Can anyone help me on how the analysis should be updated periodically and at a minimum of 5 years? I believe I know but would like everyone’s opinions on how they plan to handle this with their customers or in their plant.

In summary, NFPA 70E says if a major change occurs and not to exceed 5 years AF analysis is to be updated.

What is the term "updated" consist of? (New dates on labels?)

I always recommend others to record equipment engineering changes and develop a process to continually update all records/documentation at the completion of a change.

I assume, (that word gets me into trouble a lot) that if the process of good record keeping is upheld, then the date of the label, does not matter. But the 5 year thing has me stumped how to properly address when asked. I can only give my best guess.

Should new "dated" labels be created every 5 years to maintain compliance?

Should you contact the utility and re-study the complete system? What should be the scope of work for the analysis not to exceed 5 years?

As far as I can tell there is nothing in detail stated on this compliance? What is the industry best standard to address this issue?

I would recommend, for a large facility such as mine, or many facilities like it sounds like you have, that at a minimum, that all records be maintained, including arc flash analysis on new equipment and system changes.

The utility information should also be updated AT LEAST every five years and a new analysis run. I don't think it would be necessary to repost everything, provided there were no major changes. This should be documented and records kept.

I would double check the one-line, verify that breaker and relay settings haven't been changed, include modifications that have been done, update the utillity information, and re-run the analysis. I wouldn't replace labels unless something changed.

I agree. Check the utility fault current to see if it changed. Review settings on adjustable trip devices to verify they are the same. Document the meeting and file the minutes for records. A survey of the field labels would be good, but to look for missing or damaged ones, you don't have to replace good clean ones. I would think that any 'known' major changed would be documented and re-analyzed as they occur.

Thanks guys, it seems we all agree that the date on the label makes no difference. Unless, the re-run analysis has significant increases in IE.

We also agree that ongoing record keeping is the best method to keep track of electrical system changes.

And, after a period of time not to exceed 5 years the study should be reviewed by; Labels verified, switchgear breaker trip settings verified, utility data verified, check that one-lines are up to date, re-run the analysis to include any IEEE 1584 or NFPA 70E updates and documentation of the analysis published and filed.

Did I miss anything?
Thanks

One other thought...if you are updating a survey that was based on the 2004 70E, the incident energy limits for HRC 0 have been reduced from 0 - 2.0 to 0 - 1.2. Also HRC 1 now requires a face shield.

These would only apply if HRC and IE were recorded on the labels or if the specific PPE was spelled out on the labels.