Does article 314.29 mean I can't cover junction boxes with insulation?

[don_resqcapt19]

...

This exception would equate to the same action as removing the insulation.

Exactly...the code panel saw a need for the exception for the underground application but did not give us one for the insulation.

 

[jap]

Exactly...the code panel saw a need for the exception for the underground application but did not give us one for the insulation.

I would agree with you if we took the insulation that was on top of the junction box out of the attic and threw it out in the yard, but if your considering it part of the building, we don't actually remove the insulation from the building to get to the junction box, we simply move it to the side a little and then put it back when we're done. Just like ceiling tiles.

 

[Gregg Harris]

Exactly...the code panel saw a need for the exception for the underground application but did not give us one for the insulation.

Unfortunately there are too many repetitive proposals each code cycle that by the time you go through 3k of them and the other CMP needs to review what was determined and then the Correlation Committee has to match verbiage to other articles it gets to be taxing. IMHO there should be a 5 year cycle instead of three to get accomplished what needs to be done.

 

[iwire]

If those items are not part of the building, what are they?

Well they can't be 'part of the building' in the eyes of the CMP as we know boxes are regularly behind those.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Well they can't be 'part of the building' in the eyes of the CMP as we know boxes are regularly behind those.

Just because the CMP did not write what they wanted to does not change the code. They clearly see loose fill, in outside underground applications, as a violation of the main rule, so they provided an exception. I see the loose insulation as exactly the same idea.

 

[kwired]

There is nothing in that code sectio that says anything about the parts of the building being movable or not.

Is an access door or panel movable?
Is an access door or panel considered building finish?


There is too much overthinking going on. If something is accessible without destruction and is easy to put things back into place, IMO it is accessible. Loose fill insulation can be easily moved and put back into place with little effect on its function. Spray foam insulation essentially can not be removed and put back into place and have same function, it must be replaced if disturbed.

 

[dana1028]

Just because the CMP did not write what they wanted to does not change the code. They clearly see loose fill, in outside underground applications, as a violation of the main rule, so they provided an exception. I see the loose insulation as exactly the same idea.

Don - you may be correct with respect to the 'letter of the code' but I really doubt the intent of the code. That said, I've worked for several jurisdictions as an electrical inspector and if I were to write this up as a correction item I would have rec'd one of those Gibbs [NCIS] head slaps for doing so.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

...If something is accessible without destruction and is easy to put things back into place, IMO it is accessible. ...

That is very likely the intent of the code rule, but that intent is not reflected in the code language.

 

[tallgirl]

That is very likely the intent of the code rule, but that intent is not reflected in the code language.

Insulation is neither "finish" nor "structure".

It's not the National Insulation Code, it's the National Electric Code -- it's not going to mention everything that can be put on top of a JB, then later moved without affecting the structure or finish of the building.

In the case of underground boxes, of course they have to be covered by something. They're UNDERGROUND boxes. In the case of the exception, the "nature of things which can cover them" repeats the basic "finish" or "structure" concept.

 

[chris kennedy]

So the insulation is not a part of the building????

It is my opinion that the wording in 314 supersedes that of the definition of accessible. The insulation is part of the building and must be removed to access the box. That gets a red tag from me.
I see it much like the condition in the exception to 314.29 for underground boxes, but without the exception to permit the box to be covered with insulation.

If those items are not part of the building, what are they?

There is nothing in that code sectio that says anything about the parts of the building being movable or not.

Exactly...the code panel saw a need for the exception for the underground application but did not give us one for the insulation.

Just because the CMP did not write what they wanted to does not change the code. They clearly see loose fill, in outside underground applications, as a violation of the main rule, so they provided an exception. I see the loose insulation as exactly the same idea.

That is very likely the intent of the code rule, but that intent is not reflected in the code language.

You think too much.

 

[iwire]

Just because the CMP did not write what they wanted to does not change the code. They clearly see loose fill, in outside underground applications, as a violation of the main rule, so they provided an exception. I see the loose insulation as exactly the same idea.

OK than I expect you will start failing all installations with boxes above suspended ceilings.

 

[Lectricbota]

It is my opinion that the wording in 314 supersedes that of the definition of accessible. The insulation is part of the building and must be removed to access the box. That gets a red tag from me.
I see it much like the condition in the exception to 314.29 for underground boxes, but without the exception to permit the box to be covered with insulation.

I personally have a hard time comparing moving aside a piece of insulation,or moving a panel you can slide out of the way, with grabbing a shovel and digging around for a junction box.

I can easier compare digging for a j-box to grabbing a hammer and a sawzall and removing part of a wall.

I can also envision this thread going on for quite a while.:

 

[north star]

~ = ~

Goldigger asked:

"How are we to interpret that?"

I would encourage you and others to contact the AHJ for their
interpretation and requirements......Also, covering the junction
boxes with insulation may violate the requirements of Article
110.26, `08 NEC [ RE: " ...working space shall be provided and
maintained".

~ = ~

 

[north star]

~ = ~

johnny123,

I may have to correct my statement [ RE: Post # 2 ] regarding
having the junction boxes exposed.....Article 110.26 seems to
imply clearance [ i.e. - exposure ] is required.

This is a good topic!

~ = ~

 

[jap]

I think the building inspector should write the insulation guys up for covering up our junction boxes instead
of flagging us for not keeping ours above thiers. We're generally there first anyway.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Insulation is neither "finish" nor "structure". ...

If the code section in question actually used those words, it would not be an issue, but the section uses these words: "any part of the building".

 

[don_resqcapt19]

OK than I expect you will start failing all installations with boxes above suspended ceilings.

We should, there is nothing in the wording of the code to permit that installation.

I guess, the issue is what the word "remove" means?

 

[Gregg Harris]

We should, there is nothing in the wording of the code to permit that installation.

I guess, the issue is what the word "remove" means?

And

300.23 Panels Designed to Allow Access. Cables, raceways, and equipment installed behind panels designed to allow access, including suspended ceiling panels, shall be arranged and secured so as to allow the removal of panels and access to the equipment.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

And

300.23 Panels Designed to Allow Access. Cables, raceways, and equipment installed behind panels designed to allow access, including suspended ceiling panels, shall be arranged and secured so as to allow the removal of panels and access to the equipment.

And that changes 314.29, how?

 

[Gregg Harris]

And that changes 314.29, how?[/QUOTEi



Iwire asked you;

OK than I expect you will start failing all installations with boxes above suspended ceilings.

You responded;
We should, there is nothing in the wording of the code to permit that installation.

Then I responded with;300.23 Panels Designed to Allow Access. Cables, raceways, and equipment installed behind panels designed to allow access, including suspended ceiling panels, shall be arranged and secured so as to allow the removal of panels and access to the equipment.