Violation or not?

[rich000]

Just looking for some opinions on this. Per the manufacturer, only back or side access is required (ignore the front, obviously that is required).

The front is the on the right side. You are looking at the side (facing front of photo) and the back (left side).

So this TECHNICALLY meets the code (110.26). But if you were the inspector, what would you say?

BTW, love the new way to add photos!

Thanks.

 

[petersonra]

I don't see an issue with it code wise.

 

[kevin]

It doesn't look like there is the required 30 in. wide clearance [110.26(A)(2)] in front of the disconnect.

 

[iwire]

Just looking for some opinions on this. Per the manufacturer, only back or side access is required (ignore the front, obviously that is required).

The front is the on the right side. You are looking at the side (facing front of photo) and the back (left side).

So this TECHNICALLY meets the code (110.26). But if you were the inspector, what would you say?

I would not say anything, it meets code.

 

[richwaskowitz]

Uhh, new way to add photos?

Uhh, new way to add photos?

I missed anything about a new way to include images in postings. Can you point me to that please?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I missed anything about a new way to include images in postings. Can you point me to that please?

I don't know of any new method. It seems he is using the management attachment which was there before.

 

[magoo66]

If the 30" is present, the only problem I can see is that it is going to be difficult to get to the interlock over-ride screw if anyone needs to open the cover w/out interrupting power.