# OSHA/NFPA70E Standards Pulling Wire in Live Junction Box



## cuba_pete (Dec 8, 2011)

NFPA 70E, as one example, is filled with language about working on, around, near, etc. energized conductors.

If they weren't considered dangerous to be around, they wouldn't be in a box to begin with.

Here's some catch-all:

*C.1.2 Qualified Persons, Safe Approach Distance.*
*...*​*(1)* Be qualified to perform the job/task
*(2)* Be able to identify the hazards and associated risks
with the tasks to be performed​*C.1.2.3*​​​​To cross the restricted approach boundary and enter
the restricted space, qualified persons should meet the
following criteria:
*(1)* *Have an energized electrical work permit authorized by*
*management*
*(2)* Use personal protective equipment (PPE) that is rated
for the voltage and energy level involved
*(3)* Minimize the likelihood of bodily contact with exposed
energized conductors and circuit parts from *inadvertent*
*movement *by keeping as much of the body out of the restricted
space as possible and using only protected body
parts in the space as necessary to accomplish the work​
*(4)* Use insulated tools and equipment


----------



## Lythropus (Jan 27, 2009)

"Energized" equipment, yes 
"Exposed" anything, yes 
"Insulated" conductors? Where is that located? 

There's a difference between a random person touching a conductor (the reason for the box) and a trained electrician.


----------



## Lythropus (Jan 27, 2009)

Your list is for exposed circuits, by definition is not insulated.

Restricted approach boundary for insulated conductors?
How work permit for insulated conductors?


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

Even if there is not the possibility of direct contact with exposed energized parts, there can still be an arc flash hazard based on the activity. What happened sounds like a violation of 130.2(2). Obviously there was an increased hazard because the employee action precipitated an arc flash, so it's clear that an electrically safe work condition was not established.


> *130.2 Electrically Safe Working Conditions. *
> Energized electrical conductors and circuit parts to which an employee
> might be exposed shall be put into an electrically safe work condition before an employee performs work if either of the following conditions exist:
> (1) The employee is within the limited approach boundary.
> (2) The employee interacts with equipment where conductors or circuit parts are not exposed, but an increased risk of injury from an exposure to an arc ﬂash hazard exists.


 I'm tempted to say you could've blanketed the conductors and worked in the box without wearing PPE, but I'm not sure if that's actually true.


----------



## Lythropus (Jan 27, 2009)

Big John said:


> Even if there is not the possibility of direct contact with exposed energized parts, there can still be an arc flash hazard based on the activity. What happened sounds like a violation of 130.2(2). Obviously there was an increased hazard because the employee action precipitated an arc flash, so it's clear that an electrically safe work condition was not established.
> I'm tempted to say you could've blanketed the conductors and worked in the box without wearing PPE, but I'm not sure if that's technically true.


Thank you, that's a very relevant article.

Any other input would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

Lythropus said:


> ...Any other input would be greatly appreciated.


 Only other thing I know would be OSHA 1926.416(a) and the links to the standard interpretations. 

Again, it looks like because it was understood mechanical force would be placed on energized conductors, at a minimum it violated (a)(3):


> Before work is begun the employer shall ascertain by inquiry or direct observation, or by instruments, whether any part of an energized electric power circuit, exposed or concealed, is so located that the performance of the work may bring any person, tool, or machine into physical or electrical contact with the electric power circuit. The employer shall post and maintain proper warning signs where such a circuit exists. The employer shall advise employees of the location of such lines, the hazards involved, and the protective measures to be taken.


 It appears to me that this is the section that would allow you to argue that it could have been effectively guarded with blankets. It seems like the only resolution per 70E would have been to de-energize.


----------



## Lythropus (Jan 27, 2009)

Thanks again. Much appreciated.


----------

