408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

[physis]

Add section

408.XXX Locations Not Permitted. Panelboards containing overcurrent protection device(s) shall not be located in bathrooms of dwelling units and guest rooms of hotels and motels.

Ammend index:

Panelboards, art.408

Location, 408.XXX

Substantiation:

Because branch circuit overcurrent protection devices are not allowed to be installed in the bathrooms of dwelling units and guest rooms of hotels and motels, panelboards containing those overcurrent protection devices are also not allowed to be installed in those bathrooms.

Remainder of substantiation under construction.

I'm thinking of siting examples from other code articles and sections that are essentially only there to provide supplemental reference.

Maybe some of you guys could help with those examples.

Edited to provide some substantiation.

[ July 14, 2005, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: physis ]

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

It is covered by 240.24(E) and there is no good reason to add it again in Article 408.
Don

 

[physis]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

I have to respectfully disagree Don. What there is no good reason for is that the NEC be difficult to use.

The addition of 29 words can make the question that caused this thread to be immensely easier to answer.

Just because something is buried in the NEC somewhere doesn't mean there's nothing more that can or, I'd even say, should be done to make it more reasonably accessible.

It shouldn't be an easter egg hunt already.

 

[physis]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

Of course my original substantiation is purely sarcastic and should reflect the difficulty of finding the reference.

 

[petersonra]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

is there such a thing as panelboards without OCPDs?

 

[physis]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

I'm not completely sure. But judging by Atricle 100 I'd say yes.

 

[George Stolz]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

Perhaps amending the index would be a good solution. Under panelboards, it could reference the 240 section.

In general, I agree with Sam, that is a very buried code.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

Sam,
I look for overcurrent device location in Atricle 240, not 408. There is no prohibition on installing the panel in the bathroom, just the overcurrent protective device.
Don

 

[physis]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

Don, that's pretty much my point. I look for panelboard in 408 not 240.

Edit: What residence or guest room would have a panelboard without OCPD's in it? And just in case 408.XXX would still allow it.

[ July 14, 2005, 01:04 AM: Message edited by: physis ]

 

[physis]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

My reasoning for this is that I think most people wouldn't think to look under OCPD's for panel locations.

It is true that the issue's already addressed.

The only thing this would do is make the bathroom restriction easier to find.

So I'm interested in whether folks think it's a good idea to add this just to make things easier.

Or not worry about it because it's already in the NEC.

I think I know how Don feels.

 

[jwelectric]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

Here is a reply that I posted in another forum to a similar question. As you can see this has been addressed for at least the last three code cycles in the same manner.

Now let?s say that an old house that didn?t have a bathroom and the back porch is being enclosed to build one. The panel is in this location. As the code stands I could move the overcurrent devices to another location and use the old panel as a ?J? box with out any confusion between me and the inspector.

1999 cycle
240-24 (e) Not Located in Bathrooms. In dwelling units and guest rooms of hotels and motels, overcurrent devices, other than supplementary overcurrent protection, shall not be located in bathrooms as defined in Article 100.

2002 cycle
240.24 (E) Not Located in Bathrooms. In dwelling units and guest rooms of hotels and motels, overcurrent devices, other than supplementary overcurrent protection, shall not be located in bathrooms as defined in Article 100.

2005 cycle
240.24 (E) Not Located in Bathrooms. In dwelling units and guest rooms or guest suites of hotels and motels, overcurrent devices, other than supplementary overcurrent protection, shall not be located in bathrooms.

The panel might be allowed in the bathroom as long as it doesn't have any overcurrent devices.

 

[physis]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

The panel might be allowed in the bathroom as long as it doesn't have any overcurrent devices

Sure. That's provided for.

So do you think it's a non-issue or would you be in favor of a reference under panelboards if it didn't change the rules?

 

[iwire]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

Sam the thing is adding things like this only make the code book larger.

If you add this bathroom restriction to 408 would you also want to be redundant with the height of OCPDs by adding a section in 408?

 

[physis]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

Well, if that's the concensus.

Although I'm not sure you count Bob because you're an admitted "I like the code to be difficult" advocate.

 

[iwire]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

Originally posted by physis:
Although I'm not sure you count Bob because you're an admitted "I like the code to be difficult" advocate.

LMAO.

My wife is now wondering why I am laughing at my computer.

 

[physis]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

You'd probably even be mad if I did the proposal and they loved it and put it in and I won the Nobel Peace Prze for making the NEC easier to use and reduced stress enough in the United States to add a year to our average life expectancies.

 

[George Stolz]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

NEC-2002 Index:

Panelboards, Art. 408
Bonding, 517.14
Circuit directory, 408.4
Component parts, 408.33
Damp or wet locations, 408.17
Definition, Art. 100-I
Distribution
Definition, Art. 100-I, 550.2,
551.2
Enclosure, 408.18
General, 408.13
Grounding, 408.20, 517.19(D)
Installation, 110.26(F)
Lighting and appliance branch-circuit Definition, 408.14(A)
Number of overcurrent devices, 408.15
Overcurrent protection, 408.16
Relative arrangement of switches and fuses, 408.19
Sensitive electronic equipment, 647.4(A)
Service equipment, 230-VI, 230-VIII, 408.3(C),
408.16(A)
Spacing, minimum, 408.36
Support for busbars and conductors, 408.3
Use as enclosure, 312.8
Wire bending space, 408.35

What's so terrible about adding a reference to 240.24(E) into this index list? That would add a fraction to the code, and clarify it a lot.

After all, 110.26 is a redundant reference a sense, and it made the cut.

So why not change...

Locations, Damp or Wet, 408.17
Locations, Bathrooms, 240.24(E)

 

[physis]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

I don't mind the idea much except that logically it doesn't make a lot of sense.

It is basically my interest to just make it findable in the context of a panelboard. But 240.24(E) isn't about panelboards. It just seems all cockeyed.

[ July 15, 2005, 04:32 AM: Message edited by: physis ]

 

[wirenut1980]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

I find it cockeyed because if I see a panelboard, I would expect to see overcurrent devices inside it most of the time, which in my mind would generally put the two together. I guess that is from my inexperience that I looked at one section of the code and not the other, but my thought process was to look up what I see on the outside.

 

[physis]

Re: 408 Panelboard Locations Not Allowed

Well that's my point. I think a lot of woun't think to look in 240 for this.