Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: PPR Requirements for Testing Electrically Safe Work Condition

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Tallahassee
    Posts
    4

    PPR Requirements for Testing Electrically Safe Work Condition

    Every NFPA 70E class I've attended stressed that you have to assume all equipment is energized, and therefore where PPE until you've verified the voltage is off. Using my old 2009 70E I can't find where it says this. I'm mainly looking in 120.1. Can anyone give me give me a reference? I'm sure it's there somewhere. Thanks..

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    877
    Do you mean:

    120.1.5?

    Policies usually require you to wear your PPE as determined by the arc-flash label until you have verified 0 voltage.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland, ME
    Posts
    1,190
    I don't think 70E does explicitely state what you're looking for.

    But 130.2 says that parts shall be put in an electrically safe condition before working on or otherwise interacting with them.

    The action of "working on" includes the voltage check needed in 120.1 to verify a safe condition, so you would need PPE until you demonstrate you don't.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    9,781
    Quote Originally Posted by LPS View Post
    Every NFPA 70E class I've attended stressed that you have to assume all equipment is energized, and therefore where PPE until you've verified the voltage is off. Using my old 2009 70E I can't find where it says this. I'm mainly looking in 120.1. Can anyone give me give me a reference? I'm sure it's there somewhere. Thanks..
    Please stop using a six year old standard. There have been major changes in NFPA70E since 2009. In particular, the em[hasis for performing a risk analysis (how likely the event is) in addition to the hazard analysis (how bad things can get).
    Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Tallahassee
    Posts
    4
    Yea, I know.... I really need to be retrained. Thanks for your response.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Tallahassee
    Posts
    4
    When is Mike Holt going to do a full blown course on NFPA70E? I don't get around much, but so far I've never heard anyone have a frank discussion on this subject. I'd love for him to put together a panel of safety experts, electricians, and engineers, and thoroughly cover this subject in a video. Most trainings I attend are too short, and nobody asks any questions because they know they're going to ignore most of the things they just heard. I think he'd do a great job.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NE Nebraska
    Posts
    32,925
    Quote Originally Posted by LPS View Post
    When is Mike Holt going to do a full blown course on NFPA70E? I don't get around much, but so far I've never heard anyone have a frank discussion on this subject. I'd love for him to put together a panel of safety experts, electricians, and engineers, and thoroughly cover this subject in a video. Most trainings I attend are too short, and nobody asks any questions because they know they're going to ignore most of the things they just heard. I think he'd do a great job.
    Just because one is an expert on NFPA 70 (installation requirements) doesn't mean they are an expert on work place safety. In fact 70E doesn't necessarily come into play all that much on new installations unless you are energizing things before the construction is completed. You still have other workplace safety practices to follow that go beyond electrical hazards as well and those can vary from one place to another depending on what hazards are present.

    Then there is the fact that 70E isn't exactly the law in many places like NEC is. OSHA requires an employer to have a safety policy, but doesn't specifically state you must use 70E. But many use it because it is easier to just use it then it is to write up your own policy and cover all possibilities to the extent that something like 70E has already done for you.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Tallahassee
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by kwired View Post
    Just because one is an expert on NFPA 70 (installation requirements) doesn't mean they are an expert on work place safety. In fact 70E doesn't necessarily come into play all that much on new installations unless you are energizing things before the construction is completed. You still have other workplace safety practices to follow that go beyond electrical hazards as well and those can vary from one place to another depending on what hazards are present.

    Then there is the fact that 70E isn't exactly the law in many places like NEC is. OSHA requires an employer to have a safety policy, but doesn't specifically state you must use 70E. But many use it because it is easier to just use it then it is to write up your own policy and cover all possibilities to the extent that something like 70E has already done for you.
    Yea, that's a good point. I'm in a manufacturing plant where we make an electrical product that requires 200-600 amp circuits, and voltages between 340-600. We have production test stands which are pretty automated and have adequate guarding and interlocks, but we also have various test labs operated mainly by non-career elerical people. They follow the rules, but because it is a test lab and they are hopping from one setup/test to another, we really have to stay on top of safety issues. Also, we have both internal and visiting engineeres that sometimes need special instructions (as in having to be read the riot act). If push comes to shove I prefer to show people the actual text. Most people want to do the right thing, but sometimes complying with accepted industry standards means spending a LOT of money and/or creating significant hardship for your employees. Being able to show people the text in a code book quickly puts an end to the usual hand wringing involved in making and enforcing these rules. This is a fairly unusual situation, and may be beyond the scope of this forum.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    9,781
    Quote Originally Posted by LPS View Post
    If push comes to shove I prefer to show people the actual text. Most people want to do the right thing, but sometimes complying with accepted industry standards means spending a LOT of money and/or creating significant hardship for your employees. Being able to show people the text in a code book quickly puts an end to the usual hand wringing involved in making and enforcing these rules. This is a fairly unusual situation, and may be beyond the scope of this forum.
    NFPA70E is about establishing guidelines and standards. it is basically 'what must be done'. The actual 'thou shalt do it this way' language need to come from your company's Electrical Safe Work Practices program.
    Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NE Nebraska
    Posts
    32,925
    Fall arrest, confined spaces, LOTO of other energy sources, just to name a few hazards are no different, you usually follow whatever company policy is or you are asked to leave the facility, even if you are an outside contractor, consultant, etc.

Posting Permissions

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