Panelboards in Bedrooms

[roger]

As the definition of outlet in 2005 code would include a panel as an outlet.

I think you need to read the definition of "Device" which Don pointed out in post # 35.

Roger

 

[iaov]

Yeah, and the 9 or 10 hours you're in your home, you're actually alert because you can't tear yourself away from the Mike Holt Forum and go to bed....so this leaves only an hour or two at the most that you'd be sleeping (at the computer, of course) so the only AFCI protected thing in the house should be the computer.

Now someone is making sense!!

 

[RHJohnson]

Maybe a bedroom isn't the safest place in the house. Some years back, in the middle of winter, a large and dead tamarack tree fell and slid down the mountain. This happened in the middle of the night, and it tore through the outside bedroom wall before stopping. It just missed the couple sleeping! When it got light the HO climbed up the mountain following the skid trail for about 1/4 mile before giving up due to the steep slope and snow. I wish I had the p[icture, it did make front page in the local news. The log was almost 2' diamenter and 40' long (some had broke off). Whatever can happen does happen.

 

[TOOL_5150]

I disagree. In the 24-plexes at the project I am working at, all the panels are located on interior walls. If I were choosing placement, I would favor interior walls so as to not interfere with insulation in the exterior walls.

The main reason I'd pick a bedroom wall is because the only walls left are in the living room (highly visible), bathroom (illegal), laundry (illegal - 110.26), and bedroom closet (illegal).

I dont have the 2008... can someone explain why laundry is illegal?

~Matt

 

[Pierre C Belarge]

I dont have the 2008... can someone explain why laundry is illegal?

~Matt

He referenced 110.26, most likely he has clearance issues in the laundry room.

 

[dreamsville]

Here in Michigan there are a lot of basements, and that's where the panel is usually located. And in front of a lot of the panels you will see clothes hanging on pipes rigged to the ceiling, installed water softeners, washers and dryers and laundry tubs etc... And my favorite is water lines running directly above the panel. This includes fresh water and drain. :smile:

And inside the basement panels of the old houses; bee/wasp nests, mouse nests, dead mice, spiders and enough cobwebs to choke a mule. Gotta love it, keeps me busy.

 

[celtic]

Here in Michigan there are a lot of basements, and that's where the panel is usually located. And in front of a lot of the panels you will see clothes hanging on pipes rigged to the ceiling, installed water softeners, washers and dryers and laundry tubs etc...

None of which are a violation of the NEC.


If the items are installed after the panel was installed

And my favorite is water lines running directly above the panel. This includes fresh water and drain. :smile:

110.26(F)(1)(a)

 

[mxslick]

I think you need to read the definition of "Device" which Don pointed out in post # 35.

Roger

When is a panel an outlet?

Whenever we discuss safety issues.

Seriously, I have to say one of the things I love about being on this forum is getting the big picture and all the different viewpoints on such "controversial" subjects as this one and my all-time favorite, MWBC's.

To recap my position:

Panelboards in bed rooms are a bad idea IMHO, simply because the possibility of violent failure, although rare, does exist;

And that such a failure, if it were to occur while occupants are sleeping, carries a high risk of serious injury or death due to smoke, flames or flying panel covers;

That since most such failures are usually caused by even more rare accidents (like the primary contact in the other thread) it means that in no way do I advocate a change to the NEC banning them in bedrooms;

In any project I have design influence over I would lobby strongly to have the panel placed elsewhere;

In any other project, if the panel is placed in the bedroom, so be it. I will make sure it is wired to the highest possible standard to take a poor workmanship failure mode out of the loop;

I would not buy or rent a property where I would have to sleep in the same room with a panel.

As I'd mentioned earlier, in my own apt if the panel were to be located upstairs in the unit it would HAVE to be placed in one of the bedrooms. Thus when I changed mine out it stayed in the doghouse. At the time, copper prices were not that bad so it would have been a very modest increase in cost to run a feeder up to the panel as opposed to running the six branch circuits instead.

 

[iwire]

And that such a failure, if it were to occur while occupants are sleeping, carries a high risk of serious injury or death due to smoke, flames or flying panel covers;

Or it wakes them up immediately and they get out.

You just can't tell. :smile:

 

[riggenbw]

I've only seen one in my 38 years. I personally would never put one in a
bedroom, let alone behind a door.

 

[al hildenbrand]

I think you need to read the definition of "Device" which Don pointed out in post # 35.

The Article 100 definition of "Device" is ambiguous.

A receptacle is a device.

A switch is a device.

Saying that a "panel is a device" is just as inconclusive with respect to whether an Outlet (Art. 100 Definition) is present.

 

[raider1]

I've only seen one in my 38 years. I personally would never put one in a
bedroom, let alone behind a door.

I don't understand the aversion to placing a panel behind a door. IMO locating a panel behind the swing of a door almost always guarantees that the working space remains free and clear of stored items.

Chris

 

[roger]

The Article 100 definition of "Device" is ambiguous.

A receptacle is a device.

A switch is a device.

Saying that a "panel is a device" is just as inconclusive with respect to whether an Outlet (Art. 100 Definition) is present.

A wire nut is also a device, so your point is? The bottom line is the only circuits in this panel located in a bedroom that would need AFCI protection are the circuits feeding the bedroom.

Remember, I could have a machine shop in a bedroom (years ago as a bachelor I would actually work on my FLH in my bedroom so it's not that far fetched) with 30 amp 120 volt circuits, 240 volt welding outlets, 240 volt lathes, etc... with no AFCI protection so a panel is not a big deal.

BTW, "Ambiguous" is not in article 100. :wink:

Roger

 

[roger]

I've only seen one in my 38 years. I personally would never put one in a
bedroom, let alone behind a door.

Why not?

Roger

 

[al hildenbrand]

Roger,
Since you missed the point:
Post #18

That was an excelent thought. Lets take it one step further. Would a panel be considered an outlet. Would it have to be all on arcfault. Even the feeder!

Post #35

A panel is a device, not an outlet.

Post #58

As the definition of outlet in 2005 code would include a panel as an outlet. 210.12(b) would take effect. You would have to arcfault everything in that panel.

Post #61

I think you need to read the definition of "Device" which Don pointed out in post #35

Post #70

The Article 100 definition of "Device" is ambiguous.
A receptacle is a device.
A switch is a device.
Saying that a "panel is a device" is just as inconclusive with respect to whether an Outlet (Art. 100 Definition) is present.

Roger, you further make my "point" by stating that a "wirenut is a device".

Whether an Outlet is present in a panel cannot be dismissed by stating that the "panel is a device". The presence, or absence, of a Device has no bearing upon the presence of an Outlet.

 

[charlie]

. . . the NFPA decided that's where you should start AFCiing circuits. . .

The NFPA is the owner of the copyright and is the publisher of the NEC. You are the writer of the NEC through proposals that are acted on by panel members. Any of you could be a panel member through whatever organization you are involved in (I represent EEI). One of my good friends is Jim Dollard, with the IBEW, is on the panel with me. Some of you are involved with ABC while others are involved with IEC or the IAEI.

By the way, there were no proposals to panel 10 to prohibit overcurrent devices in the bedroom for the 2011 cycle.

 

[roger]

Al, actually you're missing the point, "device" is not mentioned in 210.12 however "outlet" is, read all of article 100 for what specific devices are considered "outlets", that is all you would need to worry about.

BTW, I didnt mean to make you go back and read the whole thread for those posts which don't change what an "outlet" is.

Roger

 

[jumper]

I think he means this:

480 how did you get into my house?:grin: lucy got some splaining to do.

 

[al hildenbrand]

I didnt mean to make you go back and read the whole thread for those posts which don't change what an "outlet" is.

Not a problem. I'd just read through the thread, as I've been "away" for awhile, and I had the give and take fresh in my mind.

Al, actually you're missing the point, "device" is not mentioned in 210.12 however "outlet" is,

No, as you see in the Quoted give and take I posted in #75, above, "Outlet" is brought up first, and then dismissed by saying that "a panel is a device, not an outlet". That's wrong. "Device" has nothing to do with whether an Outlet is present or not.

read all of article 100 for what specific devices are considered "outlets", that is all you would need to worry about.

While I agree that there are Devices considered "outlets" in Article 100, Outlets are not exclusive to Devices. The simplest: a soldered splice between branch circuit conductors and the conductors of a piece of Utilization Equipment. This soldered splice is an Outlet, yet there is no device present.

 

[raider1]

This soldered splice is an Outlet, yet there is no device present.

A piece of wire is a device.

Chris