2024 Arc Flash Labels

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

shockking

Member
Location
Sacramento, CA
Occupation
engineer
We're printing ~1,000 arc flash labels and I'm reviewing our template. I would love to get your suggestions and wish list for what to put on the labels!

One specific code question: 130.7(H) "very clearly" says not to put both the incident energy (which we plan to do) and the PPE category on the label. But some of our guys expected to see the category number. Is there some workaround to include both? Such as saying "Equivalent PPE Category", "Suggested ...", etc.? FYI, we only use Cat 2 and Cat 4 PPE (no 1 or 3).

Combing through NEC and 70E requirements, I believe the MINIMUM required contents are as follows.
1686873411829.png
Did I miss anything?

What other info do you find that's actually helpful or useful? Here's some we're discussing.

  • Header: we plan to use orange WARNING and red DANGER headers. DANGER will be for incident energy over some threshold; we've talked about 6, 12, and 40 cal/cm^2. What threshold do you guys like?
  • Bus, protective ID: We'd never get the labels on the right equipment without some location ID.
  • Date: currently we have the date of the arc flash study (which may or may not have anything to do with date applied).
  • Limited/Restricted Approach: these have both always been on in the past, but I don't think most of the team keeps straight which is what. However, we often take random people on tours, and need to know how far they should stand back, which happens to be the Limited Approach boundary. Personally I'd rather say something like "Approach limit for unqualified persons". Thoughts?
  • Working distance vs incident energy at: SKM defaults to this "Incident Energy At" language. I'm thinking of changing it "Working Distance", to match the 70E language. "Working Distance" doesn't seem well defined per se, but I haven't dug as much into that yet. Thoughts?
TIA,
Tom
 
Your labels should be based on your Electrical Safe Work Practices program. It should spell out how the label data should be interpreted by your qualified workers. I had customers with ESWP programs that said their minimum PPE was to be equivalent to a category 2 for energy AFIEl, but category 1 for face and head protection, their program called for this to be shown on their label as a Level 1 along with the calculated AFIE.

Personally I have never used the SKM label headings. I feel they are very good at building engineering software but not that great at interpreting NFPA70E.
 
The "site-specific PPE level" option in NFPA 70E can probably be used to justify what you want to do. Although I haven't seen the 2024 version. I assume this has not been formally issued yet? NFPA 70E folks have had a long-standing issue with using the PPE Categories in 70E AND the Incident Energy on the same label. They say it should be one or the other, and if you have calculated the Incident Energy, you should use that. My general advice is that consistency in labeling and proper training in how to use the labels are more important than the exact details of what is on the label. I generally favor a minimalist approach to the label content. Keep it simple.
 
Since the NEC is now requiring calculated fault current to be field labeled on several equipment types, such as panelboards, you can add that to the label, since SKM has that information.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top