Panel Clearance To Egress

[Fitzdrew516]

See attached photo. I have an issue with a comment the plans examiner is making.

This was the original comment: "Clearance from panel H1 to edge of door on E100 is insufficient. Please revise to show the door clearance requirements are met for one exit. See section 110.26 for clearance requirements in the 2008 NEC."

Now I assumed since panel H1 was a 1200A panel that he was talking about 110.26(C)(2) even thought the panel isn't over 6 feet wide. That would require me to have a second means of egress from the space if it were 1200A and 6 feet wide. So I thought he was commenting on exception (b) in that section (although it wouldn't apply here).

This was the response back to the reviewer from our project manager: "We are in receipt of your plan review comments dated 5/31/16. I’ve discussed your comment about the clearances with my electrical engineer and he believes he is showing proper clearances. Panel H1 is located on the east wall of the room. The door is located in the northwest corner of the room and swings out. More than double the required clearance has been provided in front of panel H1 {even though panel H1 is not 6 feet wide per 110.26(C)(2)} allowing for a single exit from the room."

So now he just replied with this: "Unfortunately, on page E100, it shows a 500 amp panel labeled L1 to be less than 3' from edge to single egress point. The exception in the 2008 NEC being quoted for the utilization of a single egress from this space also prohibits the location of panels and equipment within the clear distances of table 110.26(A)(1)."

So now I'm completely confused as to what he's referring to. He has now changed his comment from panel H1 to panel L1 and panel L1 is only 500A. I called him for clarification, but as per usual no one answered. Does anyone have any idea what this reviewer could be referencing? I am unaware of any rule that would not allow panel L1 to be located where it is.

Thanks,
-Drew

 

[topgone]

See attached photo. I have an issue with a comment the plans examiner is making.

This was the original comment: "Clearance from panel H1 to edge of door on E100 is insufficient. Please revise to show the door clearance requirements are met for one exit. See section 110.26 for clearance requirements in the 2008 NEC."

Now I assumed since panel H1 was a 1200A panel that he was talking about 110.26(C)(2) even thought the panel isn't over 6 feet wide. That would require me to have a second means of egress from the space if it were 1200A and 6 feet wide. So I thought he was commenting on exception (b) in that section (although it wouldn't apply here).

This was the response back to the reviewer from our project manager: "We are in receipt of your plan review comments dated 5/31/16. I’ve discussed your comment about the clearances with my electrical engineer and he believes he is showing proper clearances. Panel H1 is located on the east wall of the room. The door is located in the northwest corner of the room and swings out. More than double the required clearance has been provided in front of panel H1 {even though panel H1 is not 6 feet wide per 110.26(C)(2)} allowing for a single exit from the room."

So now he just replied with this: "Unfortunately, on page E100, it shows a 500 amp panel labeled L1 to be less than 3' from edge to single egress point. The exception in the 2008 NEC being quoted for the utilization of a single egress from this space also prohibits the location of panels and equipment within the clear distances of table 110.26(A)(1)."

So now I'm completely confused as to what he's referring to. He has now changed his comment from panel H1 to panel L1 and panel L1 is only 500A. I called him for clarification, but as per usual no one answered. Does anyone have any idea what this reviewer could be referencing? I am unaware of any rule that would not allow panel L1 to be located where it is.

Thanks,
-Drew

Honestly, i don't remember clearances around electrical equipment are based on current carrying capacities. IIRC, it's the voltage level present and whether the personnel in the space is working near exposed energized parts and whether those parts are present from either side of the personnel's position!

 

[wwhitney]

So now I'm completely confused as to what he's referring to.

I would say that in 110.26(C)(2)(b), the plan reviewer is reading the phrase "the equipment" in the second sentence as meaning any equipment, not just the (1200 A, six feet wide) equipment that triggered the 110.26(C)(2) requirements. Under that reading, the panel L1 is in the way.

I suggest the clearest way forward is to point out that H1 is under six feet wide, so 110.26(C)(2) does not apply.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[Fitzdrew516]

Thanks for the responses. I spoke with the guy who made this comment before I left the office Friday. Apparently he is the mechanical and plumbing inspector and he is acting as a middle man right now. So I asked him for the code reference that would reflect the comment that was made and he couldn't give it to me. He said he would check with whomever made the comment originally and get back to me.