Hi gentilman: I am the Master Electrician of record for a Ford Plant and I have a quick question. I have found electrical violation throughout the plant and management tell me that those problems existed before I took this position and therefor do not need to be fixed based lon a "grandfather clause". Is there such a clause in the code book and if so where.Some of lthe issues are safety related (Panels not labeled ) and I feel they should be corrected anyway. Let me know about this "grandfather clause" Thanks.
Grandfather clause
- Thread starter rheydel1
- Start date
- Status
iaov
Senior Member
- Location
- Rhinelander WI
This is a very common situation in industry. Most factories that are more than 20 years old are a giant collection of code violations. Some of these violations may have been there for 50 years or more, and while they are violations if they haven't caused a problem yet, they probably won't. Try to narrow in on what are immediate,real threats to safety.
jumper
Senior Member
- Location
- 3 Hr 2 Min from Winged Horses
i work at a college and i hear this type of bull all the time. 90% of the time the violations were not code compliant in the first place. you do not have to upgrade installs that were legal by existing codes at the time, however i dont know of any time that unlabeled panels were legal. i failed one of my first inspections 15 years ago because i called inspector before i had labeled panel.he walked in, looked at the panel cover label, wrote me up, left. boss was really mad at that one. sheetrockers had to wait till next day for reinspection to start.
tryinghard
Senior Member
- Location
- California
I don't know of this statements existence in the NEC. I think its one of the easier rationales to use when trying to avoid the application of the NEC.
Like an old car compared to new though many things have evolved, seat belts, two tail lights, two wiper blades? If an old car is still in service it is not required to be upgraded with these features even though they play a large role in safety.
Remember though everything regarding the use of electricity is directly related to safety, in other words using electricity does have a purpose but it must be installed in a safe (correct) fashion. The NEC has been authored for over a century for only two reasons: 1) personal safety, & 2) property protection (fire & life safety). So if your employer ignores this code book they are in fact ignoring the most exhaustive book written regarding the safe use of electricity. Point out your findings as safety issues rather than code violations then support your findings with the NEC if you need to.
As example though, there are some things that have never changed like the use of the neutral (grounded) conductor; it has never been allowed to parallel current with equipment ground/frames/or any other conductive items.
In your situation there?s a tendency to prove the new codes by quoting the old codes. Assert to your employer cirtain particulars that they are in fact safety issues rather than code violations. In doing this you?ll have a different attention with your hierarchy and co-workers.
- Location
- Lockport, IL
- Occupation
- Semi-Retired Electrical Engineer
There is nothing in the NEC that bears the title, "Grandfather Clause." But there is a statement that has an effect something along those lines. I am not yet at work, and I don't keep an NEC at home, so someone else will have to look it up. I believe it is in article 80 somewhere. That has been moved into the Annex at the back of the book, so it is not an enforceable article.
The words say something to the effect that an existing condition that does not meet current NEC requirements does not have to be brought up to modern standards, unless the authority having jurisdiction believes it to represent a threat to safety. The words do not, as written, say anything about the installation having been in compliance at the time it was built. But words to that effect have been added to several local codes, including the one that applies in my area.
However, no code, federal, state, local, or other, is going to agree with the proposition that, "Yea, I know it's a violation, but it has been that way for a long time, so therefore I am grandfathered, and I don't have to fix it."
The words say something to the effect that an existing condition that does not meet current NEC requirements does not have to be brought up to modern standards, unless the authority having jurisdiction believes it to represent a threat to safety. The words do not, as written, say anything about the installation having been in compliance at the time it was built. But words to that effect have been added to several local codes, including the one that applies in my area.
However, no code, federal, state, local, or other, is going to agree with the proposition that, "Yea, I know it's a violation, but it has been that way for a long time, so therefore I am grandfathered, and I don't have to fix it."
jumper
Senior Member
- Location
- 3 Hr 2 Min from Winged Horses
charlieb is correct , i checked and michigan did not adopt annex g/ article 80 when it swithed to the 05. it made its own admin code. see what it says, might help?
Guinness
Member
- Location
- Rhode Island
See 80.9
See 80.9
See 80.9 of the 2008 NEC - Talks about the applications for installations
See 80.9
See 80.9 of the 2008 NEC - Talks about the applications for installations
Annex G (Old Art. 80) is legally enforcable if it has been adopted.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
I would disagree with the other post only if these violations were not to code when they were installed. For instance, if there are open j-boxes all over the place then I believe they would need to be closed. A violation that exists because of code change does not need to be fixed. IMO
Can you "sneak" me out a new pickup, and charge it off to the maintenance dept?
Hi
Are you an IBEW electrician employed by the company doing Electrical work, or are you an Engineer holding the License that the maintenance electricians work under? How long have you been an employee of the company? Don?t kick a sleeping dog.
Charlie
- Status