live systems...?

Merry Christmas
Status
Not open for further replies.
drbond24

drbond24

Senior Member
Location
Barboursville, West Virginia
This sounds strange to me, but I just heard a rumor that something was changing in 2008 that would effect working on live systems. Our sales department called me to ask what reference in the new NEC prohibited working on energized systems. I told them I had heard of no such thing and anyway, if there were going to be a requirement like that it would be in NFPA 70E, not 70. Either way, I told them I'd put a feeler out, so here it is. Anybody have input, or I am correct in thinking that the salespeople are crazy? They're marketing an ASD/VFD connector and seem to think that this alleged reference would make our connector more marketable.
 
The NEC does not cover that, but in general, both OSHA and 70E prohibit work on or near energized systems.
Don
 
Is it strictly prohibited, or just discouraged? Will you give me a reference in 70E that says "Thou shalt not work on energized systems." (more or less) I am not as familiar with 70E as I am with 70, and I'm not even that familiar with 70.

The electricians in our plant will add breakers to the main switchgear while it is energized. I would never do it in a million years simply because I'm too clumsy and I'd kill myself, but they say it is no big deal. I guess that is something they shouldn't be doing if OSHA stops by.
 
The OSHA section I will post below applies to almost every employee in the United States.


1910.333(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.
Click to expand...
 
drbond24 said:
The electricians in our plant will add breakers to the main switchgear while it is energized. I would never do it in a million years simply because I'm too clumsy and I'd kill myself, but they say it is no big deal.
Click to expand...
I might do that for certain people, but I would also tweak the GFP settings for just in case, and put them back when done. I don't think you'll find much advice or love for hot work on this site. Most of the time, there is no reason for hot work.
 
Here shutting down office lights or computers simply will not go over well.Yes its the right thing to do but they wont want you back.Most GC 'S want Jim back again for the next job.Just finished a remodel and he shook my hand and said i did great,i told him thanks but rather you tell my boss.I choose when and what i work live and if i say no thats final.
 
220/221 said:
I think they left that vague intentionally as it's wide open fot interpetation.
Click to expand...

I agree it is vague.

Any guess how it will be interpreted if someone is injured or killed doing this hot work?

If the hot work is allowed, PPE is necessary.
 
I'll only do hot work on the big stuff indoors where an arc flash study has been done. The facilities where you absolutely have to do hot work have mostly all done arc flash studies by now. This dictates the PPE and any maintenance GFP settings that are to be used. For outside work, there is a long history of the PPE that needs to be worn and the tools that need to be used at various voltage levels.
 
Note 1: Examples of increased or additional hazards include . . . removal of illumination for an area.
Click to expand...

LarryFine said:
There's one that can be stretched into a rather wide exception.
Click to expand...

I agree it could be, but do not forget that it is in combination with this..

unless the employer can demonstrate that deenergizing introduces additional or increased hazards
Click to expand...

Now, as an EC you decide to have your guys work live swapping ballasts using that exception. Now one of your guys gets hurt or killed....it does happen...now OSHA comes out and investigates.

Do you think they will agree that not shutting off the power was the right way to go?

I am not saying I am perfect, I have worked live and all of you will decide to do things as you want.....but if you think OSHA (if involved) will let it slide based on those examples if someone gets injured I have a bridge to sell you. :smile:

What is the increased hazard of shutting down the lights in most locations?

We could bring in a light stand.

We could schedule the outage during a break or lunch.

All I am trying to point out that OSHA will be interpreting it very conservatively, they are NOT interested in making it easy for us.
 
Last edited:
Yes we often could do this after hours,weekends,etc..Problem is doing so now pushes up the bid due to overtime and often the customer needing to have some extra staff when they would have been closed.Also we now have one man standing at the panel to shut it off and turn it on as we retrofit some 200 fixtures or whatever else.Those numbers will make you the high bid and no work.OSHA cares less about the cost.Not saying they are wrong just that it drives prices so high the job is cancelled.
 
Jim you bring up real problems.

The fact is if we all told our customers we have to kill it to do it then the work would not be lost. ..... but I know we got a long way to go before that happens.

I am presently in a lucky situation, I am assigned at a building that has a tight safety policy, if I violate OSHA rules I will likely be replaced. I run conduits to the panel and then a shut down is planed to cut them into the panel.

I understand this is presently not the norm, most businesses want it done now and cheap. Hopefully this will start to change.
 
iwire said:
Jim you bring up real problems.

The fact is if we all told our customers we have to kill it to do it then the work would not be lost. ..... but I know we got a long way to go before that happens.

I am presently in a lucky situation, I am assigned at a building that has a tight safety policy, if I violate OSHA rules I will likely be replaced. I run conduits to the panel and then a shut down is planed to cut them into the panel.

I understand this is presently not the norm, most businesses want it done now and cheap. Hopefully this will start to change.
Click to expand...

That i agree with you on.Perhaps someday it will happen.
 
Over and over again.

Over and over again.

I have heard this stressed so many times, and man, do I back it! There are alot of times you have to go in live. Actually online is alot easier than offline most of the time. I think this subject should stress on the importance of proper PPE, because we all know we have to go in live sometimes. If you come to work sporting a pair of Nike's, jeans, and a t-shirt, well,................ you better turn around and find another career. It is your duty to cover your own tail and wear the proper equipment. Anyone who has ever sufferd a flash and not have the right PPE is one hard to feel sorry for. I have had many poke jabs at me for all of the PPE I use. Joke all you want, I come home in one piece, and I do so with pride.
 
iwire said:
The OSHA section I will post below...
Click to expand...

Thank you. I'll forward that section to them and see if it satisfies them.

mdshunk said:
I'll only do hot work on the big stuff indoors where an arc flash study has been done. The facilities where you absolutely have to do hot work have mostly all done arc flash studies by now. This dictates the PPE and any maintenance GFP settings that are to be used.
Click to expand...

Not only have we not done an arc flash study, no one wears any PPE except for safety glasses. I certainly prefer that the electricians come in on the weekend when they can just shut everything down, but sometimes management doesn't want to pay the overtime for that or they're in a hurry to get it done before the weekend.
 
There is some crap about handle-tied breakers in the '08 to shut off MWBC's. IMO this was an attempt to cross the line into worker safety in the NEC in 210.4B - I'm sure others can elaborate on the intent of it.
 
It seems that the new 2008 rule for MWBCs and handle ties could actually cause MORE electricians to work hot circuits! In the past, you only had to kill one circuit to change that ballast. Now you have to kill 3 circuits. And the customer may not understand.... "Wait, you have to turn off 14 offices in the area to fix that one light in that ONE office?"
 
NFPA 70E

I agree energized work is not the best option. but some times is the only option. specially if you are troubleshooting control systems.

Article 130 (A) (1)

The only time you could work on energize equipment is if it is determined to be the only option and you obtain an energize work permit. and proper PPE for the level of Arc Flash and voltage available

this will apply for any volt above 50 V

NOW article 130 (A)(3)
If you are testing, troubleshooting, or doing voltage measurement. You do not need the permit but you will need to have proper PPE as stated above.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top