Emergency Response Training
Also, in 110, they try to move all their training requirements in one section now, and so here Emergency Response Training. So if you have first responders, also, if you have people that are exposed to shock hazards, then they have to be trained in how to release a victim from an energized circuit, and that training has to occur annually. So we're talking now about how to release a worker from a circuit that is energized and they're locked on to that circuit. So that's the first part, exposed to shock hazards. The second part, now we're looking more at CPR and AED. This also used to be an annual training, but if you look down into D, "Training shall occur at a frequency that satisfies the requirements of the certifying body." So that's nice, because the Red Cross or the American Heart Association, they usually issue cards that are good for two years. So now that training can just coincide with their requirement. It used to be that that training had to be every year. So that's a nice change for us.
Ground-Fault Circuit -Interrupter (GFCI) Protection
GFCI. So the thing that changed here is that there is a new revision to the UL standard 943, and this requires all manufacturers to give us GFCIs with a self-test feature, so they're going to test themselves. We don't really have to test them. And if there is a problem, when they go through their self-test, they are automatically going to trip, and they are going to be de-energized. They are going to provide us with a light or some type of audible indication, but the manufacturer will now provide that to us. That is excellent, because, let's face it, how many people went out and tested their GFIs every month like we're supposed to? So this is going to be very nice.
Work Involving Electrical Hazards
Article 130, which is pretty much the heart of NFPA 70E, and the first change we see in there is normal operating condition. So it used to be that we had five conditions that we had to satisfy before we could go up and operate a piece of equipment normally, but now they've added one here. And so number one was always there, properly installed. Number two, always there, properly maintained. Properly maintained, by the way, in my opinion, is tough, because it has to be maintained in accordance with those manufacturer's instructions and applicable industry codes and standards. I always used, for an example, a molded case circuit breaker. I mean, how many of us go out and test the torque on that once a year? I mean, we might do thermal imaging. How many of us make the plastic out? So it's tough to get properly maintained, but I mean, hopefully, we can strive to get there.
Number three is the brand-new one, and if you're familiar with the National Electrical Code, this did come out on 110.3(B) of the National Electrical Code, that the equipment has to be used in accordance with the instructions that were included in UL listing and labeling or any testing agency and in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. So we better hang on to those instructions, because they've become part of the National Electrical Code. A good example that I could use, I guess, here would be sometimes I'll walk into an office building, I'm going to perform some electrical work, and I happen to see these little electric space heaters underneath the desk. Well, if we look at the instructions that come with that space heater, it will flat-out tell us, "Residential use only. Cannot be in a commercial or industrial building." So those manufacturer's instructions become extremely important.
Four, five, and six are not new, they were all there in 2015, but these are the six conditions that we would have to satisfy to go up and operate a piece of equipment normally just the way the manufacturer wants us to. We shouldn't have to be wearing any PPE during this time, because there should be no opportunity of shock, arc flash, arc blast, all the covers are on, the equipment's working great. So, of course, if you walked up to a piece of equipment and you could tell immediately by looking at it that it has arced before or that, you know, there are screws missing in the cover, which is not maintained properly, then we should be putting our personal protective equipment on to service that equipment.
Still in Article 130, Working While Exposed to Electrical Hazards, they tell us here, "If additional protective measures are required, they have to be selected and implemented according to the hierarchy of risk control." So, again, you know, eliminate, substitute, all those, "When the additional protective measures include the use of PPE," so we go all the way down to number six, "then the following has to be determined, the appropriate work practices we're going to use," we better know the arc flash boundary, so the arc flash boundary would be determined either by the incident energy analysis method or the PPE category method. And then, "The PPE that we're going to use inside that arc flash boundary." And table 130.5(C) can give us an indication that if we are going to have to use these additional protective measures or not.
So I took a little bit of that table, and I wanted to show it to you. So 130.5(C), this table was also in the 2015 version of 70E, but if we take a look at it now, this does apply to the incident energy analysis method and the PPE category method. In 2015 version, a lot of people were under the impression that this only could be utilized with the PPE category method. But if I've generated my label with incident energy analysis method, I can certainly use this table now. And, if we come down to the part that's underlined for AC systems and we work on energized conductors and circuit parts, including voltage testing, so we know we're energized, right? It comes over, and the equipment condition, it doesn't matter if it's brand-new, it doesn't matter if it's 45 years old. If we look over the likelihood of occurrence, yes, there is the likelihood of occurrence here of an arc flash, because we have covers off with testing, everything's energized. We make one mistake, we have a short circuit or a ground fault, and we are going to be in the middle of an explosion. So this table can be used with either method that we chose to generate our labels with.
And it goes on. Also, this is a nice change, in my opinion, here that 130.5(G), a table that actually came from Annex H of the 2015 version of 70E. So this used to be in the Annex. Now, it's in the regular sections of 70E. And what they have done here is they have given us the personal protective equipment that we need if we are using the incident energy analysis method. And, of course, that's the full-blown arc flash study. So if we're doing the full-blown arc flash study, it now tells us exactly what we have to wear all the way up to 12 calories.
So what I like about this, and I became aware that many people in my classes that I teach didn't even know this existed in the back of the document, and they wanted to mix the two methods together when they chose the PPE, which we never could do, this really spells it out for us. So from 1.2 calories all the way up to 12, we have to have an arc-rated clothing system that's equal to or greater than the estimated incident energy. So I look at my label, and I see that I've got 10 calories per centimeter squared of incident energy, I can put a 12 calories shirt on, that's no problem. I do not have to put a flash suit on, because it says, "Long-sleeve shirt and pants, or coverall, or arc flash suit." So that's a big difference between the incident energy analysis method and the PPE category method, because with the PPE category method, I had to put a flash suit on when I got above 8 calories here. And the manufacturers are making clothing all the way up to 12, which is nice, so I could have a 12 calories shirt on, 12 calories jeans, put my hard hat and face shield on. I can purchase a hard hat now with a balaclava built right in, get my gloves on, and, really, if I'm wearing the shirt and pants throughout the whole day, I mean, that's my work uniform, really then I'm just throwing on my hard hat and gloves. So it makes it quite a bit easier for us. But this table will go with method number one.