Replacement breaker box in closet

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MichaelJ

Member
Location
Georgia
Nec 240.24(d) states that overcurrent devices are not to be placed in clothes closets . Is there any exceptions to allow replacing a old fuse box with a new breaker panel and leave it in a closet? Thanks
 
paul said:
I would contact the AHJ and see what they have to say about it.
Click to expand...

The Authority Having Jurisdiction (typically building or electrical official) is not empowered to waive rules, but rather bound by duty to enforce rules such as the NEC which might have been adopted by the regulations promulgated by the elected officials within a given community. Depending on a "home-rule" clause and the actual language adopted, of course, a community may waive certain requirements by special law (in NY state a More Restrictive Legal Standard can be applied for thru the Department of State) or pass a variance at a local level (in NYS, a variance must be passed at the state level). Hard to imagine a petitioner coming to a state variance board of review for permission to put overcurrent protective devices within a clothes closet in violation of 240.24(D). :smile:
 
UAC Section 106: Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of the technical codes, the building official may grant modifications for individual cases. The building official shall first find that a special individual reason makes the strict letter of the technical code impractical and the modification is in comformity with the intent and purpose of the technical code, and that such modification does not lessen health, life, safety and firesafety requirements or any degree of structural integrity. The details of actions granting modifications shall be recorded and entered in the files of the conde enforcement agency.

So can the AHJ over ride the code? Yes

Will they do it in this case? My guess is no.
 
cowboyjwc said:
UAC Section 106: Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of the technical codes, the building official may grant modifications for individual cases. The building official shall first find that a special individual reason makes the strict letter of the technical code impractical and the modification is in comformity with the intent and purpose of the technical code, and that such modification does not lessen health, life, safety and firesafety requirements or any degree of structural integrity. The details of actions granting modifications shall be recorded and entered in the files of the conde enforcement agency.

So can the AHJ over ride the code? Yes

Will they do it in this case? My guess is no.
Click to expand...

I would think that any reasoning that would find in favor of allowing ocpd's in the clothes closet would be suspect and it would be interesting to read the petioner's statement asking, or the building official's interpretation for rationalizing relief from 240.4(D). Unless, of course, the point is made about "large" closets in which there is no close proximity to the ocpd's...but that's probably another thread...:smile:
 
I said they probably wouldn't get it......firesafety......and I agree with you 100%.

But I always like to hear their sad stories and let them think we're going to apporove it......just kidding.
 
MichaelJ said:
Nec 240.24(d) states that overcurrent devices are not to be placed in clothes closets . Is there any exceptions to allow replacing a old fuse box with a new breaker panel and leave it in a closet? Thanks
Click to expand...
By my estimation, I would say that replacing with a new panelboard is "new work" and must conform to the electrical code. Repairing would be a different scenario. :smile:
 
Jim W in Tampa said:
Whats better,leave it as is or fix that is slightly better but not legal?
Click to expand...
I'll add a third part to your question. What's better: 1. Leave it as is; 2. Fix it so that it's slightly better but not legal; or 3. Make it code compliant.
Answer: #3 :smile:
 
wbalsam1 said:
I'll add a third part to your question. What's better: 1. Leave it as is; 2. Fix it so that it's slightly better but not legal; or 3. Make it code compliant.
Answer: #3 :smile:
Click to expand...

And if the owner can't afford number 3 then we would rather he keep #1 ?
 
Jim W in Tampa said:
And if the owner can't afford number 3 then we would rather he keep #1 ?
Click to expand...

Economic hardship is always a tough one to answer. A stock, but unreasonable answer often goes like this: "Have the applicant apply for a waiver, get a variance, etc." This isn't a good answer to someone who doesn't have the money or time to go thru these types of hoops. It's a tough question.

From my perspective as an inspector with a duty to protect people from the hazards that arise from the improper use or installations of electricity, I must err on the side of good judgement and insulate myself and my company from wrongful death suits, negligent homicide, negligence, fraudulent inspections, and a host of other concerns, so it goes without saying that I would require the job to comply, even knowing that I am forcing people to spend money towards code compliance that might not seem on the face of it to be readily justifiable. :smile: Even though I know where you're coming from, my answer is still #3. :)
 
o.c.d. in closet

o.c.d. in closet

Jim W in Tampa said:
Whats better,leave it as is or fix that is slightly better but not legal?
Click to expand...
We had a similar situation, large room,off of the bedroom, but it was just for shoes, Hummmmmm, No, It walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck, Hummm its probably a duck. No panel in the closet.
 
I agree that #3 is the right way but it will likely remain as is.Sad part is that if it burns the insurance company will likely pay to bring it up to code.Have seen it happen.They actually got a new service because of a small fire.
 
Jim
It is nice to have a heart, but it is not always so good for the one who has the heart.

As you can see, once having been an inspector, it is not easy to say..."okay just this time" ...because it may come back and bite the inspector for permitting a violation for any reason.
Also, once one starts to give one person consideration for whatever, it is almost impossible to not start to give others some kind of consideration and then...well, why even have an inspector.
 
"Yes sir we can fix it. Not a problem. We'll make it right if it costs every dime you have".

That's a joke I use from time to time with contractors that have a sense of humor, but the sad thing is it's not always a joke. Sometimes you just can't make it right no matter what.

This city takes a very agressive approch to code compliance right now and other cities are looking at our program. Why do we do it? Because someone died in a fire. Why did they die in a fire? Because a few years back we took an agressive approch and were told to knock it off because the "powers that be" were recieving to many complaints about our program.

Tear it out if you have to. Fix it if you can, but it will be to code.
 
Pierre C Belarge said:
Jim

As you can see, once having been an inspector, it is not easy to say..."okay just this time" ...because it may come back and bite the inspector for permitting a violation for any reason.
Also, once one starts to give one person consideration for whatever, it is almost impossible to not start to give others some kind of consideration and then...well, why even have an inspector.
Click to expand...
its not that he is allowing a violation, as one post says, repairs are allowed to go back as origanally installed, but if the fuse box is going to be replaced because " i need more breaker space" that is a totaly differant situation. At least that is the way it is in the area where we work.
 
Jim W in Tampa said:
............Sad part is that if it burns the insurance company will likely pay to bring it up to code............
Click to expand...

It's the inspector's job to assure a safe, code compliant installation; it's the insurance company's job to settle fairly in accordance with the terms of the policy. How often we read of failures in both areas. :smile:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top