PPE use with lighting breakers rated as switches

[G._S._Ohm]

Safety rules depend on the relative safety and the relative public outrage.

1000 people/day dying of smoking related illnesses apparently doesn't mean diddly in the US but there are other countries that actually promote the well-being of their inhabitants.

1000 people/day dying in jumbo jet crashes for just one day or two in the US or anywhere would cause the roof to fall in.

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q="public+perception+of+risk"&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

 

[defears]

This reminds me of the #6 egc required for hot tubs. Because nobody normally reads instructions.

Somebody gets electrocuted in a hot tub and manufacturer blames the electrician because that #10, (which is OK to NEC) is not the #6 required in the instructions.

Somebody gets blasted with an arc flash from turning on a breaker for lights and the manufacturer says should have been wearing PPE, it's in the instructions.

There is no more liability in this country at all. IT'S ALWAYS YOUR FAULT.

 

[kwired]

I understand the possible dangers of operating any device that may end up carrying fault current when operated, but if we are supposed to wear certain protective devices or clothing when doing so then we need to design things differently. There is electrical equipment big gear and small gear installed in literally every place that has electric power. Large industrial is about the only place that has qualified staff that are the only ones allowed to perform any operation on this equipment. That leaves everyone else with switches breakers etc. accessible to anyone willing, no matter what their qualifications are to attempt to reset them or turn them off if they feel that may be solution to trouble they may be having. They may even have a LOTO program in place to lock out energy source to equipment but do not do any electrical work on said equipment, therefore are not electrical qualified people, but are just locking it off to protect from an unexpected start.

Same dangers do exist even in a dwelling, although it is usually minimal you can not rule it out in dwellings.

If a dead front can not protect you from what may happen behind it how can you expect someone not trained to know it may not be safe to operate the equipment?

If these devices are not safe to be around without special considerations then they should not be accessible to untrained people, or should be required to be designed to contain dangers inside. That design may require different minimum specifications from one install to the next.

 

[zog]

Excellent post, now we are having a real life discussion

I understand the possible dangers of operating any device that may end up carrying fault current when operated, but if we are supposed to wear certain protective devices or clothing when doing so then we need to design things differently. There is electrical equipment big gear and small gear installed in literally every place that has electric power. Large industrial is about the only place that has qualified staff that are the only ones allowed to perform any operation on this equipment. That leaves everyone else with switches breakers etc. accessible to anyone willing, no matter what their qualifications are to attempt to reset them or turn them off if they feel that may be solution to trouble they may be having. They may even have a LOTO program in place to lock out energy source to equipment but do not do any electrical work on said equipment, therefore are not electrical qualified people, but are just locking it off to protect from an unexpected start.

The 70E is really aimed at industrial facilities that have thier own staff as you mentioned, smaller facilities do not, again as you mentioned. Which is yet another reason to be calling a qualified electrician who not only understands installation of electrical systems but has the proper training, meters, and PPE to troubleshoot and repair such systems. When 70E became a big issue 10 years ago I expected EC's to embrace it as an oppurtunity for them to get more work because owners had yet another reason to be calling them, but instead many have been trying to fight the system. Talk to some EC's that have embraced 70E and they will tell you about the positive impact it has had on thier business (Most of them anyways).

Same dangers do exist even in a dwelling, although it is usually minimal you can not rule it out in dwellings.

70E does not apply to dwellings, and while there may be a small arc flash hazard in most cases there is not, just not enough energy for an arc to be self sustaining. You see an arc falsh if you unplug a running vacuum cleaner, but a OCPD does not need to clear the fault because it will nto self sustain.

If a dead front can not protect you from what may happen behind it how can you expect someone not trained to know it may not be safe to operate the equipment?

If these devices are not safe to be around without special considerations then they should not be accessible to untrained people, or should be required to be designed to contain dangers inside. That design may require different minimum specifications from one install to the next.

Typically equipment large enough to be an issue has controlled access anyways, in an electrical room, vault, etc.. And as equipment designs evolve we will start to see safer equipment on the market, just a matter of time before arc containment becomes a standard (not optional) design and testing criteria.

 

[kwired]

If 70E is OSHA mandated to be followed by employees then how does it not apply to anyone exposed to electrical hazards if their activity around electrical equipment is a part of their employment. This could be an electrician at an industrial plant, an appliance repairman working on an appliance in a customers dwelling, or the custodian trying to find a circuit breaker because the lights in a hallway are not working.

The smaller facilities do not have true qualified individuals but will still rely on the maintenance man that is good with about anything until he gets into a situation he does not understand - then they call a real electrician and he would like to rip out everything the maintenance man has attempted to do.

Out of all of the people mentioned above the industrial electrician is probably the only one that has even heard of 70E, yet by OSHA requirements they are all supposed to follow 70E.

How long until we start seeing 70E being followed in other than large industrial and a few others here and there? Closest thing I see on much of a regular basis is protective gear worn by POCO employees. I don't have copy of 70E myself or for that matter much of the required equipment but I do things differently than I did years ago. I do not like to work on anything energized and am a lot more adamant about shutting things off first than I used to be.

I remember LOTO being a little like 70E is now when I was first starting in this trade. You heard all about it but seldom saw it in practice. Now I notice a lot of people using it - not just electricians either. Some early misconceptions were that it applied only to electricity.

 

[pfalcon]

OSHA does not mandate the 70E but only strongly implies it through its patterned use of the "General Duty Clause". In particular OSHA 1910 and 1926 rephrase the 2004 versions of 70E Chapter 1 and NEC Article 110.

Knowing the 70E has never been a requirement to be qualified. Nor is it required to be an electrician. Knowledge of the task to be performed is required. Though I too struggle with the concept of a non-electrician being qualified to wire much of anything without supervision.

As to when the smaller shops become regular in complying, that will probably be determined by market price. The larger industrial shops have the funds to buy the PPE, the finger-safe components, the training programs, and all the other elements that make up OSHA and 70E programs. As the prices come down then smaller shops will adopt them until you can't buy anything else or operate in any other manner. There are still plenty of shops that haven't caught up with LOTO yet.

 

[iwire]

The 70E is really aimed at industrial facilities that have thier own staff as you mentioned, smaller facilities do not, again as you mentioned. Which is yet another reason to be calling a qualified electrician who not only understands installation of electrical systems but has the proper training, meters, and PPE to troubleshoot and repair such systems.

That is great, but again way off the OPs topic.

He is talking about breakers used as light switches.

You do understand this is common to save the cost of light switches in many locations other than industrial?

Typically equipment large enough to be an issue has controlled access anyways, in an electrical room, vault, etc..

I have to disagree there, at the types of places I work often the equipment is in areas open to all employees.

 

[kwired]

OSHA does not mandate the 70E but only strongly implies it through its patterned use of the "General Duty Clause". In particular OSHA 1910 and 1926 rephrase the 2004 versions of 70E Chapter 1 and NEC Article 110.

Knowing the 70E has never been a requirement to be qualified. Nor is it required to be an electrician. Knowledge of the task to be performed is required. Though I too struggle with the concept of a non-electrician being qualified to wire much of anything without supervision.

As to when the smaller shops become regular in complying, that will probably be determined by market price. The larger industrial shops have the funds to buy the PPE, the finger-safe components, the training programs, and all the other elements that make up OSHA and 70E programs. As the prices come down then smaller shops will adopt them until you can't buy anything else or operate in any other manner. There are still plenty of shops that haven't caught up with LOTO yet.

LOTO is more common than it was 20 years ago. I see a similar issue with fall protection or confined space working conditions. 20 years ago you may have heard of these issues and the safety equipment designed for it, but unless you went to a large industrial site or some - not all- government owned or funded project you never saw any of it.

You still don't see these safety items being used all the time but they are becoming more common. Any business that has 10 or more employees seem to be better at it than the smaller ones. I'm talking about all industries not just construction related workers.

 

[jim dungar]

Though I too struggle with the concept of a non-electrician being qualified to wire much of anything without supervision.

As you said, being qualified has nothing to do with wiring, or other common 'electrician tasks', at all.
I would bet the average 'field tech' uses their voltmeter more often than the average construction electrician.