NFPA 70E and Arc FlashComplex Problem - Simple solution

Tuesday, June 18, 13

Overview• “ARC FLASH” REVIEW• DRIVERS TO COMPLY• EDS APPROACH• EDS SUCCESSES

Tuesday, June 18, 13

Arc Flash• Arc-Flash on the internet

- Yahoo: 18,100,000- Google Images: 15,500,000- Youtube: 8,900

•Arc-Flash in The Work Place- Commercial: Malls, Grocery Stores, Office Buildings- Manufacturing: Large or Small Scale- Industrial: Power Plants, Steel Facilities, Refineries

•All Facilities With Three Phase Power!

Tuesday, June 18, 13

•Categories of Electrical Hazards (Annex K)-Shock-Arc-Flash-Arc-Blast

•Definition: The energy released when electric current passes through air.

-Initiated by a short circuit-Explosive force of molten metal and ionized air or plasma arc-Intense heat & Blinding light-Percussive sound and pressure wave (blast)-Shrapnel for equipment incorrectly applied -Toxic smoke and fumes

•Consider effect of Available fault current on the arc flash hazard level. -High fault current can sometimes = lower arc flash hazard levels

Arc Flash

Tuesday, June 18, 13

Pressure Waves

Copper Vapor:Solid to Vapor

Expands by67,000 times

Molten Metal

Intense Light

Hot Air-Rapid Expansion

Extreme Heat35,000 °F

Shrapnel

Sound Waves

Arcing Short Circuit

Tuesday, June 18, 13

Tuesday, June 18, 13

• Article 130.5 - An Arc Flash Hazard Analysis shall determine the Arc Flash

Boundary, the incident energy at the working distance, and the Personal Protective Equipment that people within the arc flash boundary shall use.

• You can’t have Labels, PPE, or Boundaries without a proper analysis

- NFPA 70E – does offer tables but they are ultra conservative and have very strict system parameters in order to be valid for use

NFPA 70E - 2012

Tuesday, June 18, 13

Tuesday, June 18, 13

Tuesday, June 18, 13

Tuesday, June 18, 13

Tuesday, June 18, 13

• The NFPA 70E has not been formally adopted by OSHA at this time

• So OSHA only relies on the following section of the CFR for enforcement and citations?

- Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, The General Duty Clause

RIGHT??

Drivers

Tuesday, June 18, 13

Wrong!Tuesday, June 18, 13

• 1910.333(a) – Explains that work practices shall be consistent with the nature of and extent of electrical hazards.

• 1910.335(a)(1)(i) – Employees working in areas with potential electrical hazards shall be provided with and shall use electrical PPE appropriate for parts of the body and work to be performed.

• 1910.335(a)(1)(v) – Talks about safegaurding against electric arcs or flashes or from flying objects resulting from electrical explosion.

• 1926.95(a) – Protective equipment shall be provided wherever it is necessary by reason of the hazard.

CFR 1910

Tuesday, June 18, 13

Region 1 News Release: 10-1132-BOS/BOS 2010-358 Fri., Aug. 20, 2010

Contact: Ted FitzgeraldPhone: 617-565-2074Email: fitzgerald.edmund@dol.gov

US Labor Department's OSHA proposes $350,000 in fines against US PostalService for electrical hazards at Portsmouth, NH, mail processing facility

CONCORD, N.H. - The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited the U.S. Postal Service for five alleged willful violations of safety standards following an inspection at the Portsmouth, N.H., Processing and Distribution Center. The Postal Service faces a total of $350,000 in fines, chiefly for exposing workers to electrical hazards.

OSHA's inspection, conducted in response to employee complaints, found untrained or inadequately trained employees at the Portsmouth distribution center performing troubleshooting and voltage testing on or near live electrical equipment and wiring that had not first been de-energized. The workers also lacked personal protective equipment and were not instructed on proper electrical lockout/tagout procedures.

As a result of its inspection, OSHA has issued five willful citations to the Postal Service for the conditions at the Portsmouth facility. OSHA defines a willful violation as one committed with plain indifference to or intentional disregard for employee safety and health.

"These citations and the sizable fines proposed here reflect the Postal Service's ongoing knowlEDSe of and failure to address conditions that exposed its workers to the severe and potentially deadly hazards of electric shock, arc flashes and arc blasts," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA

Tuesday, June 18, 13

Region 1 News Release:10-1026-BOS/BOS 2010-344 Mon., Aug. 9, 2010

Contact: Ted FitzgeraldPhone: 617-565-2074US Labor Department's OSHA proposes $357,000 in fines against US PostalService for electrical hazards at Boston mail processing facility

BOSTON - The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited the U.S. Postal Service for alleged willful and serious violations of safety standards following an inspection at the Boston Processing and Distribution Center. The Postal Service faces a total of $357,000 in fines, chiefly for exposing workers to electrical hazards.

"These citations and sizable fines reflect both the gravity of the hazards identified during this inspection, and the Postal Service's knowlEDSe of and systemic failure to address these hazards," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. "The dangers of electric shock, burns and explosions were real, present and ongoing. The Postal Service must take comprehensive and aggressive action to correct these conditions once and for all."

OSHA's inspection, which began Jan. 28 in response to worker complaints, found that employees at the Boston center, including mechanics and technicians working with or near live electrical equipment or parts such as bar code readers and elevator control panels, were not provided with adequate training, safe electrical work practices, required personal protective equipment or insulated tools.

These conditions exposed the workers to the hazards of electric shock, arc flashes and arc blasts, and resulted in OSHA issuing the Postal Service five willful citations carrying $350,000 in proposed fines. OSHA defines a willful violation as one committed with plain indifference to or intentional disregard for employee safety and health.

Tuesday, June 18, 13

How to conduct an AF Analysis•Understand the cost drivers of having an analysis done.•When comparing bids look for comparison of options and quantity of items for a true apples to apples

•When getting proposals understand what is necessary• Data Collection

- Who gets it is important- The number of items in the study drives cost

• Build One-Line diagram- The number of items in the study drives cost

• Run Arc-Flash Calculations• Provide Energized Electrical Work Permits• Provide Labels

Tuesday, June 18, 13

EDS Approach• Overview of cost drivers (Quantity and Data collection)• EDS Phased Approach

• Phase I: Data collection, initial calculation, review with client- Data collection onsite by EDS with client support or contractor support- One-line development and data entry- Provide client with preliminary results and one-line diagram for review, comments and approval

• Phase II: Final Report, Energized electrical work permits, Multimedia deliverable

- EDS provides labels high quality vinyl labels for installation- EDS provides onsite label application- EDS provides onsite training or offsite options. Training will prepare workers to implement safety

changes and will provide compliance certification cards for each worker.

Tuesday, June 18, 13

OPTIONS• Optional services

- Training- Incorporation of Arc Flash Analysis into the safety program- Short Circuit Analysis- Protective Device Coordination- Autocad update of drawings with data and/or arc flash energies and

PPE levels- Design of protective scheme to lower hazards

Tuesday, June 18, 13

EDS Successes• Municipal

- 10 Pump Stations- 2 Waste Water Facilities- 4 Water Treatment Facilities

• Industrial- 19 Power Plants- 3 Steel Facilities- 26 Refractory Plants

• Commercial / Manufacturing- 20+ Commercial Manufacturing

Tuesday, June 18, 13