Recent fail inspection

[ActionDave]

I think y'all are putting a lot of faith in labels on panels. I never trust a panel schedule. It's usually a starting point but I'm always sceptical of them.

 

[S-117]

That's ridiculous!

You have to label the panel because YOU INSTALLED IT. Any of that other stuff you had nothing to do with and, while you can bring it to the attention of the owner and offer a price to fix it, it's not up to you to bring it up to code just because you are there.

I think that if these are the places you work in where hacks did the work, it would explain why you are getting an argument about labeling the panel, and perhaps why you have to low ball to get the job.

-Hal

I have to agree with this statement. YOU touched the panel, so YOU have to make it comply with the labeling of circuits.
Also, the AHJ has discretion on code interpretation or having requirements in addition to code (within reason).

 

[S-117]

OK, I will answer this question with another question before I walk the dog. Why don't we have to install GFCIs & AFCIs on panel swaps? What is more important? I think Dennis wrote that one.

I guess I'm just not a sheep. I want something more than, just do what is said to do and shut up. That last line was about me only, I'm not calling anyone here a sheep

I would posit that these ARE required. I just think AHJs were not demanding this, but the NEC is clear on this... I think even mike holt said this in his videos

 

[S-117]

I recently failed an inspection for not labeling a panel change out at a house. I did label all the 30 & 50 amp circuits but there were about 15-17 circuits all 15 & 20 amps which were not labeled in the old breaker panel. This is a 150 year old house, 3 floors & knob & tube wiring with some newer romex, typical stuff. I did not want to charge the customer to label all there circuits because it would have taken some time and if I did include this time in my quotes I wouldn't get another change out job.

Met with the inspection agency and complain that this requirement would required some time to complete and that it would increase the cost of panel change outs. The agency did not change there position. They said it could be done in a few minutes. I did not agree with that because I have completed work like this and it can take some time.

I know the requirements of what section 408.4 read, but can I make a case on:

#1 The unlabeled circuits are a previous code violation and not within my scope of work
#2 Also that this section was not intended to include existing unlabeled circuits, only new circuits that were installed at the time of the panel change out.

Please keep in mind that in my opinion enforcing section 408.4 on panel changes where there are unlabeled existing circuits is not fair to the customers who have to pay for the work.

I also contacted the chief electrical official of an adjoining county and he advised that 408.4 should not apply to existing unlabeled circuits because it is not retroactive.

What are the opinions of you members who are inspectors or officials or electricians?

I suppose the real question is, how did you write your contract?

if your contract was simple and says, "Install new electrical panel to code" then you kinda have to eat the cost of the extra work

however, if you have line items, such as, " remove old, install new, add AFCI, add smoke detector, pull permit," etc. and never said anything about relabeling, you aren't to blame and just advise the client of the extra work that wasn't quoted.

 

[kwired]

I know what the section says and the last sentence doesn't mean anything to me or the property owner. I have had large hospitals, casinos, industrial facilities, etc.... where literally every panel legend was in violation of that sentence.

Roger

I agree with the concept that was put in there, but at same time a lot of the labeling is for transient conditions of occupancy, especially in non dwelling places. Change of ownership, type of activity that goes on, and so forth can still leave you with some general use circuits remaining as they were, but the use of the space may be entirely different and confusing when you read the old panel directory, especially if you didn't know what was there before. Even in School buildings you might have label that says "first grade lights", but the actual area served hasn't been the first grade room for several years. Solution of giving it a room number doesn't always work either, those can change over time as well.

 

[hbiss]

I agree with the concept that was put in there, but at same time a lot of the labeling is for transient conditions of occupancy, especially in non dwelling places. Change of ownership, type of activity that goes on, and so forth can still leave you with some general use circuits remaining as they were, but the use of the space may be entirely different and confusing when you read the old panel directory, especially if you didn't know what was there before. Even in School buildings you might have label that says "first grade lights", but the actual area served hasn't been the first grade room for several years. Solution of giving it a room number doesn't always work either, those can change over time as well.

You can only label them according to what is there when you are there. That needs to be done as accurately as possible using locations and descriptions that would be obvious to someone not living in the house. That way there is some assurance that the directory will survive a transfer of ownership.

Once you label breakers you can't control what happens after you leave. You are only responsible for labeling breakers in a compliant manor for your inspection.

-Hal

 

[kwired]

You can only label them according to what is there when you are there. That needs to be done as accurately as possible using locations and descriptions that would be obvious to someone not living in the house. That way there is some assurance that the directory will survive a transfer of ownership.

Once you label breakers you can't control what happens after you leave. You are only responsible for labeling breakers in a compliant manor for your inspection.

-Hal

My point is it is still based on transient condition of occupancy. As I also mentioned the room number method of identification is maybe one of the best methods, yet those numbers can still change over time leaving you with an inaccurate identification after the change.

Seen places where they put panel/breaker ID on wall plates of receptacles, gets messed up first time a painter comes in and takes all the plates off and doesn't put them back where they came from. Not exactly what this thread is about but still along similar lines.

 

[hbiss]

My point is it is still based on transient condition of occupancy. As I also mentioned the room number method of identification is maybe one of the best methods, yet those numbers can still change over time leaving you with an inaccurate identification after the change.

Seen places where they put panel/breaker ID on wall plates of receptacles, gets messed up first time a painter comes in and takes all the plates off and doesn't put them back where they came from. Not exactly what this thread is about but still along similar lines.

We have to separate commercial from residential. With commercial, often there is no way around "transient conditions" and no one is going to blame anybody when panel directories get messed up. Entire floors and spaces get rearranged and repurposed. Just make a good faith effort to label according to any work you do. That's all anybody could ask and that's the intent of the Code.

With residential, it's much less likely that the layout is going to drastically change. Using obvious physical locations to label breakers ensures that future owners and workers will have the information they need. That's the intent of the Code here.

From the 2011 handbook RE 408.4:

The requirement to provide an up-to-date, accurate, and legible circuit directory applies to panelboards and switchboards covered in Article 408. The circuit directory is an important feature for the safe operation of an electrical system under normal and emergency conditions. The purpose of an accurate and legible circuit directory in these types of equipment is to provide clear identification of circuit breakers and switches that may need to be operated by service personnel or others responding who need to operate a switch or circuit breaker in an emergency. This requirement is specific to switchboards and panelboards; however, the identification requirements of 110.22 apply to all disconnecting means

-Hal

 

[kwired]

We have to separate commercial from residential. With commercial, often there is no way around "transient conditions" and no one is going to blame anybody when panel directories get messed up. Entire floors and spaces get rearranged and repurposed. Just make a good faith effort to label according to any work you do. That's all anybody could ask and that's the intent of the Code.

With residential, it's much less likely that the layout is going to drastically change. Using obvious physical locations to label breakers ensures that future owners and workers will have the information they need. That's the intent of the Code here.

From the 2011 handbook RE 408.4:



-Hal

It says nothing about commercial vs residential. I agree with what you said is how most AHJ's will approach it, but if they want to be jerks, wording certainly allows for them to be more strict on what is acceptable without them having to make their own amendments to justify it.

 

[hbiss]

That's why I said "we" need to be aware of how we approach labeling circuits depending on commercial or residential.

What you have to do in commercial may not strictly follow 408.4. Labeling something "exam rm 1" (when there is no clue other than asking staff where it is) may be the only way to do it.

However labeling a residential bedroom "Billy's Room" can certainly be replaced with "2nd Fl North Bedroom", something that anyone can find and is 408 compliant.

I don't think any inspector would disagree with any of this.

-Hal