NFPA 70E 130.7(C)(10)(d)(1) Informational Note sates that gloves that are at least 0.03 in. thick have been shown to have an ATPV in excess of 10 cal/cm2. Is anyone using leather gloves as arc rated equipment? If so, are there specific items being used that you can share?

I would think that the leather protectors that go over the rubber gloves would meet or exceed this.

Leather protectors are an option, but not necessarily best suited to be used as a general purpose leather glove.

Tig gloves are somewhat inherently flame resistant, readily available, and most importantly, very thin. They maximize dexterity for electrical work while meeting the requirement of a full leather glove.

Greetings from Canada. I was recently in a client and they had just purchased class 0 gloves with leather protectors. I noticed that on the leather protector was an ATPV rating. As many of us are aware we now have an ASTM standard- not mandatory for the arc flash testing of hand protection. In 2005 WH Salisbury had done extensive testing up here at Kinectrics on both the rubber insulating gloves and the leather protectors- separately and both gloves combined. The question is the ATPV rating stamped on the leather protector, does this represent the ATPV of just the outer leather protector or both the outer leather protector and the inner dielectric glove both combined?

I've worked with clients that have electrical safety rules dictating the use of lineman's gloves with protectors for all tasks regarding arc flash hazard. This includes handling large panel and manhole covers. I've discussed this with them. It's the engineering department is just making things easy on themselves, they don't have to reference and qualify another piece of PPE. I disagree with the one style glove for all electrical work and I personally use tig gloves or leather work gloves for these tasks.

Something I have been recently looking at is gloves for use when stripping and terminating wire. It turns out that although leather is amazingly abrasion resistant and somewhat puncture resistant, jt is decidedly not cut (slash) resistant, even less so than cotton. The issue at hand was that an apprentice had 'cut resistant' gloves on. The gloves were rated 'level 1', the lowest level. They basicallu did nothing for him. It is looking like level 4 or more is the minimum we should have considered. Some of the cjt resistant gloves use kevlar and would be heat and arc flash resistant as well.