312.7

[SLD3258]

Any reason why an existing Cutout box or cabinet could not be calculated per article 312.8 (Using it as a pull box for feeder conductors), since the existing box is UL listed as a Cutout box?
With the conduits and conductors we're adding into this cutout box, I'll have adequate size and space per 312.8, but if the classification of this pull box is changed to a pull box, because there is no overcurrent device or switch inside it, then the box size will need to be increased because we're now under Article 314, costing the customer in the end.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

What size wires are coming into the panel. Is this nm cable? I think if that is the case you should be fine

 

[SLD3258]

312.7

its a 48"X48"X16" deep cutout box.
(8) 4" PVC coming in the bottom and (8) 4" PVC out the back feeding and existing MDP.
We're adding a Entire service generator back-up to the facility. Need to re-route the bottom (8) 4" through the cut-out box to the new ATS switch, and (8) 4" pvc back from the ats.
750 AL THHN

 

[augie47]

Are your 4" conduits in one row ?
IMO, since the box will be used as a pullor junction box, it will need to meet 314.28.
Unless my math fails me, IF the 4"s are in one row it would be undersized.
Otherwise, I see no problems but I have seen an argument made in regard to the listing of the box (Is it listed as a junction/pull box)

 

[SLD3258]

Yes, unfortunately the existing installation has (8) 4" in a row.
The box is listed as a "Cutout box" Pic attached.

 

[augie47]

I would say you are at the mercy of your AHJ.
Will he allow a non-Code complaint (size-wise) box and will he allow a cut-out box to be used as a pull box (most AHJs I met will do so)

I would lean toward allowing the install. Others may or may not, but in the end it's your AHJ's call.

 

[Joe Villani]

its a 48"X48"X16" deep cutout box.
(8) 4" PVC coming in the bottom and (8) 4" PVC out the back feeding and existing MDP.
We're adding a Entire service generator back-up to the facility. Need to re-route the bottom (8) 4" through the cut-out box to the new ATS switch, and (8) 4" pvc back from the ats.
750 AL THHN

Any issues with 230.7?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

IMO, you need to use art 314

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I would say you are at the mercy of your AHJ.
Will he allow a non-Code complaint (size-wise) box and will he allow a cut-out box to be used as a pull box (most AHJs I met will do so)
I would lean toward allowing the install. Others may or may not, but in the end it's your AHJ's call.

As far as the AHJ allowing a cut-out box to be used as a pull box he doesn't have a lot of choice. Junction boxes that have a cover that "telescopes" over the sides of the box when the cover is closed is a "cut-out" box per the listings.
The size is an issue and the AHJ many or not permit it.

 

[SLD3258]

As far as the AHJ allowing a cut-out box to be used as a pull box he doesn't have a lot of choice. Junction boxes that have a cover that "telescopes" over the sides of the box when the cover is closed is a "cut-out" box per the listings.
The size is an issue and the AHJ many or not permit it.

What I find interesting is, if this same box had a Overcurrent device or switch in it, per 312.8, and if my math is correct, this box would be adequate for the amount of wires and pipes installed, but since we'd be using it as a "pull box" and changing its name, it's not of adequate size.

 

[augie47]

Its possible the present dimensions were based on an earlier Code where termination clearances were less stringent and the two sections are addressing two different basic requirements, cut-out boxes more so on termination clearances, pull boxes on dimensions to reduce the possibility of damage during pulls.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

What I find interesting is, if this same box had a Overcurrent device or switch in it, per 312.8, and if my math is correct, this box would be adequate for the amount of wires and pipes installed, but since we'd be using it as a "pull box" and changing its name, it's not of adequate size.

Chances are this box with overcurrent protective device in it would not have all these 4" conduits entering it. As a panelboard the wires generally would not be expected to be as large and they would be expected to terminate. I see it very differently.

 

[SLD3258]

Chances are this box with overcurrent protective device in it would not have all these 4" conduits entering it. As a panelboard the wires generally would not be expected to be as large and they would be expected to terminate. I see it very differently.

No, your right, just trying to see if there's a loop whole on this. The fact is, after reviewing this scenario, the box appears to have been sized wrong to begin with when sized as a PB, and managed to pass inspection in august of 08'.
Here's a pic of the existing conditions.