NECA

A Sound Business Decision: Turning Off the Power When Working on Energized Circuits

by Jerry Rivera, Director, Safety

“Turning off power, when working on energized circuits, is just not feasible.”

“If we have to shut down power, you will have to explain to the client.”

These common reasons for not turning off the power when working on energized circuits are not relevant excuses. Responses like these fail to address the underlining concerns that truly exist: is turning off the power inconvenient, or should a shut-down have been estimated at the bidding stage?

These questions cannot continue to be answered at the field level. Shutting down energized circuits for safety reasons must be an executive decision, as well as a management philosophy. The industry must do away with the notion that placing circuits in electrically safe working conditions  is only a compliance issue. Failing to see past compliance underlines the true problem our industry faces when embracing electrically safe working conditions.

Many electrical professionals are well aware of the requirements set forth by NFPA 70E, but continue to view these practices as a non-mandatory.  However, if you are not using NFPA 70E for guidance in establishing electrically safe working conditions, then what are you using? There is no other standard that addresses electrical safety in such detail like NFPA 70E. The standard has achieved recognition amongst governmental, state and international entities. We can no longer continue to disregard its authority when it comes to electrical safety.

If the information provided above does not persuade you to adopt NFPA 70E guidelines, take a look at some of the contract language appearing project documents for electrical contractors, in particular: “Electrical safety program shall meet NFPA 70E requirement.”  If you haven’t noticed the above referenced language in contracts, you might want to start reading the fine print. NFPA 70E-standard safety programs are becoming the norm when so far as utility owners, general contractors and facility owners are concerned.

Now that we have acknowledged NFPA 70E as the standard for electrical safety programs  maybe we can begin to embrace some of its context. Remember, no matter what part of the industry sector your firm is part of, whether inside electrician or outside electrician, the NFPA 70E can be used to ensure overall protection of the workforce.

Below are some of the relations that are applicable between contract employer and host employer, as seen on the NFPA 70E standard.

Article 110.5 Talks about the relationship that exist between Contractors, the article goes into great detail by explaining the relationship that must exist between contractors and clients: the Host Employer being the contactor and Contract Employer being the client (GC or facility owner). Below are just some examples of host and contract employer responsibilities:

Known hazards that are covered by the standard, that are related to the contract employer’s work, and that might not be recognized by the contract employer or its employees.

Information about the employer installation that the contract employer needs to make the assessment required by Chapter 1.

2. The host employer shall report observed contract employer related violations of this standard to the contract employer

1. The contact employer shall ensure that each of his or her employees is instructed in the hazard communicated to the contract employer by the host employer. This instruction is in addition to the basic training requirements by the standard.

2. The contract employer shall ensure that each of his or her employees follows the work practices required by this standard and safety related work rules required by the host employer.

a. any unique hazard presented by the contract employer work.

b. any unanticipated hazard found during the contract employers work that the host employer did not mentions and,

c. the measure that the contractor took to correct any violation reported by the host employer under paragraph (A)(2) of this section to prevent from such violations from reoccurring in the future.

Work Permit (ANNEX J) where all parties involved are aware of the work being performed. More than aware all parties involved should sign the permit, this means client, contractor and others affected. Ensure these changes are considered during bid time.

If you are still not convinced that establishing electrically safe working conditions is a viable option, read on!

NECA contractors have a legal obligation to inform clients of the liability that energized work presents. The industry cannot continue to satisfy a client’s wish of not interrupting electrical service when safe completion of the work requires a shut-down. From a liability perspective, it doesn’t make any financial sense to expose employees to live electrical work without the proper protection.

Unprotected workers expose to live circuits could cost millions of dollars to electrical contractors and clients. This doesn’t account for the human factor behind injuries. Considering that long after the scars have healed the effects will still remain.

An example of some of the associated cost for burns due to arc flash and blast is found in Washington State’s workers compensation data. This will be able to show a small glimpse of a huge problem.  From 2000 to 2005, there were 350 work related burns of which 30 are associated to arc flash/blast explosions. These 30 claims incurred a total of $1.3 million in losses. This cost captures just a modest fraction of what an arc flash/blast can truly cost. Here some additional costs that are not reflected: physical therapy, lost salaries, rehabilitation and the litigation cost.

Litigation alone could bankrupt any business. Remember that litigation does not only impact the electrical contractors, it also impacts clients. This is why all too frequently small print at the bottom of contracts says the “duty to hold harmless agreement” “additionally insured” or “duty to represent”. Not only will the electrical contractor be faced with litigated cost pertinent to their defense but also their clients.

The above reasons are why Electrical Contractors must change the all too common practice of working live; we are crating a greater disservice to our clients and industry the continuance of this practice.

1. De-energize - this should always be your first consideration. Part of doing away with the well established culture is eliminating energized work from the bottom rung. Place the notion inside the minds that the task cannot be done energized and explain to customers some of the NFPA requirements. Review the legal liabilities that can arise in the practice of working with the power on. Article 120 goes through some extensive detail in outlining the establishment of electrically safe working condition, so the options are available.

2. Justification - if work must be done live in order to preserve life and there is no other way to bypass the sources of energy such as generators and other then and only then should we look at the other alternatives.

3. Energized Work - if and only if it has been established by the contractor and host employer that the work needs to be live. Then generate an Energized Electrical Protocol.

Remember, working the circuits live should be the last step in any organizations decision-making matrix. De-energizing is the most profitable decision.