CGB Fittings and Arc Flash

[Ambitiouslearner]

Hey guys, this is my first post but first and foremost, I want to express my appreciation for the knowledge everyone shares as it's helped me out of my fair share of binds!

My question is in relation to plastic CGB fittings. Currently I am closing out a project on a commercial administration/warehouse building as the PE for a GC. After an incredibly in depth electrical inspection (literally opening every Jbox, device, etc and inspecting every splice point, termination point, etc) by the clients electrical inspector (not affiliated with the city) we finally finished our punch list and demobilized. However, now that we've demobed, he's added an addition item (they are refusing to pay our portion of retainage associated with punch list because of this) that we now have to address.

As some backstory, this inspector has been a pain in the neck to work with. He has quoted tons of sections of code throughout the project that I had to point out were incorrect in the given situation or not applicable in the given situation and despite him realizing that I'm correct will continue to report back to the moderator of the punch list that the items are still a violation. The only ways that I've been able to get him to admit he's wrong is by recording his convorsation's with me, saving his text messages, or destroying his arguments in lay mans terms to his boss (who knows nothing about electrical as he's just a general QC guy with a specialization in pipe). To date, he added 130 electrical items as "violations" over 4 PEMB's, and I have disproven a little over 100 of them.

We have a Quincy QGS 25 HP Air compressor - (http://www.quincycompressor.com/products/rotary-screw-air-compressors/qgs/) and are using a Plastic CGB fitting in lieu of a cord and plug because:

A.) The compressor is anchored to the ground
B.) It has it's own disconnect mounted nearby
C.) Due to the location, and the clearance from the wall (approximately 3' from a wall behind the air compressor), and how we know that every owner in the world will shove any material they can in any space they see as potentially available - it could have potentially caused a trip hazard or had the opportunity to be pulled from the wall/damaged by an unknowing individual moving material in places it shouldn't be to begin with

So, with this latest one, he stated that we are in violation by using the CGB fitting in lieu of a cord and plug for the above mentioned air compressor because it violated sections 110.16 and 110.18 of the NEC. I have already explained to him and his boss that 110.16 has nothing to do with the CGB fitting as it pertains to the marking on the equipment. The part I'm struggling with is 110.18 and explaining to his boss that the CGB isn't a violation as he's looking for something from "somebody smarter" as he put it than I to corroborate that it's acceptable. Is there another way to go about demonstrating that I'm correct in this situation? I've reached out to my electrical engineer and my electrician, but the problem is that this has come up AFTER we've all demobed from the job site and after all the crap they've been through already with this guy and they've already gotten the majority of their money, they're not exactly itching to help this jobsite. Below is the code sections mentioned for reference:

110.16 Arc-Flash Hazard Warning. Electrical equipment, such as switchboards, switchgear, panel boards, industrial control panels, meter socket enclosures, and motor control centers, that are in other than dwelling units, and are likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized, shall be field or factory marked to
warn qualified persons of potential electric arc flash hazards. The marking shall meet the requirements in 110.21(B) and shall be located so as to be clearly visible to qualified
persons before examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance of the equipment.
Informational Note No. 1: NFPA 70E-2012, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace, provides guidance, such as determining severity of potential exposure, planning safe
work practices, arc flash labeling, and selecting personal protective equipment.
Informational Note No. 2: ANSI Z535.4-1998, Product Safety Signs and Labels, provides guidelines for the design of safety signs and labels for application to products.

110.18 Arcing Parts. Parts of electrical equipment that in ordinary operation produce arcs, sparks, flames, or molten metal shall be enclosed or separated and isolated from all
combustible material.
Informational Note: For hazardous (classified) locations, see Articles 500 through 517. For motors, see 430.14.


Thanks in advance!

 

[wbdvt]

Unless I am reading it wrong, I am confused what 110.18 has to do with a CGB fitting. How does that fitting cause arcing in normal operation? I would ask him to explain that.

 

[Ambitiouslearner]

Thanks for the reply!

He's trying to make a case that the CGB fitting its self is a "combustible material" and as such we can't use it. I was completely blown away by this when he told me, but I have to address it in a way that allows me to inform him of his ignorance and make his boss realize that I'm correct too so it can be removed from our punch list.

 

[hbiss]

Sounds like he is trying to justify his incompetent existence to his superiors.

-Hal

 

[steve66]

How do you respond to anything that far off the wall? I would think he needs to clarify the violation a little better before you can respond.

If they are holding your retainage hostage, it might be easier to just replace the fitting with a plug and receptacle. I would get his approval first. I would also try to make sure he isn't going to come up with any more off the wall violations.

The next time they want a quote or bid, I would just assume you won't get the retainage, and I would add it into the bid.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Thanks for the reply!

He's trying to make a case that the CGB fitting its self is a "combustible material" and as such we can't use it. I was completely blown away by this when he told me, but I have to address it in a way that allows me to inform him of his ignorance and make his boss realize that I'm correct too so it can be removed from our punch list.

So are the insulation on the conductors and the non-metallic parts inside of the enclosure.

 

[wbdvt]

is it worth it to do battle or just replace CGB with a metallic one?

 

[Strathead]

is it worth it to do battle or just replace CGB with a metallic one?

At some point it is worth it just because a person like this inspector needs to be put down. Perhaps the first thing the OP could do is request information from the manufacturer. A little research shows that ASTM-136 is a test for combustible materials and if the material the fitting is made out of is tested to this standard it will easily put this to bed. Or, possibly to convince the layman you refer to if he is a reasonable thinking person, get you hands on an Arlington box extender. Show him that it is plastic and its listed use is to comply with 314.20. If that flimsy piece of plastic is used to isolate combustible material then no reasoning person would conclude that a PVC fitting would not.

 

[Ambitiouslearner]

So are the insulation on the conductors and the non-metallic parts inside of the enclosure.

Everything is enclosed in the enclosure. The only thing psuedo exposed is where power enters the enclosure.

*update* I appreciate the advice from everyone! I sent my rebuttal to them again via e-mail and the inspector replied that he had already contracted another electrician to come in and change the fitting to cord and plug. I told him that's his prerogative if he would like to do that, but I will not accept any charges for it nor would I be able to warranty any portion that was changed or messed with. His boss replied with a "<inspectors name>, come to my office, we need to talk" and the item was removed from the punch list. So I guess it's been "taken care of". Hopefully I am actually *done* this time and I can get off this nightmare job!