No, the Code change itself was motivated by servicer injuries. This is noted in that ROP and ROC elsewhere in the Substantiations and in the CMP's Statements.
Yes, i understand the CMP have substantiations they base code changes on Brian
but i question those service injuries, and would wager many are the sign guys, or maintenance men
Certain electrical equipment are
manufactured with these sorts in mind, like fusible disconnects that have an interlocking door mechanism cutting power to the fuses
Yet here we have a code requesting these same sorts, who will never own a copy of the NEC,
install a safety device
So their substaintiation is rather
cyclical logic
just imho....
further still, i bought a tin of these>
i'm less than impressed
~S~