Did I miss something here in the conversation, the study test that Jim & the Oberon Co. has performed had nothing to do with accessories or underwear clothing underneath your FR work-wear. The test was actually testing the protection of the Hard hat & face shield assembly that Oberon brings to the industry.

If the cap liners melt, then they can't be woren under FR clothing. 70E 130(12)(c) does not permit undergarmets which will melt, so I am not sure why you would want something on your head that could melt in the event of an arc flash.

Yes you did. My comment was not directed at the testing, but at Jim's suggestion that a foam hard had liner may be worn under an arc flash hood. As cbauer has said, this violates 130(12)(c). Note that the section speaks of "underlayers (underwear) next to the skin." A foam hard hat liner worn this way certainly qualifies as an underlayer (worn under the FR hood) next to the skin.

I understand your concern, but please allow me to explain further. I revised my original post to add clarity to my statement and remove the word "myth". This was due to the fact that *some* foam liners used for lateral protection on type II caps can melt. Thanks to Ernie and Hugh we have testing evidence to demonstrate this. What the Oberon Company tested for was ignition on what I considered to be the most popular type II hard caps here in Canada. Our results showed NO ignition, melting or dripping. Thanks to our testing I'm now confident in speaking about the type II hard cap liners that we tested in relation to electrical hazards. NEVER forget or neglect to conduct a proper hazard analysis! Ask yourself should the foam liner in your type II hard cap EVER be exposed to sufficient incident energy to surpass the ignition point? Arc Flash faceshields and Arc Flash Hoods when selected properly WILL provide protection to both your eyes/face/skin and your hard cap/type II foam liner/ear plugs/safety glasses. In the absence of an applicable ASTM F18 testing standard (hurry up Hugh!) all we have available is our existing resources, including the report I contributed to this forum. I am not endorsing the use of any type II hard cap liner, but rather sharing with you our technical data on the subject. If worker's were to follow your methodology regarding meltable ancillary type PPE (not garments!!) then nobody would be using ear plugs. Tell me why the standard(s) allow for non-arc rated FR ear canal inserts?! What is most important is what becomes appropriate; Noise induced hearing loss or wearing available HPD's (hearing protective devices)? Receiving lateral impact injuries to your HEAD or using type II foam lined hard caps?! Please, at the end of the day we MUST keep things in perspective and use ancillary type PPE that is the most practicable for the hazard(s).

As I understand it, (after contacting NFPA with the question) they don't. Since even the the plugs that are marketed as Arc Plugs do not show us any arc flash testing, we are left to decide how best to be non-compliant.