Arc Flash Forum
https://brainfiller.com/arcflashforum/

130.5[C] "incident energy analysis" ?
https://brainfiller.com/arcflashforum/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=3811		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  mike01 [ Tue Nov 03, 2015 5:17 am ]
Post subject:  130.5[C] "incident energy analysis" ?
In reviewing the 2015 70E as it relates to our company’s label updates, typically in the past we listed the incident energy along with the system voltage and boundary and the appropriate HRC / PPE category for the equipment based on the calculated I.E. However looking over the revised 70E 130.5[C] indicates that the results of an incident energy analysis to specify PPE is not permitted? Also what is the definition of Site Specific level of PPE indicated under equipment labeling? Are most people moving away from indicating the PPE category on the equipment label? :?:
Author:  wbd [ Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 130.5[C] "incident energy analysis" ?
Basically if you have had a study done, then you cannot use the tables and associated category. The label will have the incident energy value listed at the appropriate working distance, typically 18". Workers are then expected to utilize the proper PPE based on the IE value. Annex H provides guidance on the selection of the proper PPE.

Many companies will utilize Annex H to derive site specific PPE categories and include that in their Electrical Safety Program/Practices.
Author:  arcad [ Tue Nov 03, 2015 8:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 130.5[C] "incident energy analysis" ?
mike01 wrote:
In reviewing the 2015 70E as it relates to our company’s label updates, typically in the past we listed the incident energy along with the system voltage and boundary and the appropriate HRC / PPE category for the equipment based on the calculated I.E. However looking over the revised 70E 130.5[C] indicates that the results of an incident energy analysis to specify PPE is not permitted? Also what is the definition of Site Specific level of PPE indicated under equipment labeling? Are most people moving away from indicating the PPE category on the equipment label? :?:


The revised language states at least one of the following:


•  Either the available incident energy with the corresponding working distance or the arc flash PPE category in Table 130.7(C)(15)(A)(b) or Table 130.7(C)(15)(B) shall be listed but not both.

•  Minimum arc rating of clothing is required.

•  Site-specific level of PPE is required.


Call it instead "Site-specific Level of PPE". As long as you don't call it "PPE Category" there should be nothing preventing you from doing so. Remember that not that long ago people were told not to mix HRC with incident energy. So they began to call it 1, 2, 3 and 4 PPE categories to get away from the term HRC. This time around the NFPA 70E claimed ownership for the term "PPE category" that people moved to, and say you can't use that term with incident energy. Also, the NFPA Handbook shows a sample label with fields to be filled in for "Available Incident Energy" and "Level of PPE" while just half a page earlier states that "available incident energy" cannot be included with the "PPE category" in table 130.7(C)15(A)(b). It makes sense since the "Level of PPE" and "PPE Category" are technically two different terms.
Author:  mike01 [ Wed Nov 04, 2015 5:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 130.5[C] "incident energy analysis" ?
Interesting and confusing at the same time, in the one section under “Arc-Flash PPE” the revision indicates that “the results of an incident energy analysis to specify an arc flash PPE Category in in Table 130.7[C][16] shall not be permitted”. In the very next section under the “incident Energy Analysis Method” the informational note refers to Annex H Table H.3[b] for information on selection of arc-rated clothing and other PPE however when comparing this to table 130.7[C][16] it does not cover the 4-8 cal/cm² it jumps right from 1.2 to 1.2 to 12 cal/cm², so if you list the “Level of PPE” on your label what table are you referring to determine what is the appropriate PPE for that level?
Author:  JBD [ Wed Nov 04, 2015 8:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 130.5[C] "incident energy analysis" ?
mike01 wrote:
.. it does not cover the 4-8 cal/cm² it jumps right from 1.2 to 1.2 to 12 cal/cm², so if you list the “Level of PPE” on your label what table are you referring to determine what is the appropriate PPE for that level?


Effectively NFPA70E is saying that Table 130.7[C][16] is the appropriate PPE only for the very specific tasks and conditions found in 130.7(C).
They are saying it is really up to your company to publish its own table of PPE based.

From what I have seen, many companies are now following the list in Annex H. Several of these companies even allow their employees to wear 'normal' shirts for their routine work and don appropiate PPE only as needed.
Author:  arcad [ Tue Nov 10, 2015 11:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 130.5[C] "incident energy analysis" ?
here is an example of custom made arc flash label we've recently designed and printed for one engineering company. The PPE requirements are based on Personal Protective Equipment Table provided by the company.

Image
Author:  Voltrael [ Wed Nov 11, 2015 5:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 130.5[C] "incident energy analysis" ?
arcad wrote:
here is an example of custom made arc flash label we've recently designed and printed for one engineering company. The PPE requirements are based on Personal Protective Equipment Table provided by the company.

Image


Why did you keep the Prohibited Approach Boundary on the label?
Author:  Jim Phillips (brainfiller) [ Mon Dec 21, 2015 6:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 130.5[C] "incident energy analysis" ?
I prefer to not include the list of PPE the label since it sometimes will change in NFPA 70E. Better to reference the latest edition of 70E or the company policy for PPE. Just my 2 cents.
Author:  wbd [ Mon Dec 21, 2015 2:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 130.5[C] "incident energy analysis" ?
I agree with Jim. We list the IE and then reference NFPA 70E and site specific policy
Author:  arcad [ Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 130.5[C] "incident energy analysis" ?
Jim Phillips (brainfiller) wrote:
I prefer to not include the list of PPE the label since it sometimes will change in NFPA 70E. Better to reference the latest edition of 70E or the company policy for PPE. Just my 2 cents.


the customer has decided they wanted to keep the Prohibited Approach boundary on the label. We always tell customers about any discrepancy we spot in arc flash label layout they come up with but leave it up to them to make final decision. Here is another example of custom made arc flash label we've recently produced showing limited and restricted approach boundaries only, referencing calculation method and NFPA 70E PPE tables instead of the list of PPE on the label:

Image
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 7 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/