ALPHA ENGINEERINGPower & Energy · Since 1979
The modeling is the part people picture: a short circuit study, protective device coordination, and incident energy calculated at every panel, run in whatever software your other engineering already sits in. That work has an end date. What comes after it doesn't, because the facility keeps changing and a label only protects somebody as long as it still matches the system behind the door. Most of the exposure we come across is a good study that quietly stopped describing the building.
Your safety manager can walk up to any panel in the facility and know the number on that label is the right one.The study is a document with a date on it. Somebody has to keep the labels, the procedures and the training current as the facility changes around it.
A vendor does the study, delivers the report and labels, and the engagement ends. Lower upfront cost, but nobody owns the updates that come later.
Workable if your layout rarely changes and EHS already holds safety documentation tightly.Your EHS team owns the program after the study, tracking changes and scheduling retraining. Works when they have the time and technical depth.
Good if your EHS staff have both the time and the electrical depth to track it.An engineer stays attached to the system, reviewing changes as they happen and keeping the study, labels, and procedures current together.
Best when the system changes often, or when you'd rather not be the one deciding whether a change triggers a re-study.Whichever approach suits your facility, these four elements have to remain aligned as the facility changes.
We review what you send and follow up about what has likely changed since, and whether it is worth doing anything about yet.
Request an Engineering Review →You speak directly with an engineer about your situation and the next step.