Code question

[U6D5XE]

Is there any place in the NEC that states thet telephone and data equipment need to be "readly accesable". I am getting tired if being told to put this equipment in out of the way places, like under cabinets, in closets and other storage places. I loose the battle because there is no code or I cannot find it. Had a discussion with a fire inspector at there office once whereI had to spend 45 min moving stuff that completly covered there telephone system and he said there was no code to cover tis. I said it should be the same one as fire panels, but said not.

 

[iwire]

110.26 applies to all electrical equipment 0 to 600 volts.

 

[Edgreer]

Telephone

Telephone

The answer is in the NEC under 760 and also in EIA/TIA standards 568-A which show how a telephone and data network is to be installed. Also any bssci cert data company can and should be involved with this part of the project
ed

 

[hbiss]

760 applies to fire panels as the OP states a fire inspector pointed out. EIA/TIA standards are only guidelines and carry no enforcement weight. I see no reason or even the necessity for a BICSI anything on a job.

I too believe 110.26 is the applicable article.

-Hal

 

[KyawaComm]

The answer is no.

 

[roger]

The answer is no.

Can you give us some code wording that exempts it from the requirements of 110.26?

Roger

 

[George Stolz]

Wouldn't 800.21 be pointless if 110.26 applied?

 

[iwire]

90.3 puts 110.26 out of the picture for Chapter 8 telephone equipment, however data equipment may well fall under Article 725 and would be subject to 110.26

 

[roger]

George, 800.21 may actually be supporting 110.26 in some ways, maybe not for the phone equipment, but for any electrical that would be rendered inaccessible by the cables preventing removal of panels, electrical equipment above ceiling tiles for example.

Roger

 

[George Stolz]

This is far enough out of my grip I can't even phrase my question in a meaningful way.

I guess, for starters, let's say I have a cabinet with an ethernet switch. Battery-powered, to eliminate any second-hand 120V conditions on my hypothetical. Cat-5 come into the enclosure and exit. Is this a 725-covered installation?

 

[iwire]

I have a cabinet with an ethernet switch. Battery-powered, to eliminate any second-hand 120V conditions on my hypothetical. Cat-5 come into the enclosure and exit. Is this a 725-covered installation?

The handbook would have us believe so and I can't think of anything but habit to dispute that view.

 

[iwire]

Also take a look at 645.6 and the FPN under it.

 

[George Stolz]

Also take a look at 645.6 and the FPN under it.

As I read it, that would seem to contradict the idea that my hypothetical setup is governed by 725.

645.6 Cables Not in Information Technology Equipment Room. Cables extending beyond the information technology equipment room shall be subject to the applicable requirements of this Code.

FPN: For signaling circuits, refer to Article 725; for fiber optic circuits, refer to Article 770; and for communications circuits, refer to Article 800. For fire alarm systems, refer to Article 760.

What am I missing?

 

[iwire]

IMO data cabling is signaling more than it is communications.

Once we look at the scope of 800 we see they are talking about telephone, telegraph, outside wiring for fire / bugler alarms and other similar central station systems.

IMO your Ethernet hub does not fit in there, but can fit in the scope of 725.

 

[George Stolz]

This is some rough stuff.

I can see what you're saying, but I could see it falling under "similar central station systems" (the hub being the central station for data transfer), or under Article 830.

This is really hard to read.

 

[iwire]

I can see what you're saying, but I could see it falling under "similar central station systems" (the hub being the central station for data transfer), or under Article 830.

This is really hard to read.

Central Station is a type of alarm monitoring system, besides the central station part only applies to outside wiring.

 

[George Stolz]

Thanks for the correction.

I still think this is impossible to read.