ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#103024 - 03/08/02 02:07 PM Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC
Joe Tedesco Offline
Member
Registered: 10/07/00
Posts: 2749
Loc: Boston, Massachusetts USA


http://www.bussmann.com/library/docs/430.102%20Disconnecting%20Means%20Location.pdf


[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 08-10-2002).]
_________________________
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
Top
2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
#103025 - 03/08/02 04:43 PM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC
resqcapt19 Offline
Member
Registered: 11/10/00
Posts: 2148
Loc: IL
Joe,
While it is correct that the disconnecting means is required by the code to have a "permanently" installed locking device, if the equipment doesn't have such a device the service person is still permitted to install his or her own temporary device as a lockout. There are a number of devices on the market that can be installed on breaker boxes to provide the required permanent lockout means. Here ia a link to one such product: http://multimedia.mmm.com/mws/mediawebse...amp;HcKkbzzzzY-

Would you consider the devices that snap onto the breaker and are held in place by the panel cover a "permanent" means?
Don(resqcapt19)
_________________________
Don(resqcapt19)
Top
#103026 - 03/08/02 04:48 PM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC
Joe Tedesco Offline
Member
Registered: 10/07/00
Posts: 2749
Loc: Boston, Massachusetts USA
Don:

You raise a good question, and the pen should be put to the paper for a 2005 proposal.

None of the items you describe here are really "permanent" -- so that will be the question -- can they still be used?
_________________________
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
Top
#103027 - 03/14/02 08:31 PM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC
John Steinke Offline
Member
Registered: 04/03/01
Posts: 518
Loc: Reno,Nv., USA
I really hat it when manufacturers try to use/abuse the code to hawk their latest wares. If Bussman thinks that everybody is going to replace all their fuse boxes, motor disconnects, etc., they must have caught that Mississippi Mosquito virus!
NEC doesn't cover or address temporary or maintenance lockouts- that's a matter for OSHA. OSHA say USE THEM.
It should also be noted that new codes apply only to new installs- so older enclosures, even ones that lack padlock hasps, are still compliant (code at time of install applies)
We've come a long way in ten years; it wasn't so long ago that there were no lock-out devices for fuses and circuit breakers.
I admit to violating OSHA rules on a regular basis. For example, I have purchased my own, rather than relying on my employer to provide an adequate assortment. In doing so, I am violating OSHA rules, which forbid this. So cite me! I also use my toolbox lock for lock-out purposes- another violation! I will do whatever is necessary to protect myself, even if the rules say "no."
I have also used zip-ties to secure lock-out devices. Something about a brass padlock swinging around in a hot box, or somebody banging into a swinging door (that the lock keeps from closing) strikes me as silly.
Top
#103028 - 03/15/02 03:51 PM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC
electure Offline


Member
Registered: 12/24/00
Posts: 4259
Loc: Fullerton, CA USA
The one on the bottom left of the "Unpermissable" ones is a good one.
Locks out everything from a snap switch to a big breaker. I guess I've got to throw it away?
Top
#103029 - 03/15/02 05:02 PM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC
resqcapt19 Offline
Member
Registered: 11/10/00
Posts: 2148
Loc: IL
John,
John,
Quote:
NEC doesn't cover or address temporary or maintenance lockouts- that's a matter for OSHA. OSHA say USE THEM.

When a new installation is made for a motor circuit, the NEC in 430.102 requires that a permanent lockout device be provided as part of the equipment. It is a code violation to install a motor circuit disconnect that can only be locked out by the use of a temporary device. Temporary lockouts will still be required for existing disconnects and non-motor disconnects. Lock out/ tag out is a very important safety issue and we need to follow the rules.
Don(resqcapt19)
_________________________
Don(resqcapt19)
Top
#103030 - 03/16/02 06:34 PM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC
harold endean Offline
Member
Registered: 02/16/02
Posts: 2233
Loc: Boonton, NJ
Joe,

Most people don't realize how much this code will enforce. Doesn't this code mean that any well drilled in the front (back) lawn also needs a disconnect outside and within 50' and insight of the well head? How about ejector pumps? attic fans? any motor? etc? This can be far reaching if you think about it.

Harold
Top

Member Spotlight
Member Since: 04/03/02
Posts: 6778
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box


Who's Online
0 registered (), 70 Guests and 10 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
 
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
 
Top Posters (30 Days)
Admin 47
HotLine1 43
gfretwell 19
Ruben Rocha 12
Trumpy 9
 
Newest Members
Scotto, Freecrowder, clee512, Jdscott2005, FAIZAN

ECN Electrical Forums - sponsored by Electrical Contractor Network - Electrical and Code Related Discussion for Electrical Contractors, Electricians, Inspectors, Instructors, Engineers and other related Professionals