Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Andy Cooper
I understand some large companies SWEB, Powergen etc have a requirement to work on live electrical equipment. It is also understood that to provide a continuous power supply reasonable risks are taken and controls are strict.
I work for a manufacturing company that operates 24/7, parts of the operation require electrical maintenance that if switched off would prove to be very costly in lost product and time. I do not deem myself to be knowledgeable in electrical matters and would appreciate any advice on controls that can be enforced, best practices, risk assessments or even advice on ‘how to assess cost verses risk’ etc.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Roger the Dodger
You need to consider Regulation 14 of the Electricity at Work Regs 'Work on or near live conductors'
No person shall be engaged in any work activity on or so near any live conductor (other than one suitabl covered with insultating material so as to prevent danger) that danger may arise unless -
a) it is UNREASONABLE in all circumstances for it to be dead; and
b) it is REASONABLE in ALL the circumstances for him
c) suitable precautions (including where necessary the provision of suitable equipment) are taken to prevent injury
In everyday language I take this to mean that there must be a damned good reason to work live. This is because it is very easy to render an electrical system/conductor safe by turning it off. Which compared to the hazard presented by electricity and the risk of death it presents seems entirely reasonably practicable in just about all factory situations that I can think of. Loss of production/cost is not good enough.
I think the argument used by the power companies, is that becuse the national grid system provides power to everyone, turning it off on purpose is unacceptable because there will be machines/computers/processes operating which may cause further accidents if turned off e.g. hospital life support machines, trains, etc etc.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Paul Costelloe
Roger beat me to it while I was composing my reply to this posting but here it is for what its worth !
Reg. 14 of the Electricity at Work Regs imposes an absolute duty not to carry out work on or near live equipment unless it can be justified by a defined risk assessment.
The following conditions must be satisfied:
It must be unreasonable in all the circumstances for the live part to be dead AND it must be reasonable in all the circumstances for work to continue on the part whilst it is live AND suitable precautions to prevent injury are taken.
The kind of factors which would help to justify live working would be for instance, the impracticality of carrying out the work with the equipment dead (e.g. fault finding requiring it to be live) or the creation of other hazards by making the equipment dead (as would be the case if the Supply Authority only worked on equipment whilst dead) or the need to comply with other statutory requirements, for instance emission control plant.
In summary, I think you would have difficulty in arguing that downtime and subsequent loss of production (i.e cost) ALONE would justify live working.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Chris Pope
I think you will find that the organisations referred to have developed safe systems of work, which they use to train their staff. They have a sort of rule book of all of these procedures. SWEB told us that the index to their safety policy alone runs to about 170 pages. It is very unlikely that your organisation is likely to be in the same league. I believe that there are technical alternatives to your problem which involve separate isolate able supplies. You should engage a technical specialist to give you a feasibility study for this problem,
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
My first rule on live work was that authorisation could only be given by the plant manager who, by signing the permit, accepted total responsibility for the safety of the work to be undertaken.
Makes 'em think.
Merv
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Stuart Nagle
In addition to the above excellent replies, I would add that in a continuous manufacturing environment, it is not beyond the realms of possibility for the works engineer to have implemented alternate supplies to machines so that isolation and maintenance on supplies, repair and replacement of cables and switch gear etc, as well as breakdowns through failures can be adequately controlled and managed within a safe system of work, without the need to work live in any but the least ocassions when there is absolutely no reasonable alternative!!
In most 24/7 manufacturing industries, time is usually set aside during a week, fortnight etc for specific maintenance tasks to be undertaken, usually pre-planned, that enable routine shutdowns to undertake 'essential' maintenance works.
I would like to think that such systems are in place in your workplace, and that your works engineer has a pre-planned and safe system of work in place for the kind of works to which you refer.
Stuart
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Andy Cooper
Thank you All for your responses, independent thought is always appreciated.
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.