Arc Flash Forum :: View topic - 2012 Proposed Label Requirements

The problem with dating the label is that after five years, most labels will not have to be changed for increased IE, but will show a date over five years old. This will cause questioning of the label validity.

Surely the intent is not to have to relabel everything just because the date on the label does not reflect the latest study date. Or is it?

I dug my heals in and pushed for more detail based on what the software can provide.

Surely the intent is not to have to relabel everything just because the date on the label does not reflect the latest study date. Or is it?

We use Easypower which lists both a PPE level (HRC) and the IE (unsure if I could or would change this).

Also, our first plant to have the AFHA completed did not include the analysis date and I do not believe that re-labeling for this reason is a justifiable use of time and resources.

Primary customer wanted as much information available for the workers, and therefore did not agree with 2012 limitation of ONLY cal or HRC.

(1) Only one of the following: Available incident energy or minimum arc rating of clothing

Author:	Jim Phillips (brainfiller) [ Sun May 22, 2011 12:22 pm ]
Post subject:	2012 Proposed Label Requirements
The NFPA 70E labeling requirements are about the change again. 2004 - Basic Arc Flash Warning Label 2009 - Warning label with either the available incident energy or required level of PPE 2012 - The proposed new labeling requirements for the 2012 Edition of NFPA 70E include: (1) Only one of the following: Available incident energy or minimum arc rating of clothing (2) Date of arc flash hazard analysis (3) Nominal system voltage (4) Equipment Identification (5) Arc Flash Boundary Question: Are your existing labels already in compliance with the 2012 proposal? If not, will you / your clients be re-labeling? Our existing labels already comply Our existing labels won’t comply, we will re-label Our existing labels won’t comply, we might re-label Our existing labels won’t comply, we won’t re-label We don’t have labels - yet As always, comments are always welcomed and encouraged.

Author:	S. Patel [ Mon May 23, 2011 7:28 am ]
Post subject:
Fortunately we used the complete labels that our software created which covered all of these latest changes to the label requirements. I can see this has the potential to become a very big headache if the requirements continue to change with each edition.

Author:	A King [ Mon May 23, 2011 7:41 am ]
Post subject:
We use Easypower which lists both a PPE level (HRC) and the IE (unsure if I could or would change this). Also, our first plant to have the AFHA completed did not include the analysis date and I do not believe that re-labeling for this reason is a justifiable use of time and resources.

Author:	ScottS [ Mon May 23, 2011 10:55 am ]
Post subject:
I feel like we dodged a bullet with this one. Some in our group wanted only to post the PPE Arc Rating per the 2009 Edition of 70E. I dug my heals in and pushed for more detail based on what the software can provide. I think I feel a bit vindicated but now I am concerned that everytime a new 70E is in the works, we will be fretting over how much time / money we will need to spend to change what we did previously.

Author:	jghrist [ Mon May 23, 2011 11:28 am ]
Post subject:
I assume that "minimum arc rating of clothing" is not the PPE or HRC category, but is the Arc Rating expressed in cal/cm² per the definition in Article 100. As such, the new labelling requirements would not prohibit having IE and a PPE category. They would prohibit listing both the calculated IE cal/cm² and the Arc Rating cal/cm². The problem with dating the label is that after five years, most labels will not have to be changed for increased IE, but will show a date over five years old. This will cause questioning of the label validity. Surely the intent is not to have to relabel everything just because the date on the label does not reflect the latest study date. Or is it?

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

2012 Proposed Label Requirements https://brainfiller.com/arcflashforum/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1722	Page 1 of 1

Author:	ScottS [ Mon May 23, 2011 12:00 pm ]
Post subject:
jghrist wrote: The problem with dating the label is that after five years, most labels will not have to be changed for increased IE, but will show a date over five years old. This will cause questioning of the label validity. Surely the intent is not to have to relabel everything just because the date on the label does not reflect the latest study date. Or is it? I did not think that far ahead. Still trying to digest it all. In the absense of any direction, I imagine one approach might be to add a small label on the warning label stating something like "Re-validated - Month / Year" Yes we did only post the PPE arc rating, not the calculated PPE. I have seen some of the other posts / debate about mixing categories etc.

Author:	Don Jones [ Mon May 23, 2011 12:28 pm ]
Post subject:
ScottS wrote: I dug my heals in and pushed for more detail based on what the software can provide. I now wish I spoke a bit louder. We went with the 2009 Edition requirements - Arc Rating (cal/cm^2) on the label. Thought we were doing good. Not sure if we have the time/budget to do this again. I think the info is still in our arc flash software database so perhaps all we need to do is reconfigure our labels. Still going to be a bit of a pain.

Author:	A King [ Tue May 24, 2011 5:57 am ]
Post subject:
jghrist wrote: Surely the intent is not to have to relabel everything just because the date on the label does not reflect the latest study date. Or is it? 130.3 says that the AFHA shall be updated when major modification or renovation takes place and that it shall be reviewed periodically, not to exceed five years to account for changes. I would think as long you document that a review has occurred, one-line diagrams are up-to-date and the IE results have not changed, you would not be required to relabel.

Author:	ZeroSeq [ Tue May 24, 2011 1:17 pm ]
Post subject:
We already comply.

Author:	Gary B [ Tue Jun 14, 2011 7:30 am ]
Post subject:
Primary customer wanted as much information available for the workers, and therefore did not agree with 2012 limitation of ONLY cal or HRC. But we have relabelled the entire plant when other minor changes occurred in the recommended PPE. The NFPA committee should be aware of the expense these 'little' changes cause, understanding that the standard's credibility goes down with each revision.

Author:	SPETE [ Wed Jun 15, 2011 4:37 am ]
Post subject:
A King wrote: We use Easypower which lists both a PPE level (HRC) and the IE (unsure if I could or would change this). Also, our first plant to have the AFHA completed did not include the analysis date and I do not believe that re-labeling for this reason is a justifiable use of time and resources. We also use Easy Power and probably will not change PPE and HRC. I include the dates in the comments section.

Author:	jghrist [ Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:38 am ]
Post subject:
Gary B wrote: Primary customer wanted as much information available for the workers, and therefore did not agree with 2012 limitation of ONLY cal or HRC. The standard does not say ONLY cal or HRC. Quote: (1) Only one of the following: Available incident energy or minimum arc rating of clothing Arc rating of clothing is not the HRC, it is the rating of clothing expressed in cal/cm².

Author:	Lane Price [ Fri Oct 11, 2013 5:50 am ]
Post subject:
I am new to the forum and also attempting to understand 70E fully. Are the labels required be Red, Orange or does it matter?

Author:	Jim Phillips (brainfiller) [ Sun Oct 13, 2013 3:57 pm ]
Post subject:
This short article of mine about label colors might help. It is based on ANSI Z535, NFPA 70E and a survey question on this forum a while ago.

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