BEYOND THE CALCULATIONS: LIFE AFTER ARC FLASH

ANALYSIS
H. Wallace Tinsley III
Member, IEEE
Eaton Electrical
130 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15086

Michael Hodder
Member, IEEE
Eaton Electrical
4120B Sladeview Cres
Mississauga, ON L5L 5Z3

Abstract Once an Arc Flash Analysis has been

performed for a facility, the quantification of the potential
incident energy has been completed. However, this is only
the first step in establishing and implementing a complete
arc flash program. Labels must be applied to the equipment
and the information presented must be appropriately
meaningful and instructive to qualified persons preparing
to access the energized equipment. Arc Flash warning
labels are only one type of arc flash documentation that
should be presented and available to facility personnel. A
comprehensive safety policy and corresponding training
program should be developed and implemented to ensure
understanding and compliance with the procedures in
place to reduce the impact of a potential arc flash hazard.
Lastly, a preventative maintenance program must be put
into place to ensure that all electrical equipment, most
importantly the protective devices, will react appropriately
during an arc flash event.
Index Terms Arc Flash Analysis, Arc Flash Training, Arc
Flash Warning Labels, Maintenance Program
I.

INTRODUCTION

Much has been written in recent years regarding the arc

flash hazard and the importance of quantifying the incident
energy at all locations where work may be performed on
energized equipment.
This quantification is typically
accomplished by performing an arc flash hazard analysis
utilizing one of several calculation methods. However, the initial
arc flash analysis is only the first step in establishing and
implementing a complete arc flash program.
II.

REVIEW OF STUDY RESULTS AND ENERGY

REDUCTION APPROACH

Upon completing the initial arc flash analysis, the next step
is to review the results of the study with the facility safety,
maintenance and electrical staff.
Prior to labeling the
equipment, several items need to be addressed in order to
finalize the arc flash analysis calculations.
A.

Determination of Hazard Risk Category (HRC) Thresholds

It is the authors experience that the initial arc flash analysis

will usually reveal a number of work locations where the
2
calculated incident energy exceeds 40 cal/cm - the upper limit
of HRC 4 set forth in the NFPA 70E Standard for Electrical
Safety in the Workplace 2004 Edition. Due to arc blast pressure
concerns, it is recommended that the incident energy at these

Aidan M. Graham
Senior Member, IEEE
Eaton Electrical
13205 SE 30th St, Ste 101
Bellevue, WA 98005

locations be lowered below 40 cal/cm2 in order for personnel to

safety perform energized work on these locations.
Additional HRC thresholds are often desired in order to
minimize the cost of purchasing personal protective equipment
(PPE) for each employee. A summary of the NFPA 70E Hazard
Risk Categories is shown in Table 1. Each HRC is associated
with specific requirements for PPE.
Table 1: Hazard Risk Categories (HRC)
Incident
Hazard Risk
Incident
Energy
Category Energy From
2
2
To (cal/cm )
(HRC)
(cal/cm )
0

>0

1.2

< 1.2
<4

<8

< 25

25

< 40

When a facility decides to purchase clothing for HRCs 1

through 4, the cost per employee is very high. In order to avoid
having to purchase clothing for each HRC, specific HRC
thresholds are often set. For example, one of the most common
approaches is to limit the PPE to HRCs 2 and 4. All employees
requiring arc flash PPE are provided clothing that meets HRC 2
and clothing that meets HRC 4. Using Table 1 as a reference,
HRC 2 clothing would be required for all locations where the
2
calculated incident energy is less than 8 cal/cm . Likewise,
HRC 4 clothing would be required for all locations where the
calculated incident energy is greater than or equal to 8 cal/cm2,
but less that 40 cal/cm2. Any locations with incident energy
2
levels above 40 cal/cm are deemed unsafe for energized work.
Using the above-mentioned philosophy as a guideline, it is
then common practice to attempt to set HRC thresholds for
each particular type of equipment within a facility.
For
example, in a 480 V distribution system it is often feasible to set
the desired maximum threshold for all panelboards and motorcontrol centers (MCC) to HRC 2 and for all switchboards and
switchgear to HRC 4.
B.

Incident Energy Reduction Approach

Using the guidelines and HRC thresholds defined by the

facility personnel, the study engineer must then re-examine the
initial arc flash analysis and choose solutions to get each
equipment location below the desired HRC threshold. This is
accomplished using one of many incident energy reduction
techniques. A summary of the most common techniques are
listed below:

PRESENTED AT THE 2007 IEEE IAS PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY CONFERENCE IN WILLIAMSBURG, VA: IEEE 2007 - PERSONAL USE OF THIS MATERIAL IS PERMITTED.

Changing Existing Work Procedures: One of the

lowest cost and most straightforward methods to
reduce the incident energy exposure is to change
existing work procedures. One example of this
would be changing the work location when
performing power quality measurements using a
portable meter. Historically, measurements have
been performed by direct connection of the voltage
and current probes to the primary circuit, where
incident energy can be relatively high. By taking
measurements utilizing the potential transformer
and current transformer circuits, one can
dramatically reduce the potential incident energy
exposure. Another example of procedure change
is to use a laser light beam for bus dimension
measurement on energized switchgear (see Figure
1 below).

maintenance switch is that the reduced settings are

only in place during maintenance and can be
switched back to the settings of the coordination
study at the completion of the work task. Additional
contacts can be added to the maintenance switch
to monitor its status.

Retrofit / Replacement of Equipment: Retrofit or

replace protective devices with devices that clear
faster at the respective arcing fault currents. This is
often accomplished by changing fuse types, such
as going from an RK5 fuse to an RK1 fuse or by
changing trip unit functions, such as going from a
trip unit that utilizes only the long time and
instantaneous functions (LI) to a trip unit that
utilizes long time, short time and instantaneous
(LSI) functions.
The study engineer should always attempt to accomplish the
incident energy reduction using the least-cost method first
(typically changing working practices or modifying existing
protective device settings). If these do not provide adequate
reduction, then more costly solutions such as device retrofit or
replacement may be required.
C. Revise Arc Flash Analysis
After determining the most appropriate incident energy
reduction methods for each location where the energy level is
too high, the initial arc flash analysis should be revised to
incorporate all changes. This updated arc flash analysis should
be used as the guide in upgrading and/or replacing equipment,
testing and setting all overcurrent protective devices,
purchasing PPE and printing arc flash warning labels for all
equipment locations where energized work may be performed.
III. IMPLEMENTATION OF STUDY RESULTS

Figure 1: Alternate Method for Bus Dimension

Measurement

Modifying Existing Settings: Modify the existing

protective device settings to decrease the clearing
time at the associated arcing fault current. Care
must be taken when implementing this solution, as
protective device coordination may be affected
when reducing the clearing time of protective
devices.

Increasing Working Distance: Increase the working

distance (where feasible) at specific locations in
order to reduce the calculated incident energy.
Care must be taken when implementing this
solution, as the goal is to provide a solution that still
allows personnel to feasibly perform work at each
location. Increasing the working distance may
hinder a persons ability to work on the equipment.

Adding Maintenance Switches: The addition of a

maintenance switch allows personnel to reduce
the clearing time of a protective device by either
reducing the existing settings (typically used on
low-voltage circuit breakers) or by switching to a
second settings group (typically used on mediumvoltage multi-function relays). The benefit of a

A.

Adjustment, Retrofit, Equipment Modification, Replacement

Upon completion of the revised arc flash analysis,

appropriate action must be taken to implement the proposed
modifications to the power system. Until these modifications
have been made, arc flash labels displaying the results of the
revised analysis should not be posted.
The proposed corrections and changes should be prioritized
according to the financial and logistical impact to the facility.
The energy reduction techniques are often be grouped
according to the following categories.

Adjustment: The reduction techniques corresponding to

the fewest financial and logistical concerns are those
system adjustments and procedural adjustments that
may be made immediately. Such techniques should be
implemented prior to the application of labels and, as
appropriate, should be immediately included as a part of
arc flash hazard training for affected workers. Examples
of such reduction techniques may include portable
meter usage and some device setting adjustments.

Retrofit: Arc flash energy reduction is often achieved by

retrofitting and upgrading trip units to provide a more
accurate (lower tolerances), more rapid, and more
customizable
tripping
response.
Implementation
involves the purchase and installation of the new trip

unit and typically allows for a direct replacement without

the need to modify the equipment or enclosure.

Equipment Modification: Some reduction techniques

may require additional equipment modification for
complete implementation. For example, bus work,
enclosure doors, hinges, and latches may need to be
upgraded or replaced. These modifications do not
typically require that the entire lineup of equipment be
replaced. For example, if a fuse should be replaced by a
circuit breaker or vice versa, the existing equipment
(enclosure, footprint, etc.) may be sufficient, but some
internal cell modifications may be required.

Replacement: In some cases, the existing system

components are simply insufficient to allow for the
application of the required arc flash energy reduction
techniques. In this case, replacement of the existing
system components would be required.
The proposed changes may also be prioritized according
frequency of access to each piece of equipment. For example,
when a reduction technique is suggested for an area of the
distribution system that is rarely accessed and the financial or
logistical ramifications discourage implementation, these
recommendations may be postponed or rejected in favor of
simply identifying that particular space as Dangerous. It should
then be communicated that locations labeled as Dangerous
may not be accessed under any circumstances when the
equipment is energized. If, at a later date, implementation is
feasible (or required), the reduction technique and a new label
should be applied.
B.

Test and Set All Overcurrent Protective Devices

In haste to apply arc flash labels to equipment, a very

important step of the study implementation is often neglected.
While it is important to make modifications discussed above, it
is equally important to test and set all of the overcurrent
protective devices to ensure agreement with the software model
of the system. The arc flash calculations are based on the
operation of the overcurrent protection as represented in the
model. If the model does not reflect the reality of the distribution
system, the arc flash calculations are invalidated.
When a complete system analysis has been conducted and
the coordination of the overcurrent protection has been
evaluated, the model should be the recognized standard to
dictate the adjustment of the protective devices and any devices
found to be contrary to the study model should be corrected.
For each distribution system and device type, the process
for setting and testing will vary. Care should be taken if
adjustments are attempted while the associated circuit is
energized. Some overcurrent devices will operate and open the
associated circuit breaker when adjustments are made. For
others, adjustments may be made while online (closed), but
injection testing will be required to confirm the actual response
of the device in accordance with the expected operation.
For proper implementation of the recommended device
settings and to confirm the existing settings as shown in the
software model, an outage should be scheduled and the
devices should all be adjusted and tested before the application
of arc flash labels to the equipment.

IV. ARC FLASH LABELING

Installing arc flash warning labels is one of the most critical
steps after completion of the arc flash analysis and
implementation of the study results. It can also be one of the
most frustrating due to the countless decisions that must be
made prior to installing the first label.
Prior to a determination of label content, label placement,
and label quantity, the calculation basis for the labels should be
defined.
Proper arc flash calculations take several short circuit
contribution scenarios and determine the worst-case energy for
TM
requires the
each system location. IEEE Std. 1584-2002
minimum and maximum short circuit contributions be
considered. Additional scenarios (switching, loading, utility
contribution, generator contribution) may also be required,
depending on the distribution system.
While this comparison of contribution scenarios is required
for the calculations, this information may or may not be included
on the arc flash labels.
When the incident energy values listed on the arc flash
warning labels are the worst-case incident energy values
considering multiple system configurations, the qualified person
may suit up according to the label and not have to consider the
particular system configuration at the time of the work.
Some power systems may have a scenario that exists for a
particular switching condition that occurs for only a brief period
of time, e.g. one hour each year. The rest of the time, the
normal scenario applies. When labels correspond to this
infrequent configuration and display a high energy level and the
normal configuration(s) produce less energy, workers are
required to wear a higher level of PPE than necessary.
One solution to this dilemma is to provide labels based on a
specified condition (for example the normal operating
condition). Training must then be provided to ensure that when
the power system is not in normal mode, the qualified worker
must refer to the report document for the scenario that applies.
This requires a reporting of all scenarios in the final report.
Once calculation scenarios have been determined, the label
content can be chosen.
A.

Minimum Content Requirements

Arc flash labels are required by the NEC (NFPA 70) in

section 110.16. The stipulations of this section do not specify
the content of the label, only that labels should warn of a
potential arc flash hazard. Several proposals have suggested
that this section be revised to explicitly require certain
information to be included, but, to date, each has been rejected
and the determination of label content is left to the individual
facilities.
B.

Labeling Issues Not Clearly Addressed in Standards

Locations < 240 V fed by 125 kVA or Less: IEEE Std

TM
1584 -2002 states that equipment below 240 V need not be
considered unless it involves at least one 125 kVA or larger lowimpedance transformer in its immediate power supply. [2]
Therefore, 208 V locations are not typically included in an arc
flash analysis unless they are fed from a transformer larger than
125 kVA. However, most facility owners want labels on all
panelboards. Therefore, while detailed calculations may not be
performed for 208 V locations supplied by a transformer smaller

than 125 kVA, labels should still be provided for these locations
and are typically labeled as hazard risk category zero.
Single-phase and DC Equipment: Generic warning labels
may be placed on single-phase and direct-current (DC)
equipment, but no published standards presently provide the
calculation methods for these circuits. One should not assume
that there is no hazard at these locations, but any quantification
of energy will be based on preliminary testing, personal
experience, and reasonable hypothesis.
Equipment not Routinely Accessed: As stated in NEC
Section 110.16, the labels are applicable to those locations
likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing or
maintenance will energized. [3] In contrast, labels do not need
to be applied to equipment locations that are not routinely
accessed while energized. For example, in most cases,
transformers, junction boxes, and conduit need not be labeled.
C. Selecting Meaningful Information for Labels.
With this flexibility to customize the labels, care should be
given to provide adequate, meaningful information to qualified
persons without overwhelming the reader.
Generic arc flash warning labels meet the minimum
requirements, but do not provide quantification of the hazard. A
qualified person is required by OSHA to be able to determine
the hazards and the boundaries associated with the work to be
performed. The Arc Flash Hazard and the associated Flash
Protection Boundary are included in this requirement. If the arc
flash warning label does not display this information, the
qualified person must either determine the hazard(s) and the
boundaries by an approved calculation method or they are
required to reference some previous documentation containing
these calculations for the location in question.
The information on the labels should be selected to reflect
the established safety policy and procedures of a given facility.
The labels should not be designed to replace or inclusively
duplicate to contents of the safety policy.

Location or Bus Name: When the arc flash labels go

beyond the required minimum warning label and
display information corresponding to specific
calculations, the equipment location should be
displayed to insure proper placement of the labels.
This location name should be identical to the bus
names used in the associated Arc Flash Analysis
report so that the applied labels directly reference the
calculations.

Hazard Risk Category: Each arc flash calculation

determines an incident energy and a corresponding
Hazard Risk Category. These categories are used to
direct qualified persons to wear appropriate Personal
Protective Equipment (PPE). This category should be
included on the label.

Flash Protection Boundary: The Flash Protection

Boundary defines the distance from the exposed,
energized part within which a qualified person must
wear the appropriate PPE. This boundary should be
displayed on the label so that workers do not need to
perform this calculation each time energized access is
required.

Protective Device Name: The results from most power

system analysis software will display the name of the

device found to eliminate the arcing event. This device

name may be displayed on the label to aid in the
placement of the label. The label should be placed at
the specified location or Bus Name that is protected by
the listed device name.
This device name may be particularly important to
reference the location of a maintenance switch (See
Special Cases below) that should be engaged before
accessing the equipment.
It is important to recognize that the listed protective
device name may not reference the device most
immediately upstream. Qualified electrical personnel
should be trained to recognize that this device should
not be assumed capable of de-energizing the
equipment location. In the calculation model, this
device may correspond to one of several fault
contributing branches.

Incident Energy: The calculated incident energy may

be displayed on the arc flash label (along with an
associated working distance), but the presentation
should be carefully considered.
The Hazard Risk Category corresponds to a range
of calculated energies. For example, Hazard Risk
Category 2 corresponds to an energy range between 4
and 8 cal/cm2. As a guideline, NFPA 70E-2004
suggests that for a given Hazard Risk Category, the
corresponding minimum arc rating of the PPE be
specified according to the upper limit of the associate
range of energies.
However, some flexibility is permitted and when the
actual incident energy level is displayed, the qualified
person may be allowed to select their PPE according
to that level of energy. For example, if the displayed
2
energy is 5.3 cal/cm , the qualified person may safely
elect to wear PPE sufficient for 6 cal/cm2. If this actual
energy is not displayed in favor of an energy range, the
qualified person is given no choice but to don the PPE
corresponding to the upper limit of the Hazard Risk
Category range.

Shock Hazard Information: Shock Hazard information

has been shown on arc flash labels in many
applications. However, it is not required nor is it
typically desired on an arc flash label for two reasons.
The first reason is that shock hazard and arc flash are
not directly related by the same variables. Arc flash is
based upon a calculated fault current and a specific
device clearing time while shock hazard is based upon
the voltage at the work location. The second reason is
that in order to detail both Arc Flash and Shock hazard
information, the font on each label must be reduced to
a small size that makes the labels more difficult to
read. If shock hazard boundary labels are required, it
is recommended by the authors that this information be
provided on a separate label.

Working Distance: Incident energy calculations are

typically provided at the recommended working
distances listed in IEEE Std 1584TM-2002. It may be
useful to provide incident energy values at additional
working distances in the study report, but for labeling
purposes it is common practice to provide the incident

energy values based on the typical [2] working

TM
distances listed in IEEE Std 1584 -2002. This
distance can be changed from typical to specific
equipment enclosure dimensions and location of
exposed energized parts if required on a case-by-case
basis. Refer to Figure 2 below for an example of a
spreadsheet that calculates the hazard at a different
distance from the studys calculated IE values. This
can be performed when four calculated values are
provided:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Values from Arc Flash Study

Energy
Working
Distance
(cal/cm^2) Distance (in)
Factor
4
18
1.473

Energy calculated by analysis.

Working Distance used to by the analysis
calculation.
Distance factor associated with the analysis
calculation.
Revised working distance for the proposed
job task.

New
Calculated
Energy
(cal/cm^2)

1.44

New
Calculated
HRC

0.208-15 kV Open Air or Cable

where:
2

is incident energy in cal/cm

is the working distance
s the distance exponent

(The remaining constants and variables are defined in

discussion.)
Equation 2

( )

Once Y is determined, the working distance (D) may

be changed to suit a given job task. The distance
exponent (x) is dependent on the equipment in
question and does not change. Table 2 shows the
distance exponents associated with various equipment
types. With Y, D, and x, a new energy is easily
determined.

0.208-1 kV

MCC and panels

1.641

0.208-1 kV

Switchgear

1.473

1-15 kV

Switchgear

0.973

Table 2: Distance Exponents for Distribution Equipment

IEEE Std 1584TM-2002, but are not required for this

E Dx = Y

System
Distance x
Equipment Type
Voltage (kV)
Factor

Equation 1

E
D
x

36

1182.9288

Figure 2: Hazard Calculations at Multiple Working

Distances

The energy equation (Equation 1) from IEEE Std.

1584-2002 may be simplified as shown by Equation 2
which has only three terms comprised of the energy,
calculated by the analysis, the working distance and
the distance factor used by the analysis calculation
and everything else combined as represented by the
letter Y in Equation 2.

x
t 610

E = C f En
x
0.2 D

Enter New
Working
Distance

Calculated
x
Y = E (D )

Settings Implemented Box: It may be desired that the

label include a method to track whether or not the
recommended settings in the study report were
implemented in the field. This could be a blank line for
the persons initials and the date the settings were
implemented or some other method to allow the worker
who is referencing the label to determine if the settings
were indeed implemented.

D. Customized Labels for Special Cases

Protective Devices with Multiple Settings: When a

protective device is capable of operating under multiple
settings or settings groups, it may be desirable to post
a special label that provides the hazard information for
both setting configurations. For example, if a
maintenance switch (MS) is installed to provide faster
fault clearing time at a particular location, the hazard
without the use of the MS will be greater than when the
MS is engaged. It is important to direct qualified
persons to the location where the MS is to be engaged
and to warn of the hazard that is present when the MS
is not in use. Similar labels may be desirable when
overcurrent relays with selectable setting groups or
other MS configurations are used.

E.

Quantity of Labels

It is common practice to provide one arc flash warning label

per equipment location studied. This label has generally been
located at the main protective device or incoming power
compartment. This label should contain sufficient information to
describe the entire equipment location. A qualified person is
responsible to properly apply the information to their job task(s).
However, it has occasionally been requested that a label be
placed on each equipment compartment with a benefit that the
worker does not have to find the main protective device or
incoming power compartment to find the arc flash warning label.
The major downside to this method is that over-labeling the
equipment leads to much higher and often unnecessary costs.
There is also a possibility of an assumption that all
compartments may have the same hazard level when in reality,
compartments may have different hazard levels.
F.

Printing and Applying Labels

Printing Materials: Careful attention should be paid to

the quality and durability of the labels selected for
application. For clean, contained environments, labels
printed by an ink jet or laser jet printer may suffice.
These labels, however, may fade, smear, and lose
adhesion if exposed to direct sunlight, rain, cleaning
solvents, spills, oils, etc. For these environments, high
adhesion vinyl labels should be printed with a thermaltransfer printer. Depending on the printer selected,
lamination may be required to protect the labels from
exposure to excessive wear.

Installation of Labels: The general recommendation for

installing arc flash labels is to position them as close
as possible to the main protective device or incoming
power supply, at a height from the floor that allows the
labels to be clearly visible to most personnel. It is
important for the label placement to be standardized
throughout the facility so that qualified persons are
trained to refer to a specified location on the equipment
and are not required to search for haphazardly placed
labels.
V.

ESTABLISH SAFE WORK PRACTICES

After completing the steps shown in Sections II, III and IV

above, it is then necessary to review the existing safe work
practices or create new safe work practices. Switching
procedures may also need to be revised or changed.
Training is a critical component that is required to achieve a
successful Arc Flash safety program. This includes re-certifying
employees on an annual basis. For guidance on this topic, refer
to NFPA 70E-2004 Article 110 General Requirements for
Electrical Safety-Related Work Practices.
A.

Below are a number of topics that should be included in Arc

Flash Hazard training:

Review of the Arc Flash Hazard report results and

implementation of these results. For example,
maintenance procedures need to be re-evaluated
to align with the results of the Arc Flash study and
its recommendations

Review of limits of the study scope of work. For

example, the study may not have included the
entire facility and there may be locations in the
system that were not labeled yet.

Review of the single line diagram contained in the

Arc Flash Hazard report and the link between the
single line and the Arc Flash Hazard labels.

Include references from NFPA 70E-2004 in the

training program. Perform training for interpretation
and compliance with NFPA 70E-2004.

Carry out training in the use and care of the specific

PPE that will be used at the site.

Include hands on training for donning and wearing

all applicable PPE. Photos of a person wearing the
correct PPE for each hazard category also provides
a good training aid. An example of this is shown in
Figure 3.

Train All Qualified Employees

There is a need for different training, depending

requirements. For example, qualified electricians will
more extensive training compared to the amount of
required by operators who may only be performing
tasks such as switching electrical equipment on or off.

on job
require
training
specific

Figure 3: Photo Demonstrating Proper HRC 2 PPE

The training should be consistent (shift to shift or

plant to plant).
Training regarding work procedures shall address
such issues as:
o Lock out/Tag out
o Reading Arc Flash Warning Labels and
wearing proper PPE
o Use of safe working practices during the
execution of the task.
o If temporary fast settings are used to lower
incident energy, then for each work
location that is affected, a work procedure
or safety policy should be written to

B.

require these alternate settings to be

engaged prior to work.
Any new procedures that are required for
Arc Flash reduction need to be
demonstrated and practiced. For example,
new techniques may be required to
achieve temporary fast fault clearing time.

Evaluate and Purchase Appropriate Personal Protective

Equipment (PPE)

Several items should be considered during the process of

evaluating and purchasing the appropriate PPE, based on the
calculated energy levels at a facility. These considerations
include, but are not limited to:

Standard HRC levels determined during the

review of study results stage. For example, in
many cases, a choice of HRC 2 for everyday work
wear will make sense.
Questions such as: What does each employee
require? How many sets of PPE does each
employee need? Do all employees get the same
PPE? Do some employees only get HRC 2 while
others may need HRC 4 as well? Should HRC 4
PPE be issued on an individual basis or should it
be purchased in a few sizes and put in a central
location where it is most likely needed?
Other items to consider when evaluating PPE
include:
o Cost
o Quality
o Comfort - lightweight, breathable, etc.
o Wear Life
o Laundering methods - home or industrial
o Coveralls versus shirt and pants
o Flash suits versus layering to achieve
HRC 4
VI. MAINTENANCE PROGRAM

Developing and sustaining a thorough maintenance program

is a crucial step in ensuring that the investment in an arc flash
program does not go to waste. A comprehensive maintenance
program includes, at a minimum, the following three phases:
1.

Work Procedures: Maintaining and/or updating work

procedures to comply with the Arc Flash standards and
report recommendations

2.

Equipment Maintenance: Routine testing and cleaning of

electrical equipment is essential in ensuring that all
equipment, most importantly the overcurrent protective
devices, will react appropriately during an arc flash
event.

3.

Arc Flash Study: Updating and re-running the arc flash

analysis due to changes to the power distribution system
is crucial to maintaining accurate arc flash calculations
and arc flash warning labels. These system changes
can include modification to the utility distribution system
or equipment changes internal to the customer facility.

VII. CONCLUSION
The Arc Flash Safety Program is not complete after the
calculations are done. There are many other steps to be taken
which include:
- Reducing the arc flash hazard at locations above
acceptable thresholds
- Implementation of the recommendations or changes
- Communication and training to affected employees
- Proper and meaningful labeling
In addition, there is ongoing maintenance required to
achieve a successful arc flash safety program.
VIII. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors thank W. S. Vilcheck for his sponsorship,
advice, and encouragement.
IX. REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]

Electrical Safety Requirements for Employee Workplaces, NFPA 70E2004 NFPA.

IEEE Guide for Performing Arc-Flash Hazard Calculations, IEEE Std
1584TM-2002.
National Electrical Code, NFPA 70

X.

BIOGRAPHIES

Wally Tinsley received a BSEE in 2001 from Clemson

University in South Carolina. Mr. Tinsley is currently employed
as a Power Systems Senior Engineer by Eaton Electrical where
he is a study engineer with a stated emphasis on arc flash
analysis. Mr. Tinsley is the chairman of his groups arc flash
committee and is responsible for the standardization and
improvement of arc flash analysis methods at Eaton Electrical.
Michael Hodder received a BASc in Electrical Engineering
from University of Waterloo in 1977. Mr. Hodder is currently
employed as an Advisory Engineer with Eaton Electrical
Services and Systems, a Division of Eaton Corporation. He
presently performs power system studies and is a technical
trainer for Power System and Electrical Safety seminars. Mr.
Hodder was previously employed by the Industry Services
Division of Westinghouse Canada Inc. where he was
responsible for power system studies, testing, commissioning,
startup and maintenance of power system installations. Mr.
Hodder is a member of IEEE and a registered Professional
Engineer in Ontario. He is the author of several technical
publications.
Aidan M. Graham received the BSEE in 1998 and MSEE in
1999 from the University of Nevada, Reno. Mr. Graham is
currently employed as the Western Zone Team Leader for the
Power Systems Engineering Group at Eaton Electrical Services
and Systems, a division of the Eaton Corporation. His core
responsibility is the management of all power system
engineering business in the Western US. Mr. Graham is a
Senior Member of the IEEE and is a Registered Professional
Engineer in the State of Washington and Oregon. He is author
of several technical publications.