National Fire Protection Association Report
1 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Second Revision No. 10-NFPA 70B-2014 [ Section No. 7.1.3 ]
7.1.3
Chapter 1 of NFPA 70E covers electrical safety-related work practices and procedures for employees who
work on or near exposed energized electrical conductors or circuit parts in workplaces that are included in
the scope of that standard. These practices and procedures are intended to provide for employee safety
relative to electrical hazards in the workplace. All maintenance personnel should confirm that the
requirements of NFPA 70E are adhered to when where performing electrical maintenance procedures.
7.1.3.1
The following are some of the considerations as required by in Article 110 of NFPA 70E:
(1) Training requirements (see 110.2)
(2) Electrical safety program (see 110.1)
(3) Use of electrical equipment (see 110.4)
7.1.3.2
The following are some of the considerations as required by in Article 120 of NFPA 70E:
(1) Verification of an electrically safe work condition (see 120.1)
(2) De-energized electrical equipment that has lockout/tagout devices applied(see 120.2)
(3) Temporary protective grounding equipment (see 120.3)
7.1.3.3
The following are some of the considerations as required by in Article 130 of NFPA 70E:
(1) Energized work [see 130.2(A)]
(2) Approach boundaries to energized electrical conductors or circuit parts for shock protection(see
130.4)
(3) Test instruments and equipment use (see 130.4)
(4) Limited approach boundary [see 130.4(C)]
(5) Other precautions for personnel activities (see 130.6)
(6) Personal and other protective equipment (see 130.7)
Submitter Information Verification
Submitter Full Name: Christopher Coache
Organization:
National Fire Protection Assoc
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Submittal Date:
Wed Dec 03 14:18:48 EST 2014
Committee Statement
Committee Statement: Replaced "as required by" with "in" to comply with the NFPA Manual of Style.
Response Message:
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
National Fire Protection Association Report
2 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Second Revision No. 11-NFPA 70B-2014 [ Section No. 8.6.6 ]
8.6.6
When repairing, rebuilding, and/or remanufacturing listed equipment, the work should be conducted by a
qualified person or organization to assure that no changes are made to the equipment that might
void prevent the equipment listing and that the product continues to meet the from meeting the applicable
performance and safety requirements used to list the equipment .( [ See also NFPA 791 and OSHA Safety
& Health Information Bulletin (SHIB), "Certification of Workplace Products by Nationally Recognized
Testing Laboratories."] .)
Submitter Information Verification
Submitter Full Name: Christopher Coache
Organization:
National Fire Protection Assoc
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Submittal Date:
Wed Dec 03 14:21:36 EST 2014
Committee Statement
Committee
Statement:
Although OSHA's SHIB is not law, it is a valuable information tool (from an authoritative source), to
further educate purchasing, engineering, operation, and maintenance in ensuring a safe workplace
at plants with hazardous (classified) locations. Therefore the SHIB should be highlighted as a
significant resource for individuals concerned with listed equipment used in hazardous locations.
Thus this should warrant a specific "see also" reference within the body of the 70B standard.
Major Chemical, Petrochemical and Refining operations are diligent to ensure that only listed
equipment be installed in hazardous (classified) locations. But at the maintenance level there is often
a lack of understanding of key product attributes of listed equipment that if compromised, could void
a third party listing and/or create an unsafe device. Therefore it is critical that standards highlight
information from an authoritative source that gives the reader an understanding of what can
potentially create an unsafe device with noncompliance to OSHA regulations.
The term "void" is replaced with respect to third party listing. It is the equipment that is under
consideration rather than the listing.
Response
Message:
Public Comment No. 6-NFPA 70B-2014 [Section No. 8.6.6]
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
National Fire Protection Association Report
3 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Second Revision No. 12-NFPA 70B-2014 [ Section No. 8.6.7 ]
8.6.7
If required, the The AHJ can assess the acceptability of modifications to determine if the modifications are
significant enough to require re-evaluation of the modified product by the organization that listed the
equipment.
Submitter Information Verification
Submitter Full Name: Christopher Coache
Organization:
National Fire Protection Assoc
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Submittal Date:
Wed Dec 03 14:27:43 EST 2014
Committee Statement
Committee Statement: Removed "if required" to comply with the NFPA Manual of Style.
Response Message:
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
National Fire Protection Association Report
4 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Second Revision No. 13-NFPA 70B-2014 [ Sections 8.11.2, 8.11.3 ]
8.11.2 Methods for Verifying Proper Tightness After Initial Installation.
Inspect electrical connections and terminations for high resistance using one or more of the following
methods:
(1) Use a low-resistance ohmmeter to compare connection and termination resistance values to values
of similar connections and terminations. Investigate values that deviate from those of similar
connections or terminations by more than 50 percent of the lowest value in accordance with
ANSI/NETA MTS, Maintenance Testing Specifications for Electrical Power Equipment and Systems.
(2) Verify the tightness of accessible connections and terminations using a calibrated torque
measurement tool in accordance with 8.11.3 , 8.11.4 , and 8.11.5 .
(3) Perform a thermographic survey. (See Section 11.17.)
8.11.3 Checking Tightness When Where There Are No Signs of Degradation.
After a connection or termination is torqued to the specified value there can be metal relaxation. It is not
appropriate to check an existing connection or termination for tightness to the prescribed specified value
with a calibrated torque measurement tool. Doing so can result in an improperly terminated conductor or
cause damage to the connection and might void the listing. One industry practice is to use a calibrated
torque measuring tool to check existing connections and terminations at 90% 90 percent of the specified
torque value as determined in Section 8.11.1 8.11.1 8.11 . If the screw or bolt does not move, the existing
connection or termination is considered properly torqued. If the screw or bolt moves it is an indication the
connection or termination is not properly torqued and the connection or termination should be reinstalled.
Submitter Information Verification
Submitter Full Name: Christopher Coache
Organization:
National Fire Protection Assoc
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Submittal Date:
Wed Dec 03 14:29:28 EST 2014
Committee Statement
Committee
Statement:
Revised 8.11.2(2) to reference sections which provide specific procedures to verify tightness
of connections.
Section 8.11.1 is the applicable specific reference section to determine the proper original
installation torque value.
Response
Message:
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
National Fire Protection Association Report
5 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Second Revision No. 14-NFPA 70B-2014 [ Section No. 14.3.11.1 [Excluding any
Sub-Sections] ]
Luminaires (fixtures) shall should be inspected to verify that they are properly grounded.
Submitter Information Verification
Submitter Full Name: Christopher Coache
Organization:
National Fire Protection Assoc
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Submittal Date:
Wed Dec 03 14:34:33 EST 2014
Committee Statement
Committee Statement: "Shall" was changed to "should" to comply with the NFPA Manual of Style.
Response Message:
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
National Fire Protection Association Report
6 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Second Revision No. 2-NFPA 70B-2014 [ Section No. 15.9.4.1.1 ]
15.9.4.1.1*
Battery chargers play a critical role in maintaining batteries because they supply normal dc requirements
and maintain batteries at appropriate levels of charge. Chargers should be set and maintained according
to manufacturers' instructions. Charger output voltage should be set and periodically verified (at least
once per year) to be in accordance with the battery manufacturers' instructions. Battery chargers should
be maintained in accordance with the charger manufacturer’s instructions.
Submitter Information Verification
Submitter Full Name: Christopher Coache
Organization:
National Fire Protection Assoc
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Submittal Date:
Wed Dec 03 11:50:52 EST 2014
Committee Statement
Committee Statement: Delete the second sentence as it is redundant to the subsequent two sentences.
Response Message:
Public Comment No. 8-NFPA 70B-2014 [Section No. 15.9.4.1.1]
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
National Fire Protection Association Report
7 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Second Revision No. 3-NFPA 70B-2014 [ Section No. 15.9.4.3 [Excluding any
Sub-Sections] ]
Personnel should be aware of the types of hazards associated with stationary batteries, such as
flammable/explosive gas hazards, chemical hazards, electric shock hazards, and arc flash/thermal
hazards. Not all stationary batteries have the same types or degrees of hazards. Personnel must
understand the potential hazards and do a risk assessment prior to any work per Section 7.1 and NFPA
70E. Personnel should also follow the manufacturer's instructions. As a minimum, the safety precautions in
15.9.4.3.1 through 15.9.4.3.5 should be observed. IEEE 1657, IEEE Recommended Practice for
Personnel Qualifications for Installation and Maintenance of Stationary Batteries, provides levels
recommended provides recommended curriculum for various skill levels. (See 15.9.4.1.2 .)
Submitter Information Verification
Submitter Full Name: Christopher Coache
Organization:
National Fire Protection Assoc
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Submittal Date:
Wed Dec 03 11:52:02 EST 2014
Committee Statement
Committee Statement: Delete the unnecessary word "level".
Response Message:
Public Comment No. 9-NFPA 70B-2014 [Section No. 15.9.4.3 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
National Fire Protection Association Report
8 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Second Revision No. 15-NFPA 70B-2014 [ Section No. 33.2.5 ]
33.2.5 Emergency Response.
Following emergency response actions, personnel should maintain vigilance regarding potential shock
and fire hazards. Internal shorting due to mechanical damage and/or water ingress from fire-fighting
efforts could exist even though the array might be disconnected and might appear to be de-energized.
Removal of damaged panels should be performed with the appropriate PPE. (See also UL Firefighter
Safety and Photovoltaic Installations Research Project.)
Submitter Information Verification
Submitter Full Name: Christopher Coache
Organization:
National Fire Protection Assoc
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Submittal Date:
Wed Dec 03 14:36:01 EST 2014
Committee Statement
Committee Statement: Added a reference to provide additional guidance.
Response Message:
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
National Fire Protection Association Report
9 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Second Revision No. 16-NFPA 70B-2014 [ Section No. C.1.3.11 ]
C.1.3.11 OSHA Publications.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20210.
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety & Health Administration, Directorate of Technical
Support and Emergency Management, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities: Safety
& Health Information Bulletin (SHIB) 02-16-2010, "Certification of Work place Products by Nationally
Recognized Testing Laboratories".
Submitter Information Verification
Submitter Full Name: Christopher Coache
Organization:
National Fire Protection Assoc
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Submittal Date:
Wed Dec 03 14:39:50 EST 2014
Committee Statement
Committee Statement: Document is referenced within body of NFPA 70B and should be referenced in Chapter 2.
Response Message:
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
National Fire Protection Association Report
10 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Second Revision No. 18-NFPA 70B-2014 [ Section No. Q.6 ]
Q.6 Hospital Electrical Panel Fire.
A fire necessitated the evacuation of patients on the fourth and fifth two floors of a healthcare and
emergency services hospital. The fire originated in an electric panel on the wall of a patient’s room on the
fourth floor . There was never any routine inspection or preventive maintenance performed on these
low-voltage panels. Fire and smoke damage resulted and business was interrupted due to the loss of use
of those floors for patient care due to during the cleanup and restoration period. The insurance loss cost
payment was in excess of $320,000 Costs exceeded $300,000 (U.S.).
Supplemental Information
File Name
Description
Case_Histories_qQ.6_revised.docx
revised case history q.6.
Submitter Information Verification
Submitter Full Name: Christopher Coache
Organization:
National Fire Protection Assoc
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Submittal Date:
Wed Dec 03 14:49:07 EST 2014
Committee Statement
Committee Statement: The case history was modified to be a more general example.
Response Message:
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
Case_History_for_Global_FR-86_Q.6_edited.docx (pages 11, 12) Chubb & Son, a division of Federal Insurance Company
Hospital Electrical Panel Fire
A fire necessitated the evacuation of patients on two floors of a healthcare and emergency services hospital. The fire
originated in an electric panel on the wall of a patient room. There was never any routine inspection or preventive
maintenance performed on these low-voltage panels. Fire and smoke damage resulted and business was interrupted due
to the loss of use of those floors for patient care during the cleanup and restoration period. Costs exceeded $300,000
(U.S).
National Fire Protection Association Report
11 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Second Revision No. 17-NFPA 70B-2014 [ Sections Q.10, Q.11, Q.12, Q.13 ]
Q.10 Infrared Inspection Prevents Potential Failure and Outage of 20 MVA mVA Transformer.
The observation at the initial infrared survey was indicated the transformer was not cooling properly. The
infrared image showed an uneven heat pattern on the transformer cooling fins. This condition could result
in the transformer overheating and a breakdown of the oil — especially in the summer heat . Failure of this
substation transformer would result in loss of power to business businesses and homeowners on the
west end of the grid .
After consultations between the client owner and repair firms, it was determined that there could be
several causes for this cooling problem: the transformer could be low on oil, the transformer could have
shifted (tilted on an angle), or sludge could cause be causing a blockage in the fins.
When the client opened the observation port at the top of the transformer was opened , they inspectors
noted that approximately half of the tubes were covered with oil. The oil-covered tubes measure The
initial infrared image showed an uneven heat on the right-hand side of the 5/6/09 thermogram. The client
added approximately 25 gallons pattern. The fins properly filled with oil showed a hotter surface
temperature than those fins that were not properly filled with oil. After adding the appropriate amount of oil
to the transformer and recharged re-charging the nitrogen blanket. As a result, , another infrared image
was taken. The infrared image after the 6/1/09 thermogram repair indicated a balanced an even heat
load pattern across the cooling fins . Detection of this the abnormal condition and the corrective actions
prevented potential failure and loss of power, and improved the reliability of the client’s owner’s
operations. (See also Section 11.7.)
Q.11 Hospital Transformer Failure.
The 2500 kVA main power transformer for a hospital’s emergency generator hospital failed, which
resulted in fire damage to the transformer and the associated bus duct. The insurance loss costs were
$138,905 Costs exceeded $130,000 (U.S.). The transformer was less than five years old. After the initial
installation, an electrical contractor added cooling fan kits to the transformer. It is unknown whether this
attributed to the failure. To avoid any potential business interruption, a readily available replacement
transformer was installed instead of the original specialty transformer due to the several months lead time
for a like-kind replacement.
What triggered the need to alter the manufacturer’s design and install additional cooling fan kits? Did
overloading, improper maintenance, or loose connections create an overheating condition? Insurance
company case study reports indicate 52% percent of transformer failures are preventable. Failures for
relatively new transformers can could be due to localized damage, limitations in design/application, and
improper maintenance that does not allow for detecting symptoms of developing faults. Site testing and
commissioning provide a baseline for future maintenance. Defects of poor workmanship will usually cause
a transformer to fail in very early stages of its life. (See also Sections 8.11, 11.11 , and 11.17 .)
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
National Fire Protection Association Report
12 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Q.12 Office Building Drive System Loose Connection Results in Arcing Fault.
A 350-ton centrifugal chiller unit failed at a commercial real estate office building. The building engineer
found that the chiller had no power to the panel. The chiller was used a few weeks prior due to warm
weather, but was not used in the last week. He found that the 800 A breaker had tripped. He also
noticed week prior to failure. After the building engineer noted an odor in the room , typical of electrical
damage. Because in the chiller room, it was not immediately needed, discovered that there was no
further investigation until the following Tuesday. The engineer performed some power to the chiller panel
and the 800A breaker had tripped. Some basic electrical tests were performed on the transformer in the
cabinet and on some of the cabling to check for , with no obvious short circuits or ground faults found . He
noticed There was some spattering around the load side of the 800 A breaker, but did it was not
know determined if it this was old or new . He did not perform any tests and no test were performed on
the breaker. No further investigation was conducted at the time because the chiller was not needed.
The chiller panel cabinet door was closed, and the breaker set to on reset . As soon as the breaker was
closed a severe arcing fault occurred within the drive system enclosure panel . A service company was
then called in and determined that the unit could not be repaired. The 800 A 800A circuit breaker for the
units drive system suffered an arcing fault due to a loose connection. Insurance loss costs were Costs
exceeded $100,000 (U.S.).
Proper safe work practices and maintenance procedures should always be followed. When an
overcurrent protective device opens as a result of a fault, OSHA §f1910 1910 .334(b)(2) and NFPA 70E do
not permit reclosing a circuit breaker or replacing fuses until it is safe to do so. The drive system should
have been thoroughly checked out after the first circuit breaker trip to determine the cause, assess the
action to remedy the failure, and ensure it is safe to re-energize the system. It is not known if regular
maintenance was performed on the drive system, but it’s It’s possible that a regular preventive
maintenance program that included visual inspection, cleaning, testing, and infrared inspection could
have identified and corrected the root cause before the first circuit breaker trip was necessary.
Q.13 Hospital MCC Fails and Air Conditioning Down.
The plant operator heard a loud bang and found smoke coming from the chiller plant MCC. Failure of an
the MCC for chillers the chiller plant resulted in the loss of critical air conditioning for to a
hospital hospital’s operating room. As a result, and the entire facility. Due to the failure, procedures in the
operating room were cancelled. Lead times for replacement MCC parts were six to eight weeks.
Insurance loss costs were $425,498 Emergency temporary repairs that included a transformer rental
needed to be made to restore partial operations. The fuses for the dry-type transformer that provided
power to the MCC had two open fuses and extensive arcing damage was found along the MCC bus bar.
The MCC was considered aged as it was thirty years old. Costs exceeded $400,000 (U.S.).
Periodic infrared inspection was conducted on the MCC by a contractor. It was not known if any abnormal
conditions were identified during those inspections. Infrared testing is only part of a preventive
maintenance program and is helpful in identifying defects on exposed energized parts that have a load at
the time of inspection. A comprehensive PM program that includes other testing, like ultrasound and
electrical tests, visual inspection, and checking for tightness and proper torque, particularly on the bus bar
for the MCC, could have identified the defect or problem before failure. Age of equipment should also be
considered in determining frequency of maintenance intervals.
Supplemental Information
File Name
Description
Case_Histories_Q.10_Q13_revised.docx
revised case histories for q.10-q13.
Submitter Information Verification
Submitter Full Name: Christopher Coache
Organization:
National Fire Protection Assoc
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Submittal Date:
Wed Dec 03 14:46:05 EST 2014
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
National Fire Protection Association Report
13 of 13
http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...
Committee Statement
Committee Statement: The case histories were modified to be more general examples.
Response Message:
12/30/2014 3:36 PM
Q.10 Infrared Inspection Prevents Potential Failure and Outage of 20mVA Transformer The observation at the initial infrared survey indicated the transformer was not cooling properly. The infrared image showed an uneven heat pattern on the transformer cooling fins. This condition could result in the transformer overheating and a breakdown of the oil. Failure of this substation transformer would result in loss of power to businesses and homeowners. After consultations between the owner and repair firms, it was determined that there could be several causes for this cooling problem: The transformer could be low on oil, the transformer shifted (tilted on an angle), and sludge could be causing a blockage in the fins. When the observation port at the top of the transformer was opened, they noted approximately half of the tubes were covered with oil. The initial infrared image showed an uneven heat pattern. The fins properly filled with oil showed a hotter surface temperature than those fins that were not properly filled with oil. After adding the appropriate amount of oil to the transformer and re‐charging the nitrogen blanket, another infrared image was taken. The infrared image after the repair indicated an even heat pattern across the cooling fins. Detection of the abnormal condition and the corrective actions prevented potential failure and loss of power, and improved the reliability of the owner’s operations. (See also Section 11.7.) Q.11 Hospital Transformer Failure The main power transformer for a hospital failed which resulted in fire damage to the transformer and the associated bus duct. Costs exceeded $130,000 (U.S.). The transformer was less than five years old. After the initial installation, an electrical contractor added cooling fan kits to the transformer. It is unknown whether this attributed to the failure. To avoid any potential business interruption, a readily available replacement transformer was installed instead of the original specialty transformer due to several months lead time for a like‐kind replacement. What triggered the need to alter the manufacturer’s design and install additional cooling fan kits? Did overloading, improper maintenance, or loose connections create an overheating condition? Insurance company case study reports indicate 52% of transformer failures are preventable. Failures for relatively new transformers could be due to localized damage, limitations in design/application, and improper maintenance that does not allow for detecting symptoms of developing faults. Site testing and commissioning provide a baseline for future maintenance. Defects of poor workmanship will usually cause a transformer to fail in very early stages of its life. (See also Sections 8.11, 11.11, and 11.17.) Q.12 Office Building Drive System Loose Connection Results in Arcing Fault A centrifugal chiller unit failed at a commercial real estate office building. The chiller was used a few weeks prior due to warm weather, but was not used in week prior to failure. After the building engineer noted an odor typical of electrical damage in the chiller room, it was discovered that there was no power to the chiller panel and the 800A breaker had tripped. Some basic electrical tests were performed on the transformer, with no obvious short circuits or ground faults found. There was some spattering around the load side of the breaker, but it was not determined if this was old or new and no test were performed on the breaker. No further investigation was conducted at the time because the chiller was not needed. The chiller panel cabinet door was closed, and the breaker reset. As soon as the breaker was closed, a severe arcing fault occurred within the panel. A service company was then called in and determined that the unit could not be repaired. The 800A circuit breaker for the drive system suffered an arcing fault due to a loose connection. Costs exceeded $100,000 (U.S.). Proper safe work practices and maintenance procedures should always be followed. When an overcurrent protective device opens as a result of a fault, OSHA 1910.334(b)(2) and NFPA 70E do not permit reclosing a circuit breaker or replacing fuses until it is safe to do so. The drive system should have been thoroughly checked out after the first circuit breaker trip to determine the cause, assess the action to remedy the failure and ensure it is safe to re‐energize the system. It’s possible that a regular preventive maintenance program that included visual inspection, cleaning, testing and infrared inspection could have identified and corrected the root cause before the first circuit breaker trip was necessary. Q.13 Hospital MCC Fails and Air Conditioning Down The plant operator heard a loud bang and found smoke coming from the chiller plant MCC. Failure of the MCC for the chiller plant resulted in the loss of critical air conditioning to a hospital’s operating room and the entire facility. Due to the failure, procedures in the operating room were cancelled. Lead times for replacement MCC parts were six to eight weeks. Emergency temporary repairs that included a transformer rental needed to be made to restore partial operations. The fuses for the dry‐type transformer that provided power to the MCC had two open fuses and extensive arcing damage was found along the MCC bus bar. The MCC was considered aged as it was thirty years old. Costs exceeded $400,000 (U.S.). Periodic infrared inspection was conducted on the MCC by a contractor. It was not known if any abnormal conditions were identified during those inspections. Infrared testing is only part of a preventive maintenance program and is helpful in identifying defects on exposed energized parts that have a load at the time of inspection. A comprehensive PM program that includes other testing, like ultrasound and electrical tests, visual inspection, and checking for tightness and proper torque, particularly on the bus bar for the MCC, could have identified the defect or problem before failure. Age of equipment should also be considered in determining frequency of maintenance intervals.