Arc Flash Protection

Status
Not open for further replies.

cowboyjwc

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Simi Valley, CA
Contractors: Are you being required to install arc flash warning labels, such as the one shown in the handbook and required by 110.16?

Inspsectors: Are you requiring the installation of the lables and if you are under the 2008 code are you getting the analisys?
 
"If you combine the requirements of 110.16 of the 2008 NEC with the newly added requirements of 130.3(C) of the 2009 70E, you have a complete requirement specifying which equipment to mark and what information to include in the marking. The phrase from the NEC ?are likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized? can help in the decision of which equipment to mark."

I try and reasonably promote bilingual warning signs. It makes me feel better that all understand the hazards. Just my two cents

http://www.labelprinters.org/ clam to be cost effective

JJ
 
As an inspector, I require the label but do not require the analysis. On many occasions, the utility can only provide an estimated available fault current, and can't guaranty it will even be near that vaule anytime in the future.

In short, the numebrs would not have any real meaning...
 
cowboyjwc said:
Contractors: Are you being required to install arc flash warning labels, such as the one shown in the handbook and required by 110.16?

Inspsectors: Are you requiring the installation of the lables and if you are under the 2008 code are you getting the analisys?
I'm putting the stickers on the gear as they come with it.

Analysis? I think you nailed that with your last post John.
 
chris kennedy said:
I'm putting the stickers on the gear as they come with it.

Analysis? I think you nailed that with your last post John.

I was told by the inspectors I needed the labels. The C-H supplier was amazed..then got me a handfull. When I ran out I just made labels with MS Word and slapped one on every diconnect, breaked panel, meter etc. on commercial jobs. The inspectors were happy ...so I was happy.
 
bphgravity said:
. . . In short, the numbers would not have any real meaning. . .
We have the following statements in our Electric Service and Meter Manual (Goldbook):
  1. Although the exact amount of fault current can not be known for a particular installation, the Company will furnish the data for calculation.
  2. The Indianapolis Power & Light Company power grid is a dynamic power system that changes from moment to moment as demands are made to the system. Furthermore, permanent changes to the system are common which will change the information provided.
As far as I know, there are no electric utilities in this country that have a distribution system that is not dynamic; therefore, they can not provide information that will not change over time. :smile:
 
The new 70E requirements for labeling require either the Ei or the PPE required to be on the label, so either and arc flash analysis needs to be done or the PPE from the tables needs to be on the label.
 
charlie said:
As far as I know, there are no electric utilities in this country that have a distribution system that is not dynamic; therefore, they can not provide information that will not change over time. :smile:


BINGO! And you really shouldn't be expected to.
 
zog said:
The new 70E requirements for labeling require either the Ei or the PPE required to be on the label, so either and arc flash analysis needs to be done or the PPE from the tables needs to be on the label.


Who ensures and enforces its accuracy over time?
 
JJ, I hadn't even thought about them being bilingual. Good Idea and thanks for the post. I just got a call from a wholesale house yesterday saying they had never seen the stickers and didn't know where to get them.
 
bphgravity said:
Who ensures and enforces its accuracy over time?

the owner is responsible, and if someone is injured and the labeling is found to be incorrect, you can bet OSHA will find them at fault.
 
I'm not too sure about that. I would think it would be the responsibility of the worker to ensure the label is correct by re-performing the analysis before energized work were to occur. Again, this would make the label have little to no function.

I guess I parallel this to the resistance of the grounding electrode system. What point is it to document the grounding resistance and label it on the service equipment when 2 days later it's no longer accurate.

As an electrician and electrical contractor, I would never assume a label installed is accurate at all. Much like panelboard directories. There is no telling what has changed since it was originally filled out.
 
zog said:
The new 70E requirements for labeling require either the Ei or the PPE required to be on the label, so either and arc flash analysis needs to be done or the PPE from the tables needs to be on the label.
Unless 70E has been adopted by the AHJ, the inspector has no authority to require a label that has the incident energy or PPE requirement on it. The NEC only requires a generic label and the inspector can only enforce the codes that have been adopted by the AHJ.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Unless 70E has been adopted by the AHJ, the inspector has no authority to require a label that has the incident energy or PPE requirement on it. The NEC only requires a generic label and the inspector can only enforce the codes that have been adopted by the AHJ.

The NFPA 70E is an extension of the NFPA 70 (NEC) is it not?
 
bphgravity said:
I'm not too sure about that. I would think it would be the responsibility of the worker to ensure the label is correct by re-performing the analysis before energized work were to occur. .

99% of the workers have no idea how to properly calulate the Ei, I will trust the EE that did the study.
 
The state of Florida has not adopted the NFPA 70E and OSHA regulations are not typically within the scope of enforcement of the building department.

Citizens and the public call our office all the time to report workers hanging off ladders, hanging over the edge of roofs, working with only shorts on, ect, ect.

There is really nothing we can do about it.

The one exception is the energizing of a service. This is the only time we look for safety related issues not exactly within the scope of the NEC. However, receiving electrical service is not a right. Meaning, the city will not allow electrical energy to serve a building or structure were it is deemed unsafe.

This is regardless of what OSHA or anyone else thinks.
 
Why bother posting labels if the calcs aren't done?? It upsets me that the ones that sit behind a desk and make the decision to just put a sticker on the panel cover to "appease" their lack of understanding of 70E. I attended a "live" arc flash demonstration at KEMA electrical short circuit laboratory a few years back and my attitude towards energized work was changed forever. It is absolutely amazing to witness a fault in the 50 calorie range from 35 feet away. The plasma ball produced is hotter than the sun, the percussion blast will knock a Clydesdale to the ground, and sound is louder than two locomotives crashing into each other...and this particular blast was conducted with a 30amp 480v disconnect for a duration of 2 cycles. Local disconnects arent even on the minds of the folks that are in a hurry to get everything "labeled". In reality, a local disconnect is more dangerous than a panelboard because the blast is now "choked" due to the narrower enclosure and the deeper surface area which directs the blast into a tighter path typically, at eye level. It aggravates me that the goal is to just slap a label on the gear to achieve compliance, all you have achieved is ignorance. Next time you adhere your pretty little pink polka dotted bi-lingual scratch and sniff sticker onto a panel cover-take a minute to stop and think about why it is now a requirement. Maybe a trip to the the local burn unit could help you realize why this has become mandatory. These people out in the field are relying on you for correct information and if you de-classify a hazard, they will most certainly treat the situation differently and complacency will become more apt to follow. This "new era" of safety practices and procedures has an effect that changes the mind set of how we do things and often times it is perceived as an inconvienence because of decreased wrench time, an increase in paper work, and frustration from a lack of understanding. But the bottom line is, this is meant to save lives....As an IBEW Journeyman, Estimator, and now Project Manager I will personally educate anyone who doesnt have the time to learn about 70E and hopefully help them understand that the number #1 goal is to have everyone come home to their wife and kids at night. BTW-Utility companies must provide you with available fault currents, and if they don't- the "stickers" should be classified as the highest hazard possible.
 
Dr.Sparks said:
. . . I will personally educate anyone who doesn't have the time to learn about 70E and hopefully help them understand that the number #1 goal is to have everyone come home to their wife and kids at night. . .
I know my post means nothing to you by the tone of your rant. However, the why is apparent if you know that you can't just do the calculations, post the numbers, and know that they will change at some time in the future. In fact, the numbers may change before you get a chance to post them. I have also seen the same type of demonstrations at the Buss facilities in St. Louis and am also impressed with the lack of safety in some facilities. However, wearing the 'moon suit' will not protect you in all cases. There are some installations where the amount of incident energy is so high, the only way to work on the equipment is to shut it down.

We are aware that an open flash is much safer than an arc in a box. We are in the process of looking at our whole system and our procedures to make sure our workers are safe. The electrical industry is also being made aware of what arc flash, arc blast, and incident energy is and what to do about it. Due to our dynamic system, we can only give you the numbers at one point in time. Most of the serving electric utilities are giving those numbers or are in the process of obtaining the proper software to get the number you need to calculate the incident energy. A label is the only way to warn the electrician that he can not open a piece of equipment without doing the calculations.

I hope your statement above is accurate, there can never be enough training and passion about safety. :smile:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top