PPE Nfpa 70e

[brother]

Well I think this is a stretch in the interpetation of the Nfpa 70e in ppe.

It was said that when you are 'testing the voltage' (ie with a fluke sticking the prongs into it) on a 480,120, 208 receptacle with the cover on that you STILL have to have on the ppe (hrc 2) gloves, maybe even face shield etc.. Because of the way its worded in nfpa 70e

This is a bit much here!! because really this is no different than just pluging something in!! can someone help me get a better understanding here, this came up after an electrician was burned from just doing this little bit.

 

[zog]

I would answer this but you seem to disregard all my answers, then tell me I am wrong, then when I prove myslef you disapear and never respond, this has been a pattern.

Let me ask you this, have you actually read the 2009 NFPA 70E? Or are you still just listening to what the other guys at your plant say? The answer to this is pretty clear if you read the standard.

I am not trying to be a jerk here but it sure seems you have a lot of electricians injured at your facility and it seems like no one knows much about the right thing to do, just a lot of hearsay from the other guys. Obviously you and the other guys have not had proper 70E training and should not be working on energized equipment until your companies Electrical Safety procedures and training programs are improved. I am not blaming you, I am blaming your management and safety department.

I am sure someone will give you an easy answer and next week when another guy gets hurt there will be another questiion but I hope I am wrong about that, i hope these injuries gives your plant a wake up call to get in compliance.

 

[brother]

I would answer this but you seem to disregard all my answers, then tell me I am wrong, then when I prove myslef you disapear and never respond, this has been a pattern. .

Im not aware of what you are talking about, I do not ever remember disregarding any of your answers, and if there is a response needed that I miss, I apologize, but im not aware of any. You can post a link to them if you wish. As for telling you that you are wrong, I dont recall that either. Are you making an error here just like you did with the 'disregard to the pm' post??

Let me ask you this, have you actually read the 2009 NFPA 70E? Or are you still just listening to what the other guys at your plant say? The answer to this is pretty clear if you read the standard. .

Have ordered the nfpa 70e 2009 but havent gotten it yet. This is not a 'plant' where I presently work. I hear the guys but I dont believe all that they say, some of them dont know what they are talking about especially when i research and find the answers.

I am not trying to be a jerk here but it sure seems you have a lot of electricians injured at your facility and it seems like no one knows much about the right thing to do, just a lot of hearsay from the other guys. .

Well here recently there have been 2 electricians that got hurt. One almost a year go and one just a week ago. Some people know the right thing to do, its just the info is not being put out like its suppose to. I agree there needs to be more training!!

Obviously you and the other guys have not had proper 70E training and should not be working on energized equipment until your companies Electrical Safety procedures and training programs are improved. I am not blaming you, I am blaming your management and safety department. .

I believe I know enough of safety practices to work safely on energized circuits. They just recently started this 'NFPA 70e' policy. And there are some questions that the 'management' need to get answered, cause I will agree that some of them dont know themselves.

I am sure someone will give you an easy answer and next week when another guy gets hurt there will be another questiion but I hope I am wrong about that, i hope these injuries gives your plant a wake up call to get in compliance.

I pray that no one else gets hurt. However this is a WAKE up call!! where this guy got hurt, is not in my immediate area where I work. He works in another department. Apparently he had not had the recent safety training either.

If you dont wish to anwer my question then thats fine. Ill find the answer and SHOW my fellow workers and 'management' if necessary. I always try to pursuit knowledge and get a better understanding and raise awareness.

 

[zog]

Brother, has the facility where you work done an arc flash hazard analysis? Or are you using the tables?

 

[jim dungar]

This is a bit much here!! because really this is no different than just pluging something in!! can someone help me get a better understanding here, this came up after an electrician was burned from just doing this little bit.

The person got injured most likely because they did not have on the appropriate PPE.

When you use a voltmeter you have typically have your face closer to the "electricity" than when you plug something in.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

In many cases the rules would not require a high level of arc flash protection (but you only know this if you have done the required investigation of the power supply and the calculations), but would always require shock protection (voltage rated gloves)

 

[billsnuff]

how about this

how about this

no study done - equipment 240 vac or less

work on....circuit parts (volt testing) HRC 1

need 4 cal ls shirt and pants, gloves, face shield.........

study completed, equip 240 vac or less (panel is<1.2 cal/cm^)

work on....circuit parts (volt testing) HRC 0

LS shirt/pants, sfty glasses. (work outside rest. approach?)

is this statement correct

 

[zog]

In many cases the rules would not require a high level of arc flash protection (but you only know this if you have done the required investigation of the power supply and the calculations),

Right, more info is needed by the OP to determine the arc flash PPE required, if any.

but would always require shock protection (voltage rated gloves)

Cant agree with that, v-rated gloves are only required to cross the RAB by qualified persons, the RAB for 120V is "Avoid contact" , proper probes with finger gaurds make gloves not required for this. The 208V one is tricky, is that 208V to ground? If so you need to multiply the 208V by 1.732 to determin the RAB, which would be 301-750V and make the RAB 1 foot, same as the 480V, so gloves would be required if crossing that 1 foot boundary. IMO gloves should always be worn for voltage testing but thats just me.

 

[zog]

no study done - equipment 240 vac or less

work on....circuit parts (volt testing) HRC 1

need 4 cal ls shirt and pants, gloves, face shield.........

study completed, equip 240 vac or less (panel is<1.2 cal/cm^)

work on....circuit parts (volt testing) HRC 0

LS shirt/pants, sfty glasses. (work outside rest. approach?)

is this statement correct

Assuming the results of the study show <1.2 cal/cm2, yes, that would be correct. But the actual study may say otherwise

 

[billsnuff]

yes, Zog

yes, Zog

these are the actual numbers for a particular lighting panel in our plant.

was just comparing using the book and actuals from our study, FWIW.

i also had some panels that were just the opposite, had to do some fuse changing up stream, some were 250V instead of 600V and some were mixed.

Money well spent, that study. 14 mo. later and were are still updating one lines and labels. As part of the initial cost, they track our changes and send us udated info.

Installing current limiting reactor for a buss on the 16th. Buss is rated 22kA w/ 24kA available. this will get us to 4.64kA under.

to the OP, didn't mean to hijack, just wanted to share some actual experience.

 

[zog]

Bill, didnt realize you were talking about your plant, my bad.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Cant agree with that, v-rated gloves are only required to cross the RAB by qualified persons, the RAB for 120V is "Avoid contact" , proper probes with finger gaurds make gloves not required for this. The 208V one is tricky, is that 208V to ground? If so you need to multiply the 208V by 1.732 to determin the RAB, which would be 301-750V and make the RAB 1 foot, same as the 480V, so gloves would be required if crossing that 1 foot boundary. IMO gloves should always be worn for voltage testing but thats just me.

Scott,
I thought that you had to use voltage rated gloves when you are using a tool that crosses the RAB based on the wording in 130.2(C) in the 2004 edition of 70E. The probe on the voltage tester is a tool and will be placed in contact with the energized part.

 

[zog]

Scott,
I thought that you had to use voltage rated gloves when you are using a tool that crosses the RAB based on the wording in 130.2(C) in the 2004 edition of 70E. The probe on the voltage tester is a tool and will be placed in contact with the energized part.

Conductive tools, I assume he has insulated probes (CATIII rated)

 

[brother]

Brother, has the facility where you work done an arc flash hazard analysis? Or are you using the tables?

this is not a panel board or switch board, and yes they are using the tables. we do not have the 2009 nfpa 70e. Its on the way. Im looking at table 130.7(C)(9)(A) Panelb. or Switch>240 and says nothing of a receptacle testing in the title, even though the other part is talking about voltage testing

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Conductive tools, I assume he has insulated probes (CATIII rated)

So if I use an insulated tool on voltages below 300 I don't need gloves? I don't get that from the wording in 70E, but I don't have a copy here at home to check.

 

[zog]

So if I use an insulated tool on voltages below 300 I don't need gloves? I don't get that from the wording in 70E, but I don't have a copy here at home to check.

Not rubber gloves, you may need leather gloves for arc flash PPE but we are discussing shock PPE here. "Avoid contact" is a tricky term that leaves some room for interpretation, the prior head of the 70E commitee told me to think of it like this, if you were working on the equipment and someone bumped into you, could that cause you to contact live parts? For tet points or a wall outlet I dont think it would, having your arms inside a control panel, it probally would, so it depends a lot on body position and equipment configuration. I think the 2009 handbook discusses this.

The verbage you are looking for is also tricky, found in different places in each edition, let me know if you have trouble finding it and what revision you have.

 

[brother]

Not rubber gloves, you may need leather gloves for arc flash PPE but we are discussing shock PPE here. "Avoid contact" is a tricky term that leaves some room for interpretation, the prior head of the 70E commitee told me to think of it like this, if you were working on the equipment and someone bumped into you, could that cause you to contact live parts? For tet points or a wall outlet I dont think it would, having your arms inside a control panel, it probally would, so it depends a lot on body position and equipment configuration. I think the 2009 handbook discusses this.

The verbage you are looking for is also tricky, found in different places in each edition, let me know if you have trouble finding it and what revision you have.

now back to the original posters question. so whats the answer. ??

 

[zog]

now back to the original posters question. so whats the answer. ??

Well assuming you are using the tables, and assuming you can use the tables (You are within the amp-cycle limits) it would be HRC 1 for the 240V and below and HRC 2* for the 480V.

 

[billsnuff]

70e - '09

70e - '09

HRC1 = 4 cal FR ls shirt & pants, face shield, hard hat, safety glasses, hearing protection, leather gloves (as needed) and leather work shoes.

HRC2* = 8 cal FR shirt & pants, face shield and balaclava (head sock), hard hat, safety glasses, hearing protection, leather gloves and leather work shoes.

 

[brother]

Ok, another question on the how far to go on the nfpa 70e. Is it ok to just turn off the 'main' THAT IS in the panel to do work on that panel?? It was my understanding that you could not do that, that you MUST turn off the power going to that panel to consider that panel deenergized. Is this correct or wrong??

Also, if you taking off the cover, and just leaving the dead front on a panel, its my understanding that you still have to have on ful gear, (arc flash suit/gloves/ for 480) etc.. LESS ppe for 120/208. Another electrician I know says no. whos right and whos wrong?