Does any one have specifications they have used for the periodic analysis reviews that are required by 70E article 130.5. Or, if you don't have specifications, do you have a suggestion for what should be included in these reviews?

Thanks

We have treated the arc flash study review much like a short circuit / coordination study. At our sites if there are major changes i.e. new additions, new major equipment, we will go back and revisit the study. Otherwise we go back for a complete study review every 5 years or so. (sometimes a little longer )

When we review our studies, we just check the data to see if any device settings were changed, utility data changes etc. If no changes were made, we just reconfirm the existing study. If a few changes were made, we revise the data base and rerun the study to see if it had a significant affect on the results.

I can see a problem if an older study just had minimal info on the arc flash labels. They would need to brought up to the latest requirements. Our labels have all the info and then some, so this is not a problem.

This will be interesting. We have only reviewed our short circuit and coordination study once in all the years I've been here - and it took some doing to get it approved.

Looks like I need to begin the soft sell with managment now since I have 3 years left before our 5 year time limit to review the arc flash study.

Should the specifications for review include verifying the input data from the original study? Or are adequate procedures set up to keep track of feeder additions, cable changes, protection setting changes, etc, such that input other than recorded changes need not be considered?

I ask this, but I also realize that:

a. Records of changes will not be complete in most plants.

and

b. There will be inadequate budget to do a complete verification of input data.

We are just starting get get requests for 5 year reviews from some of our industrial clients. They are pretty good about trying to keep things up to date, so we are trying to balance doing a significant review with not spending a lot of money validating information that was already validated in the original study.

We are considering validating some major items like the utility contribution and unit substation breaker settings and comparing the model to the latest one-line diagram. The rest of the review would be limited to reviewing the model and the existing study for common mistakes, 70E standard changes, etc.

This would involve very little field verification (of course specific field verification would be required if issues come up during the review).

I am curious if other people think that is sufficient, or if they are doing more field verification when they do reviews.

If they get rid of the 125 kva cut off and change it to a short circuit level, how many more places will now need to be included? One area that I work in has about 100 "exempted" sites... Will these all need Arc Flash studies done on them? Including the 4 circuit 10/240 panel with a 10 kva xfmr..
This would be a rather substantial change to their previous study, and require alot of info gatherring...