Code violation ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
eprice said:
The problem with your logic is that if it is true, then 90.3 isn't enforceable either, so what is says is irrelevant. Article 90 is enforceable. It contains the scoping of the NEC and explains how it is applied. 90.4 is part of that explanation, just as 90.3 is.
Click to expand...

And yet, if it is enforceable it can't be because it doesn't say it is. :)
 
eprice said:
Yes, it would be a variation of the liar's paradox
Click to expand...
And therefore the entire code is meaningless and unenforceable. The "statement" of the liar's (and barber's) paradox is not a statement and therefore can not be either true or false. (At least that is the way most logicians deal with the matter.)
 
GoldDigger said:
And therefore the entire code is meaningless and unenforceable. The "statement" of the liar's (and barber's) paradox is not a statement and therefore can not be either true or false. (At least that is the way most logicians deal with the matter.)
Click to expand...
I think you might want to consider just why the NEC might be applicable in a particular jurisdiction. It is not because the NFPA says so.
 
charlie b said:
No. There is no problem, and there is no violation. Let us reflect on two important words within 110.26: "likely" and "require." Live work on a receptacle outlet is not likely, and I can't think of a single circumstance in which it would be required. Conclusion: not one of the working space rules within 110.26 would apply to a receptacle outlet.
Click to expand...


Charlie I agree completly, If we interpret 110.26 to the extent thats been discussed here then there is a whole host of work space violations. How many of us have a receptacle behind your TV or a piece of furniture. How about receptacles behind vending machines.
 
joebell said:
Charlie I agree completly, If we interpret 110.26 to the extent thats been discussed here then there is a whole host of work space violations. How many of us have a receptacle behind your TV or a piece of furniture. How about receptacles behind vending machines.
Click to expand...
Then the answer is to make the wording of 110.26(A) match the intent, not to be saying it applies to this equipment but not that equipment.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Then the answer is to make the wording of 110.26(A) match the intent, not to be saying it applies to this equipment but not that equipment.
Click to expand...

Don

Maybe the wording found in 110.26(E) " All switchboards, panelboards and motor control centers" should be brought forward to the beginning of the section to make a clearer indication as to the intent of the rules spelled out in the rest of the section. After reading through this topic again I can see where the term "equipment" is being the cause for confusion.
 
joebell said:
Don

Maybe the wording found in 110.26(E) " All switchboards, panelboards and motor control centers" should be brought forward to the beginning of the section to make a clearer indication as to the intent of the rules spelled out in the rest of the section. After reading through this topic again I can see where the term "equipment" is being the cause for confusion.
Click to expand...
Joe,
The term equipment is defined in Article 100 and we have no choice but to use that definition any time the word is used in the NEC.

There have been proposals to put wording in 110.26(A) that would closely match the wording in 110.26(E), but they have been rejected by the CMP.
 
petersonra said:
in a typical year, how many times does the typical electrician use his volt meter to check if an outlet is live? the answer suggests that it is extremely likely.
Click to expand...
I am willing to declare that that activity does not fall into the category of "examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance." You are not evaluating the physical condition (e.g., signs of overheating, tightness of connections, damaged plastic or metal parts) of the receptacle itself, and you are doing nothing to change its condition. But I can see value in the opposite point of view as well.
 
joebell said:
Maybe the wording found in 110.26(E) " All switchboards, panelboards and motor control centers" should be brought forward to the beginning of the section to make a clearer indication as to the intent of the rules spelled out in the rest of the section.
Click to expand...
It is not as simple as that. There are things that need working space, but that do not need "dedicated equipment space." An example is a VFD or a fused disconnect. The three things specifically named in 110.26(E) (2011 version) share the characteristic that it is expected that new loads may be added someday, and that room will be needed above or below the equipment to run new conduits. A VFD and a fused disconnect would not share that characteristic. So a clear statement of what does, and what does not require working space is no easy thing to write.
 
is it a code violation to install a covering such as painting over the front of a panel board?

is it a code violation to install a PB in a closet that is 6 inches deep with a 36" door in front of it?

what is the difference between the two?
 
Yes and no to your first two questions, in that order.
In the second case, I have to open a door, in order to be able to walk into an electrical room. Once the door is open, I look to see if the required working space in front of the panel of interest is clear of any objects. In the first case, I am already in the room that has the panel, and I already see that something is stored within the working space.
 
We have a mantra here "Our job is to solve complicated problems not complicate solved problems" Six pages of non real text. Not all recepts have ready access - has been -- will be -- won't change. To throw 110.26 in the recept location and what private owners do after inspections is absurd. General recepts are for convience per wall space. Reread your previous sections & complicate all you want -- six pages oh my
 
mwm1752 said:
We have a mantra here "Our job is to solve complicated problems not complicate solved problems" Six pages of non real text. Not all recepts have ready access - has been -- will be -- won't change. To throw 110.26 in the recept location and what private owners do after inspections is absurd. General recepts are for convience per wall space. Reread your previous sections & complicate all you want -- six pages oh my
Click to expand...
This has been a debate about what the code words actually say and not about the real world.

These types of debates often result in proposals for code changes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top