IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 51, NO.
4, JULY/AUGUST 2015
Electrical Safety, Electrical Hazards, and the 2018
NFPA 70E: Time to Update Annex K?
Tammy Gammon, Senior Member, IEEE, Wei-Jen Lee, Fellow, IEEE,
Zhenyuan Zhang, Student Member, IEEE, and Ben C. Johnson, Life Fellow, IEEE
Abstract—Sharing the same goals and overlapping member-
ship, IEEE and NFPA are committed to improving electrical safety
in the workplace. Knowledge about electrical hazards, particu-
larly arc flash hazards, has expanded greatly since the first 2002
edition of the IEEE Standard 1584, IEEE Guide for Performing
Arc-Flash Hazard Calculations. In the NFPA 70E Standard, 2004
edition, the 1584 arc-flash hazard calculations were included in
the recommended methods for quantifying the potential inci-
dent energy exposure. In 2004, IEEE and NFPA initiated the
IEEE/NFPA Arc Flash Collaboration Project to conduct research
and testing which would lead to a greater scientific understanding
of the arc flash hazard. Presently, IEEE Standard 1584 is in the
process of major revision. Subsequent editions of NFPA 70E—
the 2009, 2012 and 2015—have greatly expanded the coverage
of the arc flash hazard. However, NFPA 70E Annex K, which
addresses the general categories of electrical hazards, has changed
little since the 2004 edition, except for the addition of a short
paragraph on arc blast hazards in 2009. This paper suggests
content for expanding the 2018 NFPA 70E Annex K.
Index Terms—Arc flash, electrical hazard, electrical safety, elec-
trical shock, NFPA 70E.
I. I NTRODUCTION
T HE first edition of NFPA 70E, entitled Standard for Elec-
trical Safety Requirements for Employee Workplaces, was
published in 1979 to help OSHA provide guidance on electrical
safety in the workplace. In 2004, NFPA 70E, retitled Electrical
Safety in the Workplace, first included annexes to provide sup-
plementary information so that the requirements of 70E might
be better understood and implemented with greater ease. Since
the 2004 70E edition, the number of annexes and the depth
and range of their content on achieving electrically safe work
places have increased significantly. However, NFPA 70E’s 2015
Annex K, General Categories of Electrical Hazards, is very sim-
Manuscript received February 3, 2014; revised June 10, 2014 and January 20,
2015; accepted January 22, 2015. Date of publication February 24, 2015; date
of current version July 15, 2015. Paper 2014-CSC-0017.R2, presented at the
2014 IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Technical Conference,
Fort Worth, TX, USA, May 20–23, and approved for publication in the IEEE
T RANSACTIONS ON I NDUSTRY A PPLICATIONS by the Codes and Standards
Committee of the IEEE Industry Applications Society.
T. Gammon is with John Matthews & Associates, Cookeville, TN 38502
USA (e-mail: tgammonphd@gmail.com).
W.-J. Lee and Z. Zhang are with The University of Texas at Arlington,
Arlington, TX 76019 USA (e-mail: wlee@uta.edu; zhenyuan.zhang@mavs.
uta.edu).
B. C. Johnson is with Thermon Manufacturing Company, San Marcos, TX
78666 USA (e-mail: ben.johnson@thermon.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIA.2015.2406852
0093-9994 © 2015 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
2709
ilar to the original Annex K printed in 2004. The only additional
Annex K material, added in 2009, is a short section on arc
blast. NFPA 70E focuses on establishing a safe workplace for
employees involved with the installation, troubleshooting and
maintenance of electrical equipment. Moreover, the purpose of
70E as defined in Section 90.1 is “to provide a practical safe
working area for employees relative to the hazards arising from
the use of electricity [1].”
Understanding the nature and consequences of electrical
hazards provides the impetus for developing and following
electrically safe work practices. Over the last decade, consid-
erable effort has been expended in redeveloping 70E with the
goal of establishing safer work environments. Annex K should
convince employers how critical electrical safety programs are.
Annex K should also convince workers how critical it is to
follow safe work practices and to be able to recognize unsafe
electrical conditions. For the maximum effectiveness of 70E,
redevelopment and expansion of Annex K needs consideration
in three areas. Annex K should identify 1) the range of electrical
hazards; 2) the threshold electrical parameters capable of caus-
ing various physiological responses and injury from electrical
shock; and 3) the types of potential injury and the physical
mechanisms (as well as thresholds) such as heat, light and
pressure capable of human harm during an arcing event.
The NFPA 70E-2015 Annex K is reprinted in its entirety in
this introduction for easy comparison and review with addi-
tional content suggestions which appear in subsequent sections
of this paper. Suggested content for Sections K.1 and K.2 are
provided in Sections II and III. The 70E-2015 Sections K.3
and K.4 should be combined to address all hazards associated
with an arc-flash explosion; suggested content is provided in
Section IV. The suggested Annex K content will need to be
rewritten and presented in a manner which best engages all
members of the electrical safety community, including man-
agers, workers, contractors and inspectors. The prose injury
descriptions presented in this work and thresholds may need
to be presented in “easy access” table or graphical form for
quicker comprehension. Other than citation numbers, less sub-
stantiation will be provided about the reference information and
statistics.
The reproduction of Annex K also serves another purpose.
NFPA 70E has been widely cited for its informative and injury
data. However, NFPA did not generate this data, and not all
material and statistics have been adequately documented. NFPA
70E is viewed as a worldwide authority on electrical hazards
and electrical safety in the workplace. It is critical that it reflects
2710 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 51, NO. 4, JULY/AUGUST 2015
the most authoritative, published scientific work. The suggested
content for Annex K in Sections II–IV is well referenced. This
paper also serves as a concise summary, capturing the critical
details of the publications and studies cited.
Informative Annex K. General Categories of Electrical Haz-
ards, NFPA 70E-2015: [Reproduced with permission from
NFPA70E-2015, Electrical Safety in the Workplace, Copyright
2014, National Fire Protection Association. This reprinted ma-
terial is not the complete and official position of the NFPA
on the referenced subject, which is represented only by the
standard in its entirety. Electrical Safety in the Workplace
and NFPA70E are registered trademarks of the National Fire
Protection Association, Quincy, MA.]
K.1 General Categories: There are three general categories
of electrical hazards: electrical shock, arc flash, and arc blast.
K.2 Electric Shock: Approximately 30 000 nonfatal electrical
shock accidents occur each year. The National Safety Council
estimates that about 1000 fatalities each year are due to elec-
trocution, more than half of them while servicing energized
systems of less than 600 V. Electrocution is the fourth lead-
ing cause of industrial fatalities, after traffic, homicide, and
construction accidents. The current required to light a 71/2-W,
120-V lamp, if passed across the chest, is enough to cause a
fatality. The most damaging paths through the body are through
the lungs, heart, and brain.
K.3 Arc Flash: When an electric current passes through
air between ungrounded conductors or between ungrounded
conductors and grounded conductors, the temperatures can
reach 35 000 ◦ F. Exposure to these extreme temperatures both
burns the skin directly and causes ignition of clothing, which
adds to the burn injury. The majority of hospital admissions
due to electrical accidents are from arc flash burns, not from
shocks. Each year more than 2000 people are admitted to burn
centers with severe arc flash burns. Arc flashes can and do kill
at distances of 3 m (10 ft).
K.4 Arc Blast: The tremendous temperatures of the arc cause
the explosive expansion of both the surrounding air and the
metal in the arc path. For example, copper expands by a factor
of 67 000 times when it turns from a solid to a vapor. The danger
associated with this expansion is one of high pressures, sound,
and shrapnel. The high pressures can easily exceed hundreds or
even thousands of pounds per square foot, knocking workers off
ladders, rupturing eardrums, and collapsing lungs. The sounds
associated with these pressures can exceed 160 dB. Finally,
material and molten metal are expelled away from the arc
at speeds exceeding 1120 km/hr (700 mi/h), fast enough for
shrapnel to completely penetrate the human body.
II. S UGGESTED C ONTENT FOR K.1
K.1 E LECTRICAL H AZARDS
Both electrical shocks and arc-flash explosions represent
electrical hazards in the workplace. Although the electric utility
industry is often associated with electrical hazards, potential
electrical hazards are present in all workplaces. According to
the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 1635 electrical
fatalities occurred in the private sector between 2003 and 2010;
however, 52% occurred in the construction industry alone and
TABLE I
2003–2010 N ONFATAL E LECTRICAL I NJURIES , P RIVATE I NDUSTRY∗
only a total of 11% occurred in the trade, transportation and
utilities industries [2]. Electrical fatalities accounted for 10.4%
of the industrial fatalities after motor vehicles and violence,
the leading causes of industrial fatalities, were eliminated from
the list. Non-fatal electrical injuries accounted for 8.7% of the
total nonfatal injuries which occurred in the private sector. As
Table I shows, the utilities industries account for only a small
number of the 20 350 nonfatal electrical injuries that occurred
in the same time period.
The numbers of shock and burn injuries and fatalities are
probably higher than the BLS statistics indicate. Many less
serious incidents were probably not reported. Furthermore,
since electrical injuries are defined by the category “contact
with electric current,” it is likely that a number of arc flash
injuries were miscategorized. Tragic electrical incidents may
also cause extensive injuries which result in death after the
required reporting period for fatalities has elapsed. According
to statistics compiled by CapSchell [3], five to ten arc flash ex-
plosions occur every day and result in ten to fifteen employees
being hospitalized and one to two dying as a result of burn
injuries. The 2003–2010 BLS data presented in [2] suggests an
average of 205 electrical fatalities and 2544 electrical injuries
occur each year. The CapSchell statistics indicate that 365 to
730 electrical fatalities and 3650 to 5110 nonfatal electrical
injuries occur from arc-flash explosions alone, not including
those from electrical contact accidents.
III. S UGGESTED C ONTENT FOR K.2
K.2 E LECTRICAL S HOCK1
Table II lists thresholds for 60-Hz, 10 000-Hz and dc electric
shock currents established from Dalziel’s early research involv-
ing human and animal experiments. An individual’s response
to shock current depends on weight, height, bone structure,
and muscular development [4], [5]. Shock thresholds for dc
and higher frequency ac systems are higher than those for
50/60-Hz power systems. Fig. 1 illustrates that shock current
thresholds for ac systems generally increase as a function
of frequency, particularly above 1000 Hz. Table III provides
current thresholds listed in IEC TS 60479-1. The thresholds
of ventricular fibrillation for 1- and 3-s shocks are based on
electrical accident data and represent a lower boundary of a
time-current plot [6, Fig. 20]. For short shock duration periods
less than 0.1 s, ventricular fibrillation is likely to occur only
during the vulnerable period of the heart cycle.
1 Note: Unless explicitly indicated as in Fig. 1 and Tables II–IV, the voltage
and current levels discussed in Section II apply to 50/60-Hz, ac power systems.
GAMMON et al.: ELECTRICAL SAFETY, HAZARDS, AND THE 2018 NFPA 70E, TIME TO UPDATE ANNEX K?
TABLE II
C URRENT T HRESHOLDS D ETERMINED IN DALZIEL’ S
E ARLY R ESEARCH [4]
Fig. 1. Dalziel’s research: Let-go current versus frequency [4] 1956 IEEE.
Reprinted with permission from C. Dalziel [4].
TABLE III
C URRENT T HRESHOLDS IN S TANDARD IEC TS 60479-1 [6]
Even an extremely low-level shock causing a startle reaction
(an uncontrolled muscular reaction) has a potential for injury, if
it causes a response such as tripping or falling. The threshold
startle reaction for an adult is 0.5 mA, the maximum level
2711
of allowable current leakage from an appliance permitted for
most circumstances. Shock current becomes dangerous (as well
as extremely painful) at the “let-go” current, the current level
that causes the hand to involuntarily close and grasp on a
conductor. The “inability to let go” threshold for an adult has
been set at 6 mA, higher than the 5-mA trip level required for
GFCI devices [7]. When a person cannot “let go,” perspiration
increases and skin resistance decreases, so higher levels of
current flow through the body. Respiratory paralysis, the loss
of voluntary control over the respiratory muscles, can be fatal
at current levels of 30 mA for a 68-kg (150-lb) adult [8]–[10].
Electrical workers standing on ladders have broken free from
low-voltage2 “let-go” shocks by kicking the ladder away from
themselves and falling. The response to let-go currents at high
voltage can differ significantly: a person’s grasp of a conductor
may involuntarily tighten, or the person may be propelled from
the conductor [5].
By definition, electrocution is death caused by electrical
shock. Electrocution sometimes occurs from respiratory arrest,
current flow though the respiratory center in the brain; however,
current flow through the heart is usually the cause of electro-
cution. The heart muscle stops pumping blood either due to
cardiac asystole or ventricular fibrillation. Cardiac asystole is
the stopping of the heart; asystole occurs from contact with high
voltage which generate shock currents greater than 1 A in the
body [12], [13]. Cardiac asystole does not necessarily lead to
death, since a fall or blow to the chest may cause the heart
to revert to a normal rhythm without medical defibrillation.
Ventricular fibrillation is the most common cause of electrocu-
tion, particularly for voltages below 1000 V. Based on 0.5% of
70-kg (154-lb) adults, the fibrillation threshold is commonly
set at 100 mA for a 3-s shock duration [14], [15], but has
been associated with currents as low as 30 to 50 mA in the
literature [16]. When a human heart enters a state of ventricular
fibrillation, which is a rapid, uncoordinated and asynchronous
quivering of the heart, it rarely reverts to a normal heart rhythm
without medical defibrillation. Particularly at low voltages such
as 120 V, death can occur without any electrical burns on the
body and without any conclusive autopsy findings. People with
heart conditions, may be susceptible to ventricular fibrillation at
thresholds below the normal population. Early literature reports
“a number” of electrocutions occurring from 65-V circuits
and even one from 46 V [17]. More recently seven cases of
electrocution, four occurring at 24 to 75 Vac and three at 36 to
75 Vdc have been reviewed in [18].
The severity of a shock is determined by the magnitude,
the duration and the path of current flow through the body.
Ohm’s law is commonly used to estimate the shock current
as the quotient of the contact voltage and 500 ohms, the
initial, internal resistance based on 5% of the population [6].
This conservative estimate excludes skin resistance. The body
impedance is actually a nonlinear function of current path and
2 The term “low-voltage” refers to system voltages up to 600 V. The Na-
tional Electric Code [11] considers voltage over 600 V, “high voltage.” The
descriptive term, “high voltage” in Section III most aptly refers to all “medium
voltage,” distribution and transmission systems associated with voltages of
2400 V and higher.
2712 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 51, NO. 4, JULY/AUGUST 2015
TABLE IV
T OTAL B ODY I MPEDANCE (Ω) NOT E XCEEDED IN 50% A DULTS ,
H AND - TO -H AND C ONTACT [6]
duration, touch voltage, skin moisture, contact pressure, and
contact surface area. In Table IV, the total body impedance
(50% of the population) for hand-to-hand contact is provided
for several touch voltages at different moisture levels and
contact surface areas. As the touch voltage increases to 700 V,
the total body impedance asymptotically approaches the in-
ternal body impedance. A person lying on the ground with a
defective tool on his chest might have a much lower internal
body resistance, on the order of 100 Ω [13].
In longer duration shocks after the skin has broken down, the
total body impedance approaches the internal body impedance
for touch voltages over about 100 V [6]. Blisters have been
known to form (and the skin’s resistance drops) after human
skin had made contact with a 50-V energized circuit for 6 or
7 s [17]. The skin resistance is inherently low at the location of
a cut or abrasion. Dalziel [19] reported, “At 240 V and above,
the voltage punctures the skin instantly, leaving a deep localized
burn.” When the skin’s protective barrier breaks down, a person
is at much greater risk for serious electrical shock injury.
In high-voltage contact accidents, the injured worker usually
has skin destruction at the contact points, but any involved
extremities may only be slightly swollen. However, the skeletal
muscle in the affected extremity is in “a state of severe unre-
lenting muscle spasm or rigor,” and frequently has “marked
sensory and motor nerve malfunction [20].” Nerve damage and
poor circulation cause the limb to be weak, stiff and cold; “the
patient is often served by amputation of the damaged extremity
and replacement with a functional prosthetic extremity [20].”
Amputation rates as high as 65% have been noted in high-
voltage contact accidents [21]. Experienced physicians have
compared electrical trauma to crush injuries because both types
of injuries are characterized by the “relative vulnerability of
the nerve and muscle tissues,” as well as the large release of
intracellular contents from the damaged skeletal muscle into
the circulating blood. The release of large protein molecules
can result in kidney failure. The release of ions can significantly
shift blood serum concentrations, affecting the heart and other
organs [20].
Electrical shock injury can be very complex. Nerve damage
may occur from even brief shocks without an appearance
of muscle injury [20]. Some immediate effects of electrical
shock can include confusion, headache, amnesia and uncon-
sciousness. Secondary effects lasting on the order of hours
to days can include paralysis in the legs, muscular pain, vi-
sion abnormality, swelling, headache and cardiac irregularities.
Long range effects may not surface for several years and may
include paralysis, speech or writing impairment, loss of taste,
and numerous other disorders resulting from damage to the
nerve tissues, which do not regenerate [22]. In recent years, a
type of electrical shock injury, identified as “diffuse electrical
injury” has resulted in the development of chronic physical and
neuropsychological issues from low-level electrical shocks that
were not expected to cause long-term injury. Common physical
symptoms include muscle aches, generalized fatigue, numbness
and path related weakness and tingling. Common neuropsycho-
logical symptoms include insomnia, increased anxiety, concen-
tration and cognitive problems, personality changes, and short
term memory loss [23], [24].
IV. S UGGESTED C ONTENT FOR K.3
K.3 A RC -F LASH E XPLOSION
When an arcing fault occurs, an unintended current path
(between phases or phase and ground) forms directly through
air. An “arc-flash” incident is characterized by a flash of bright
light, and is often accompanied by loud boom. Often an arc-
flash incident is truly an explosion, associated with the genera-
tion of energy and release of high-temperature gases [25]. Arc
temperatures can reach 20 000 K (35 000 ◦ F) [26]. A person
standing two feet from a 25 000-A arc might experience a blast
pressure of 160 lb/ft2 (1.1 psi) [27]. In the vast majority of arc
incidents, thermal burn injuries cause the greatest harm.
A. Thermal Energy/Burn Injury
The level of burn injury depends on many parameters, in-
cluding the magnitude of the fault current, a person’s distance
to the arc, and the duration of the fault. (Note: Burn injury
may be prevented with appropriate PPE!) For a short-duration
arc, the generated heat may cause superficial flash burns to
exposed skin, such as the face, neck, and hands [28]. The
rapid generation of heat may even carbonize the skin without
the development of deep injury [29]. However, the ignition of
clothing gives rise to deeper, more serious burns. Fig. 2 il-
lustrates that a person’s chance of surviving a serious burn
injury is a function of age and the percentage of the total body
surface area burned. Surviving serious burn injury also depends
on the depth and location of the burns. Other survival factors
include preexisting health conditions (such as cardiac, liver, or
lung disease) and secondary burn effects (such as circulatory
shock and pulmonary edema). If a victim survives the initial
period of shock, death may occur in the following weeks due
to the secondary effects on the brain, heart, lungs, liver, and
kidneys [30].
Irreversible burn damage has been hypothesized to occur
when the skin reaches a temperature of 96 ◦ C (205 ◦ F) for
0.1 s [26] (based on earlier work [30]–[32]). Although this
prediction is conservative because the local cooling effects of
blood circulation have been neglected, it is quite low compared
with Table V, temperatures recorded from thermocouples on a
mannequin during a staged arc test.
The “safe” threshold for incident heat on bare skin has
generally been accepted at 1.2 cal/cm2 [35], based on Stoll’s
onset of a 2nd degree burn, which involves the formation of a
blister [36]. Fabric testing on blue cotton, twill shirt material,
GAMMON et al.: ELECTRICAL SAFETY, HAZARDS, AND THE 2018 NFPA 70E, TIME TO UPDATE ANNEX K?
Fig. 2. Burn survival: function of age and body percentage burned (Data
source: 2002–2011 National Burn Repository data [33]).
TABLE V
T EMPERATURES ON M ANNEQUIN ’ S E XTENDED H AND AND N ECK [34]∗
5.2 ounces per square yard, demonstrated a 90% chance of
ignition when exposed to incident heat levels of 6.9 cal/cm2
[37]. The arc rating of personal protective equipment (PPE)
is the energy level incident on the equipment that has a 50%
probability of: 1) transferring 1.2 cal/cm2 to a surface (i.e.,
person) under the PPE (ATPV) or; 2) the fabric breaking open
(EBT). Workers can experience serious burn injuries if the
incident energy rating of the PPE is less than the incident heat
experienced during an arc-flash incident.
B. Pressure/Blast Injuries
When an arcing fault is initiated, a high-pressure front is cre-
ated as the expanding gases in the vicinity of the arc compress
the surrounding air. The blast wave from general explosions
travels outward at supersonic speeds that may exceed 900 mi/h
(463 m/s) [38]. The severity of the blast pressure depends on
the initial peak pressure, the duration of the overpressure, a
person’s distance from the explosion, and “the degree of fo-
cusing due to a confined area or walls [39].” Blast pressures are
greater when the explosion occurs indoors, particularly in small
enclosed rooms (such as electrical closets), and the pressure
wave reflects from the walls [40]. A worker may actually be
far enough away from the arc to escape burn injury, but sustain
severe blast injury to due to the propagation of the pressure
wave in the room [41].
Primary blast injuries directly result from the pressure wave
striking the air- and fluid-filled organs. Primary blast injuries
can cause collapsed lungs, ruptured eardrums, or concussions
without a direct blow to the head [42]. In a worker who appears
unharmed immediately after an arc-flash explosion, loss of
hearing (which may be temporary or permanent), confusion,
and unsteady walking may indicate a blast injury. Other symp-
toms such as concentration difficulty, depression, and memory
problems may not surface for weeks after the arc-flash ex-
plosion [41], [43]. Various pressure thresholds associated with
2713
TABLE VI
P RESSURE T HRESHOLDS [43]
TABLE VII
P RESSURES R ECORDED F ROM A RC T ESTS
pressure injury, along with the OSHA limit for impulsive noise,
are listed in Table VI. For comparison, Table VII contains some
limited pressure data from arc tests. Pressure measurements
taken in closed equipment demonstrate a huge potential arc-
blast hazard.
Secondary injuries result from flying debris propelled by the
blast wind. Wounds can occur anywhere, including the eye
and head. During an arc-flash explosion, flying molten material
may cause direct burn injury to the skin or ignite clothing.
People can also be injured by shrapnel or projectiles. Shrapnel
refers to all types of high-velocity fragments resulting from
an explosion [44]. Any object [45], including bolts, tools, and
even heavy equipment, can become a projectile in an arc-flash
explosion. The threat of shrapnel is linked to the magnitude of
the blast pressure. Shrapnel tends to be irregular in shape and
has sharp edges. The velocity of shrapnel during an arc blast is
“generally considered to start at approximately 150 to 180 m/s
(500–600 ft/s) [46].” Arc-flash hood windows and face shields
must meet the projectile impact requirements of ANSI Z87,
which specifies that a 6.4-mm steel ball must not penetrate at
a velocity of 91.4 m/s (300 ft/s). The ballistics test performance
of two hood shield windows and two arc flash suits to 5.6-mm,
nonspherical fragments appears in Table VIII.
Tertiary blast injuries result from individuals being thrown
by the blast. During an arc-flash explosion, individuals may be
injured by being thrown off a ladder or propelled into a wall or
equipment. But the tertiary effects of the arc blast may also help
reduce the severity of burn injury.
C. Light/Eye Injury
Very brief, arc-flash incidents sometimes occur without caus-
ing burn or blast injury to nearby workers. However, the bright
2714 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 51, NO. 4, JULY/AUGUST 2015
TABLE VIII
BALLASTIC R ESULTS : 50% OF F RAGMENTS
P ENETRATING S PECIMEN [46]
TABLE IX
L IGHT L EVEL M EASUREMENTS IN R ECENT P UBLICATIONS
light, visible within a millisecond, may cause flash blindness.
(Limited light data from two arc tests is listed in Table IX.) flash
blindness is a temporary vision loss, which occurs when the
retina receives excess thermal energy, but not enough to cause
a burn. A reduction in visual acuity can last a few minutes or
a few days. The recovery time from flash blindness depends
on the brightness, size, and direction of the light flash, as well
of the light spectrum and person’s age [50]. Recovery times
also increase when a pupil is more dilated [51], as in the case
of a person’s pupil size increasing to receive more light in
a dimmer environment. Light radiated by an arc flash covers
part of the ultraviolet region, predominately in the range of
200 to 600 nm [52]. Long term visual effects from ultraviolet
and infrared light exposure may also occur. Cataract devel-
opment is fairly common in workers surviving significant in-
juries from arc-flash explosions [41]. Testing has indicated that
safety glass significantly reduced the energy reaching the eye
to about 40% [37].
D. OSHA Arc Flash Records
OSHA arc flash records have been analyzed to substantiate
the reality of nonthermal burn injuries and to correlate burn in-
juries and fatalities with voltage level. An analysis of 424 public
OSHA records from 1980 to 2004 involved investigations on
electric arc injuries and fatalities3 ; nonthermal injuries were
reported in 7.3% of the records. It was noted, “The risk of burn
injuries from this hazard can be very severe. However, an elec-
3 For reference information only: According to the Occupational Health
and Safety Standard, 29 CFR 1904.39, a work-related accident resulting in a
death (within 30 days of the incident) or the hospitalization of three or more
employees must be reported to OSHA [54]. In 2005, David Wallis presented an
analysis of 454 public records of OSHA investigations involving electric arcs
which occurred between 1980 and 2004; 30 incidents, involving arc welders,
arc furnaces, and electric shock, were eliminated. A subsequent analysis was
conducted on 2005–2008 OSHA records. Five of the 100 “electric arc” records
were eliminated on similar grounds. In the 2005–2008 data, the four records of
eye injuries were: two flash burns to the eyes (with no face injury specified),
momentary blindness, and required eye flushing from a fault causing a battery
to blow up in a person’s face. An additional record, not included in the table,
included both face burn and eye injury. In one incident, an employee died after
inhaling the hot gases from the electric arc [56].
TABLE X
N ON -B URN I NJURIES F ROM OSHA “E LECTRIC A RC ” R ECORDS
[55],[56]
TABLE XI
OSHA “E LECTRIC A RC ” AND “B URN ” R ECORD
I NJURIES (1984–2007) [58]∗
tric arc poses a substantial risk of nonburn injuries. . . less well
known. . . frequently less severe than the potentially threatening
burn injuries [55].” Table X provides a summary of the original
analysis and an additional nonburn injury analysis of 95 OSHA
records released between 2005 and 2008 [56]; 14.7% of the
2005–2008 records reported nonburn injuries. It is likely that
many of the OSHA records did not document any or all of the
nonthermal burn injuries that occurred. It should be noted that
eye injuries and hearing damage can result from serious thermal
burns, as well as the respective effects of light and sound.
The nonburn injury data in Table X also includes reports
of smoke inhalation and asphyxia. Intense arc temperatures
can vaporize the electrodes (typically copper or aluminum)
and adjacent enclosure walls (typically carbon steel). It has
been estimated that vaporized copper has a volume which is
67 000 times larger than its original solid form [57].The work-
ers probably suffered smoke inhalation or were asphyxiated due
to the conductor and enclosure metal vaporization or combus-
tion byproducts from the ignition of insulation, paints, and other
materials used in the manufacturing of electrical equipment.
Exposure to the gases released during an arc event can result in
permanent lung damage and the development of lung disease.
A study of 1984–2007 OSHA records found that of the 532
records located with keywords “electric arc” and “burn,” 62%
occurred on low-voltage systems (LV); of the 329 low-voltage
incidents, 66% involved 480 V. However, the percentage
of 480-V incidents may have been much higher, since the
voltage level was not recorded in 26% of the LV incidents.
Table XI briefly summarizes the type of injuries involved based
on the system voltage. Some workers were also shocked during
the arc incident, particularly on medium- and high-voltage
systems (MV/HV). An overwhelming, 86%, of the LV fatalities
occurred on three-phase, 480-V systems.
GAMMON et al.: ELECTRICAL SAFETY, HAZARDS, AND THE 2018 NFPA 70E, TIME TO UPDATE ANNEX K?
V. C ONCLUSION
Suggested replacement content for the 2018 NFPA 70E
Annex K has been presented to the industrial and commercial
power systems engineering community. The community-at-
large is encouraged to participate in updating Annex K during
the NFPA 70E revisions process. Proposals for the 2018 Annex
K will be accepted until July 6, 2015. However, comments on
the first draft of 70E-2018 (including Annex K) can be submit-
ted between March 7 and May 16, 2016. The NFPA standards
process is very democratic. NFPA standards are developed and
improved through community involvement.
R EFERENCES
[1] Electrical Safety in the Workplace, NFPA70E-2015, 2014.
[2] Electrical Safety Foundation International, “Workplace electrical injury
and fatality statistics,” Bureau of Labor Statistics Data, Apr. 17, 2013.
[Online]. Available: Esfi.org
[3] D. K. Neitzel, “Controlling electrical hazards through effective risk man-
agement,” presented at the Conf. Record IEEE IAS PCIC, Toronto, ON,
Canada, Sep. 19–21, 2011, Paper 2011–27.
[4] C. F. Dalziel, “Effects of electric shock on man,” IRE Trans. Med. Elec-
tron., vol. PGME-5, pp. 44–62, Jul. 1956.
[5] R. M. Fish and L. A. Geddes, “Conduction of electrical current to
and through the human body: A review,” ePlasty—J. Plastic Surgery,
pp. 407–421, Oct. 12, 2009.
[6] Effects of Current on Human Beings and Livestock–Part 1: General As-
pects, IEC TS 60479-1, 4th ed., Jul. 2005.
[7] “ Personnel protection devices for specific applications: special consider-
ations for conditions of-use constraints,” EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, USA/Ford
Motor Co., Dearborn, MI, USA./U.S. Dept. Energy, Idaho Falls, ID, USA,
TR-114090, Oct. 1999.
[8] M. S. Hammam and R. S. Baishiki, “A range of body impedance values
for low voltage, low source impedance systems of 60 Hz,” IEEE Trans.
Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-102, no. 5, pp. 1097–1103, May 1983.
[9] R. H. Lee, “Electrical safety in industrial plants,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Gen.
Appl., vol. IGA-7, no. 1, pp. 10–16, Jan. 1971.
[10] P. E. Sutherland, D. Dorr, and K. Gomatom, “Response to electrical stim-
uli,” IEEE Ind. Appl. Mag., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 22–30, May/Jun. 2009.
[11] National Electrical Code, NFPA Std. 70, 2014 ed., 2013.
[12] M. Morse and J. Morse, “Electric shock,” in Wiley Encyclopedia of
Biomedical Engineering. New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 2006.
[13] T. Bernstein, “Electrical shock hazards and safety standards,” IEEE Trans.
Educ., vol. 34, no. 3, pp.216–222, Aug. 1991.
[14] L. R. DeLaplace and J. P. Reilly, “Electric and magnetic field coupling
from high voltage AC power transmission lines—Classification of short-
term effects on people,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-97,
no. 6, pp. 2243–2252, Nov. 1978.
[15] L. Yu and R. T. Beck, “Evaluation of electrical hazards in AC low
voltage systems,” in Conf. Rec. 35th Annu. Petroleum Chem. Ind. Conf.,
Sep. 12–14, 1988, pp. 213–218.
[16] M. Bikson, A review of hazards associated with exposure to low volt-
ages, Jun. 6, 2014. [Online]. Available: http://bme.ccny.cuny.edu/faculty/
mbikson/BiksonMSafeVoltageReview.pdf
[17] W. B. Kouwenhoven, “Effects of electricity on the human body,” Elect.
Eng., vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 199–203, Mar. 1949.
[18] D. Roberts, “50-V shock hazard threshold,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,
vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 102–107, Jan./Feb. 2010.
[19] C. F. Dalziel, “Electric shock hazard,” IEEE Spectr., vol. 9, no. 2,
pp. 41–50, Feb. 1972.
[20] R. C. Lee, “Physical mechanisms of tissue injury in electrical trauma,”
IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 223–230, Aug. 1991.
[21] M. Capelli-Schellpfeffer, M. Toner, R. C. Lee, and R. D. Astumian,
“Advances in the evaluation and treatment of electrical and thermal injury
emergencies,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 31, no. 5, pp.1147–1152,
Sep./Oct. 1995.
[22] Electro Test Inc., “Beware of electrical safety hazards,” ECM, vol. 94,
no. 7, pp. 37–44, Jun. 1995.
[23] M. S. Morse, “How much damage can a low voltage shock do?—
Traditional theory, modern theory, and pervasive myths,” presented at the
IEEE Industry Applications Society Electrical Safety Workshop, Dallas,
TX, USA, Mar. 18–21, 2008, Paper ESW2008-07.
2715
[24] M. S. Morse, “A report on the current state and understanding of
human response to electrical contacts,” presented at the IEEE Indus-
try Applications Society Electrical Safety Workshop, Dallas, TX, USA,
Mar. 11–15, 2013, Paper ESW2013-05.
[25] “Explosion,” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia, modified on Apr. 24,
2013. [Online]. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosion
[26] R. Lee, “The other electrical hazard: electrical arc blast burns,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. IA-18, no. 3, pp. 246–251, May/Jun. 1982.
[27] R. H. Lee, “Pressures developed by arcs,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,
vol. IA-23, no. 4, pp. 760–764, Jul./Aug. 1987.
[28] S. Hettiaratchy and P. Dziewulski, “ABC of burns: Pathophysiology
and types of burns,” Brit. Med. J., vol. 328, no. 7453, pp. 1427–1429,
Jun. 12, 2004.
[29] G.-R. Yan, M. Li, and Y. Wu, “A clinical analysis of 836 cases with elec-
trical injury,” Ann. New York Acad. Sci., vol. 888, pp. 88–99, Oct. 1999.
[30] C. P. Artz, J. A. Moncrief, and B. A. Pruitt, Burns. Philadelphia, PA,
USA: W. B. Saunders Company, 1979.
[31] F. C. Henriques, Jr. and A. R. Moritz, “Studies of thermal injury: I. The
conduction of heat to and through skin and the temperatures attained
therein. A theoretical and experimental investigation,” Amer. J. Pathol.,
vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 531–549, Jul. 1947.
[32] A. R. Moritz, and F. C. Henriques, Jr., “Studies of thermal injury: II.
The relative importance of time and surface temperature in the causa-
tion of cutaneous burns,” Amer. J. Pathol., vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 695–720,
Sep. 1947.
[33] 2012 National Burn Repository Report of Data for 2002–2011, dataset
version 8.0, American Burn Association, National Burn Repository,
Chicago, IL, 2012.
[34] R. A. Jones et al., “Staged tests increase awareness of arc-flash hazards in
electrical equipment,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 659–667,
Mar./Apr. 2000.
[35] T. E. Neal, A. H. Bingham, and R. L. Doughty, “Protective clothing
guidelines for electric arc exposure,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 33,
no. 4, pp. 1041–1054, Jul./Aug. 1997.
[36] A. M. Stoll and M. A. Chianta, “Method and rating system for evaluation
of thermal protection,” Aerosp. Med., vol. 40, no. 11, pp. 1232–1238,
Nov. 1969.
[37] R. L. Doughty, T. E. Neal, T. A. Dear, and A. H. Bingham, “Testing update
on protective clothing & equipment for electric arc exposure,” IEEE Ind.
Appl. Mag., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 37–49, Jan./Feb. 1999.
[38] N. Colovos, “Blast injuries,” in Emergency Medicine: A Compre-
hensive Study Guide, New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill, 2000. [On-
line]. Available: http://mediccom.org/public/tadmat/training/ndms/blast
_document.pdf
[39] “Blast injury,” Online. Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia, modified
on Oct. 3, 2008. [Online]. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blast
_injury
[40] N. Sperm, S. Branica, and K. Dawidowky, “Tympanoplasty after war blast
lesions of the eardrum: Retrospective study,” Croatian Med. J., vol. 42,
no. 6, pp. 642–645, Dec. 2001.
[41] M. Capelli-Schellpfeffer, G. H. Miller, and M. Humilier, “Thermo-
acoustic energy effects in electrical arcs,” Ann. New York Acad. Sci.,
vol. 888, pp. 19–32, Oct. 1999.
[42] G. L. Wallace, “Blast injury basics: A guide for the medical speech-
language pathologist,” ASHA Leader, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 26–28,
Jul. 2006.
[43] M. Capelli-Schellpfeffer, R. C. Lee, M. Toner, and K. R. Diller, “Corre-
lation between electrical parameters and injury,” IEEE Ind. Appl. Mag.,
vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 25–31,41, Mar./Apr. 1998.
[44] “Shrapnel,” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia, modified on Nov. 5, 2008.
[Online]. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrapnel
[45] “Projectile,” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia, modified on Nov. 11,
2008. [Online]. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projectile
[46] T. E. Neal and R. F. Parry, “Shrapnel, pressure, and noise,” IEEE Ind.
Appl. Mag., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 49–53, May/Jun. 2005.
[47] W.-J. Lee, T. Gammon, Z. Zhang, B. Johnson, and S. Vo-
gel, “IEEE/NFPA collaboration on arc flash phenomena research
project,” IEEE Power Energy Mag., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 116–123,
Apr. 2012.
[48] G. E. Heberlein, Jr., J. A. Higgins, and R. A. Epperly, “Report on enclo-
sure internal arcing tests,” IEEE Ind. Appl. Mag., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 35–42,
May/Jun. 1996.
[49] J. E. Bowen, M. W. Wactor, G. H. Miller, and M. Capelli-Schellpfeffer,
“Catch the wave,” IEEE Ind. Appl. Mag., vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 59–67,
Jul./Aug. 2004.
[50] J. D. Teresi, “A review of research on flash blindness,” Radiol. Defense
Lab., San Francisco, CA, USA, Rep. USNRDL-TR-68-76, Jul. 1, 1968.
2716 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 51, NO. 4, JULY/AUGUST 2015
[51] S. L. Severin, N. L. Newton, and J. F. Culver, “A study of photostress and
flash blindness,” USAF School Aerosp. Med., Brooks Air Force Base,
TX, USA, Rep. SAM-TDR-62-144, 1962.
[52] R. A. Wilson, R. Harju, J. Keisala, and S. Ganesan, “Tripping with the
speed of light: Arc flash protection,” Proc. 60th Annu. Conf. Protective
Relay Eng., College Station, TX, USA, Mar. 27–29, 2007 pp. 226–238.
[53] A. D. Stokes and D. K. Sweeting, “Electric arcing burn hazards,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 134–141, Jan./Feb. 2006.
[54] Reporting Fatality, Injury and Illness Information to OSHA, Title 29 Code
of Federal Regulations, Std.1904.39, Jan. 19, 2001.
[55] NFPA/IEEE Research and Testing Planning Committee (RTPC), Final
Report, Jul. 28, 2005.
[56] T. Gammon, Unpublished analysis of OSHA Records, “electric arc” key
term, Mar. 2005/Sep. 2008.
[57] W. R. Wilson, “High-current arc erosion of electric contact materials,”
Trans. AIEE Power App. Syst. III, vol. 74, no. 3, pp. 657–663,
Aug. 1955.
[58] C. Wellman, “OSHA Arc-flash injury data analysis,” presented at the
IEEE Industry Applications Society Electrical Safety Workshop, Daytona
Beach, FL, USA, Jan. 31–Feb. 3, 2012, Paper ESW2012-28.
Tammy Gammon (S’91–M’99–SM’06) received
the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees from the Georgia
Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA, all in
electrical engineering.
Since 2003, she has been a Senior Electrical Engi-
neer with John Matthews & Associates, Cookeville,
TN, USA. She performs research and analysis in
power and power quality issues, in fires of electrical
origin, in electrical arc and shock injuries, and in
product design and manufacturing.
Dr. Gammon is a Licensed Professional Engineer
in the State of North Carolina. She served as the Research Manager for the
IEEE/NFPA Arc flash Research Project from 2006 until 2014.
Wei-Jen Lee (S’85–M’85–SM’97–F’07) received
the B.S. and M.S. degrees from National Taiwan
University, Taipei, Taiwan, and the Ph.D. degree
from The University of Texas at Arlington (UTA),
Arlington, TX, USA, in 1978, 1980, and 1985, re-
spectively, all in electrical engineering.
He has been involved in research on arc flash and
electrical safety, utility deregulation, renewable en-
ergy, smart grid, microgrid, load forecasting, power
quality, distribution automation and demand side
management, power systems analysis, online real-
time equipment diagnostic and prognostic systems, and microcomputer-based
instrumentation for power systems monitoring, measurement, control, and
protection. Since 2008, he has also served as the Project Manager for the
IEEE/NFPA Arc flash Research Project. He is currently a Professor with the
Department of Electrical Engineering and the Director of the Energy Systems
Research Center at UTA.
Prof. Lee is a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of Texas.
Zhenyuan Zhang (S’13) received the B.S. degree
from Chang’an University, Xi’an, China, in 2007.
He is currently working toward the Ph.D. degree
in electrical engineering in the Energy Systems Re-
search Center, Department of Electrical Engineering,
The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington,
TX, USA.
His focus lies in arc flash research, but he has
also been involved in hybrid energy storage, smart
grids, renewable energy, electrical safety analysis,
and power systems analysis.
Mr. Zhang has served as a Project Associate for the IEEE/NFPA Arc Flash
Research Project since 2010.
Ben C. Johnson (AM’74–SM’90–F’97–LF’07) is
presently Senior Consultant for Thermon Manufac-
turing Company, San Marcos, TX, USA. His career
spans a broad range of industrial experience, includ-
ing 44 years with Thermon and eight years in the
petrochemical industry with Ethyl Corporation and
Diamond Shamrock Corporation. He was Thermon’s
Vice President of North American Sales for five
years and Thermon’s Vice President of Engineering
for 12 years, responsible for product application
design, field and construction services. He was pre-
viously Thermon’s Vice President of Research and Development. He is the
holder of eight patents in the field of surface heating and is responsible for
numerous new product innovations. He has authored or coauthored 19 papers
for various societies. As United States delegate to the International Electro-
technical Commission (IEC), he is the Convener for TC31 Maintenance Team
79-30, Electrical Equipment in Flammable Atmospheres, Electrical Resistance
Trace Heating and US Technical Advisor for IEC TC27, Safety in Electroheat
Installations.
Mr. Johnson is a member of the U.S. Technical Advisory Committee for IEC
TC31. He served as Cochair of the IEEE/NFPA Collaboration on Arc Flash
Research.