Closed Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 31 to 34 of 34

Thread: Clearance above a light switch

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    23,770
    I see it differently. Outside of a main panel there is very little that needs to be energized while working on it.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NE Nebraska
    Posts
    12,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Strathead View Post
    Regretfully the code uses the cryptic "likely to require" leaving everything up to interpretation. I, still contend that a voltage test is not an examination, otherwise it would have been a reasonable expectation that the authors would have stated testing in the list of items requiring clearance. Of course the other option is that they left it vague so that there was a way to point fingers whenever an incident occurred.
    I agree that leaves everything up to interpretation.

    I also believe that any equipment is likely to require some work done to it at some time - but it does not necessarily need to be done while energized.

    Why isn't voltage testing included somewhere in "examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance", which is the wording used?
    Last edited by kwired; 05-07-12 at 07:36 AM.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    16,241
    Quote Originally Posted by Dennis Alwon View Post
    I see it differently. Outside of a main panel there is very little that needs to be energized while working on it.
    The issue is not "need." The issue is "likely." Some heavy handed lead maintenance person may very well pressure one of the junior employees to perform live work under the philisophy that the company cannot afford the down time associated with turning power off. Is that likely? Well, that is the key question.
    Charles E. Beck, P.E., Seattle
    Comments based on 2008 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NE Nebraska
    Posts
    12,423
    Quote Originally Posted by charlie b View Post
    The issue is not "need." The issue is "likely." Some heavy handed lead maintenance person may very well pressure one of the junior employees to perform live work under the philisophy that the company cannot afford the down time associated with turning power off. Is that likely? Well, that is the key question.
    Actually it is the production managers that don't think the company can afford down time.

Closed Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts