Access to Panelboard

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

barclayd

Senior Member
Location
Colorado
A campus building contains a branch circuit panelboard. The professor 'owning' the room has installed a metal bracket/bar/padlock across the front of the panelboard to 'keep his students out of it'. Good idea.

However, maintenance electricians, facility engineers, etc. cannot access the panelboard until he opens the lock. Bad Idea.

I know the Code restricts access 'to qualified people' in many cases. Is there a Code article that would prohibit unqualified people from restricting access to qualified people? I have never seen this situation before, and would very much like to put a stop to it.

db
 
Try 240.24(A), "overcurrent devices shall be readily accessible." You can bring along the article 100 definition of "accessible, readily," and state the opinion that a bar and lock would constitute an "obstacle," in the context of that definition.
 
On a more practical note I would let the Professor know that if the maintenance electricians or facility engineers have to shut off a circuit in that panel that they would now simply shut off the feeder supplying the panel. I am sure a key would be forthcoming.
 
I couldn't find it, but was hoping " ... occupants shall not restrict access to qualified persons by means of locks, blah, blah, blah ...." was in there somewhere.

I'll try common sense, but can't guarantee the result.
Maybe a six-pack of LEFTHAND HAYSTACK WHEAT beer might work.
www.lefthandbrewing.com

db
 
iwire said:
When did locking access to panel boards become an NEC violation? :-?
Click to expand...
I am not saying that it is. But what about the "readily accessible" requirement? I have never seen a panelboard that did not have a locking mechanism included in the panel door. But those are likely to be commonly keyed, and the maintenance personnel would have that key. I would say that this arrangement does not violate the "readily accessible" requirement, since the keyed door is the door to which you need to have access, and since there is no obstacle blocking access to that keyed door. Here, however, you can't get to the door "readily," since there is an "obstacle," namely an external bar and lock, in the way. I see a distinction here. What do you think?

Bottom line: The professor doesn't have to be an expert on the NEC, in order to be made to understand that this is not a good idea.
 
charlie b said:

Here, however, you can't get to the door "readily," since there is an "obstacle," namely an external bar and lock, in the way. I see a distinction here. What do you think?

Bottom line: The professor doesn't have to be an expert on the NEC, in order to be made to understand that this is not a good idea.
Click to expand...

Might be worth a try.
The first sentence of the definition - "Capable of being reached quickly ..."
just might work, too.

Thanks, I'll let you know.
db
 
Electrical panels and rooms are allowed to be locked if the person requiring access have a key. 110.26

But later in 110.26 we have rules for safe working clearances.
So lock the panel but the area in front must be kept clear, for ready accessibility.
 
tom baker said:
Electrical panels and rooms are allowed to be locked if the person requiring access have a key. 110.26

But later in 110.26 we have rules for safe working clearances.
So lock the panel but the area in front must be kept clear, for ready accessibility.
Click to expand...

I was trying to remember where it said that it can be locked. Thanks for posting that.

Now... 110.26(G)... if we want to be lawyers, 110.26(G) does not require that qualified personnel have the key, or even access to the key! It simply says "Electrical Equipment rooms or enclosures housing electrical apparatus that are controlled by a lock(s) shall be considered accessible to qualified persons."

So, on that note, the professor is okay. However: If he installed some non-approced / non-UL bracket/bar/padlock directly in front of the panel, he is violating the workspace.
 
crossman said:
Now... 110.26(G)... if we want to be lawyers, 110.26(G) does not require that qualified personnel have the key, or even access to the key! It simply says "Electrical Equipment rooms or enclosures housing electrical apparatus that are controlled by a lock(s) shall be considered accessible to qualified persons." So, on that note, the professor is okay.
Click to expand...
[ASIDE: This statement was moved in the 2008 NEC to a new paragraph 110.26(G); it used to be part of the initial paragraph of 110.26.]

No, on that note the professor is not OK. I think you are reading it backwards. You too, Tom.

To understand this statement, you need to start by recognizing that sometimes a rule can be relaxed, if we are certain that unqualified persons cannot gain access to the equipment. One example is 110.31(B)(2). If we wish to take advantage of the relaxed rules, we need to make sure only qualified persons can have access. All that is being said in the 2008 article 110.26(G) is that if a panel is locked, then that counts as ?accessible to qualified persons,? and therefore we can take advantage of any available and applicable ?relaxed rules.? It does not say that anyone and everyone can install their own locks. If you don?t plan to take advantage of any relaxed rules, then 110.26(G) does not apply.

I am still looking for comments on my statement that the professor?s bar and lock constitute an ?obstacle,? in the context of the article 100 definition of readily accessible.
 
i can imagine...

i can imagine...

a situation in which one might need ready access to a panel to shut a circuit down, even if the cb in question hasn't tripped. i once had to do this when a hard-wired 120V/24V transformer overheated due to a downstream wiring fault. i happened to be working near the panel when it started cooking and was able to switch the circuit off before things really got going.
 
I was just going to add is the professor qualified?
Charlie has a great point this section was buried, it was moved to the head of the line.
 
charlie b said:
To understand this statement, you need to start by recognizing that sometimes a rule can be relaxed, if we are certain that unqualified persons cannot gain access to the equipment. One example is 110.31(B)(2). If we wish to take advantage of the relaxed rules, we need to make sure only qualified persons can have access. All that is being said in the 2008 article 110.26(G) is that if a panel is locked, then that counts as ?accessible to qualified persons,? and therefore we can take advantage of any available and applicable ?relaxed rules.? It does not say that anyone and everyone can install their own locks. If you don?t plan to take advantage of any relaxed rules, then 110.26(G) does not apply.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I am being ignorant, but I am not understanding your commentary. 110.26(G) means exactly what it says. Equipment controlled by a lock and key shall be considered acessible to qualified persons. I don't see where "relaxed rules" change what it says. I'm sure the CMP intended that the qualified persons have access to the key, but that is not what they wrote. Perhaps the CMP needs to revise their wording.

As for blocking access, if any type of extraneous equipment is installed across the access to electrical equipment, seems that is a violation to me. A non-Ul listed non-approved bar installed across the door of a panel seems to violate the working space. IMSO.
 
crossman said:
110.26(G) means exactly what it says. Equipment controlled by a lock and key shall be considered accessible to qualified persons. I don't see where "relaxed rules" change what it says.
Click to expand...
Yes, the article does say that. It does say that a lock makes an item ?accessible to qualified persons.? But so what? Why should it bother saying that? What does that gain for us? Why is it important that something be accessible only to qualified persons?

What 110.26(G) does is to answer the inquiry, ?I need my equipment to be accessible ?only to qualified persons,? and I want to know whether this would count.? It does not answer the question, ?Why do you need your equipment to be accessible only to qualified persons??

The point I had tried to make is that the phrase ?accessible to qualified persons? means something by itself. It means that different rules apply to that equipment, as opposed to equipment that anyone can get to.
 
1. Associate Professor of Art - hmmmm has made some cool wire sculptures, but maybe not an electrician.
2. Bar assembly is attached to the wall - does not actually touch the panelboard.
3. The old-timers around here say " it's always been there ".
4. I think the 'readily accessible' - obstacle argument will work fine.
5. I'll keep the ' oops, there goes that pesky main feeder again ' in my back pocket.

thanks to all
db
 
Okay, maybe I am getting it.

The first sentence of 110.26 says "Sufficient access... shall be provided and maintained about all electrical equipment to permit ready and safe operation and maintenance of such equipment.

So looking at 110.26(G), if the equipment is locked, and if keys are not available to the qualified persons, then they certainly cannot comply with the general statement at 110.26 first sentence.
 
In the small %

In the small %

I am not really following this thread. I think, for what it's worth, certain devices should be keyed/lockable. I don't always agree with a panel board being locked unless there is enough "qualified" personnel on staff 24/7. Then of course you have institutions and elderly homes, schools where they could be locked due to some people otherwise not knowing of the dangers at hand switching different circuits or mains, but "locked" across the board is very broad.

OCPD devices will serve their purpose behind locked doors, but I find that irrelevant. If there isn't a maintenance person on staff 24/7, than "locked" is very touchy.........

OCPD's are not 100% reliable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top