Updates on Code Revisions 2016 EFCOG Electrical Safety Workshop

Upcoming Revisions 2017 NEC to be published September 2016 2018 NFPA 70E – 2nd Review of Proposals, comment resolution, and final votes – THIS WEEK, to be published September 2017 IEEE 1584 – to be released 2016- late -– Guide to Arc Flash Calculations

2018 NFPA 70E Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace 1. All references to other standards will be removed from mandatory text. 2. The DC shock table will be reduced to 50 volts, but the lower range will go from 50 to 300 volts. 3. The lower thresholds for hazardous energy will be implemented into Articles 320, 330, and 350 will be 50 Vac and 100 Vdc. 4. The exception to 130.2 has been removed. 5. Deleted references to SPGFCI introduced during first draft. 6. PC 32 Richard Waters reject. 7. Better clarification of Shock Hazard definition with informational note. 8. PC 31 Richard Waters reject. 9. Global change replacing short circuit current to available fault current with informational note to definition addressing batteries. 10. Defined Fault Current and Fault Current, Available, including an illustration.

2018 NFPA 70E Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace 11. Documented program must include inspection element. 12. Applying hierarchy of controls to risk assessments. 13. PC 153 Mark Scott reject. 14. Documented program must include investigation of near misses. 15. Minor changes to training for safe release but not much impact for us. 16. Article 120 major changes in format and content. 17. PC 158 Mark Scott reject. PC 145 Mark Scott reject. I did not capture the actions on other 120 PC by EFCOG members, but they may have been folded into the major overhaul of 120.

IEEE 1584 – Guide to Arc Flash Calculations

Final Report of Task Group ‘New Model Validation’ IEEE P1584 Final Report of Task Group ‘New Model Validation’ Chair – Dan Doan Vice Chair – Albert Marroquin Meeting at ESW on March 7, 2016

Membership Scope Meeting schedule Summary of evaluation Conclusions Path Forward

Membership Dan Doan Chair Albert Marroquin Vice-Chair / Secretary, ETAP Jim Babcock Member Lloyd Gordon Member Ken Jones Member Wei Jen Lee Member Afshin Majd Member, EasyPower Vince Saporita Member, EATON Tom Short Member, EPRI Marcelo Valdes Member, GE Mike Lang IEEE/NFPA Collaboration Chair Daleep Mohla P1584 WG Chair Bruce McClung P1584 WG Vice Chair Jim Phillips P1584 WG Secretary Everyone stand up

Scope Review the new model, model basis, methods, data Compare results to the existing 2002 model Develop application guidance to be included in the text of the next edition of IEEE-201X for review by P1584WG

Model Modifications (Each was reviewed by TG) Modification Number Modification Date 1 September 2013 2 July 2014 3 August 2014 4 October 2014 5 March 2, 2015 6 March 16, 2015 7 April 4, 2015 8 June 15, 2015 9 July 28, 2015 10 August 21, 2015 11 September 2, 2015 12 September 14, 2015 13 September 25, 2015 14 November 14, 2015 15 December 3, 2015 16 December 14, 2015 17 December 21, 2015

Summary of evaluation For details, see TG reports August 2015 and February 2016. Phase 1: Understanding of test results and data processing Phase 2: Creation of validation plan and comparison validation tools Phase 3: Comparisons against processed test results performed by IEEE/NFPA Collaboration Phase 4: Comparisons against IEEE 1584-2002 test results.

Phase 2 Tools Validation Tool Created by Matlab Comparison Program (s), C#, C++ Based Arc Current Asymmetrical / Symmetrical Component Program Albert Marroquin Iarc Comparison Program using Excel Marcelo Valdes Comparison Program(s) to Check against all types of available data / Alternative Regression AF Model Programs Tom Short Typical Factory/Site Model Comparison Dan Doan Statistical Analysis Tools and Plots in Excel Afshin Majd Model Result Comparisons against Test Results – Excel and third party software Jim Babcock

Examples: Arc Current Comparison Spreadsheet

Examples: HCB configuration with graphing of box size, IE, and working distance:

Examples: Modification Comparison spreadsheet:

Phase 3 Model predictions were compared against all test results to determine the overall performance of the model Outliers and incomplete test data points were reviewed Final model development test data (subset of total test results) was agreed on with collaboration research team Annex to report has 2 files, ‘Model Development’ data and ‘All Test’ data spreadsheets

Phase 4 Final model release candidate was reviewed and compared with model development test data Comparisons showed the proposed model has improvements over the 1584-2002 model: HCB, HOA, and VCBB configurations are available Continuous model between LV and MV Arcing current variation is considered at MV More enclosure sizes Larger variable range especially gap Results are less ‘over-conservative’, especially AFB at MV Gap variable considered for entire voltage range

Range of Parameters Voltage: 208V to 15kV (all configurations) Frequency: 50 or 60 Hz Bolted Fault: 208-600V 500A to 106kA 601V-15kV 200A to 65kA Gap between conductors: 208-600V 0.25 to 3 inches (6 to 76 mm) 601V-15kV 0.75 to 10 inches (19 to 254 mm) Working Distance: 12” minimum Arc Flash Boundary: same as WD Duration: no limits Enclosures: Note: Width must be > (4 x Gap) 208 - 600V 14x12 to 20x20 (inches) >600V - 2.7kV 20x20 to 26x26 (inches) >2.7 - 5kV 26x26 to 45x30 (inches) >5 - 15kV 36x36 to 45x30 (inches)

Application Guidance Use Average and Minimum Iarc calculations, determine the durations for both, find the IE’s, and pick use the higher value. (All configurations, all voltages) Enclosure sizes – use closest size from table 8.2, or use a value in the range allowed by voltage for more detailed calculation. Also use deep/shallow selection for <600V. Some guidance on selecting configurations (HCB vs VCB vs VCBB, for example)

The following documents/files go along with the report: Model Files The following documents/files go along with the report: DataSummary All Test.xlsx DataSummary Model Development.xls IARC Ratio at Different Voltage_1.xlsx IEEE1584 ExcelCalculator_Version 2.6.2_User Define.xlsm IEEE1584 ExcelCalculator_Version 2.6.2_User Define_M.xlsm

Example Calculator sheet Or open calculator and show configurations

Conclusions TG reviewed the proposed model in 17 modifications Exceptions: TG did not duplicate the regression analysis that provided the equation values TG did not review equations for ‘HCB with CT no Tube’ (no test data provided) Scope was to evaluate results, not duplicate results; did not have enough time to complete this. HCB with CT, No Tube – TG did not receive data.

Conclusions TG consensus: If applied within valid parameter ranges, the proposed model will provide results which are consistent, in more applications than 1584-2002 The new model is based on over 1800 test points with additional configurations The new model corrects some anomalies in 1584-2002 such as discontinuity at 1kV TG has completed its scope and submitted a detailed report to WG officers

Future Research Recommendations There is room for improvement; more testing would be useful to determine effect of: Range of enclosure sizes Enclosure depth Distance from arc to back of box Larger and smaller gaps based on actual equipment Larger working distances Effect of actual equipment including contents DC

Working Group Presentations

Working Groups 4 DOE Electrical Safety Handbook 2 Hazardous Energy Control 3 10CRF851 Flowdown, and Subcontractors 5 Risk Assessment per 70E-2015 1 DC Systems

Working Group 4 DOE Electrical Safety Handbook Lloyd Gordon, LANL Mike Hicks, Idaho DOE Eugene Santiago, BNL John Lacenere, PPPL

Working Group 2 Hazardous Energy Control Stephanie Collins, LBNL

Working Group 3 Electrical Safety Subcontractors and 10CFR851 Flowdown Jeff Williams, NNSA, Los Alamos etc.

Working Group 5 Risk Assessment Greg Christensen, INL

Working Group 1 DC Systems Leads Gary Dreifuerst, ex LLNL Stan Berry, ex Navy Alan Tatum, current ORNL Peter McNutt, NREL