Circuit Load Identification

[Samuel Ramser]

Art 480.4 addresses identification of switchboards & panelboard directory(s). My question concerns the directory's branch circuit and/or load identification at the individual device.
When a switchboard/panelboard directory is updated or corrected is there a specific code requirement to also update circuit identification on the various devices that are located out of sight?

 

[tom baker]

Identification is not required for any device only the panels. If you do mark the circuit number on a switch or receptacle cover, and didn't update it if changed, then don't bother marking in the first place.

 

[Samuel Ramser]

Panel Directory loads

Panel Directory loads

Existing 3-phase remote loads were marked (Example: feed from panel Pxxx Bkr 7-9-11). The panels contains 3-phase breakers that were re-numbered giving each 3 phase circuit breaker a single number rather than the origional 3 numbers. Is there a specific code requirement to renumber or eliminate the load device marking that is now incorrect? It seems unsafe not to correct the remote device markings especially for disconects located out of sight.

 

[Volta]

Existing 3-phase remote loads were marked (Example: feed from panel Pxxx Bkr 7-9-11). The panels contains 3-phase breakers that were re-numbered giving each 3 phase circuit breaker a single number rather than the origional 3 numbers. Is there a specific code requirement to renumber or eliminate the load device marking that is now incorrect? It seems unsafe not to correct the remote device markings especially for disconects located out of sight.

I can only consider trusting the label without testing unsafe, not leaving an incorrect one.

Now thoughtless, rude, unprofessional, inconvienient . . . :roll:?

I would update any I could easily find, but wouldn't worry from a direct safety standpoint.

The devices are not required to carry information about the feeding circuit by the NEC.

Welcome to the forum.

 

[zbang]

Sometimes I find that the outlet IDs are more useful than the panel schedule, at least they give a starting point like "L2-25" while low voltage panel 2 just says "outlets" (and outlets, outlets, lights, lights, etc).

I also think that renumbering breakers like that is bordering on criminal... just as repeatedly hand-writing in schedule changes. C'mon, at least put some white tape over the old writing first. Better yet, type up a new schedule when the old one is covered with changes.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

OP brought up something i never gave thought to. We might move a breaker at the panel and not be aware that some devices were marked that now will be wrong. I have done some larger buildings that demanded devices be marked. Nothing in NEC about devices that i know of. Can see how a wrongly labled device could be a serious hazard if a less than qualified electrician was involved.

 

[hotwire1955]

you do if receptacles are in critical care areas 517.19

 

[Volta]

you do if receptacles are in critical care areas 517.19

Good point!

 

[Samuel Ramser]

Code Requirenents when re-numbering panels

Code Requirenents when re-numbering panels

There are several hundred panel directories being updated at our facility. Typed panel legends are being inserted inside the panel doors. Several panel directories that contain 3 pole circuit breakers are being re-numbered (see examples below).
Many of the remote devices have existing identification labels. Example: Disconnect for Pump #2 has a label that reads ?fed from Panel P0101 BKR. 8-10-12?.
Question: Is there a specific National Electrical Code or OSHA requirement to re-label the remote devices? Similarly is there a requirement to re-label remote devices when circuit breakers are rearranged in an electrical panel?

Example A
1. Roof top A/C Unit 2. Electric Unit Heater
3. ? ? ? 4. ? ? ?
5. ? ? ? 6. ? ? ?
7. Pump #1 8. Pump #2
9. ? ? 10. ? ?
11. ? ? 12. ? ?
13. Air Compressor 14. Pump #3
15. ? ? ? 16. ? ?
17. ? ? ? 18. ? ?

Example B
1. Roof top A/C Unit 2. Electric Unit Heater
3. Pump #1 4. Pump #2
5. Air Compressor 6. Pump #3

 

[Samuel Ramser]

Do you believe there should be a NEC requirement to update remote devices (if they are labled) when panel directories are revised?