Painters, Recepticle Faceplates

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mike Furlan

Member
Location
Lemont Il
Painters will remove the faceplates from recepticle faceplates before painting.

Taking off the faceplates exposes live conductors.

Should they be required to de-energize, and lock out and tag out the circuits involved based upon NFPA 70E?
 
chris kennedy

chris kennedy

Senior Member
Location
Miami Fla.
Occupation
60 yr old tool twisting electrician
Which part of 70E are you referring to? 130.2(A)? Then give them some gloves 130.7(A).:grin:

I'm not making light of this, I think it's and interesting question.
 
infinity

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
IMO if they remove the plates then it's their problem when it comes to compliance.
 
M

marissa2

Senior Member
Location
Connecticut
What is better, to remove them or paint over them? Myself I lkke them removed so they don't get covered wuit several coats of paint.
Lou
 
mcclary's electrical

mcclary's electrical

Senior Member
Location
VA
I'm with Bryan! You trimmed out too early. There should be VERY LITTLE touch up after trim out. Painters and electricians are usually the last ones out, but almost simultaneously.
 
don_resqcapt19

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Mike Furlan said:
Painters will remove the faceplates from recepticle faceplates before painting.

Taking off the faceplates exposes live conductors.

Should they be required to de-energize, and lock out and tag out the circuits involved based upon NFPA 70E?
Click to expand...
The prohibited approach boundary for 120 volts is "do not touch" so voltage protection is not required to remove the covers. I doubt that there is enough current available at that point in the circuit to required any arc flash protection. I expect that the only thing 70E would require would be a long sleeve non-melting fabric shirt.
 
infinity

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
chris kennedy said:
Rob, do you have the 70E? I believe it is the employers responsibility to establish a safe working environment.

110.3
Click to expand...

If the EC installed the plates and energized the receptacles hasn't he already done all that's required? If the painter wants to remove the plate why should the EC be involved at all? If the painter removes the cover on a panel and blows himslef up is the EC responsible for that too?
 
M

Mike Furlan

Member
Location
Lemont Il
chris kennedy said:
Which part of 70E are you referring to? 130.2(A)? Then give them some gloves 130.7(A).:grin:

I'm not making light of this, I think it's and interesting question.
Click to expand...

How about 1301.1

"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. . ."
 
M

Mike Furlan

Member
Location
Lemont Il
don_resqcapt19 said:
The prohibited approach boundary for 120 volts is "do not touch" so voltage protection is not required to remove the covers. I doubt that there is enough current available at that point in the circuit to required any arc flash protection. I expect that the only thing 70E would require would be a long sleeve non-melting fabric shirt.
Click to expand...

But you can only work with live parts if to de-energize would cause additonal hazards, or is infeasible.

Neither condition is met.

There is no reason that all live parts could put in a safe condition.
 
M

Mike Furlan

Member
Location
Lemont Il
infinity said:
If the EC installed the plates and energized the receptacles hasn't he already done all that's required? If the painter wants to remove the plate why should the EC be involved at all? If the painter removes the cover on a panel and blows himslef up is the EC responsible for that too?
Click to expand...

No the EC would not be responsible, but the painter's boss, and the ES&H guy who signed off on the work would be.
 
Sierrasparky

Sierrasparky

Senior Member
Location
USA
Occupation
Electrician ,contractor
Mike Furlan said:
No the EC would not be responsible, but the painter's boss, and the ES&H guy who signed off on the work would be.
Click to expand...

Painters problem all the way. If I was there before the painter was done then I can tell you that painter IS LATE. That painter better be leveling those plates and all the screws facing the same way.
OH I hate when they touch my work before it's accepted.,.....:mad:
 
Last edited:
don_resqcapt19

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Mike Furlan said:
But you can only work with live parts if to de-energize would cause additonal hazards, or is infeasible.

Neither condition is met.

There is no reason that all live parts could put in a safe condition.
Click to expand...
Your not working with live parts unless you cross the prohibited approach and are not working near live parts unless you cross the restricted approach boundary. For a 120 volt receptacle both of these boundaries are listed as "avoid contact" (do not touch) in Table 130.2(C). The removal of the device covers is not working on or near live parts, the only issue would be arc flash protection, however the protection category would most likely be "0" requiring only long pants and long sleeve shirt of non-melting fabric.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top