IAEI News – January/February 2010 Digital Edition
Not just in print, the current issue of IAEI News is also available online.
January/February 2010 is available now for you to flick through from cover to cover online! Try it out and give us your feedback. We would love to know what you think.
But remember, you can’t collect a website…
Edited on February 3, 2010 to fix link.
Blog — Product Safety Incidents: “I told you so” just isn’t good enough!
Explosion and deaths in North Carolina from non-certified industrial machinery.
In 2004, the West Pharmaceutical plant exploded killing several people and injuring many more. The cause of the explosion was non-certified equipment operating in an area containing explosive dust. The incident was a tragedy that likely could have been avoided.
In the beginning, West Pharmaceutical opened the plant and got their certificate of occupancy (CO) after all the local inspections were complete. NC inspectors have been informed and vigilant for many years, so it’s likely that their equipment was initially inspected for the certification status (e.g., UL, CSA, MET, ETL, TUV, etc.). At some point, more machinery was added, maybe even without the need to pull an electrical permit. This is when the non-certified equipment was installed.
Sometime in 2002, representatives from our office visited West and asked the plant managers if the equipment used in the facility was all certified by third party agencies. The question was never answered, and they were plainly told, “We’re not interested.”
Around 2003, NC OSHA received a complaint and did an inspection of West. OSHA cited their usual litany of non-compliances, including machine guarding and some other wiring problems. There was no mention of non-certified equipment. OSHA had once again walked through a facility with blinders on when it came to the listing and labeling status of equipment.
The OSHA non-compliances were “corrected,” and then several months later the plant exploded, causing a personal, economic, and environmental disaster that is still under investigation. In 2004, a newspaper interview revealed non-certified equipment as the cause of the explosion (http://www.nciaei.org/section/pdfs/WestPharmUnapEquip.pdf).
But why wouldn’t West listen when the electrical safety experts asked them about their equipment? Most likely it was the cost, and a perception that the service was not necessary, that it was only an added expense. So… would you hesitate to consult your doctor about an important surgery because you suspect he’s making money from providing this service?
In electrical safety, we take criticism from people who don’t understand electrical hazards. What they don’t know is this: We may have already saved their lives with the correct building wiring and systems, with restaurant equipment that didn’t start a fire, with the paint booth or coating system that didn’t explode in their workplace, or with the medical equipment that didn’t electrocute them during a doctor or hospital visit.
Did we see any improvements after the West Pharmaceutical disaster? Ironically, even after all this, the NC Building Codes Council, the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce, the Catawba County Economic Development Council, ZF Lemforder’s attorney and the NC Legislature and Governor allowed an exemption of “Industrial Machinery” for building and electrical inspections. Maybe someday the families of the dead and injured employees of West will understand how our own government and special interest groups are working hard to allow another disaster like this one.
Safety in Our States
We should all be champions of electrical safety and strive to ensure that our customers, our friends and our families do not experience the worst that electricity has to offer. In the words of Wesley Smith of Mount Lebanon, Pennsylvania, who almost had a major incident, “Fire is something that you definitely don’t want to have happen to you, and it’s something that could have easily happened (to me). But since I had an experience that made me very aware, I wouldn’t put in another circuit unless it was protected with an arc-fault circuit interrupter.” Mr. Smith is among many others who have experienced an electrical incident. Fortunately, in his case no lives were taken and no valuable property was lost. In this article, we will explore electrical fires and an update of the 2008 NEC adoption process across the United States. The incidents shared here are real and based on actual experiences.
The Illusion of GFCI Protection
During the required annual pool inspections for commercial indoor pools, the inspector happened upon a ground-fault circuit-interrupter (GFCI) device, with a water cooler connected but without a cover plate. Using his tester it was discovered that the GFCI device protecting the receptacle failed to trip. Expanding the test to all GFCI devices around the pool, it was discovered that the failure rate was 100%. The devices were subsequently removed and sent to Underwriters Laboratory (UL) for evaluation. The end result of this process was disappointing, but it demonstrates a fundamental flaw in the overall system that exists to insure electrical safety. The story is one of parochial views and half measures; but the fundamental question is, “Can the public reasonably expect GFCI protection from a listed and labeled GFCI device when they plug in their appliance?”
Hazardous Area Classification: Division or Zone — You Do Have a Choice
OK all you sports fans out there, it’s football season; and everyone is fired up and running out to buy the latest item of team gear to show their support. But, hey, wait just a minute; your team did real well last season, but maybe it’s time to make a different choice for this season. I know you’re thinking to yourself, What do football and hazardous locations have to do with each other, right? Well, just like with football teams, in a hazardous (classified) area, you also have a choice. The choice in football is which team to support, which one will perform better in volatile situations and atmospheres. When we talk about the hazardous (classified) area, we also have a choice of methodologies to mitigate and prevent volatile situations and atmospheres. The football stadium, however, is not the type of hazardous (classified) location we will be discuss in this article; although, sports fans, a fumble during either process could have the potential to be extremely hazardous in both arenas.
Supply-side PV Utility Connections
Many larger PV systems cannot meet the requirements for a load-side (of the service disconnect) connection to the premises wiring system and a supply-side connection must be considered.
Code Considerations
The supply-side connection (also known as a service-entrance tap) is allowed by the National Electrical Code (NEC) and is addressed in a number of sections in the Code.
Do you inspect and approve electric signs? Things you may want to know about your authority
In most jurisdictions in this country, there has been implemented some version of a building code.
Beyond the quality and safety issue, the electric sign or outline lighting installation shall comply with the building code. The building code, which is either adopted by local ordinance or by state mandate, requires electrical utilization equipment (electric signs) to be installed in accordance with the provisions of NFPA 70, the National Electric Code.
Reprinted from the widely adopted 2009 International Building Code:
Chapter 27 Electrical:
2701.1 Scope. This chapter governs the electrical components, equipment and systems used in building and structures covered by this code. Electrical components, equipment and systems shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the provisions of NFPA 70.
A New Generation
A former student called me to ask how to size a new generator for a facility. He said the calculated load would be 1200 amps at 277/480 three-phase four-wire. It would be used for supplying power when the normal electrical supply system is interrupted. This would include lighting for general illumination, for life support equipment found in operating rooms and for other electrical emergency systems necessary for safety and health of the occupants.
Since the building houses a state government entity it would be necessary to conform to NEC-2008 Article 700; however, Article 701 is similar in the provisions as set forth in that article. The big difference is found in Part III of 701 and 700, Sources of Power. Section 701.11 requires a maximum time period of 60 seconds for legally required standby power after normal power supply is lost. Section 700.12 requirement for emergency systems is to not exceed 10 seconds. Keep in mind there are other significant differences/similarities within the two articles.
Electrical Installations After the Fire

Photo 1. This view shows the hills of Kinglake where the fire passed through and it is encouraging to see the grass that has re-grown. All the hills in the photo suffered and, as you have heard, many homes and businesses were lost.
Australia is a country that has a variety of terrains from the tropical regions of the north to the mountains in the south. In February 2009, Victoria experienced one of the natural disasters that result from bushfires that become out of control. All of Victoria had reached the 40°C (104°F) temperatures in many areas by 11 a. m., along with hot northerly winds that would create havoc upon Victorians for many weeks to come.
The outpouring of many from around the world as Victoria suffered was incredible, and it was really humbling to see the money that was raised; the world seemed a smaller world with all this support. For those who have been involved in fires, much will not surprise you; however, it is important to understand how the Australia bush and attitudes have survived through all this tragedy.
Was the Fire Protection Research Foundation’s (FPRF) Residential Electrical System Aging Research Project completed?
Question
I understand UL conducted research on old homes to determine the effects of aging on residential electrical wiring systems. Is that research project complete, and where can I get the report and any recommendations from the research?
Do Stacked AFCIs Cause Panelboards to Overheat?
Question
I have noticed that arc-fault circuit-interrupter (AFCI) circuit breakers tend to be warmer to the touch than regular circuit breakers. Now that the 2008 NEC requires most circuits in a dwelling to be protected by a combination-type AFCI circuit breaker, and there will be more AFCIs stacked into a panel, will the added heat affect the operation of the circuit breakers in the panelboard or create a hazard?
When the lightning strikes…are we going to be prepared for it?
Traditionally, when we plan to do anything, we should ask ourselves three questions:What? Why? How?Let’s apply this approach to the subject at hand.
Seriously, as electrical designers, installers and regulators, what do we know about a need for a lightning protection system? Except for a few references, the Canadian Electrical Code is silent on this subject (and we’ll get back to the Code references later). With proliferation of metal flagpoles, spires, chimneys, tall construction cranes, cell towers and other communication installations on rooftops of the buildings, this question becomes more and more relevant.
Even if we know about this system of protection against lightning strikes, why would we install it on certain buildings and structures and why would other buildings remain without such protection? Is the criterion for an answer transparent to everyone?









Recent Comments