PPE for terminating wires on energized Circuit Breaker

[askDano]

I have an energized 480v, 60 amp, Circuit breaker, the line side of the CB is finger safe and the load side is exposed. I want to pull wires into the load side and terminate them while the CB is energized.
The calculations for PPE are line side Cat 2 and load side Cat 0. If I?m only working the load side can I use Cat 0 PPE for this job?
Is this defined some place?

 

[iwire]

Are you troubleshooting?

If not you may not really be allowed to do it even with PPE

 

[kwired]

Please clarify - are you wanting to terminate conductors to load side while breaker is energized and closed or just the line side is energized and the breaker is open?

 

[iwire]

Please clarify - are you wanting to terminate conductors to load side while breaker is energized and closed or just the line side is energized and the breaker is open?

Interesting question but may not change anything.

 

[kwired]

Interesting question but may not change anything.

I know, but even if disregarding shock potential or arc flash hazards, I can't figure why one would want to terminate these conductors while the breaker is energized and closed in the first place, unless there for some reason is other load already connected and we want to add something else - even then I certainly do not want to make this proposed connection "live" even with PPE.

 

[Jraef]

As I interpret 70E, if it is Cat. 2 on the line side when energized and you open the door or remove the cover to work there, it is never going to be less than Cat. 2. The HRC is based on the incident energy in the space, not on the wires. So maybe if the panel containing this breaker is somehow separating the working air space between Lien and Load, I'm not buying the "Load side is Cat. 0" argument.

 

[kwired]

Please clarify - are you wanting to terminate conductors to load side while breaker is energized and closed or just the line side is energized and the breaker is open?

Interesting question but may not change anything.

Maybe I misread the OP initially, it looks like he intends to do this work with the breaker open but the other side is energized, sorry about that. Though it may not change the potential exposure it at least makes much more sense than where I thought this could have been going.

 

[ptonsparky]

Please clarify - are you wanting to terminate conductors to load side while breaker is energized and closed or just the line side is energized and the breaker is open?

At first I thought he meant while closed. Even at my least informed stage of idiocy, that would not have been an option.

 

[Drake5265]

I usually say to myself if there is any question I would schedule the shutdown of the panel and do it the safest way possible instead of messing around in a live panel. If the Line Side stays covered and the breaker is deenergized I would say stick with the HRC 0

 

[kwired]

I think what the OP is asking is no different than asking if it is acceptable to connect a circuit to a breaker in a panelboard where the panelboard is energized but the breaker you are connecting to is opened at the time. What you are working on is dead, but there are other live components within the enclosure.

 

[hillbilly1]

I think as long as you are out of the prohibited area, your ok as long as proper PPE is worn along with proper tools. Teminating on a breaker that is turned on, or in an area within the prohibited area could not be done.

 

[iwire]

Hillbilly

Can you point out the OSHA section that allows us to add a circuit to a panel with exposed live parts?

It is my understanding that live work is prohibited in most cases even with PPE.

 

[WorkSafe]

I think as long as you are out of the prohibited area, your ok as long as proper PPE is worn along with proper tools. Teminating on a breaker that is turned on, or in an area within the prohibited area could not be done.

29CFR1910.333(a)(1)

"Deenergized parts." Live parts to which an employee may be exposed shall be deenergized before the employee works on or near them, unless the employer can demonstrate that deenergizing introduces additional or increased hazards or is infeasible due to equipment design or operational limitations. Live parts that operate at less than 50 volts to ground need not be deenergized if there will be no increased exposure to electrical burns or to explosion due to electric arcs.


Note 1: Examples of increased or additional hazards include interruption of life support equipment, deactivation of emergency alarm systems, shutdown of hazardous location ventilation equipment, or removal of illumination for an area.


Note 2: Examples of work that may be performed on or near energized circuit parts because of infeasibility due to equipment design or operational limitations include testing of electric circuits that can only be performed with the circuit energized and work on circuits that form an integral part of a continuous industrial process in a chemical plant that would otherwise need to be completely shut down in order to permit work on one circuit or piece of equipment.


Note 3: Work on or near deenergized parts is covered by paragraph (b) of this section.

 

[hillbilly1]

29CFR1910.333(a)(1)

"Deenergized parts." Live parts to which an employee may be exposed shall be deenergized before the employee works on or near them, unless the employer can demonstrate that deenergizing introduces additional or increased hazards or is infeasible due to equipment design or operational limitations. Live parts that operate at less than 50 volts to ground need not be deenergized if there will be no increased exposure to electrical burns or to explosion due to electric arcs.


Note 1: Examples of increased or additional hazards include interruption of life support equipment, deactivation of emergency alarm systems, shutdown of hazardous location ventilation equipment, or removal of illumination for an area.


Note 2: Examples of work that may be performed on or near energized circuit parts because of infeasibility due to equipment design or operational limitations include testing of electric circuits that can only be performed with the circuit energized and work on circuits that form an integral part of a continuous industrial process in a chemical plant that would otherwise need to be completely shut down in order to permit work on one circuit or piece of equipment.


Note 3: Work on or near deenergized parts is covered by paragraph (b) of this section.

According to that then, you cannot change a breaker or add a wire to a spare breaker in a panel That is the service equipment, even though the main is off, because of the energized parts on the line side of the main. This would require a utility shutdown for this simple task. What does paragraph (B) say?

 

[petersonra]

just a thought

how is there any difference between an employee not being exposed to a live situation if the terminals on the line side are not accessible and the door being closed?

you are either exposed to the dangerous condition or not.

if the line terminals are not accessible, how is there any danger to the employee?

 

[kwired]

just a thought

how is there any difference between an employee not being exposed to a live situation if the terminals on the line side are not accessible and the door being closed?

you are either exposed to the dangerous condition or not.

if the line terminals are not accessible, how is there any danger to the employee?

There is a difference between "line shields" and covers that completely isolate the live parts.

I believe Canada code does require a shield over the line side of the main breaker as well as all of the supply conductors and I have seen photos of Canada approved panels with shield in place - and it explains some of the slots, holes, etc you find in the USA versions of same panels that you always look at and wonder "what is that hole for". With one of those panels, if you turn off the main there is nothing energized you can possibly contact without first removing the cover (not just a finger shield) over the supply conductors and line side lugs of the main breaker.

 

[kwired]

According to that then, you cannot change a breaker or add a wire to a spare breaker in a panel That is the service equipment, even though the main is off, because of the energized parts on the line side of the main. This would require a utility shutdown for this simple task. What does paragraph (B) say?

You can not turn off a fused disconnect and check continuity of fuses or replace fuses either - the supply terminals are still live.

 

[kwired]

I have also wondered how long until our inspectors can no longer remove a panel cover to inspect if the panel is energized?

I understand that all employed persons are subject to these rules but the inspectors technically being State employees I am a little surprised that they still inspect things that are energized. Someday that will probably stop and will create hardships for everyone involved. Many projects are already in use before final inspection happens, scheduling shutdown for inspection will really be hard to adjust to dealing with, let alone the fact there is so much work still done that should have shutdowns just to perform the work. Many disable circuit they are working on, but there is still a lot of work still done everywhere in panels that are energized.

 

[hillbilly1]

You can not turn off a fused disconnect and check continuity of fuses or replace fuses either - the supply terminals are still live.

That would be another instance of having to call the utility company to shut down the service just to change a fuse............Maybe ought to start a poll on how many people have called the utility company to shut down a service to replace a 200 amp fuse?

 

[iwire]

According to that then, you cannot change a breaker or add a wire to a spare breaker in a panel That is the service equipment, even though the main is off, because of the energized parts on the line side of the main. This would require a utility shutdown for this simple task.

In my opinion you are correct.