Clearance issue?

[kenman215]

On my current project, the elec rm is located on the lowest level of the parking garage portion of the structure. The interior of the building is supported by 12" x 16" columns with 9' x 9' x 6" deep capitals at the top of each column. Main switchgear sits on a 4" tall housekeeping pad, two inches from ceiling. 4 1/2" in front of the top face of the termination section of the gear is the corner of a capital. Anyone think I might get jammed up on clearance issues with the inspector?

 

[roger]

Probably a good time for an RFI to red flag your concerns and force the AE to address the issue by maybe scheduling a meeting with the inspector.

Roger

 

[infinity]

Can the switchgear be turned 180°? If so maybe you could use gear that doesn't require rear access.

 

[kenman215]

Can the switchgear be turned 180°? If so maybe you could use gear that doesn't require rear access.

Forget about turning it, you just brought up an simple, yet obvious point. There are two sections of gear, termination side and switch side. Switch side is the only section that truly has a front, i.e. where the handles are. Technically I don't know that there is a "front" on the termination section. It's 24" wide X 30" deep, so taking off the "side" panels would actually give you greater access. Look at that section with the side as the front and clearance issues go bye bye. Thanks for the light bulb!

 

[Ponchik]

Forget about turning it, you just brought up an simple, yet obvious point. There are two sections of gear, termination side and switch side. Switch side is the only section that truly has a front, i.e. where the handles are. Technically I don't know that there is a "front" on the termination section. It's 24" wide X 30" deep, so taking off the "side" panels would actually give you greater access. Look at that section with the side as the front and clearance issues go bye bye. Thanks for the light bulb!

I would still recommend what Roger said, furthermore get the approval on paper.

On a second note, the AHJ may not see the side as "adequate access" even though in reality it is better access than the front.

 

[kenman215]

I would still recommend what Roger said, furthermore get the approval on paper.

On a second note, the AHJ may not see the side as "adequate access" even though in reality it is better access than the front.

I agree, obviously it runs through AHJ. I always like to have my argument prepared before hand, though. This particular inspector is fairly pragmatic and will generally think about things logically. For example, we had a multi-unit apartment building where the bulk of the stackable washer/dryer combos were located in bathrooms. Although code requirement would be to make the washer receptacles GFCIs, when I asked him about it, he let us slide with just regular duplex receptacles, agreeing with me that no one is going to move a stackable unit to get at the outlet behind it when there's a perfectly good GFCI eight feet away. Saved us a couple thousand in product. Hopefully this one goes the same way for us...thanks for input.

 

[roger]

I agree, obviously it runs through AHJ. I always like to have my argument prepared before hand, though.

So why should you have to argue on behalf of the AE? Let them get on board and explain their design or lack of coordination? Now, if you didn't actually follow the design you may be standing alone.

Roger

 

[roger]

Although code requirement would be to make the washer receptacles GFCIs, when I asked him about it, he let us slide with just regular duplex receptacles, agreeing with me that no one is going to move a stackable unit to get at the outlet behind it when there's a perfectly good GFCI eight feet away. Saved us a couple thousand in product. Hopefully this one goes the same way for us...thanks for input.

You do realize that just because he let you slide, your company would still be liable for the code violation if someone received a shock or worse. An inspectors mistake does not make a licensed EC innocent.

A simple solution would have been to put a faceless GFCI on the wall by the light switch.

Roger

 

[kenman215]

So why should you have to argue on behalf of the AE? Let them get on board and explain their design or lack of coordination? Now, if you didn't actually follow the design you may be standing alone.

Roger

I'm making the argument on behalf of the AE because on this particular job, the AE happens to be my PM. I do as much of his job as he can shove off on me. As to your other comment, the question of the GFCI was brought up to my PM by myself, upon which I was encouraged to ask the inspector his opinion. I find myself in the "I'm happy to hear your opinion, but we're still going to do it my way" type situations with project management far more often than I would prefer... In the end, it's their company. I've battled with management on code issues and most times they defer, this wasn't one of them.

 

[kenman215]

Clearance Issue? Update

Clearance Issue? Update

On my current project, the elec rm is located on the lowest level of the parking garage portion of the structure. The interior of the building is supported by 12" x 16" columns with 9' x 9' x 6" deep capitals at the top of each column. Main switchgear sits on a 4" tall housekeeping pad, two inches from ceiling. 4 1/2" in front of the top face of the termination section of the gear is the corner of a capital. Anyone think I might get jammed up on clearance issues with the inspector?

So I met with AHJ on site to take a look at my clearance issue and he passed us. He did say that it was a technically a code violation, but that the intent of that section of the code was to make sure that all gear and boxes were accessible by the EC and that there is nothing physically preventing the possibility of said gear from being replaced. At 86" of clearance height and being able to access and remove the cabinet from the side, he was ok with ithe install, as long as we didn't run any conduit across the bottom of the capital in front of it.