Arc Flash Forum :: View topic - ATPV on PPE labels

To comply with NFPA 70E the clothing must meet an ASTM standard. F1506 for clothing, F1891 for rainwear.

Another issue along the same lines is the care & maintenance of FR clothing. If a vendor is washing the FR clothing, are they following the manufacturer's guidelines? Some garments are "certified" for a limited number of wash cycles (50 wash cycles for example); does the vendor track how many times a garment is washed? I have seen FR clothing with holes, frayed collars and sleeves, grease stains, and missing buttons... all provided by a vendor. While we have knee jerk reaction to hold the vendor accountable, and rightfully so, the employee also has the responsibility to inspect the FR clothing before it is worn.

I love the "deer-in-headlights" expression on an FR salesman's face when you ask for certification that his FR clothing will meet specification throughout the life of the garment. :eek:

I received an FR shirt and two FR coveralls as samples by a PPE manufacturer. The shirt is rated HRC 1 and the coveralls are rated HRC 1 for one and HRC 2 for the other.

Now, all three have a label in front with the HRC (and also NFPA 70E), but only the shirt has a label inside the garment with an ATPV. None say anything about ASTM 1506 or 1959 on any label, but they all have a paragraph on the neck label about NFPA 2112 (flash fires protection).

I'm mostly worried about the two coveralls. I'm totally unsure about trusting them without a written ATPV or EBT value. I also don't like the shirt not referencing ASTM 1506 or 1959.

What's your stance on this? Should every piece of PPE list its ATPV/EBT? Is the HRC enough? Should all relevant standards be referenced on a label, or is the catalog enough?

I have a question, why are you considering purchasing Cat1 PPE when Cat2 has a similar price and is probably 12 cal rated?

I agree with Hugh. I'm on the F1506 committee and F1506 specifically requires the garment to be labeled with the ATPV or EBT. I would question them as to why it is not on the garment. F1506 also requires the garment to be labeled with a statement about it meeting F1506.
Mark Saner
msaner@workrite.com

This is a common question. HRC is a hazard/risk category in NFPA 70E and actually has nothing to do with the arc rating directly.

There is another thread about this that I began a few months ago. The issue seems to be Table 130.7(C)11 being misinterpreted.

[url="http://www.arcflashforum.com/showthread.php?t=655"]Go here for thread[/url]

The consensus in that thread seems to be: Use both IE and the HRC based on the IE and Table 130.7(C)(11).

Author:	Vincent B. [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 6:03 pm ]
Post subject:	ATPV on PPE labels
I received an FR shirt and two FR coveralls as samples by a PPE manufacturer. The shirt is rated HRC 1 and the coveralls are rated HRC 1 for one and HRC 2 for the other. Now, all three have a label in front with the HRC (and also NFPA 70E), but only the shirt has a label inside the garment with an ATPV. None say anything about ASTM 1506 or 1959 on any label, but they all have a paragraph on the neck label about NFPA 2112 (flash fires protection). I'm mostly worried about the two coveralls. I'm totally unsure about trusting them without a written ATPV or EBT value. I also don't like the shirt not referencing ASTM 1506 or 1959. What's your stance on this? Should every piece of PPE list its ATPV/EBT? Is the HRC enough? Should all relevant standards be referenced on a label, or is the catalog enough?

Author:	acobb [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:39 pm ]
Post subject:
Don't know for sure, but I thought all garments were supposed to have a label for the ATPV inside. Think you may be correct with your concern, but we have got better folks than me here on the issue!

Author:	elihuiv [ Wed Oct 14, 2009 6:51 am ]
Post subject:
No F1506, No Arc Rating, No HRC Some companies don't pay close attention to labels or standards. It might be the best fabric in the world but getting the label wrong is correctly a reason for concern. Could be an oversight by a good company but likely a low ball company. To comply with NFPA 70E the clothing must meet an ASTM standard. F1506 for clothing, F1891 for rainwear. You are right to question. Details like locking the disconnect can save a life. Questioning a label can keep you away from a bad company or make an "OK" company better. I'd confront them that they don't meet NFPA 70E because the label is improper. This is likely an honest mistake BUT I have seen a polycotton shirt from a NY supplier which had a label in it which said it was NOMEX. It was NOT Nomex. I contacted DuPont. I knew the manufacturer was known for low ball pricing and substituting false imported goods. They lost that contract but the company had to have a reason. As arc rated clothing market has grown some counterfeit goods have been coming in but this is NOT the norm.

Author:	Vincent B. [ Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:14 pm ]
Post subject:
elihuiv wrote: To comply with NFPA 70E the clothing must meet an ASTM standard. F1506 for clothing, F1891 for rainwear. I agree it must meet F1506. But is a note in a catalog (or written notice) enough for NFPA 70E, or should the label in the clothing actually say "Meets ASTM F1506" to comply? Also, for older garments (pre NFPA 70E-2009), were the requirements the same?

Author:	elihuiv [ Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:39 am ]
Post subject:
F1506 and NFPA 70E NFPA 70E just requires you meet ASTM F1506. F1506 DOES require specific statements in the garment label. I would quote but don't want to give away the standard ASTM has copyright to but stating that it meets ASTM F1506 is part of the requirement. No catalog or online statment is enough. I question any company who doesn't label properly. Do they really know they meet the standard???

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

ATPV on PPE labels https://brainfiller.com/arcflashforum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=717	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Zog [ Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:06 am ]
Post subject:
This may clear some stuff up http://www.knowyourfr.com/

Author:	acobb [ Thu Oct 15, 2009 11:14 am ]
Post subject:
Zog, Thanks for the link!

Author:	msaner@workrite.com [ Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:28 pm ]
Post subject:
no arc rating on label I agree with Hugh. I'm on the F1506 committee and F1506 specifically requires the garment to be labeled with the ATPV or EBT. I would question them as to why it is not on the garment. F1506 also requires the garment to be labeled with a statement about it meeting F1506. This would lead me to questions other things about a garment that does not comply with baisc labeling information. Check out http://www.KnowYourFR.com for other questions you should ask about FR garments. Mark Saner msaner@workrite.com

Author:	viper57 [ Wed Dec 16, 2009 4:20 am ]
Post subject:
PPE Care Another issue along the same lines is the care & maintenance of FR clothing. If a vendor is washing the FR clothing, are they following the manufacturer's guidelines? Some garments are "certified" for a limited number of wash cycles (50 wash cycles for example); does the vendor track how many times a garment is washed? I have seen FR clothing with holes, frayed collars and sleeves, grease stains, and missing buttons... all provided by a vendor. While we have knee jerk reaction to hold the vendor accountable, and rightfully so, the employee also has the responsibility to inspect the FR clothing before it is worn. I love the "deer-in-headlights" expression on an FR salesman's face when you ask for certification that his FR clothing will meet specification throughout the life of the garment.

Author:	Zog [ Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:26 am ]
Post subject:
viper57 wrote: Another issue along the same lines is the care & maintenance of FR clothing. If a vendor is washing the FR clothing, are they following the manufacturer's guidelines? Some garments are "certified" for a limited number of wash cycles (50 wash cycles for example); does the vendor track how many times a garment is washed? I have seen FR clothing with holes, frayed collars and sleeves, grease stains, and missing buttons... all provided by a vendor. While we have knee jerk reaction to hold the vendor accountable, and rightfully so, the employee also has the responsibility to inspect the FR clothing before it is worn. I have always encouraged my clients to visit the facility and see the procedures for special handeling of FR garments. One of my clients, a automotive plant went to tour thier vendor (A well knows uniform company) and found all the FR clothing was being laundered with all the non FR stuff, not following the manufactures laundering instructions. They had a big legal battle and ended up getting all thier FR uniforms replaced at the vendors expense. Now that vendor has policies in place to ensure they are handled correctly. I have seen the forms thier employees sign that basically say, "I understand if I mess up FR laundering I will get fired", but you know, in legaleese. viper57 wrote: I love the "deer-in-headlights" expression on an FR salesman's face when you ask for certification that his FR clothing will meet specification throughout the life of the garment. Thats when you say, thank you for your time, have a nice day.

Author:	elihuiv [ Tue Dec 22, 2009 1:50 pm ]
Post subject:
Arc Rated Clothing and Laundering I know of almost no clothing sold outside of the steel industry that has wash limits. The old proban treated stuff which you can still buy but NO major industrial laundry offers this because it washes out in 25 IL (Industrial Launderings). Steel and welding greens are sometimes still made of these cheap options because they get burned up before they are worn out but almost no reputable FR company offers these even for sale. Look for something that has NFPA 2112 cert and it has 100 washings but most will do far more than that. I've never seen an arc failure because of washing out cheap stuff. Could happen but specifying the right materials will usually avoid this.

Author:	Flash [ Thu Dec 24, 2009 11:00 pm ]
Post subject:
Vincent B. wrote: I received an FR shirt and two FR coveralls as samples by a PPE manufacturer. The shirt is rated HRC 1 and the coveralls are rated HRC 1 for one and HRC 2 for the other. Now, all three have a label in front with the HRC (and also NFPA 70E), but only the shirt has a label inside the garment with an ATPV. None say anything about ASTM 1506 or 1959 on any label, but they all have a paragraph on the neck label about NFPA 2112 (flash fires protection). I'm mostly worried about the two coveralls. I'm totally unsure about trusting them without a written ATPV or EBT value. I also don't like the shirt not referencing ASTM 1506 or 1959. What's your stance on this? Should every piece of PPE list its ATPV/EBT? Is the HRC enough? Should all relevant standards be referenced on a label, or is the catalog enough? I have a question, why are you considering purchasing Cat1 PPE when Cat2 has a similar price and is probably 12 cal rated?

Author:	Vincent B. [ Sun Dec 27, 2009 12:48 pm ]
Post subject:
Flash wrote: I have a question, why are you considering purchasing Cat1 PPE when Cat2 has a similar price and is probably 12 cal rated? The vendor shipped some samples. Some garments looked like the label had problems. I reported it here and asked if that was normal. That's all. For the record, we bought from somebody else (not just because of the suspicious label).

Author:	Canuck01 [ Wed Dec 30, 2009 5:47 am ]
Post subject:
msaner@workrite.com wrote: I agree with Hugh. I'm on the F1506 committee and F1506 specifically requires the garment to be labeled with the ATPV or EBT. I would question them as to why it is not on the garment. F1506 also requires the garment to be labeled with a statement about it meeting F1506. Mark Saner msaner@workrite.com We have clothing that has both ATPV rating and HRC tags attached. The ATPV is 12.3 cal/cm², the HRC is 2. Which is the correct rating to apply?

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC - 7 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	elihuiv [ Wed Dec 30, 2009 7:54 am ]
Post subject:
HRC or Arc Rating This is a common question. HRC is a hazard/risk category in NFPA 70E and actually has nothing to do with the arc rating directly. The HRC's are designed to use IF you have met the table notes and use the tables to identify your hazard and risk. So if you need an HRC 2 you must use that level but an HRC 2 can be anything from 8 cal protection to 24 cal protection. If you do calculations, you have to protect to the hazard (unless you lower the hazard by doing a risk analysis which few do). So if you have a 12 cal hazard you must wear a 12 cal protection (which happens to be an HRC 2 but not any HRC 2 will work). Hope this helps.

Author:	Canuck01 [ Wed Dec 30, 2009 8:38 am ]
Post subject:
Thanks Hugh! Must have been the turkey... I dont have a copy of ASTM 1506 and don't really know if it is referenced anywhere but is it ok to direct my clothing vendor to supply ONLY one label - ATPV? I'm trying to streamline our approach and the 2 label system is confusing.

Author:	jghrist [ Wed Dec 30, 2009 9:34 am ]
Post subject:
elihuiv wrote: This is a common question. HRC is a hazard/risk category in NFPA 70E and actually has nothing to do with the arc rating directly. Arc hazard analysis software such as SKM calculates an HRC based on the incident energy. The IEEE 1584 Calculator also calculates a "PPE per NFPA 70E Category" based on NFPE 70E Table 130.7(C)(11). Are these programs in error?

Author:	Jim Phillips (brainfiller) [ Wed Dec 30, 2009 10:02 am ]
Post subject:
There is another thread about this that I began a few months ago. The issue seems to be Table 130.7(C)11 being misinterpreted. [url="http://www.arcflashforum.com/showthread.php?t=655"]Go here for thread[/url]

Author:	jghrist [ Wed Dec 30, 2009 10:14 am ]
Post subject:
brainfiller wrote: There is another thread about this that I began a few months ago. The issue seems to be Table 130.7(C)11 being misinterpreted. [url="http://www.arcflashforum.com/showthread.php?t=655"]Go here for thread[/url] The consensus in that thread seems to be: Use both IE and the HRC based on the IE and Table 130.7(C)(11).