I found an article on ishn.com regarding changes to 70E 2015. One revision to Section 130.5(b) states the following: Only equipment that may require inspections, adjustment, servicing or maintenance while energized are required to have the field marking (label) in place. If the equipment does not require inspection, adjustment, servicing or maintenance while energized, it does not require the label.

Does anyone know if this is actually the case or going to be? This to me suggests that any equipment that will be de-energized before maintenance does not need an Arc Flash Warning label.

That is what NFPA 70E says. Most would label equipment anyway but some will ponder whether a particular piece of equipment would be serviced etc. while energized. To further complicate the issue, if equipment will not be serviced etc. while energized, would it ever be operated that could result in an arc flash hazard? The 2015 Edition of NFPA 70E includes the conditions of normal operation and Table Table 130.7(C)(15)(A)(a) provides guidance on when PPE would be required - i.e. an arc flash hazard exists.

Here is an article about what gets labeled from a while back that might also help.
http://www.ecmag.com/section/safety/such

Note that "frequent" is also a keyword. If frequent servicing is not done, no label is required. Obviously the implication here is that you could do a complete incident energy analysis but then only label a subset of the equipment, say anything that gets used one or more times per year. For everything else, consult the study as needed.

Furthermore note that anything that would be serviced would require an incident energy analysis at least as far as necessary to test for absence of voltage. The act of placing equipment into an electrically de-energized state via LOTO is itself energized work. And as to the idea that for instance it is not necessary to test for absence of voltage directly at the work site, I don't think any industrial electrician with more than a couple years of experience has NOT had an experience where things turned out to be energized when they were not supposed to be.

Thus combining these two points, the only places that would never require servicing or maintenance would have to be in the middle of wireways of some sort. So for instance a cable tray would not normally require a label. The endpoints certainly qualify as eventually requiring servicing and maintenance. Locations that include switching equipment (disconnects, breakers, fuses, starters, drives, industrial control panels) are frequently accessed while locations that contain only junctions (junction boxes, marshaling panels, transformer termination enclosures, some motor enclosures but not all) are not accessed more than once every few years and would be candidates for leaving the label off. This does not mean that an incident energy analysis doesn't need to be done (either on demand or ahead of time), only that the label can be skipped.