FAQ - Working on or near live parts (untouched copy)

[zog]

Most people think of the NFPA 70E as some sort of guide to working on energized equipment when actually it is just the opposite. There are very rare occasions when energized work is permitted.

NFPA 70E Article 130.1 Justification for work. Live parts to which an employee might be exposed shall be put into an electrically safe work condition before an 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.

Zog's note: If you dont know what "Infeasible" means, look it up; it means "incapable of being done". Dont confuse feasible with convenient.

Energized parts that operate at less than 50 volts to ground are not required to 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, but are not limited to, interruption of life support equipment, deactivation of emergency alarm systems, shutdown of hazardous location ventilation equipment

Zog's note: Notice that "removal of illumination for an area" was removed by NFPA in the latest printing due to the fact that temporary lighting can be used.

NOTE 2: Examples of work that may be performed on or near exposed energized electrical conductors or circuit parts because of infeasibility due to equipment design or operational limitations include performing diagnostics and testing (e.g., start-up or troubleshooting) of electric circuits that can only be performed with the circuit energized and work on circuits that form an integral part of a continuous process that would otherwise need to be completely shut down in order to permit work on one circuit or piece of equipment.

I corrected spelling, and added quote brackets to clearly indicate when 70E text was being quoted. -George

 

[George Stolz]

Zog, I was about to ask that you perform the edits I did above, and then remembered that the edit window had probably expired by the time I saw the thread, so I did them myself. I would like the conversation to be directed more along the lines of what content should be added or taken away, as opposed to pointing out typos.

Is the third paragraph that starts with "energized parts" 70E text or your commentary, I wasn't sure?

One thing I would like to see added before it is added to the FAQ is perhaps some statistics on what happens when people ignore it and work hot, I think that would be a good addition.

I appreciate you taking the time to do this, and hope others chime in with some suggestions too.

 

[zog]

Thanks, looks better that way, and I am a nuclear engineer so I cant spell.

 

[George Stolz]

Zog, thanks for not getting upset about it - I should have asked first.

I noticed the other post and I'm wondering: Are you thinking that there should be a seperate "Safety FAQs" in the safety forum, or do you think it should be included in the General NEC FAQs that are currently linked to from every forum? I'd prefer to include them in the General FAQs, myself.

 

[zog]

One thing I would like to see added before it is added to the FAQ is perhaps some statistics on what happens when people ignore it and work hot, I think that would be a good addition.

.

Cant, the numbers are too skewed, when OSHA shows up the story is always, "we locked the wrong thing out" or something to avoid the expensive "Willful violation"

However, recent OSHA stats say on average 2,000 Arc Flash victims a year are sent to burn units, and this recent article covers shock accidents pretty good.

http://www.ecmag.com/index.cfm?fa=article&articleID=7552

 

[zog]

Zog, thanks for not getting upset about it - I should have asked first.

I noticed the other post and I'm wondering: Are you thinking that there should be a seperate "Safety FAQs" in the safety forum, or do you think it should be included in the General NEC FAQs that are currently linked to from every forum? I'd prefer to include them in the General FAQs, myself.

I think safety FAQ section would be good, I see a different crowd in the safety area, many are Safety Managers that dont know much or care about any other area in this forum.

 

[George Stolz]

I think safety FAQ section would be good, I see a different crowd in the safety area, many are Safety Managers that dont know much or care about any other area in this forum.

Good point.

I'm heading out - I'm going to sticky what threads you've started temporarily, and then pending the outcomes of the open discussion I'll combine the finished products into a Safety FAQ in the Safety Forum only.

 

[zog]

Great, thanks groundskeeper willie

 

[cornbread]

From NFPA 70E definitions

Working On (live parts). Coming in contact with live parts with the hands, feet, or other body parts, with tools, probes, or with test equipment, regardless of the personal protective equipment a person is wearing.

Any time you are taking a voltage reading you are working on live parts?????

 

[zog]

From NFPA 70E definitions

Working On (live parts). Coming in contact with live parts with the hands, feet, or other body parts, with tools, probes, or with test equipment, regardless of the personal protective equipment a person is wearing.

Any time you are taking a voltage reading you are working on live parts?????

Yep, now look at Def of Working Near (Live Parts) - Any activity inside the LAB.

Everything in Article 130 applies to Working on or Near live parts. LAB for 50V-750V is 3'6" so everything in article 130 applies if you get closer than 3'6" to exposed live parts between 50 and 750V.

 

[naplespete57]

Suit Up!

Suit Up!

Just been tasked to participate in an arc flash study for a plant. My experience is limited re: NFPA 70 E so this will be a real learning experience.
Here is my understanding thus far.

*Personnel may not work on live parts unless properly suited with PPE.
*Each and every panel above 125 kva must be labeled according to the threat level.

Any corrections thus far?

 

[iwire]

Here is my understanding thus far.

*Personnel may not work on live parts unless properly suited with PPE.

Add to that the fact that you suit up in PPE does not allow you to work hot unless there is a real reason that the work can not be done dead.

The fact that a shutdown may be inconvenient or costly is not part of the question.

 

[zog]

Bump - Missed FAQ

 

[George Stolz]

I've moved the five topics into one sticky thread in the Safety Forum. Thanks, Zog, for doing this.

If there was an edit I've missed, or something somebody wants added, feel free to continue discussion in these "untouched copy" threads.