ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Increasing demand factors in residential
by gfretwell - 03/28/24 12:43 AM
Portable generator question
by Steve Miller - 03/19/24 08:50 PM
Do we need grounding?
by NORCAL - 03/19/24 05:11 PM
240V only in a home and NEC?
by dsk - 03/19/24 06:33 AM
Cordless Tools: The Obvious Question
by renosteinke - 03/14/24 08:05 PM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
1 members (gfretwell), 32 guests, and 14 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 40
G
Member
Quote
Originally posted by resqcapt19:
What about the OSHA rules that say you can't work on energized equipment?
Don(resqcapt19)

Is there an actual OSHA rule that states this? If so I have never heard of it. I am a lineman in Houston and very seldom do we turn anything off to work on it. From 120V to 35KV, it gets worked hot.

Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
R
Member
Glenn and Bill,
OSHA has different standards for the utility workers and construction workers. The rule for utility workers is in 1910.269 and the rule for construction is in 1926.416. There is also a rule in 1910.333 for general workers which permits live work sometimes.

1910.269(l)(1)
"General." Only qualified employees may work on or with exposed energized lines or
parts of equipment. Only qualified employees may work in areas containing unguarded, uninsulated energized lines or parts of equipment operating at 50 volts or more. Electric lines and equipment shall be considered and treated as energized unless the provisions of paragraph (d) or paragraph (m) of this section have be followed.

1926.416(a)(1)
No employer shall permit an employee to work in such proximity to any part of an
electric power circuit that the employee could contact the electric power circuit
in the course of work, unless the employee is protected against electric shock by
deenergizing the circuit and grounding it or by guarding it effectively by insulation
or other means.

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.


I don't see anything in these rules that would permit an electrican to make a service change live. Note that in 1926.416 it says nothing about PPE, the insulation is on the equipment, not the worker.

Here is a link to the OSHA index: http://www.osha-slc.gov/OshStd_toc/OSHA_Std_toc.html

Don(resqcapt19)


[This message has been edited by resqcapt19 (edited 09-17-2001).]


Don(resqcapt19)
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 466
Likes: 1
J
Member
In dealing with BGE in MD I cut the seal and pull the meter. I run the service drop to the point of connection. Utility subs make the permanant connection hot after inspection. To get temporary power I use the Polaris taps to connect to the old meter tail.

resqcapt,

In 1926.416 how did you get that the protection had to be on the equipment? Wouldn't gloves etc be 'other means'?

Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
R
Member
Jim
I was wrong about that. In a letter ruling on 1926.416, OSHA said that PPE could be used. The letter was issued on 2/23/99 and said in part:

"......Guarding against electric shock
You ask if the term "insulation," as used in 1926.416(a), refers only to the insulating
material that encases a wire, or if the term refers to "a separate insulating system worn
or used by the workers?"
Where a circuit has not been deenergized, section 1926.416(a) requires that employees
be protected from electric shock by "guarding it [the circuit] effectively by insulation."
This means that the employer must ensure that insulation already covers the energized
parts and will protect the employee. That insulation must be sufficient/appropriate for the working conditions. If it will not protect the employee, then the employer must use insulating material, such as an insulating blanket, to protect against the shock hazard.
Where that is not feasible, this provision, in conjunction with ยง1926.95(a), requires
employers to protect employees with appropriate insulating personal protective
equipment."

However, there is no way that it is permissible for an electrican to work the dwelling unit service hot per 1910.333, even if PPE is provided.
Don(resqcapt19)

[This message has been edited by resqcapt19 (edited 09-17-2001).]


Don(resqcapt19)
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 151
D
Member
Ah, our dear government trying their best to control everything and write circles around us, while everyday life and work goes on, fairly safely. Training and discipline (or the threat of) is what keeps us safe.

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 40
G
Member
As far as I know the utility that I work for here does not really care one way or the other if the seal is cut and the meter is pulled by an electrician.

Personaly I do not care either. It makes my job easier since I do not have to make a special trip to remove a meter band. Although some meters have lockbands and does require a trip.

Also there has never been a problem with "electrician connections" at the W/H. THe only thing that gets under my skin when this is done is that sometimes a change order is never called in and the work has never had a permit or inspection. After a few months those temp. conn. give up due to weather and the elements. Then we get the call of lights out or dim lights or whatever. The service usually gets permanent conn. although it has never been inspected. Unless the job was really shabby and can be determined unsafe by the utility(me). I applaud the guy who uses squeezons to make the conn at the W/H(just remember to put the copper on the bottom). THe guys who use the one bolt, insulation piercing contraptions, please stop. Those things are not worth a dime much less a 150 dimes!

I guess what I am trying to say is that I don't mind if ya'll guys make my job easier, just don't make it harder than it should be.

glenn35

Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,236
Likes: 1
Member
Glenn,

And how do you feel about using NM Connectors for split-bugs?

I see nothing in 305 (temp wiring) that exempts their use from 110-14...


-Virgil
Residential/Commercial Inspector
5 Star Inspections
Member IAEI
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 40
G
Member
Quote
Originally posted by sparky66wv:
Glenn,

And how do you feel about using NM Connectors for split-bugs?

I see nothing in 305 (temp wiring) that exempts their use from 110-14...

Not exactly sure what conn. you are referring to. Would that be the split bolts made by Kearney? What is NM? Non metalic?

Any connection that I have seen that was not a compression type will eventually give up. Except for some Fargos that are only used for a copper to copper conn. When a copper to alum. conn. is made it is best done with a compression connector. And the cu. should always be placed on bottom and never come into direct contact with the alum conductor.

WOW! How did all this get so far off topic from the original? [Linked Image]

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,392
S
Member
glenn35;
Virgil's refering to NM connectors used as a down and dirty quicky for W/H connections.....fairly well down the list for most of us.

[Linked Image]

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,056
R
Member
Quote
Originally posted by sparky66wv:
Glenn,

And how do you feel about using NM Connectors for split-bugs?

I see nothing in 305 (temp wiring) that exempts their use from 110-14...
I assume you mean the practice of using romex connectors as temp. taps. I know this is done in some localities, where the PoCo will come out and replace them. I saw it as a "trade tip" in a different forum once, and that was the first time I ever heard of it. Since then, however I have gotten a call to replace them once.

Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5