Location For Disconnects
- Thread starter Dennis Franklin
- Start date
- Status
Accessible, Readily (Readily Accessible). Capable of being
reached quickly for operation, renewal, or inspections
without requiring those to whom ready access is requisite
to climb over or remove obstacles or to resort to portable
ladders, and so forth.
I have a hard time reading this definition and accepting an AC Disconnect behind and below the top of the unit where the space between the strucure and the unit is less tha
18", I'm not that small!!
Charlie
reached quickly for operation, renewal, or inspections
without requiring those to whom ready access is requisite
to climb over or remove obstacles or to resort to portable
ladders, and so forth.
I have a hard time reading this definition and accepting an AC Disconnect behind and below the top of the unit where the space between the strucure and the unit is less tha
18", I'm not that small!!
Charlie
McDowellb
Banned
- Location
- Beverly Hills, CA
Not always Charlie. I've gotten interpretations from them via email and I thought, this is great until I read the whole email. At the end it said something like "this is not an official interpretation just an opinion." But they are very good at what they do and they may give other information you may not have thought of. I call the NFPA a couple times a month on average.cpal said:
McDowellb said:
Thanks I call on Jeff and Joe often my self, but they can not give an offical interpertation, as I understand it the request must be made to the chair of the CMP who has oversight regarding the question. I have not used that proceedure but have had good luck talking to the field reps. Unfortunately I probably won't get to them untill after labor day. unless I take a ride to Quincy.
Charlie
There have been very few Formal Interpretations for NFPA 70 that I have read, and I can only imagine there must be thousands asking.
There are only 2 for the 2005 cycle on the NFPA web site.
Good luck getting anything formal, and remember, it has to be worded as a Yes or No question.
Roger
There are only 2 for the 2005 cycle on the NFPA web site.
Good luck getting anything formal, and remember, it has to be worded as a Yes or No question.
Roger
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
[FONT="]
Don
[/FONT]
Show me the exceptions to the words as written in the code. All electrical equipment that is likely to be worked on or tested while energized is covered by the code rule. Every electrical item that has been mentioned in this thread is electrical equipment per the Article 100 definition. Does it make an sense? NO, and that is why there is such a diversion of opinions on the issue. As I said in a previous post the CMP needs to get its head out of the sand and accept a proposal that puts reasonable limits on the application of the work space rule. However, until that happens all electrical equipment that contains energized parts and is likely to be worked on or tested while energized requires the work space. This type of code writing leads code users to start ignoring code rules because some, like this one are not usable or enforceable, and they start to think other rules are the same.
Don
[/FONT]
McDowellb
Banned
- Location
- Beverly Hills, CA
Readdily accessible applies to equipment rather than wiring methods and is a different concept from that of the word accessible. With that said, what about cord and plug connected equipment such as my refrigerator? The disconnect (cord and plug) is not readily accessible nor does it have the clearences you speak of. I think you should really look at the big picture. What needs to have the clearences as per 110.26? As stated before, if there are no fuses or circuit breakers then quite simply the clearences per 110.26 are not relevant. As in the cord and plug connected equipment. If all disconnects need to be readily accessible where would you put the disconnects? Quite simply not all disconnects need to be readily accessible and that's the bottom line.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
Mr. McDowell,
Don
Read the code words....all electrical equipment that is likely to be worked on while energized requires the 110.26(A) work spaces. If you don't agree show me the words that say 110.26(A) only applies if there are fuses or circuit breakers in the enclosure. There are only two things that must exist before 110.26(A) applies as it is currently written. One, it must be electrical equipment (see the Article 100 definition of equipment) and two, it must be likely that the electrical equipment will be worked on while energized. As soon as both of these conditions exist, you must provide the 110.26(A) work space. Does this code rule make any sense...of course not, but that is what the words say. The section needs a major rewrite.
In this case the disconnect (plug) does not need 110.26(A) work space as you can't work on it while energized. As soon as you unplug it it is not energized. However the receptacle in the wall does require 110.26(A) work spaces and before you say it doesn't show me the code words that say it doesn't. As far as looking at the big picture, I am only looking at the code rule as that is what we are talking about here.
Don
McDowellb
Banned
- Location
- Beverly Hills, CA
Show me in the code where it says all receptacles are required to have clearences..... That is rediculous and not the intent of the code. I emplore you to call the NFPA at 1 (617)770-3000. They will update you on the reallity of the code in regards to clearences and readily accessible.don_resqcapt19 said:
don_resqcapt19 said:
Actually, you quoted the exception yourself:
So, since kitchen counters require receptacles, clearly that requirement negates the clearance requirement and allows the receptacles to be installed above a countertop. The big question in my mind is if the accessibility requirement in 440.14 supersedes 110.26, since 440.14 spells out the requirement for the AC disconnect.
allenwayne
Senior Member
Been out of town for a few days.Jim W in Tampa said:
Well Jim yes a breaker lock out would fix the situation if the pull out was above an a/c unit with the a/c encroaching the 110.26 requirements.If locked out then it would not be energized then working space requirements don`t come into play.110.26A states WHILE ENERGIZED !!!!!If not energized then not required to have a clear working space.If not used then it falls on the service techs shoulders.As long as it is a usable lock out we did our part.
I`ve installed 1000`s of lock outs for just this reason .We wire after a/c rough then the concrete guys pour a slab right under our disconnect then we get tagged for clearance on final.I`ve tried running the nm in the A/C chase and leaving a long tail but it usually gets cut and stolen.So I keep a large supply of lock outs around.
There are a few posters that will probably "pin my ears back" due to this post but hopefully what I'm saying makes, at the least, a small bit of sense.
I'm going to assume that everyone that has posted replies are electricians (still in the industry in one fashion or another).
That being said, why would an electrician want any less of the workspace that 110.26 gives us when working on energized equipment? If I am the electrician, regardless of fuses, breakers, relays, etc..., and I have to work on any piece of energized equipment I want all the room I can possibly get. 110.26, when you look at it, doesn't really give us all that much room in the first place.
110.26, as I see it, is one of the few code sections that "look out" for us - the electrician. I think I would rather try to argue from the side that 110.26 does apply to the OP's situation. I guess it's just hard for me to see another electrician / inspector make our job any more dangerous than it already is by attempting to interpret the code in a fashion that is making a bad situation worse.
I guess if I am in error on the proper application of 110.26 I will be able to say that I made my error on the side of the electrician. Personally, as an inspector, I jealously defend the minimum working clearances for the electrician - because I am one.
Pete
I'm going to assume that everyone that has posted replies are electricians (still in the industry in one fashion or another).
That being said, why would an electrician want any less of the workspace that 110.26 gives us when working on energized equipment? If I am the electrician, regardless of fuses, breakers, relays, etc..., and I have to work on any piece of energized equipment I want all the room I can possibly get. 110.26, when you look at it, doesn't really give us all that much room in the first place.
110.26, as I see it, is one of the few code sections that "look out" for us - the electrician. I think I would rather try to argue from the side that 110.26 does apply to the OP's situation. I guess it's just hard for me to see another electrician / inspector make our job any more dangerous than it already is by attempting to interpret the code in a fashion that is making a bad situation worse.
I guess if I am in error on the proper application of 110.26 I will be able to say that I made my error on the side of the electrician. Personally, as an inspector, I jealously defend the minimum working clearances for the electrician - because I am one.
Pete
Jim W in Tampa
Senior Member
- Location
- Tampa Florida
Mine came in today.Seems rather stupid when we all know they will never be used.Perhaps we need them on every breaker !!!!!.What if i have a panel cover with a key lock ? Does that fix anything ?Problem is in Pasco of course.I had to work on a live switch today and did not have the required space.Just how far do they want to take this foolish rule.allenwayne said:
Last edited:
I think some of the posters here are missing the point of the safety switch. This is to provide a disconnecting means while servicing the A/C unit. So you can disconnect power and safely make the repair to said equipment without being shocked. 440.14 simply states where to locate this disconnect. This switch or pull-out has no servicible parts and you make a very bad case to say that a non-fused disconnect requires working clearance. It simply is not required and you sound like an idiot when you say that a receptacle and a switch require work space just because you may test for voltage. I hope you are not an inspector. The intent of the code is very clear. I think that it is time to close this thread.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
Mr. McDowell,
Don
Is a receptactle "equipment" per the Article 100 definition?\
If they don't like what their words say, then they should direct CMP 1 to accept one of the many proposals that have been submitted to correct this code section.
Don
- Status