Industrial MCP Feeding Unrelated Equipment

[sii]

I have a situation that I believe is wrong but am having trouble articulating why.

What I have is an industrial MCP which has been "tapped" to feed multiple pieces of unrelated equipment, one of which is an overhead crane, another is a single-phase welder outlet mounted on the side. Basically, anything installed in the vicinity was fed from this panel. I haven't yet had a chance to open the panel to see how well or poorly the connections are made inside.

I won't get far just calling these NEC violations, I need to present it as as safety issue, assuming it is one.

 

[Ingenieur]

what is an mcp? mcc?
depends how itbwas 'tapped'
doesn't sound like an issue

 

[petersonra]

Doesn't sound like a problem to me

 

[sii]

what is an mcp? mcc?
depends how itbwas 'tapped'
doesn't sound like an issue

Machine Control Panel in this case. I was unclear, sorry.

 

[Ingenieur]

Machine Control Panel in this case. I was unclear, sorry.

if it is a ul listed control panel and the other stuff was added and not covered by the certification, it may be an issue, and possibly an nec violation

 

[Jraef]

The devil is in the details...

 

[petersonra]

if it is a ul listed control panel and the other stuff was added and not covered by the certification, it may be an issue, and possibly an nec violation

field devices are not covered by UL508a at all.

feeding unrelated stuff out of a control panel just does not violate the NEC IMO.

 

[Ingenieur]

field devices are not covered by UL508a at all.

feeding unrelated stuff out of a control panel just does not violate the NEC IMO.

if the panel is ul listed for a specific machine
and susequent field mods not in the original listing are made to the panel
does that not violate/void the ul listing?
if so isn't that an nec violation?
mustn't devices be used in compliance with their listing?

I'm asking, I don't know for sure

 

[petersonra]

if the panel is ul listed for a specific machine
and susequent field mods not in the original listing are made to the panel
does that not violate/void the ul listing?
if so isn't that an nec violation?
mustn't devices be used in compliance with their listing?

I'm asking, I don't know for sure

there is no such thing as voiding a UL listing. that is almost entirely a myth. the listing applies to the equipment as it left the manufacturer.

field alterations are not prohibited. but they would be subject to "approval" by the AHJ.

 

[GoldDigger]

there is no such thing as voiding a UL listing. that is almost entirely a myth. the listing applies to the equipment as it left the manufacturer.

field alterations are not prohibited. but they would be subject to "approval" by the AHJ.

And some AHJs (or at least some inspectors) are much more likely to approve a field modification if it has been certified on-site by an NRL examination.

 

[sii]

The AHJ at this location has no interest in or concern for anything beyond the point of connection of the feeder circuit. I'm pretty sure this is a design issue more than anything, it's really inconvenient to have to shut down five pieces of equipment to work on one. I was just hoping for a better reason than that to get someone to commit some $ to change it.

 

[petersonra]

The AHJ at this location has no interest in or concern for anything beyond the point of connection of the feeder circuit. I'm pretty sure this is a design issue more than anything, it's really inconvenient to have to shut down five pieces of equipment to work on one. I was just hoping for a better reason than that to get someone to commit some $ to change it.

perhaps you could go back over the last year and figure out the actual cost of doing it this way by having to shut down other pieces of equipment to work on this machine. you may find the number is insignificant or it may make a difference. at least you will have real numbers to present.

I would not present it as an inconvenience though. Figure out what the actual cost was versus the cost to change it.