110.26

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think the point is being missed.Where does it say in the NEC that future possible work on nonenergized equiptment requires a clear working space.If not within the working space for ENERGIZED then locking out the equiptments power supply would negate the working clearance requirement.Do I agree that a piece of equiptment will never need to be serviced energized,NO that would be a stupid statement.In order to properly troubleshoot anything (for the most part) Power is required we all know this.But under the way it is written a lock out negates the working clearance requirement (not energized).
This forum prides itself on the written word in the NEC,sure it is poorly written but never the less that is the way it is written.We can`t bend the wording to suit our needs.1+1=2,not3 because what might happen but 2 is the answer.
 
Equipment likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized shall comply with the dimensions of 110.26(A)....

Regardless of whether or not there is a breaker lock installed, if the equipment is likely to be examined while energized it must meet the working space requirements of 110.26(A).

Again examination includes testing for voltage.

Chris
 
Wouldn't any equipment, including a disconnect switch, likely to require such examination, adjustment, etc., require a (redundant) disconnect ahead of it, so it can be deenegrized when necessary? Where is this equipment's disconnect? Where does it end?
 
I think the point is being missed.Where does it say in the NEC that future possible work on nonenergized equiptment requires a clear working space.If not within the working space for ENERGIZED then locking out the equiptments power supply would negate the working clearance requirement.
Click to expand...
The code section {110.26(A)} does not apply to work on de-energized equipment, but it does apply to all equipment where the equipment is likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized. The existance of an upstream lockout does not change the likelyhood of energized work. The key is not if the equipment can be locked out, but rather, is it likely that someone will work on it while energized.
Don
 
ryan_618 said:
According to the instructions on GFCI receptalces, you are supposed to test them monthly. You can only test them while they are energized. As Don points out, having a GFCI (or any receptacle) above a countertop violates the literal language of 110.26(A).
Click to expand...
There was a time that I believed this myself until I did a little looking.

First I looked at the last part of 110.26(A)
or as required or permitted elsewhere in this Code.

Then as I look around in the code for a different requirements for equipment and I find that the GFCI is REQUIRED to be installed over the countertop as outlined in 210.52(C)(1) through (C)(5).
This requirement to install the receptacle above the countertop is what is being addressed by “or as required or permitted elsewhere in this Code” found in 110.26(A).

It is the requirement found in 210.52(C) that over rides the requirement for working space outlined in 110.26 with the last nine words, “or as required or permitted elsewhere in this Code.”

There is no relief found for the AC disconnect. 440.14 requires that this disconnect be readily accessible and I would think that lying over an AC unit would not qualify as readily accessible.
 
Mike,
It is the requirement found in 210.52(C) that over rides the requirement for working space outlined in 110.26 with the last nine words, “or as required or permitted elsewhere in this Code.”
Click to expand...

I don't agree. Those words were aimed a code section that no longer exists. It was 670.5 in the 2002 code.
Don
 
jwelectric said:


Yes the refrigerator has a disconnect and yes it is behind the refrigerator as allowed by 422.33 if you have the ability to read that section.



Being as I have addressed the ?fridge? of yours that you are stuck behind several times I shall not tell you about 422.33 again.


Yes I have shown you where it mandates that ALL EQUIPMENT is required to have this working space but you keep trying to add words to that section that are not there. Where are you finding the words ?NO SERVICABLE parts??

Instead of trying to bolster your thoughts across try to address the question that has been directed to you by several people, that is if you Mom will let you come out from behind the ?fridge?
Click to expand...
Wrong again... You have mis-interpretted the code. Perhaps you should call NFPA at 1-617 770-3000. I'm done with this thread.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Mike,
jwelectric said:
It is the requirement found in 210.52(C) that over rides the requirement for working space outlined in 110.26 with the last nine words, ?or as required or permitted elsewhere in this Code.?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
don_resqcapt19 said:
I don't agree. Those words were aimed a code section that no longer exists. It was 670.5 in the 2002 code. Don
Click to expand...

These words are still there they were just moved to the fine print note found under 670.1
 
from the 2002 code
670.5 Clearance.
Where the conditions of maintenance and supervision ensure that only qualified persons service the installation, the dimensions of the working space in the direction of access to live parts operating at not over 150 volts line-to-line or line-to-ground that are likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized shall be a minimum of 750 mm (2? ft). Where controls are enclosed in cabinets, the door(s) shall open at least 90 degrees or be removable.
Exception: Where the enclosure requires a tool to open, and where only diagnostic and troubleshooting testing is involved on live parts, the clearances shall be permitted to be less than 750 mm (2? ft).
Click to expand...
I think that 110.26(A) needs an exception like the one above.
Don
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
from the 2002 code

I think that 110.26(A) needs an exception like the one above.
Don
Click to expand...

Check this out.

12-84 Log #3049 NEC-P12 (670-5 and 670.1)
Final Action: Accept
TCC Action:
The Technical Correlating Committee advises that Article Scope statements are the responsibility of the Technical Correlating
Committee and the Technical Correlating Committee "Accepts" the Panel Action with the understanding that the FPN that was
accepted to be added to 670.1 will replace the existing FPN and will not be an additional FPN.
Submitter: Todd F. Lottmann Washington, MO
Recommendation:
Delete existing Section 670.5 and add new Fine Print Note No. 2 to 670.1:
670.5 Clearance. Where the conditions of maintenance and supervision ensure that only qualified persons service the installation, the dimensions of the working space in the direction of access to live parts operating at not over 150 volts line to line or line to ground that are likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized shall be a minimum of 750 mm (2 1/2 ft). Where controls are enclosed in cabinets, the door(s) shall open at least 90 degrees or be removable.
Exception: Where the enclosure requires a tool to open, and where only diagnostic and troubleshooting testing is involved on live parts, the clearances shall be permitted t be less than 750 mm (2 1/2 ft)
670.1 Scope.
FPN No. 2: For information on the workspace requirements for equipment containing supply conductor terminals, see 110.26. For information on the workspace requirements for machine power and control equipment, see NFPA 79-2002, Electrical Standard for Industrial Machinery.
Substantiation:
This proposal is the work of a Task Group from Technical Committee of Electrical Requirements for Industrial Machines, NFPA 79. The Task Group consisted of the following members of CMP 12 and NFPA 79.
Paul Dobrowsky, NFPA 79 and CMP 5; Jim Carroll, NFPA 79 and CMP 9; Tom Garvey, NFPA 79 and CMP 11; Lynn Saunders, NFPA 79 and CMP 11; Jim Pierce NFPA 79 and CMP 18; Wayman Withrow, NFPA 79; David Quave, CMP 12; Scott Cline, CMP 12 and Andy Cartal. This additional text is proposed by the Task Group with the intent that this change will let 110.26 dictate the workspace for equipment that falls under the scope of the NEC and let NFPA 79 set the requirements (and the exceptions) for the equipment falling under the scope of NFPA 79. The Task group believes that the scope of Article 670 did not include workspace requirements. The workspace requirements in 670.5 are different than those in 110.26. The Task Group believes that the intent for the addition of Section 670.5 was to allow different spacings than those of 110.26 due to nuance of machinery. In addition, this section was added because at the time NFPA 79 did not contain workspace requirements. The 2002 edition of NFPA 79 now contains these requirements for equipment within its scope of which 670.5 originally targeted. The Task Group believes that the addition of a second Fine Print Note to 670.1 will clarify the appropriate workspace requirements and guide the user to the appropriate standard.
Panel Meeting Action: Accept
Number Eligible to Vote: 10
Affirmative: 10
 
In my opinion, the references to 670 are not correct. My understanding was the device in question is the disconnect providing the supply conductors to the unit, not the unit itself.

Also, what is confusing; you guys are arguing about interpretation of a working clearance, when I would think everyone in this forum would universally support more, not less working clearances.

Especially since its the old fat guys with big guts that will probably be trying to squeeze in to check it.:rolleyes:
 
kingpb,
In my opinion, the references to 670 are not correct. My understanding was the device in question is the disconnect providing the supply conductors to the unit, not the unit itself.
Click to expand...
My reference to Article 670 was only as an example as to the meaning of the words "or as required or permitted elsewhere in this Code" in 110.26(A). You are correct as to the application of Article 670.
Don
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top