It is currently Thu Apr 23, 2026 12:06 pm



Post new topic Reply to topic

Are your exisiting labels in compliance with the proposed 2012 requirements?
Our existing labels already comply 63%  63%  [ 40 ]
Our existing labels won’t comply, we WILL re-label 17%  17%  [ 11 ]
Our existing labels won’t comply, we MIGHT re-label 11%  11%  [ 7 ]
Our existing labels won’t comply, we WON'T re-label 3%  3%  [ 2 ]
We don’t have labels - yet 5%  5%  [ 3 ]
Total votes : 63
Author Message
 Post subject: 2012 Proposed Label Requirements
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2011 12:22 pm 
Plasma Level
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:00 pm
Posts: 1736
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
The NFPA 70E labeling requirements are about the change again.

2004 - Basic Arc Flash Warning Label
2009 - Warning label with either the available incident energy or required level of PPE

2012 - The proposed new labeling requirements for the 2012 Edition of NFPA 70E include:

(1) Only one of the following: Available incident energy or minimum arc rating of clothing
(2) Date of arc flash hazard analysis
(3) Nominal system voltage
(4) Equipment Identification
(5) Arc Flash Boundary

Question:
Are your existing labels already in compliance with the 2012 proposal?
If not, will you / your clients be re-labeling?

  • Our existing labels already comply
  • Our existing labels won’t comply, we will re-label
  • Our existing labels won’t comply, we might re-label
  • Our existing labels won’t comply, we won’t re-label
  • We don’t have labels - yet
As always, comments are always welcomed and encouraged.

_________________
Jim Phillips, P.E.
Brainfiller.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 7:28 am 

Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:25 pm
Posts: 7
Fortunately we used the complete labels that our software created which covered all of these latest changes to the label requirements. I can see this has the potential to become a very big headache if the requirements continue to change with each edition.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 7:41 am 
Sparks Level

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 6:06 am
Posts: 136
Location: Michigan
We use Easypower which lists both a PPE level (HRC) and the IE (unsure if I could or would change this).

Also, our first plant to have the AFHA completed did not include the analysis date and I do not believe that re-labeling for this reason is a justifiable use of time and resources.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 10:55 am 

Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 6:01 am
Posts: 2
I feel like we dodged a bullet with this one. Some in our group wanted only to post the PPE Arc Rating per the 2009 Edition of 70E. I dug my heals in and pushed for more detail based on what the software can provide.

I think I feel a bit vindicated but now I am concerned that everytime a new 70E is in the works, we will be fretting over how much time / money we will need to spend to change what we did previously.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 11:28 am 
Arc Level

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:17 am
Posts: 428
Location: Spartanburg, South Carolina
I assume that "minimum arc rating of clothing" is not the PPE or HRC category, but is the Arc Rating expressed in cal/cm² per the definition in Article 100. As such, the new labelling requirements would not prohibit having IE and a PPE category. They would prohibit listing both the calculated IE cal/cm² and the Arc Rating cal/cm².

The problem with dating the label is that after five years, most labels will not have to be changed for increased IE, but will show a date over five years old. This will cause questioning of the label validity.

Surely the intent is not to have to relabel everything just because the date on the label does not reflect the latest study date. Or is it?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 12:00 pm 

Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 6:01 am
Posts: 2
jghrist wrote:
The problem with dating the label is that after five years, most labels will not have to be changed for increased IE, but will show a date over five years old. This will cause questioning of the label validity.

Surely the intent is not to have to relabel everything just because the date on the label does not reflect the latest study date. Or is it?


I did not think that far ahead. Still trying to digest it all. In the absense of any direction, I imagine one approach might be to add a small label on the warning label stating something like "Re-validated - Month / Year"

Yes we did only post the PPE arc rating, not the calculated PPE. I have seen some of the other posts / debate about mixing categories etc.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 12:28 pm 

Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:00 pm
Posts: 19
Location: Virginia
ScottS wrote:
I dug my heals in and pushed for more detail based on what the software can provide.


I now wish I spoke a bit louder. We went with the 2009 Edition requirements - Arc Rating (cal/cm^2) on the label. Thought we were doing good.

Not sure if we have the time/budget to do this again. I think the info is still in our arc flash software database so perhaps all we need to do is reconfigure our labels. Still going to be a bit of a pain.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 24, 2011 5:57 am 
Sparks Level

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 6:06 am
Posts: 136
Location: Michigan
jghrist wrote:
Surely the intent is not to have to relabel everything just because the date on the label does not reflect the latest study date. Or is it?


130.3 says that the AFHA shall be updated when major modification or renovation takes place and that it shall be reviewed periodically, not to exceed five years to account for changes. I would think as long you document that a review has occurred, one-line diagrams are up-to-date and the IE results have not changed, you would not be required to relabel.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 24, 2011 1:17 pm 

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:26 am
Posts: 46
Location: CA
We already comply.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2011 7:30 am 
Sparks Level

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 7:10 pm
Posts: 262
Location: NW USA
Primary customer wanted as much information available for the workers, and therefore did not agree with 2012 limitation of ONLY cal or HRC. But we have relabelled the entire plant when other minor changes occurred in the recommended PPE.

The NFPA committee should be aware of the expense these 'little' changes cause, understanding that the standard's credibility goes down with each revision.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 4:37 am 

Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 9:40 am
Posts: 19
Location: Wi
A King wrote:
We use Easypower which lists both a PPE level (HRC) and the IE (unsure if I could or would change this).

Also, our first plant to have the AFHA completed did not include the analysis date and I do not believe that re-labeling for this reason is a justifiable use of time and resources.


We also use Easy Power and probably will not change PPE and HRC.
I include the dates in the comments section.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:38 am 
Arc Level

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:17 am
Posts: 428
Location: Spartanburg, South Carolina
Gary B wrote:
Primary customer wanted as much information available for the workers, and therefore did not agree with 2012 limitation of ONLY cal or HRC.

The standard does not say ONLY cal or HRC.

Quote:
(1) Only one of the following: Available incident energy or minimum arc rating of clothing

Arc rating of clothing is not the HRC, it is the rating of clothing expressed in cal/cm².


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2013 5:50 am 

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:14 pm
Posts: 1
Location: Austin, TX
I am new to the forum and also attempting to understand 70E fully. Are the labels required be Red, Orange or does it matter?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 3:57 pm 
Plasma Level
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:00 pm
Posts: 1736
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
This short article of mine about label colors might help. It is based on ANSI Z535, NFPA 70E and a survey question on this forum a while ago.

_________________
Jim Phillips, P.E.
Brainfiller.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
© 2022-2025 Arcflash Forum / Brainfiller, Inc. | P.O. Box 12024 | Scottsdale, AZ 85267 USA | 800-874-8883