110.26(C)(2)

[m sleem]

Are we falling under 110.26(c)(2) when we have two switchboards & one ATS, the total width is more than 1.8m? if we can keep the normal switchboard away from the other combination (ATS+ emer. switchboard), By this approach we would save an extra one door!!. What do you think?
thanks in advance.

 

[infinity]

IMO the use of the word equipment means that it's one piece of equipment which could abe a switchboard with several sections connected to together to form one piece of equipment. Separate SWBD's or a combination of separate equipment such as SWBD's and an ATS switch does not need to meet that specific requirement.

110.26(C)(2) Large Equipment. For equipment rated 1200 amperes
or more and over 1.8 m (6 ft) wide that contains overcur-
rent devices, switching devices, or control devices, there
shall be one entrance to and egress from the required work-
ing space not less than 610 mm (24 in.) wide and 2.0 m
(6 1 ? 2 ft) high at each end of the working space.

 

[anbm]

IMO the use of the word equipment means that it's one piece of equipment which could abe a switchboard with several sections connected to together to form one piece of equipment. Separate SWBD's or a combination of separate equipment such as SWBD's and an ATS switch does not need to meet that specific requirement.

Also, if equipment rating is greater than 1,200A but physical width is less than 6ft , this rule won't apply either.

 

[aielli]

Also, if equipment rating is greater than 1,200A but physical width is less than 6ft , this rule won't apply either.

Is a wireway considered 'equipment'? I have a 1,200A disconnect that feed multiple meters. The wireway for the meters is >6ft, but the disconnect is <6ft. Am I required to have a second exit or double clearance?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Is a wireway considered 'equipment'? I have a 1,200A disconnect that feed multiple meters. The wireway for the meters is >6ft, but the disconnect is <6ft. Am I required to have a second exit or double clearance?

I don't believe you need 2 exits as the wireway is equipment but it does not contain over current device, switching devices, or control devices

 

[infinity]

IMO the wireway is a raceway.

 

[m sleem]

Also, if equipment rating is greater than 1,200A but physical width is less than 6ft , this rule won't apply either.

It's good to have this discussion again, the code says either 1200a or 6ft not both.

(2) Large Equipment. For equipment rated 1200 amperes
or more and over 1.8 m (6 ft) wide that contains overcurrent

 

[mwm1752]

And they didn't change it this code cycle hmy:

 

[Dennis Alwon]

It's good to have this discussion again, the code says either 1200a or 6ft not both.

I see it as both 1200 amps or more , and over 6'

110.26(C)(2) Large Equipment. For equipment rated 1200 amperes
or more and over 1.8 m (6 ft) wide that contains overcur-
rent devices, switching devices, or control devices, there
shall be one entrance to and egress from the required work-
ing space not less than 610 mm (24 in.) wide and 2.0 m
(6 1 ? 2 ft) high at each end of the working space.

 

[mwm1752]

I see it as both 1200 amps or more , and over 6'

Previous NEC have stated "or" which now says "and" which tends to summarize two different meanings -- IMO "or" means either condition & "and" means both conditions must exist

 

[infinity]

It's good to have this discussion again, the code says either 1200a or 6ft not both.

Is says 1200 amps or more not 1200 amps or more than 6'.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Previous NEC have stated "or" which now says "and" which tends to summarize two different meanings -- IMO "or" means either condition & "and" means both conditions must exist

Correct the installation would have to be 1200 or more and over 6' for the rule to apply however the wireway is not part of that measurement

 

[m sleem]

Is says 1200 amps or more not 1200 amps or more than 6'.

I'm wrong, you and dennis are right, "more" is related to 1200a not the switchboard's width.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

For the 2005 code cycle the "6' or more" was not in the code as a result of a proposal and comment made by me. That wording was restored in the 2008 code.

It is still my opinion that the safety issue is driven by the electrical size of the equipment and not the physical size, but there were a large number of proposals for the 2008 code that said otherwise.

As a side note, the triggering current for the electrical room exit doors to have panic hardware was reduced from 1200 amps or more to 800 amps or more in the 2014 code. 110.26(C)(3)