. Qualifying the employee to change the battery might be a janitor trained to use PPE gloves, be able to identify the hazards (contacts), examine for damage (eyeball it), and get the battery installed in the right direction.

When the cover is removed to replace the battery - are not the 277 V supply wires exposed inside the unit? Isn't this working hot?
I don't know, just asking.

Some terminals will be exposed: Those that connect to the battery. In this case they'll be 6V (per OP), probably DC, and some amperage. If the manufacturer is stupid then opening the battery compartment exposes the power circuits. If the manufacturer is sane then only the 6V contacts are exposed and probably only need rated gloves for the exchange if that.

Equipment under 50V is not normally considered to be an arc-flash hazard. Therefore the energized work permit may not apply. But yes, strictly speaking it's working hot just not hazardous.

 

[jimbo123]

Thanks to all for the great responses to my questions, very helpfull/