Location For Disconnects

[don_resqcapt19]

Mike,

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.

I see nothing in 210.52 or 440.14 that acts as an exception to 110.26(A). The code is in conflict with it self and the rule in 110.26(A) must be revised, but CMP 1 refuses to accept any revisions. I don't apply 110.26(A) to all equipment, but if you really read the words of the section, it does apply to any and all equipment that "is likely to be worked on while energized". Give the current state of the safety practices of many in the trade, it is very likely that any and all equipment covered by this section will be worked on while energized. Remember that even using a contact type of voltage tester or other instrument is working hot. The application of this to a receptacle may be a bit of a stretch, but I have seen then replaced while the circuit was live many times...in years past I have even done that myself. If it is likely that this type of activity will take place the current code wording requires working space.
Don

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

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.

Being a member here does not require you to read or answer any post.I am not the inspector but have one that is now picking on this issue.The code needs clearer wording on this.Is the voltage at a receptacle or switch not as leithal as that at the AC unit ?Are they not equipment that needs inspected ?

 

[marcb]

This site is not for do it yourself types. What do you do when a switch is located in a stairway?

 

[marcb]

Mike,

I see nothing in 210.52 or 440.14 that acts as an exception to 110.26(A). The code is in conflict with it self and the rule in 110.26(A) must be revised, but CMP 1 refuses to accept any revisions. I don't apply 110.26(A) to all equipment, but if you really read the words of the section, it does apply to any and all equipment that "is likely to be worked on while energized". Give the current state of the safety practices of many in the trade, it is very likely that any and all equipment covered by this section will be worked on while energized. Remember that even using a contact type of voltage tester or other instrument is working hot. The application of this to a receptacle may be a bit of a stretch, but I have seen then replaced while the circuit was live many times...in years past I have even done that myself. If it is likely that this type of activity will take place the current code wording requires working space.
Don

You better get out the sawsall so you can get the required work space for the counter top receptacle when the GFCI trips. How do you test for voltage then?

 

[don_resqcapt19]

marcb,

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.

Is it likely that the service tech will check for votlage at the line or load side of the disconenct as part of the equipment troubleshooting? In my opinion that is very likely and therefore 110.26(A) applies.

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.

It most simply is required if you read what the code words say.

The intent of the code is very clear.

You can't enforce intent...you can only enforce the code language. In this case I don't believe that the code language really reflects the code intent. I believe that the code intent is more along the lines of how you and others are reading the code section, but the words don't even come close to matching that intent. If you enforce the code, you can only enforce what the code words say. They use the word "equipment" and since that word is defined in Article 100, we must use that definition. That definition includes just about everything. The only question is if the "equipment" is "likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized". Give the lack of proper safety practices by many in the trade, it is my opinion that it is very likey that someone will do one of those listed things to the equipment while it is energized.
Don

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

Is an air handler or CU not equipment ? How can he work on it in an attic ?Better remove that bush thats blocking his space at the CU.
Yes its pushing it to require for everything,so maybe its time for some rewording in the nec.But if the inspector wants to push this i cant really argue.He simply cites the code number.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Here is a CMP 1 statement on this issue, in the form a a panel statement to a rejected proposal for the 2005 code.

1-197 Log #3251 NEC-P01
(110-26?Electrical Equipment (New) )
Final Action: Reject
Submitter: Gary J. Locke, Lockheed Martin Systems Integrations
Recommendation:
Add a definition for Electrical Equipment to read as follows:
Electrical Equipment. Switchgear, panelboards, load centers, motor control centers, controls, and similar assemblies or apparatus.
Substantiation:
The purpose of this proposal is to add definition and clarity relative to the specific types of electrical equipment affected by 110.26.
The definition of electrical equipment in Article 100 NEC-2002 is too generic to be sensibly applied to 110-26. Without a more comprehensive and specific definition, and without - by extension - the guidance such a definition provides,the provisions of 110-26 are open for misapplication to electrical equipment such as wall outlets and light switches etcetera. The public record on the history and
evolution of 110.26 indicates that electrical equipment of the types identified in the proposed definition are appropriate relative to application of the requirements of 110.26.
Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement:
The panel concludes that this proposal is too limiting as to equipment requiring access. Section 110.26 applies to all electrical equipment for the reasons stated in the first sentence of 110.26.
Number Eligible to Vote: 12
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 12

 

[marcb]

Equipment. A general term including material, fittings, devices, appliances, luminaires (fixtures), apparatus, and the like used as a part of, or in the connection with, an electrical installation. Soooo.... per your post no more sheet rock or underground conduit because all equipment must be readily accessible. It is clearly shown here in the definition all equipment including material and fittings must comply with 110.26.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

For someone trying to close this tread your not doing very good LOL
I bet we reach 300 easy in a week.Its something that has no code to solve it that makes since.

 

[monsteriname]

Does testing for voltage raise to the level of "examination" of equiptment.
It seems to me therein could lie the answer to this conundrum.

Other than that an unfused disconect is not likley to be "required" to be worked on while energized.
Even if the feed to it is a tap without a breaker, it could first be unhooked from the panel where it tied in at, and that panel would have the proper workspace around it.

Just a thought.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

marcb,

Equipment. A general term including material, fittings, devices, appliances, luminaires (fixtures), apparatus, and the like used as a part of, or in the connection with, an electrical installation. Soooo.... per your post no more sheet rock or underground conduit because all equipment must be readily accessible. It is clearly shown here in the definition all equipment including material and fittings must comply with 110.26.

[FONT=&quot]Read all of the words in what I say and what the code says. Conduit, boxes, and conduit bodies are not likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized. 110.26(A) only applies to equipment that is likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized.

The definition of the word "equipment" as found in Article 100 and the wording used in 110.26(A) combine to create an impossible situation. The wording in 110.26(A) needs to be revised but CMP 1 doesn?t seem to understand that.[/FONT]
Don

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Does testing for voltage raise to the level of "examination" of equiptment.

In my opinion the answer is yes. Both OSHA and NFPA 70E say that voltage testing is working on energized parts.
Don

 

[benaround]

Marcb,

Your answers make you sound like an idiot, do you like the intent of that?

I don't think anyone would, Do you know what respect is, if not you better

look it up. What does a 'non ya' do for a living? I'm going to stop right here.

 

[McDowellb]

marcb,
[FONT=&quot]Read all of the words in what I say and what the code says. Conduit, boxes, and conduit bodies are not likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized. 110.26(A) only applies to equipment that is likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized.

The definition of the word "equipment" as found in Article 100 and the wording used in 110.26(A) combine to create an impossible situation. The wording in 110.26(A) needs to be revised but CMP 1 doesn’t seem to understand that.[/FONT]
Don

Don, you answered your own question. There is NOTHING in a non-fused disconnect to service. There is NO difference between that and a junction box. You can interpret it any way you like, but the bottom line isMarc is right. Ask yourself this : where do I locate a disconnect / switch in your narrow mind???? In your mind, there is always that "what if". Perhaps you should contact the NFPA for advise as I do. I use this forum as a guide, not the rule. Quite simply a non-fused disconnect / toggle switch/ receptacle does NOT need to be readily accessible. I emplore you to call them.

 

[McDowellb]

Marcb,

Your answers make you sound like an idiot, do you like the intent of that?

I don't think anyone would, Do you know what respect is, if not you better

look it up. What does a 'non ya' do for a living? I'm going to stop right here.

I agree with marcb. It's frustrating to see some of the replies. I HIGHLY recommend you people contact the NFPA in regards to this. I think you'll be surprised to hear the answer is very similar to marcb. Have a good day and a better tomorrow.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

I agree with marcb. It's frustrating to see some of the replies. I HIGHLY recommend you people contact the NFPA in regards to this. I think you'll be surprised to hear the answer is very similar to marcb. Have a good day and a better tomorrow.

Nobody here would be surprised that you agree with him.Fact is we must follow what the code says.Intent is just opinion.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I HIGHLY recommend you people contact the NFPA in regards to this. I think you'll be surprised to hear the answer is very similar to marcb.

An official answer from NFPA takes at least six months as it must be processed by the CMP in a manner very close to how they process a change proposal. Any other statement from the NFPA is just opinion and is no more valid than any expressed on this forum.
You guys just keep saying that I am wrong but you can't offer any code wording to support your statements. The code wording is very clear and I agree that the code wording most likely does not support the code intent, but once the NEC is adopted by a unit of government, they can only enforce the code wording. They may have local rules to change the wording or they may, unoffically, choose to ignor the code wording for this section as it is impossible to comply with. This is what happens in most areas.

Don

 

[don_resqcapt19]

mcdowellb,

There is NOTHING in a non-fused disconnect to service.

So a service tech is "unlikely" to check voltage in a non-fused disconnet? An equipment where it is "likely" that someone will check voltage or do any other work inside of the enclosure while the parts are energized is covered by this section. As I have stated many time in this thread, it is very likely that a tech will check voltage in the disconnet while troubleshooting the equipment. Why tear the equipment apart when you can just open the disconnect cover and see if you have the proper voltage? This is the very first step for many techs. Now if you can say that this is unlikely, then and only then, you can delete the 110.26(A) safe work space requirements. If that is the case, then you only have to comply with the first part of 110.26.

Sufficient access and working space shall be provided and maintained about all electric equipment to permit ready and safe operation and maintenance of such equipment.

This applies to the disconnect only when it is unlikely that someone will work on the live parts inside of the disconnect.
The word "likely" is very subjective and is subject to debate. Again this is a rule that needs a lot of work before it can be a usable part of the code.
Don

 

[cpal]

I'm a little surprised to see this thread remains as active as it is, so I will toss in look another 10 cents. I have recieved an email from a mfg rep who has reminded me that 440.14 deals with the location of the disconnect, and does not address work space. I did not at in that light but I do see clarity in his point. I do not see anything in 440.14 that addresses workspace clearance.

in fact


I feel quite confident, that in these installations I may enforce 110.16 (A) for those installations that do not provide a minimum of 30" wide and 36" clear from the front.


Hope this helps

Charlie

 

[McDowellb]

I'm a little surprised to see this thread remains as active as it is, so I will toss in look another 10 cents. I have recieved an email from a mfg rep who has reminded me that 440.14 deals with the location of the disconnect, and does not address work space. I did not at in that light but I do see clarity in his point. I do not see anything in 440.14 that addresses workspace clearance.

in fact


I feel quite confident, that in these installations I may enforce 110.16 (A) for those installations that do not provide a minimum of 30" wide and 36" clear from the front.


Hope this helps

Charlie

If the disconnect is non-fused type, the 30"x36" is not required.