Filthy McNasty
Registered User
A "switch" was never the issue. Don't change the entire subject. A pullout disconnect needs the clearances. I'm shocked (no pun intended) at the lack of knowledge here.
I am happy to leave it up to you.A "switch" was never the issue. Don't change the entire subject. A pullout disconnect needs the clearances. I'm shocked (no pun intended) at the lack of knowledge here.
A "switch" was never the issue. Don't change the entire subject. A pullout disconnect needs the clearances. I'm shocked (no pun intended) at the lack of knowledge here.
Don't mislead the public, and people that want to learn the meaning of the codes.
That would be incorrect. The NEC code panelists have all stated that this type of equipment needs the required clearances and that the intent of the code is to have the clearances. What if a journeyman electrician or an HVAC guy wanted to put a tester on one of the terminals (examination, servicing)?
This "wordsmithing" of the section that you quote needs to stop, because you are giving readers an incorrect interpretation. That is not the intent of the NEC and that is incorrect application of the code language. Trust me.
Filthy,
I am glad you are passionate about your work and the code. Really I am, and we need people that are. I fail plenty of stuff for 110.26 every day, but I couldn't approve anything if the "unfused" disconnects needed working clearance. Do you have airhandlers in attics where you are? Or crawlspaces? Now, not only do I need to make them put in a catwalk (24") to the equipment and a 30" deep platform on the service side of equipment, but now a 30x36 platform to work on a disconnect? And BTW, cut that truss as you don't have 30" between them...
We don't all agree here which is at least part of the reason places like this exist and why we come here. But it should always remain discussion and not bashing. If you can get a formal interpretation out of NFPA, post it up, we would all love to see it. 2014 Handbook does specifically reference "switches" so maybe that is what they meant. In the meantime, keep fighting the good fight. Each AHJ is free to make their own call on this, kinda like "nearest the point of entrance" in 230.70(A)1
& = & = &
mfichter80 ( and others ),
Speaking from experience, if as an Inspector I were to
[ attempt ] to enforce every single aspect of the various
adopted Codes, then I would not be employed very long.
IMO, is the matter of "Working Clearances" an actual
& Legal code, ...Yes !.......It is the "Letter" of the Code.
Sometimes, I have had to decide which Code I would
try to enforce [ i.e. - which hill to die on so-to-speak ].
I did so out of self preservation........Maybe some of the
other Code Officials & Inspectors on here have done,
and are doing the same.........Not saying it was the right
thing to do [ i.e. - the Letter of the Code ], but I, and
others, DO have to pick and choose sometimes.
For me, it has been a judgment call numerous times...
Thanks !
& = & = &
I agree with Filthy on this. I'm a journeyman electrician, and this is what I was taught.
Once Ice challenged me on it the first time, I did start thinking about air handlers, and I'm pretty sure I have mounted disconnected on a 2x4 nailed to a rafter directly behind the the unit, and that would not meet working clearances. And like I said with my apartment closet example, I have seen inspectors compromise to some extent about meeting this code.
Honestly the way this is being picked apart, it looks like no one arguing the other side of this is an electrician.
To me this is just a matter of the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. There are always tight spaces and certain circumstances that inspectors will let slide. That doesn't mean that the code doesn't apply to those things.
This kind of arguing just means that in 5 years the wording will be changed. But the intent of the code would still be the same.
Sounds like very weak enforcement has become the norm in your neck of the woods.
110.26 Spaces About Electrical Equipment. Access and
working space shall be provided and maintained about all
electrical equipment to permit ready and safe operation and
maintenance of such equipment.
(A) Working Space. Working space for equipment
operating at 600 volts, nominal, or less to ground and likely
to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or
maintenance while energized shall comply with the
dimensions of 110.26(A)(1), (A)(2), and (A)(3) or as
required or permitted elsewhere in this Code.
Equipment. A general term, including fittings, devices,
appliances, luminaires, apparatus, machinery, and the like
used as a part of, or in connection with, an electrical
installation.
There it is...black and white...no mistaking what is meant. Any and all equipment requires working space. Equipment per the NEC is everything right down to fittings. So your literal, black and white Code is screwed up. A thinking man looks at that and says, "Hm that has problems...perhaps a line is required between what equipment deserves such space and the rest of it". My jurisdiction, which Trumps electricians, has decided that a disconnect with no overcurrent protection didn't make the cut.
Electrical work is inherently dangerous. Protection is built into the code. It has to be so in order to protect the lame idiots that produce the sloppy work that I have shown here for years. But guess what....if you can't probe a disconnect in tight quarters you should have been a plumber.
You bloviaters ranting about educating the public or calling me silly are arrogant. Shirley you are done learning.
So filthy your saying that We could never allow any any equipment or switches in attics or crawl spaces without the required 6.5' head room.
The handbook is not code...Just like commentary...