2008 Nec 112.12(b)

[beanland]

In the August 2008 EC&M, page 54, Mike Holt states that "The panelboard (guts) must be replaced ..." 110.12(B) states that contamination is prohibited ("shall not be contaiminated"). The NEC does not say that the guts must be replaced. Would cleaning suffice?

Any panel left open to air will get construction dust in it. It therefore violates 110.12(B). However, for most cases, a good vacuum and compressed air blow-out is "as good as new."

Some stuff (spray, paint, etc.) may be a tad harder to remove. In that case the cost of replacing components must be weighed against the cost to clean them.

I like 110.12(B) because if states a good practice. However, if enforced "to the letter of the code," it could never be met.

 

[cowboyjwc]

I would never worry about dust, but yes paint and texture is a whole other thing.

Now I want to say that I let them get cleaned, but as you said if you look at the letter of the code, how did you clean it? Is a solvent a comtaminent? Some guy might use steel wool or sandpaper and then did he remove some of the plating and is that a UL violation?

You sometimes have to look at it case by case.