People tend to like to stay in their comfort zone and change is not always well received. Introducing arc flash into an electrical safety program for the first time includes new concepts such as warning labels, PPE, arc flash studies, the list goes on.

When first introduced, how well was your company's / client's arc flash program received?

• Well received
• Some problems but good overall
• Very difficult
• The Hindenburg comes to mind

Stories about success and problems are always encouraged!

I am in the process of developing an Arc-Flash mitigation plan for a customer. They had a plan created several years ago by a company that was supposed to be well versed in AF, and skilled in using PTW32. Realizing that PTW32 has come a long way since then, the database I was provided me, that was developed by the other company was incomplete, and the equipment designations used held no meaning to the customer.

All this said, the new program has become a hard sell since the first run was apparently a general failure - how do you label equipment when the designation in the study does not relate to to the name in the field? Bottom line - GET IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME OR PEOPLE WILL BE RELUCTANT TO ACCEPT IT THE SECOND TIME AROUND.

SUPPLEMENTAL: The Corporation fully understands the value, though not necessarily the complexity of the study. The field people do not understand the necessity, in part because of the previous study.

Well received, however; the true test will be if our interpretations ever stand before a jury. I feel there are two aspects to arc flash protection; the happy theoretical side in which most have subscribed to improved safety, and then the gloomy liability side; wherein some seeming innocuous code change tucked in behind page 5 becomes the mater which destroys an engineer's career because it was not fully emphasized.