Panel Board Clearance

[jim dungar]

Voltage drop on a circuit does not require removing the panel cover. Lost neutral can be tested at the meter.

Yes it is 'easier' to test in the panel, and that is what I would do, but what gives us the 'right' to test in the panel?

You asked for any tests would require energized circuits in a residence. Now you want to be specific to a single location.

If you do not use open the panel for your clamp-on meter, then you would need to do it someplace on the branch circuit, say a receptacle serving a kitchen counter top, but doesn't the cabinet infringe on the working space? In previous discussions, the lack of working clearance at locations, like counter outlets, was defended by saying the energized measurements could be made at the panel. Looks like a Catch-22.:huh:

Also, many utilities do not want you 'working' in their meter sockets.

 

[iwire]

Understand that. Does that mean it is OK to be unsafe?

That is up to each homeowner to decide, but it does mean your OSHA argument is a nonissue.

 

[jxofaltrds]

You asked for any tests would require energized circuits in a residence. Now you want to be specific to a single location.

If you do not use open the panel for your clamp-on meter, then you would need to do it someplace on the branch circuit, say a receptacle serving a kitchen counter top, but doesn't the cabinet infringe on the working space? In previous discussions, the lack of working clearance at locations, like counter outlets, was defended by saying the energized measurements could be made at the panel. Looks like a Catch-22.:huh:

Also, many utilities do not want you 'working' in their meter sockets.

Again why do you need to use a clamp on meter for the house wiring? Why do you need to have a circuit energized? We do it because it is easy and fast. If you are testing equipment the wiring at the outlet should provide you with all the wire you need for testing. No catch-22 since you do not need to work on countertop 'outlets' live.

That is up to each homeowner to decide, but it does mean your OSHA argument is a nonissue.

Point being you never need power to test home wiring.

 

[jim dungar]

Again why do you need to use a clamp on meter for the house wiring? Why do you need to have a circuit energized?

Are you really saying there is never any reason to measure branch circuit and feeder currents in a 'house'?:jawdrop:

 

[jxofaltrds]

Are you really saying there is never any reason to measure branch circuit and feeder currents in a 'house'?:jawdrop:

Not saying never. Give me a few examples of why?

Is the purpose of the circuit to supply power or is it for the testing of appliances?

 

[charlie b]

I have been away from this thread too long, and have missed the fun.

Mike, I suspect your argument is purely academic, and does not necessarily represent your actual beliefs. It is possible that you might not actually make a job-related decision on this basis. But I will play along for a moment or two longer.

You seem to be basing your argument on the notion that live work is not likely in a residential application. That could also be said of an industrial facility for which the owners have published a strict policy that forbids live work under any circumstances. If you came upon an installation that did not meet the 110.26 clearance rules at that facility, would you pass the install on the basis of that policy? I am guessing you would not, but I would be interested in how you would explain the difference. I would not, in part because buildings change owners and owners change their minds. But I have another reason.

Here is my take on the wording of 110.26. It says ?likely,? but doesn?t put a time limit on it. If I were to ask myself (in the hypothetical EI role that you suggested I take on) whether there is likely to be a single time, even so much as one time in the next 70 years, that circumstances will call upon someone to perform a task with the panel energized, I would have to say yes. That is all it takes to invoke the requirement: one single circumstance during the operational lifetime of the equipment. That is the main reason I would not pass an install that did not meet the clearance rules, whether at a residential or industrial facility, and without regard to any OSHA rules or any company policies.

 

[jxofaltrds]

I have been away from this thread too long, and have missed the fun.

Mike, I suspect your argument is purely academic, and does not necessarily represent your actual beliefs. It is possible that you might not actually make a job-related decision on this basis. But I will play along for a moment or two longer.

You seem to be basing your argument on the notion that live work is not likely in a residential application. That could also be said of an industrial facility for which the owners have published a strict policy that forbids live work under any circumstances. If you came upon an installation that did not meet the 110.26 clearance rules at that facility, would you pass the install on the basis of that policy? I am guessing you would not, but I would be interested in how you would explain the difference. I would not, in part because buildings change owners and owners change their minds. But I have another reason.

Here is my take on the wording of 110.26. It says ?likely,? but doesn?t put a time limit on it. If I were to ask myself (in the hypothetical EI role that you suggested I take on) whether there is likely to be a single time, even so much as one time in the next 70 years, that circumstances will call upon someone to perform a task with the panel energized, I would have to say yes. That is all it takes to invoke the requirement: one single circumstance during the operational lifetime of the equipment. That is the main reason I would not pass an install that did not meet the clearance rules, whether at a residential or industrial facility, and without regard to any OSHA rules or any company policies.

Short answer yes I would say 110.26 was violated because of access, if a sump pit was in front of it or a sink in front of it. Both could be next to it and I think that I would have to accept the installation because there is access. I believe that you could have a washer or dryer in front of the panel because you can move them.

You could install (wire a home) the electrical and I would never have to work live except to 'test' at an appliance.


110.26 Spaces About Electrical Equipment. Access and
working space shall be provided and maintained about all
electrical equipment to permit ready and safe operation and
maintenance of such equipment.

We can put an AC disconnect behind an AC unit because we do not have to work on the disconnect live.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

...
You can test all the wiring with a wiggy or megger so why do you need to work 'live'? Other than it is the way we have done it!

Testing with a wiggy is working live. You often find the source of the problem in the panel itself, so troubleshooting in a panel is very common. Any work with any tool, or even just looking, with the cover off is working on or near energized parts.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

...Yes it is 'easier' to test in the panel, and that is what I would do, but what gives us the 'right' to test in the panel?

The OSHA rule does, but as I said before it doesn't matter if we have the "right" or not to test in the panel. The NEC rule is only based on "if it is likely" to happen. Based on what I see in the field and what I read on forums like this, it is very very likely that live work will be performed in a residential panel. In fact, probably more likely in a residential panel than in an industrial panel.

 

[jxofaltrds]

Testing with a wiggy is working live. You often find the source of the problem in the panel itself, so troubleshooting in a panel is very common. Any work with any tool, or even just looking, with the cover off is working on or near energized parts.

Wiggy for continuity only.

The OSHA rule does, but as I said before it doesn't matter if we have the "right" or not to test in the panel. The NEC rule is only based on "if it is likely" to happen. Based on what I see in the field and what I read on forums like this, it is very very likely that live work will be performed in a residential panel. In fact, probably more likely in a residential panel than in an industrial panel.

I understand everyone works on a live resy panel. It is only "likely" because we choose to work it live.

It is likely you will get shocked working live. It is not likely if the panel is de-energized.

What if I had a disconnect outside? Is 'main' panel likely to be worked hot? Is a 'sub' likely to get worked hot? Never a reason to work a sub hot.
Don't tell me to check amp draw on a circuit that is tripping breakers. You are not allowed to turn the breaker on until you have 'fixed' the problem causing the trip!

OK forget about OSHA why do you need a live panel to replace a breaker, add a circuit, check connections?

PS eveytime I come back to this thread it takes me to pp2 unless I hit the new post icon?????

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Wiggy for continuity only.



I understand everyone works on a live resy panel. It is only "likely" because we choose to work it live.

It is likely you will get shocked working live. It is not likely if the panel is de-energized.

What if I had a disconnect outside? Is 'main' panel likely to be worked hot? Is a 'sub' likely to get worked hot? Never a reason to work a sub hot.
Don't tell me to check amp draw on a circuit that is tripping breakers. You are not allowed to turn the breaker on until you have 'fixed' the problem causing the trip!

OK forget about OSHA why do you need a live panel to replace a breaker, add a circuit, check connections?

PS eveytime I come back to this thread it takes me to pp2 unless I hit the new post icon?????

Mike,
I doesn't matter what the rules are. The NEC says you need the work space if the panel is likely to be worked on live. I submit that all panels are likely to be worked on live.

As far as replacing a breaker in a resi panel, the only way not to do that live, in any panel where the service disconnect is in the panel, is to have the utility kill the power. With the current design of panels, even if you turn off the panel main to replace a breaker, you are still working "live".

 

[jxofaltrds]

Mike,
I doesn't matter what the rules are. The NEC says you need the work space if the panel is likely to be worked on live. I submit that all panels are likely to be worked on live.

As far as replacing a breaker in a resi panel, the only way not to do that live, in any panel where the service disconnect is in the panel, is to have the utility kill the power. With the current design of panels, even if you turn off the panel main to replace a breaker, you are still working "live".

True. It is likely to be worked on live only because no one will go to the trouble to de-energize the panel.

My point is - is that a justification to use 110.26(A) because no one places by the rules?

 

[jim dungar]

My point is - is that a justification to use 110.26(A) because no one places by the rules?

The rules say voltage testing is allowed.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

True. It is likely to be worked on live only because no one will go to the trouble to de-energize the panel.

My point is - is that a justification to use 110.26(A) because no one places by the rules?

And my point is that the rules that say you can't work live have nothing to do with the rules in the NEC. The NEC is very clear that if the equipment is likely to be worked on live, you must have the required work space. It does not matter why it is likely to be worked on live, it just matters that is is likely that it will be. As long as it is likely to be worked on live, you need the safe work space.

 

[resistance]

And my point is that the rules that say you can't work live have nothing to do with the rules in the NEC. The NEC is very clear that if the equipment is likely to be worked on live, you must have the required work space. It does not matter why it is likely to be worked on live, it just matters that is is likely that it will be. As long as it is likely to be worked on live, you need the safe work space.

I agree!!

 

[jxofaltrds]

And my point is that the rules that say you can't work live have nothing to do with the rules in the NEC. The NEC is very clear that if the equipment is likely to be worked on live, you must have the required work space. It does not matter why it is likely to be worked on live, it just matters that is is likely that it will be. As long as it is likely to be worked on live, you need the safe work space.

I agree!!

OMG the NEC has ESP! hmy:

 

[jxofaltrds]

The rules say voltage testing is allowed.

And why would you ever have to verify voltage in a panel?
Doubt if the voltage in the cash register is different than in the first panel in a home!

You think that since you have always worked in hot panels that that makes it the law of the land!

There is no reason that you 'need' power in any resy panel to do your job! It is plain easier for you to have it there!

 

[xformer]

And why would you ever have to verify voltage in a panel?
Doubt if the voltage in the cash register is different than in the first panel in a home!

You think that since you have always worked in hot panels that that makes it the law of the land!

There is no reason that you 'need' power in any resy panel to do your job! It is plain easier for you to have it there!

I will throw my two cents in here...
When trouble shooting a branch circuit one might check for voltage in a panel in order to verify circuit has correct source voltage.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

And why would you ever have to verify voltage in a panel?
Doubt if the voltage in the cash register is different than in the first panel in a home!

You think that since you have always worked in hot panels that that makes it the law of the land!

There is no reason that you 'need' power in any resy panel to do your job! It is plain easier for you to have it there!

It doesn't matter why. It doesn't matter if you need to. It only matters if it is likely to happen.

As far as checking voltage in a panel, if you don't have it at the load, the next step would be to check it in the panel.

 

[jxofaltrds]

Charlie thank you for playing. (and I think you "likely" have it)

I'm the EC and I put a sump pit directly under the panel in a single family home. No disconnect outside just a simple install.

You are the EI and you fail me for 110.26.

I challenge you to explain why I have violated the code.

Please explain why 110.26 applies.

Now in Ohio I have to give you the code section for a violation. Not sure if I have to debate you on the job site but should I not have to be able to explain myself somewhere?

Thanx to all for playing. I look at "likely" differently now.