electric panel working space

[mackotis]

Hello everyone . I have a "safety auditor " claiming that an industrial washer machine is too close to the electrical panel on the wall .
I explained that Electrical panel clearance is 36" in front and 30" left to right and that box extends up to 6 feet 5" in height . outside of that cube a washer is permitted .
She is measuring on an angle from the corner of the electric panel to the washer enclosure and claiming it's within 36"Any suggestions ?

 

[Carultch]

Hello everyone . I have a "safety auditor " claiming that an industrial washer machine is too close to the electrical panel on the wall .
I explained that Electrical panel clearance is 36" in front and 30" left to right and that box extends up to 6 feet 5" in height . outside of that cube a washer is permitted .
She is measuring on an angle from the corner of the electric panel to the washer enclosure and claiming it's within 36"Any suggestions ?

It's 36" of depth measured perpendicular to the cover, for the entire workspace width. It's also 6'-6" of height.

The 30" width can start from the left side, the right side, or extend 15" on both sides from the centerline, or anywhere in between, and can overlap with that of adjacent equipment.

Think of a refrigerator box that's 36" x 30" x 78". That box needs to fit in front of the equipment, and seat upon a floor/grade/platform a person can safely stand upon.

 

[mackotis]

Thank you Carultch . That was my original response . The washer does not fall inside the box . Just outside only when measured on an angle .
Thanks for the confirmation

 

[infinity]

She is measuring on an angle from the corner of the electric panel to the washer enclosure and claiming it's within 36"Any suggestions ?

Tell her to read the actual wording in the NEC. The washer can be right next to the panel. Can you post a photo?

 

[wwhitney]

Since the issue is apparently educated the safety auditor, the IRC Chapter 34 adaptation of NEC 110.26 has a nice diagram illustrating the working space in Figure E3405.1, which you can see here:

CHAPTER 34 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS - 2024 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE (IRC)

ICC Digital Codes is the largest provider of model codes, custom codes and standards used worldwide to construct safe, sustainable, affordable and resilient structures.

codes.iccsafe.org

(although that figure seems to show a 30" wide panel, which would be atypical, particularly in residential). Does the NEC Handbook or other sufficiently official reference similarly include such a diagram?

Cheers, Wayne

 

[mackotis]

agreed

 

[wwhitney]

Tell her to read the actual wording in the NEC.

To play devil's advocate, I did just that, and the NEC wording is not super precise. There is no statement like "the required working space is a cuboid," this just seems to be implicit. (cuboid = rectangular box)

And with respect to the required depth, it just refers to "the depth of the working space in the direction of live parts". How exactly do live parts imply a direction? Seems like it should say "the depth of the working space in the direction perpendicular to the face of the enclosure through which live parts will be accessed" or something more specific like that.

I'll avoid speculating on how the 110.26 requirements should be applied if the equipment enclosure is not itself a cuboid, or if you can access live parts through multiple openings that don't lie in parallel or perpendicular planes.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[infinity]

To play devil's advocate, I did just that, and the NEC wording is not super precise. There is no statement like "the required working space is a cuboid," this just seems to be implicit. (cuboid = rectangular box)

And with respect to the required depth, it just refers to "the depth of the working space in the direction of live parts". How exactly do live parts imply a direction? Seems like it should say "the depth of the working space in the direction perpendicular to the face of the enclosure through which live parts will be accessed" or something more specific like that.

I'll avoid speculating on how the 110.26 requirements should be applied if the equipment enclosure is not itself a cuboid, or if you can access live parts through multiple openings that don't lie in parallel or perpendicular planes.

Cheers, Wayne

You're off on a tangent. Carultch got it correct with the box analogy. From the NECH:

 

[wwhitney]

You're off on a tangent. Carultch got it correct with the box analogy.

Not a tangent--the NEC wording does not do the best job of conveying that it is a box. It could be more explicit or precise. It could state that it is a box, or include a diagram like Figure 410.2.

From the NECH:

That should be very helpful for the OP to show to the safety auditor to educate them.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[infinity]

Not a tangent--the NEC wording does not do the best job of conveying that it is a box. It could be more explicit or precise.

I agree and I know we have this discussion from time to time. In my estimate about 25% of the NEC is flat out poorly written and difficult to understand.

 

[jim dungar]

This is almost the chicken or the egg issue.
The NEC requires working space when the equipment is installed. The easiest way to determine this space is the 'refrigerator box' example. This results in at minimum of one safe area. The worker must be within this space when work is being performed.
However, NFPA 70E, and other safety standards, require working space wherever the worker may be standing even if it is outside of the NEC minimum space, such as off to the side.

So meeting the NEC requirements does not mean you meet other standards that may also be applicable.

 

[kwired]

Ask her what standard her dimensions came from.

What you mentioned is what NEC says and sounds like there is nothing to cite from NEC as a violation.