100 Sealable Equipment.

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

fmtjfw

Senior Member
Location
Fairmont, WV, USA
Section/Paragraph: 100 Sealable Equipment.

added

Sealable Equipment. Equipment enclosed in a case or cabinet that is provided with a means of sealing or locking so that live parts cannot be made accessible without opening the enclosure after opening the seal or lock.

Substantiation:

The whole point of "sealable equipment" is that you can't open it without opening the seal or lock.

inserted deleted
 
chris kennedy said:
I disagree.
Click to expand...

iwire said:
In my opinion your suggested change makes a lock or seal optional.
Click to expand...

Chris, bob, others -
Stop this. fmt's point is a bragging rights issue. It is only marginally connected with improving the NEC. Rather, check one of the following boxes:
  • has a marginal chance of being accepted
  • should be REJECTED out-of-hand

That's really all that matters.

ice
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Where is that term used in the NEC, other than Article 100?
Click to expand...

"seal" as used as "sealable equipment": 230.62(B), 230.92, 230.93, 240.6(C)(1), 240.82, 520.72, 695.4(B)(e)(3), 695.4(B)(e)(4).

"lock" as used in "sealable equipment": 100 Accessible., 110.26(F), 110.31, 110.31(A)(4), 110.31(D), 110.31(C), 110.76(B), 225.52(C), 230.62(B), 230.92, 230.93, 240.6(C)(3), 450.43(C), 490.35(A), 490.38, 490.53, 525.10(A), 665.22.
 
fmtjfw said:
"seal" as used as "sealable equipment": 230.62(B), 230.92, 230.93, 240.6(C)(1), 240.82, 520.72, 695.4(B)(e)(3), 695.4(B)(e)(4).

"lock" as used in "sealable equipment": 100 Accessible., 110.26(F), 110.31, 110.31(A)(4), 110.31(D), 110.31(C), 110.76(B), 225.52(C), 230.62(B), 230.92, 230.93, 240.6(C)(3), 450.43(C), 490.35(A), 490.38, 490.53, 525.10(A), 665.22.
Click to expand...
The actual term "sealable equipment" does not appear in those code sections. The only place the word search on my pdf of the handbook finds the word "sealable" other than in Article 100 is in 240.6(C)(1) and it is not followed by the word "equipment". I see no need for a definition of a term that does not actually appear in the code. If the term is intended to apply to the sections you cited, then both the code language and the definition need to match. Many of the sections you cited use the words "seal" or "sealed" but those terms are used in many other code sections with an entirely different meaning.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
The actual term "sealable equipment" does not appear in those code sections. The only place the word search on my pdf of the handbook finds the word "sealable" other than in Article 100 is in 240.6(C)(1) and it is not followed by the word "equipment". I see no need for a definition of a term that does not actually appear in the code. If the term is intended to apply to the sections you cited, then both the code language and the definition need to match. Many of the sections you cited use the words "seal" or "sealed" but those terms are used in many other code sections with an entirely different meaning.
Click to expand...

I tried to be very careful to only note the instances where "seal" or "lock" meant to prevent easy access to the contents of the enclosure or room.

For instance: 230.62(B) ... Where energized parts are guarded as provided in 110.27(A)(1) and (A)(2), a means for locking or sealing doors providing access to energized parts shall be provided.

The great majority of the references to "seal" mean a "stuffing" meant to stop the infiltration of moisture or flammable gases.

The great majority of the references to "lock" mean to lock a disconnect open or closed.

I found the uses of "seal" and "lock" to be pretty clear in its various meanings. Perhaps identifying when they are used according to the definition has merit.
 
fmtjfw said:
I tried to be very careful to only note the instances where "seal" or "lock" meant to prevent easy access to the contents of the enclosure or room.

For instance: 230.62(B) ... Where energized parts are guarded as provided in 110.27(A)(1) and (A)(2), a means for locking or sealing doors providing access to energized parts shall be provided.

The great majority of the references to "seal" mean a "stuffing" meant to stop the infiltration of moisture or flammable gases.

The great majority of the references to "lock" mean to lock a disconnect open or closed.

I found the uses of "seal" and "lock" to be pretty clear in its various meanings. Perhaps identifying when they are used according to the definition has merit.
Click to expand...

I think the code is clear enough that the definition in question could be completely removed.
 
fmtjfw said:
"seal" as used as "sealable equipment": . . .
"lock" as used in "sealable equipment": . . .
Click to expand...
Given that the NEC becomes legal document once adopted by a jurisdiction into statute, then the words have to mean what they say. . . unless, in the case of your "guidance" to apply a two-word term from Article 100 Definitions to single words elsewhere in the Code.

I submit that you could make this "lock" = "sealable equipment" by supplying a decoder ring with every copy of the text that divulges the "intent" of the CMPs.
 
3 questions raised by your comment

3 questions raised by your comment

al hildenbrand said:
Given that the NEC becomes legal document once adopted by a jurisdiction into statute, then the words have to mean what they say. . . unless, in the case of your "guidance" to apply a two-word term from Article 100 Definitions to single words elsewhere in the Code.

I submit that you could make this "lock" = "sealable equipment" by supplying a decoder ring with every copy of the text that divulges the "intent" of the CMPs.
Click to expand...

It would take more than a simple decoder ring to divulge the intent of the CMPs.:)

Instead of a decoder ring, would the better approach be to change:

230.62(B), 230.92, 230.93, 240.6(C)(1), 240.82, 520.72, 695.4(B)(e)(3), 695.4(B)(e)(4).

and

100 Accessible., 110.26(F), 110.31, 110.31(A)(4), 110.31(D), 110.31(C), 110.76(B), 225.52(C), 230.62(B), 230.92, 230.93, 240.6(C)(3), 450.43(C), 490.35(A), 490.38, 490.53, 525.10(A), 665.22.

to use the term "sealable"?

Should "lockable" for protection of energized parts and exclusion of non-qualified personnel be under sealable?
Further do you recommend, perhaps, that "sealable" be applied only to POCO revenue protection and adjustable CBs?
 
GoldDigger said:
Can you compliantly LOTO a disconnect just by "sealing" it if it is within sight? Or is an actual lock required?

Tapatalk!
Click to expand...

You can even if not in sight.

OSHA recognizes 'tag out' if the equipment cannot have a lock installed on it.

But it seems risky, if the poop hits the fan someone will figure out a way it could have been locked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top