NEC 408.4 as it relates to Permit Drawings versus actual field conditions

[jdaly]

AllAll,

We do a lot of work in a local jurisdiction around Herndon, VA and one county is requiring us to list the room numbers on the panel schedules on the permit submission drawings (NEC 408.4). No other local jurisdiction is requiring this but they are holding firm on their position. As we know, room numbers can often change at the last minute or the electrician could wire the receptacles up differently than what is shown on the plans based on the existing field conditions or how the new panelboard comes from the manufacturer. We just don't see any benefit to doing this at permit document submission level but rather feel this is something the electrician needs to coordinate and comply with once he is done with the project and all of the circuits and room numbers have been finalized.

Article 408.4 states that this has to be done at the completion of the project and who better to do this than the electrician once all of the circuits are pulled and the room numbers are finalized? We just feel that doing this on the front end provides no real benefit because typically panel schedules at the end of the project don?t look anything like the panel schedules that were prepared on the permit set of documents. We feel this is a requirement the electrician has to comply with in the field and not the design engineer in preparation of the plans for permit submission.

I welcome the thoughts of electrical engineers, electricians and electrical inspectors on this topic and what their interpretation of the code requirements for 408.4 should be. Should this be on the design engineer or should this be on the electrician to coordinate in the field with actual field conditions, pulled and demoed circuits and finalized room numbers?

Thanks,
Joe

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I don't work with planning but posting this will bump you up for others to see and hopefully help out.

 

[ron]

408.4 is titled "Field Identification Required". Field identification is done in the field, not on drawings. Of course, as every interaction with the Building Dept, you have to decide if it is worth the struggle to arm wrestle with them.

 

[dbeasley488]

Plan reviewers

Plan reviewers

If the AHJ is demanding you do it on this one issue to get a permit then you really don't have much of a choice. I usually will call the reviewer to see if I can get a little wiggle room or a different interpretation on something but if they're adamant, you'll just waste time arguing back and forth. Nowadays with review times stretching into 4-6 weeks in some places, you really don't have time for it.

 

[hmspe]

I agree that this should be done in the field rather than at plan review, but many of the jurisdictions where I work require that every entry in a panel schedule be unique. "Lighting 1", "Lighting 2", etc. is generally good enough, but I don't think it meets the intent of the NEC. For that matter, I don't think room numbers are enough, either. Over the course of time "Room 101" is in the same category as "Steve's office" -- both are dependent on transient conditions of occupancy. It gets especially interesting when all that the architect shows is "Steve's office", and the plans reviewer will not accept electrical plans that have room numbers added when the architect does not show room numbers. I personally think this rule is impractical and that the unintended consequences override any benefit.

 

[roger]

Personally I think the legends should be correct at plan review and if there are signage changes at the end of the project they can be changed then. I hate it when a designer requires more info on the panel schedule on their punch list when they were to lazy (sorry for being blunt) to include the specifics in the drawings.

Roger

 

[iwire]

Lets keep it simple, there is no real way to comply with this in most locations. I think the intent is great but unobtainable.

408.4 Field Identification Required.
(A) Circuit Directory or Circuit Identification. Every circuit and circuit modification shall be legibly identified as to its clear, evident, and specific purpose or use. The identification shall include sufficient detail to allow each circuit to be distinguished from all others. Spare positions that contain unused overcurrent devices or switches shall be described accordingly. The identification shall be included in a circuit directory that is located on the face or inside of the panel door in the case of a panelboard, and located at each switch or circuit breaker in a switchboard. No circuit shall
be described in a manner that depends on transient conditions of occupancy.

I challenge you to effectively mark the panel directory here so that you could distinguish the circuit from all others.

 

[kwired]

Lets keep it simple, there is no real way to comply with this in most locations. I think the intent is great but unobtainable.




I challenge you to effectively mark the panel directory here so that you could distinguish the circuit from all others.

An identification system that has a specific name/number for a branch circuit as well as marking the outlets with same name/number is closest thing that comes to my mind as far as something that will work - it can still have that name plus a description at the panel directory.

If room 101,102, etc is transient in nature then there is not much you can mark it with that will work. "Room 101" likely will be effective longer than "Steves Room". I guess maybe the panel directory needs to include a floor plan with room numbers marked on it so that if the room numbers ever get changed the directory still is accurate. Someoe will still find a way to mess that up also. You are still supposed to turn the circuit off, lock it out, and check for voltage when making modifications or repairs. Directories are not always accurate in the first place - people make mistakes.


If you want to make sure you don't turn off the wrong circuit - then use of tracing equipment is a very good idea.
I use a tracer often even when I am the one that marked the panel - just a way to verify what is being turned off before turning it off.