3.1.1
Except as provided for in 3.1.2 or under the relevant requirements specified in 3.7.4,
no animal or carcass shall be worked on by persons while electricity is applied.
So to me there are 2 situations only anyone can work on an animal while electricity is applied.
3.1.2
Protection against direct contact in compliance with 3.1.1 is not necessary if the equipment
is within the zone of influence of equipotential bonding and the equipment is Class A. The
situation of access to the carcasses needs to be taken into consideration when applying this.
(Except 3.1.2 talks about direct contact though? Not working on the animal but maybe they meant the animal or carcass can be worked on in that case)
3.7.4.2
Operators of Class B equipment shall be protected against contact with the
enlivened animals. This can be achieved by:
(a) Ensuring the voltage at the point of contact of the operator with the carcass is less than 6Va.c.r.m.s. or 15Vripple-free d.c.This may be verified by measurement of the voltage gradient on the animal. See Appendix B;
(b) The operators using insulated tools to isolate themselves from the live animal; or
(c) Use of gloves that provide an adequate level of electrical insulation from the exposed voltages
(In the case of back stiffeners only we have 3 options)
I have sites with equipement defined as Class B by the manufacture and that is not used as a back stiffener. Different kinds of stimulators and immobiliers. Sites have staff working on the animal/carcass while electricity is applied. Their claim to safety is they are redefining the equiment as Class A using the method descirbed in 3.7.4.2 (a) by doing this method they are meeting the definition of Class A as defined in the standard even though the equipment comes defined as Class B. Is that the purpose of the classes? or is the Class something a manufacturer should define and be adhered too?
Aside from simply making an assessment based on the Class definitions, I only see the options to do so under 3.7.4.2
If this is acceptable, my next question is how often should this be done? There is no guidance in this standard about how often such should be undertaken. I don't believe a 1 off measurement and then never doing it again is sufficient, this would need to be done regularly to ensure it is always within those limits. What evidence would you expect from a site to prove this as an acceptable method of ensuring safety?