Panel workspace for HVAC

[augie47]

Considering that the pile of gravel was the 1st "fix", I shudder to think what the 2nd fix will be.
To be honest, and this may rub some folks the wrong way, it is what I classify as a "knuckle wrapper". I'd explain to the GC/ E/C and HVAC guy as to why it is a violation and let this ONE slide.

 

[triplstep]

I have rejected an HVAC installation three times.... I am just looking for opinions at this point.

My opinion is that the panel workspace for this installation is compliant. It is nowhere near ideal that is for sure. However, any service technician will have the opportunity to safely access the panel. This is a good post, and I'm glad you are looking for opinions. I appreciate the reasonableness of inspectors to reach out, such as you.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

They now created a bigger violation by covering the flex with only a few inches. Also might be violation to cover the freon lines. We all know that gravel will be going away. Personally i think it was fine and safe in first picture. They could build a wood platform to cover the lines but that too will be removed after final. Your pushing the code a bit more than needed if you fail this. Yes you can fail it but why unless your trying to win some kind of ongoing battle.

 

[M. D.]

After seeing the pictures, I would argue that this is not a violation.

110.26(A)(3)

I would argue that the refrigeration lines are "other equipment associated with the electrical installation"

I agree I'm not seeing the violation

Originally Posted by 2008 NEC
110.26(A)(3) Height of Working Space. The work space shall be clear and extend from the grade, floor, or platform to the height required by 110.26(E). Within the height requirements of this section, other equipment that is associated with the electrical installation and is located above or below the electrical equipment shall be permitted to extend not more than 150 mm (6 in.) beyond the front of the electrical equipment.

 

[WorkSafe]

I would not cite this.

 

[Pierre C Belarge]

The original installation is not compliant.

The gravel on the LFNC is a violation of 356.12(1), and 300.5(F) Backfill.

 

[Mgraw]

deleted by me

 

[Mgraw]

"I would not cite this."

I disagree, the A/C guy could have entered the building straight in with two penetrations or could have offset his penetration.

 

[Pierre C Belarge]

One thing we may be forgetting, is who was there first. If the HVAC installer was there first, shame on the electrician, if reversed, shame on the HVAC.
In my opinion, building officials should be looking for stuff like this as well.

 

[mcclary's electrical]

IMO,,,,,,there was no violation to start. The equipment was associated with the electrical equipment and did not stick out further than six inches. They were fine.


But now, there is a violation of 300.5 (f).


Had they used sand, they would be legal. But this is in violation and should be failed again, although it should NOT have been failed the first time, and sand instead of gravel would have fixed it.

 

[Mgraw]

The equipment was associated with the electrical equipment and did not stick out further than six inches. They were fine.
.

This is an assumption at best. I don't know how far the tee stuck out and I am still not sure this would be associated with electrical equipment

 

[mcclary's electrical]

This is an assumption at best. I don't know how far the tee stuck out and I am still not sure this would be associated with electrical equipment

you left out two words, the wording reads "other equipment" associated with the electrical installation. This "other equipment" is associated with the electrical equipment. They are all the same system. And,,,,it's not a guess. A 4" plumbing tee does not stick out six inches

 

[Mgraw]

A 4" plumbing tee does not stick out six inches

True but it does not appear to be against the wall.

 

[Pierre C Belarge]

IMO,,,,,,there was no violation to start. The equipment was associated with the electrical equipment and did not stick out further than six inches. They were fine.


But now, there is a violation of 300.5 (f).


Had they used sand, they would be legal. But this is in violation and should be failed again, although it should NOT have been failed the first time, and sand instead of gravel would have fixed it.

Go back to 110.26(F)(1)(a).
It basically says "no piping, or other equipment foreign to the electrical installation shall be located in this zone."
The zone of course is from the grade up to 6ft above the equipment.

The lineset is not associated with the electrical equipment.


I disagree, as there is not enough sand there to protect the LFNC from physical damage should someone be working on the panel.

 

[mcclary's electrical]

Go back to 110.26(F)(1)(a).
It basically says "no piping, or other equipment foreign to the electrical installation shall be located in this zone."
The zone of course is from the grade up to 6ft above the equipment.

The lineset is not associated with the electrical equipment.


I disagree, as there is not enough sand there to protect the LFNC from physical damage should someone be working on the panel.

It is not required that the fill provide protection,,,,,rather that the fill not contain objects to damage wiring. The fill need not protect, as you say.


Also, IMO they are associated. Once assembled, they are one entire system associated together. That's like saying your alternator is not associated with your motor.

 

[necbuff1]

It looks like this is one of those installations that is going to go 50/50 on the opinions. So let me go a little farther in my thinking: 1) IMO "other equipment" does not apply to the tee so the 6 inches is irrelevant. Other electrical equipment would apply to the seal-tite. The tee and the lines are foreign. Just as water lines from a water heater. Just b/c a branch circuit is connected to the water heater does not mean they can be ran atop of a panel. This is a 4w panelboard. Now no circuits can come directly from grade to the equip b/c the tee is in the way. 2) Now a pile of gravel has been dumped on it and it impedes the clean access to the panel. 3) If this gravel can somehow be construed as "grade", the problem is compounded b/c now there is FMC below grade and in a wet location. And I would be hesitant to think the t-stat wire was listed for direct burial. Wet locations probably. At any rate I think this installation is a code violation. The interior of the raceway is classified the same as the outside conditions. Just my 2 cents..

 

[Mgraw]

Agree 100% By the way I do Electrical and Mechanical.

 

[benaround]

Are those AC units seperate structures ? Supplied by a feeder.

 

[Mgraw]

You can argue all day that the units are "other equipment" but the chase the tubing is running through is not.

 

[bshep]

necbuff1, while I think you are technically correct, I think it's a little bit extreme to try to get them to redo the install at this point. This is the perfect case for " Im going to pass it this once, but next time it's a fail"