This week’s question has been the subject of much debate.
Should an arc flash calculation study be performed by / under the direction of a licensed Professional Engineer (P.E.)

• Yes
• No
• Depends on the Situation (Comments Please)

PE's are like passing an NEC test...it says nothing about the quality of the result. Some (most) of the really bad workmanship I deal with comes from engineering firms where everyone is a PE.

Performing an arc flash study is already an expensive endeavor and I think that businesses should have the option to do the analysis in-house providing they have someone qualified to do so (by qualified, I do not necessarily mean a P.E.). In addition to cost reduction, the ability to perform the study in-house allows businesses to keep the study up-to-date with renovations, new equipment installations and standard revisions. It is also important that the analysis, labeling, required associate training and the company’s electrical safety procedure are all in alignment with each other.

However, if performing an arc flash analysis as a contractor for a client, being a licensed P.E. may be requirement for engineering work in that region and if that’s the case I believe in abiding by the law.

While I am not opposed to testing and licensing, I do agree with PaulEngr that it does not guarantee expertise or quality workmanship.

I believe it is "legal" do perform the study in house for your company in most (all?) states. I think the rule is you can not offer engineering services for hire as in a consultant to another company.

p
The rules with regards to "professionals" vary by country and state/province. In the US it is common to differentiate between situations involving the "public" (licensed electricians for jobs which require pulling permits). In some states having a PE is automatic qualification as an expert witness but not in others. States are not uniform in the list of "privileged" occupations. For instance doctors and lawyers are almost always on the list but engineers and pest control not always.

I have worked with many P.E.'s that were quite knowledgeable and others that I would not want changing a light bulb. So even though this may be a requirement in many cases, I'm not sure it is a true indication of capability.

Paul >> Pest Control???

I agree, but I think there needs to be some sort of qualifer that the person doing the study is qualified to do it. While I am not a PE, I think I am capable of doing an accurate study.

I would certainly feel more comfortable if I saw a Arc Flash Warning label if there was some assurance that whoever posted the results of their "study" didn't just pull numbers out of the air.

For me it depends some what on the situation but for the most part my answer is "No"

I agree with the other observations about P.E.'s but I do think there should be some sort of certification for doing arc flash studies. There are too many people out there without a clue offering this service.

This is engineering work according to the laws of most states. Unless performed under an industrial exemption, a P.E. is required. While there is never an absolute assurance of competency, the P.E. stamp means the engineer considers himself competent and is willing to put his license on the line.

I agree 100% with stevenal. While both professional engineers and unlicensed engineers may just blindly enter data into a program and accept its answers, with a P.E. there's a better chance that an irregular answer will be questioned.

I'm not a PE but do have a EE degree and been in the trade for many years with the last 10 in electrical safety. It can be argued an arc flash study is really an "audit" of an exsiting electrical system, not engineering a new or modifing a system and reporting the "As Found" results.
It could also be argued that as long as recommedation for mitigation such as modifying cables, breakers or fusing aren't included in the study it's not considered "engineering".

Engineering is defined in Webster's as:
1. Application of science to designing things: the application of science in the design, planning, construction, and maintenance of buildings, machines, and other manufactured things.
2. Profession involving technical designing: a branch of engineering pursued as a profession, e.g. civil engineering or electronic engineering

Webster might rule where statutes leave the term undefined. I think you'll find most states will provide definitions that go way beyond design. Here is a snipet from the NCEES Model Law from many states take their cue. http://cdn4.ncees.co/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Model-Law.pdf
Practice of Engineering—The term “Practice of Engineering,� as used in this Act, shall mean
18

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]any service or creative work, the adequate performance of which requires engineering[/font][/size]
19

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]education, training, and experience in the application of special knowledge of the[/font][/size]
20

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences to such services or creative work as the[/font][/size]
21

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]following:[/font][/size]
22

[INDENT=1][SIZE=2][font=Georgia]a. Consultation, investigation, expert technical testimony, evaluation, planning, design,[/font][/size][/INDENT]
23

[INDENT=1][SIZE=2][font=Georgia]design coordination, and/or commissioning of engineering works, products and systems[/font][/size][/INDENT]
24

[INDENT=1][SIZE=2][font=Georgia]b. Planning the use of land, air, and/or water[/font][/size][/INDENT]
25

[INDENT=1][SIZE=2][font=Georgia]c. Teaching of advanced engineering subjects[/font][/size][/INDENT]
26

[INDENT=1][SIZE=2][font=Georgia]d. Performing engineering surveys and studies[/font][/size][/INDENT]
27

[INDENT=1][SIZE=2][font=Georgia]e. The review and/or management of construction for the purpose of monitoring and/or[/font][/size][/INDENT]
28

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]ensuring compliance with drawings and specifications[/font][/size]
29

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]Any of the items above that embraces such services or work, either public or private, in[/font][/size]
30

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]connection with any utilities, structures, buildings, machines, equipment, processes, work[/font][/size]
31

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]systems, projects, communication systems, transportation systems, and industrial or[/font][/size]
32

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]consumer products, or equipment of a control systems, communications, mechanical,[/font][/size]
33

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, chemical, environmental, or thermal nature, insofar as they[/font][/size]
34

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]involve safeguarding life, health, or property, and including such other professional services as[/font][/size]
35

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]may be necessary to the planning, progress, and completion of any engineering services are[/font][/size]
36

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]considered the practice of engineering.[/font][/size]
37

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]Design coordination includes the review and coordination of those technical submissions[/font][/size]
38

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]prepared by others, including as appropriate and without limitation, consulting engineers,[/font][/size]
39

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]architects, landscape architects, surveyors, and other professionals working under the[/font][/size]
40

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]direction of the engineer.[/font][/size]
41

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]Engineering surveys include all survey activities required to support the sound conception,[/font][/size]
42

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]planning, design, construction, maintenance, and operation of engineered projects, but[/font][/size]
43

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]exclude the surveying of real property for the establishment of land boundaries, rights-of-way,[/font][/size]
44

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]easements, and the dependent or independent surveys or resurveys of the public land survey[/font][/size]
45

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]system.[/font][/size]
46

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]A person shall be construed to practice or offer to practice engineering, within the meaning[/font][/size]
47

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]and intent of this Act, who practices any discipline or branch of the profession of engineering;[/font][/size]
48

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]or who, by verbal claim, sign, advertisement, letterhead, card, or in any other way represents[/font][/size]
49

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]the person to be a professional engineer, or through the use of some other title implies that the[/font][/size]
50

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]individual is a professional engineer or that the person is licensed or authorized under this[/font][/size]
5
Act; or who holds the person out as able to perform, or who does perform

[SIZE=1][font=ArialMT]51[/font][/size][SIZE=2][font=Georgia]any engineering[/font][/size]
52

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]service or work or any other service designated by the practitioner which is recognized as[/font][/size]
53

[SIZE=2][font=Georgia]engineering.[/font][/size]

Gee sounds like we all need our union cards.

Just heard that starting in 2020 you will need a masters degree or equivalent to become a PE.

If a PE is required to perform/oversee an arc flash study it will likely drive the cost up of doing a study.

Being a PE doesn't guarantee technical competence with a study. I've worked with a few PE's on projects over the years that were clueless. The only thing they had going for them is the ability to pass a test.

Stevenal quoted: "Here is a snipet from the NCEES Model Law from many states take their cue."

I would be interested in seeing a list of the many states you are making reference to.

Just as having an MD doesn't guarantee medical competency. Just the same, I want my doctor to have this particular qualification; and so do the laws of my state. Also required by his insurance company even though a veterinarian might be more competent to do the work.

Guess I left out a word. Should be a "which" after "from." Probably should have said "all states take their cue." It's only a matter of degree to how far they vary.