Temporary work in possible classified location

Status
Not open for further replies.
paulengr said:
So who is?

Comical engineers?

NFPA 499 among others never once uses phrases like “qualified”.

NEC only puts the purview outside THAT Code just as generation, transmission, and distribution fall under NESC.

NFPA 499 or the fuel gas Code or the burner codes don’t make that determination.
Click to expand...
Well, since NFPA 499 is for dusts, I don't think too many people would try to apply it to diesel anyway. Then again, maybe you would; you tried to apply gas and liquid concepts to dusts on another thread (post #9)

The responsibility for having proper documentation is always with the owner/operator. Who is qualified to create it may be up to debate.

BTW saying, "Oh, Oh, OH, it's diesel so it doesn't need to be classified.", just means you may have overlooked other relevant criteria, which is why we shouldn't try to do classifying on this forum. Only a person knowledgeable of the full installation should.
 
rbalex said:
Well, since NFPA 499 is for dusts, I don't think too many people would try to apply it to diesel anyway. Then again, maybe you would; you tried to apply gas and liquid concepts to dusts on another thread (post #9)

The responsibility for having proper documentation is always with the owner/operator. Who is qualified to create it may be up to debate.

BTW saying, "Oh, Oh, OH, it's diesel so it doesn't need to be classified.", just means you may have overlooked other relevant criteria, which is why we shouldn't try to do classifying on this forum. Only a person knowledgeable of the full installation should.
Click to expand...

Ok it’s NFPA 497, my mistake.

The fuel storage codes and burner/boiler codes generally cover most cases. 497 and 499 are the very generic codes that result in larger or more restrictive classifications if you skip the others. For instance the burner and boiler codes state that the piping and burners are not considered a hazardous location if the codes are followed, and the fuel storage codes are similar. So yes you have to look at the installation details and the associated codes. Unlike “electrical installations” NFPA does not have one giant “hazardous location” code.

However a very, very frequent mistake made by many process engineers is to jump straight past the process specific codes and jump right to the generic ones or to apply say the codes for gasoline to fuel oils.
 
rbalex said:
Well, since NFPA 499 is for dusts, I don't think too many people would try to apply it to diesel anyway. Then again, maybe you would; you tried to apply gas and liquid concepts to dusts on another thread (post #9)

The responsibility for having proper documentation is always with the owner/operator. Who is qualified to create it may be up to debate.

BTW saying, "Oh, Oh, OH, it's diesel so it doesn't need to be classified.", just means you may have overlooked other relevant criteria, which is why we shouldn't try to do classifying on this forum. Only a person knowledgeable of the full installation should.
Click to expand...
You are much more educated than I so I feel like a teenage stepping in the ring with Mike Tyson. It seems to me that the way I've seen you speak about classification that you feel any building being built needs to have a specialized person to classify or not classify every place in every building.

It comes off like some electricians saying a homeowner should not be allowed to change a receptacle because they don't own a torque screwdriver. Technically not NEC compliant (not using a torque screwdriver) but doubtful it will be a problem. I actually find it rather insulting that you believe an EC is not able to make the determination of whether or not there are enough conditions on site to warrant a classification. In the OP's site, if fuel oil transfer is the only thing going on in that area then the NEC tells us there is no need for classification. Taking your position to the extreme, I would need to call in a qualified person to determine if I have any "classified" areas on a room addition to my house.

I submit that since you are an expert in this field that you have succumb to " To the man who only has a hammer, everything he encounters begins to look like a nail" syndrom. I mean no disrespect or insults by my comments and acknowledge your superior education.
 
I’m not planning on printing this thread and using it in court. More just asking the question so I know what questions I should be asking. I agree that someone with a PE license should be the AHJ

thanks guys
 
oldsparky52 said:
You are much more educated than I so I feel like a teenage stepping in the ring with Mike Tyson. It seems to me that the way I've seen you speak about classification that you feel any building being built needs to have a specialized person to classify or not classify every place in every building.

It comes off like some electricians saying a homeowner should not be allowed to change a receptacle because they don't own a torque screwdriver. Technically not NEC compliant (not using a torque screwdriver) but doubtful it will be a problem. I actually find it rather insulting that you believe an EC is not able to make the determination of whether or not there are enough conditions on site to warrant a classification. In the OP's site, if fuel oil transfer is the only thing going on in that area then the NEC tells us there is no need for classification. Taking your position to the extreme, I would need to call in a qualified person to determine if I have any "classified" areas on a room addition to my house.

I submit that since you are an expert in this field that you have succumb to " To the man who only has a hammer, everything he encounters begins to look like a nail" syndrom. I mean no disrespect or insults by my comments and acknowledge your superior education.
Click to expand...
LLSolutions said:
I’m not planning on printing this thread and using it in court. More just asking the question so I know what questions I should be asking. I agree that someone with a PE license should be the AHJ
more
thanks guys
Click to expand...
Oldsparky52, no offense taken at all.

I have said many times before, classifying a location is neither rocket science nor trivial, but it should be done by someone who knows what they are doing. That doesn't necessarily mean a PE (or AHJ)

Back when NEC Zones were introduced (technically 1996, effectively 1999) the NEC did require a registered PE to classify for Zones. [1999 NEC Section 505-6(a)]. That is no longer an NEC requirement since well over half of the CMP at the time wouldn't be qualified (even those that were degreed engineers); however, some jurisdictions do require a PE stamp (not necessarily electrical) on for all electrical area classification documents.

The fact is, a location may be classified simply by experience alone as noted in NFPA 497, 499, or API RP500; e.g., NFPA 497[2017], Section 5.6.4. Those documents also contain fairly exhaustive material on the full process of classifying more complex systems. NOTE: there's more to properly classifying a location than checking a few diagrams or tables.

I do appreciate LLSolutions offer to not use this thread in court; however, despite this site's disclaimers to the contrary, a responding licensed PE could still be held liable for erroneous answers. (They should know better) Several codes of professional ethics also come into play.

All that said, my original response (Post #2) still stands: the classification, if any, should be properly documented, temporary or not.

EDIT ADD: The real OP question was if an overhead solution was permitted. The answer is yes in Class I, Division 2.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top