110.3 Note 1, 2017 NEC

[jimingram]

Back in the day (25 years ago), I would often go to the salvage yard to get a used piece of electrical equipment. I would make sure it was in good condition before I would install it. I also had one instance where I removed conductors and panelboards from one project and then installed them in another project. Each time I did this, the installation passed inspection.

Around that time, I had a project in an apartment complex, which was to upgrade from fuses to circuit breakers in each unit. The chief electrical inspector advised me to simply remove the fuse bus and replace it with the circuit breaker bus. The existing housings were large, probably commercial, and easily had the required dimensions. I even created a procedure to pefectly align the new bus the with panel cover. The inspector was pleased with how well his idea worked out.

At first look, it would appear that if the equipment is not new it must be reconditioned, refurbished, or remanufactured to be compliant. If this is the case, it appears that the above would not be permitted without an evaluation by a Field Evaluation Body and then Field Labelled. I also see big consequences for needed repairs on apartment service equipment. Which catergories would the repairs fall into? Would labelling be necessary?

I would appreciate your comments.

 

[jumper]

The best I can offer is the panel statement that had the word "used" in it, but the submitting PI and 2017 NEC does not.

CMP said "A new Informational Note No. 1 following 110.3(A) is included to clarify that the general term equipment can apply to new equipment and also used, refurbished, or reconditioned, remanufactured equipment."

So if the AHJ approves the used equipment, I would say it is not a problem except for warrenties and such.

Used is a subjective term so this could get murky real quick IMO. I am not an EC, so I have no real idea how this would work out.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

The best I can offer is the panel statement that had the word "used" in it, but the submitting PI and 2017 NEC does not.

CMP said "A new Informational Note No. 1 following 110.3(A) is included to clarify that the general term equipment can apply to new equipment and also used, refurbished, or reconditioned, remanufactured equipment."

So if the AHJ approves the used equipment, I would say it is not a problem except for warrenties and such.

Used is a subjective term so this could get murky real quick IMO. I am not an EC, so I have no real idea how this would work out.

Well to be honest, it was added to account for the work done by NEMA and PEARL in an effort to combat the use of products that are not new but are being "re-used" without the original manufacturers benefit of use evaluation if you will. The change in 110.3(A) is with harmony to change (new rule) in 110.21(B) for reconditioned equipment and the new associated labels and origin data now demanded. The agreement was that if it is reconditioned, manufactured or refurbished that it was essentially reconditioned for use and the organization that did that work has to be denoted on a label.