It is currently Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:28 pm



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
ekstra   ara
 Post subject: Where in 70E does it allow energized "SOPs"?
PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2020 11:44 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 7:11 pm
Posts: 20
Location: Illinois
Hi All,
I have run into this in a number of threads discussing 70E issues. I've been a student of 70 since the 2000 edition. I don't recall verbage anywhere in the standard saying it is alright to not put the equipment or system in an ESWC in order to do maintenance if the task is a usual low risk operation, example often cited, replacing a blown fuse? My read of the standard tells me if you're dealing with 50V AC or more you need to put the equipment in an ESWC if crossing the LABSP or interacting with the equipment in a fashion creating an increased likelyhood of an arc event. Of course the exceptions apply for greater risk, infeasable, countinuous process and less than 50V. What am I missing here? In what Article is permission granted?
Thanks in advance for your thoughts concerning this.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Where in 70E does it allow energized "SOPs"?
PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2020 7:19 am 

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:42 am
Posts: 27
I would say voltage testing, visual inspections where the restricted approach boundary is not crossed and troubleshooting exceptions would not require an electrically safe work condition.

In cases outside of what was previously stated, the work would need to be evaluated:

1) Infeasible, e.g. operational limitations or equipment design.
2) More hazardous to shut off, e.g. hospital applications

There is no specific verbiage that I'm aware of other than that. The risk portion comes into play (as I'm sure you know) when an EEWP is warranted, troubleshooting required, etc.

Mike


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Where in 70E does it allow energized "SOPs"?
PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2020 11:48 am 
Arc Level

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:49 pm
Posts: 499
Location: New England
I think the 2000 code mentioned 'infeasible' and that was related to continuous processes.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
© 2019 Arcflash Forum / Brainfiller, Inc. | P.O. Box 12024 | Scottsdale, AZ 85267 USA | 800-874-8883