No announcement yet.

Table 1 API 500 10.1.3

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Table 1 API 500 10.1.3

    Could it be argued that table 1 of API 500 10.1.3 would only apply to figures in chapter 10?


    API RO 500, (2012)


    This section presents guidelines for classifying locations for electrical installations at locations surrounding oil and gas drilling and workover rigs and facilities on land and on marine fixed and mobile platforms where flammable petroleum gas and volatile liquids are produced, processed, stored, transferred, or otherwise handled prior to entering the transportation facilities.

    The following recommendations for determining the degree and extent of classified locations are specific examples of situations commonly encountered in producing and drilling operations and have been developed by experience in the industry. Application of these examples to similar, though not identical, situations should be made with sound engineering judgment, employing material presented in this recommended practice and other publications. Specific examples listed consider only the item discussed and do not take into account the possible influence of adjacent areas classified due to other equipment.

    10.1.2 says one can apply to "similar, though not identical, suituations", provided one uses "sound engineering judgment"

    Are they? (similar)
    Are you ? (using sound engineering judgement)

    Possibly we are only getting half the story.

    This section uses the terms "guidelines", and "engineering judgement". That leaves it open to interpretation.

    What in specific are you look at?
    Without data you’re just another person with an opinion – Edwards Deming


      Begining of API Special notes and Forward.

      Reading through all that I take that to mean its a general guideline that is broad and gives general information but leave an out saying that sites can vary, engineering and AHJ should be consulted.
      Working in the ND oil patch I have found that sites can vary wildly going from sweet to sour from one minute to the next. It is better to err on the side of caution and have engineering documentation from a registered professional engineer (RPE) stamped and signed for the extent of classified locations for these areas.
      If documentation is not stamped and signed by a RPE for the lack of better words the paper has more value in the porta facilities.
      Without that signed and stamped documentation, a company is open to the AHJ and oil company I&E rep. Which could side with C1D1 wiring methods when you wired it C1D2.
      My best advise is if no engineering documentation is going to be produced for that site. Consult your AHJ and oil company I&E rep for questions and concerns before you get to far along.


        Bump-- the last post was posted last evening and never got cleared so I bumped it. [MENTION=160414]Kendrick K[/MENTION]
        They say I shot a man named Gray and took his wife to Italy
        She inherited a million bucks and when she died it came to me
        I can't help it if I'm lucky


          I endorse iceworm's initial reply. Some additional comments:
          [LIST][*]The NEC requires classifications to be "properly documented" [Section 500.4(A)][*]While the NEC defines classified locations [Section 500.5], except for installations covered by Articles 511 to 516, it does not say how to classify a location but references external standards in the INs of Section 500.4(B).[*]The "RP" in API RP500 means recommended practice. It is not a code. However, since it is ANSI sanctioned, FedOSHA can cite it under the general duty clause.[*]Neither FedOSHA nor the NEC requires a PE to create the "proper documentation". However, some local jurisdictions may. At one time the NEC did require locations under Article 505 to be PE certified, but it no longer does.[/LIST]
          Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
          Answers based on 2017 NEC unless otherwise noted.