ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues Lack of Maintenance and Unqualified Persons—Their Impact on Electrical Installations

Don:

Most all listed or labeled equipment comes with instructions that are required to be followed, and include detailed guidelines to keep the products operational.

I see where the rules in 110.3(A) and (B) apply.

What if there was a switch that was defective like this one?



Sparky:

Please clarify what you are trying to say. We find it very difficult to understand you!

Joe,
Only instructions that are part of the listing and labeling are required to be complied with by 110.3(B). If all manufacturer's instructions were required to be followed, then there would be no code compliant use for "classified" breakers. I have rarely seen "maintenance instructions" as part of the listing and labeling information. Yes, they are almost always included in the manufacturer's instructions, but not in the listing and labeling, and yes these maintenance rules should be followed, but I still see no NEC rule that requires this.
The switch in your last post certainly should be repaired or replaced, but it has already been installed, and was apparently in compliance at the time of installation. At this point, unless it is being replaced, it is outside the scope of the NEC.
Don

Each State or Town adopts "model" codes, such as the NEC, as they see fit to be law. Included in each building code are the requirements where these model codes are to be referenced. Invariably, the building code is adopted for building, i.e. new construction and remodeling. The existing buildings section of building codes deal with remodeling concerns. The fire codes are adopted, side by side, with the building codes. Fire codes address the maintaince issues. Take a look at NFPA 101, for the maintenance of buildings. Talk to your fire marshal with your concerns, it is his job to inspect the buildings in your town for proper maintenance.

This issue opens up a whole can of worms. If we assume maintenance is required by the NEC, who is responsible for this maintenance in one and two family dwellings? The original installer? The current homeowner? In my area the only time it comes up is in the sale of a home and then the seller is responsible for systems to be compliant to a certain extent. And that is by the authority of the lending institution, not the building inspector or fire marshall.

Don:

I think we may begin to see our way towards a clearer understanding of the issues we have been discussing here. I (we) can thank some of my colleagues for their opinions quoted below.

This thread can remain here, and we can continue to discuss the subject.



I concede, Joe

[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 01-06-2004).]

Vermont, in an amazing moment of lucidity, instituted the TQP (technically qualified person) certification for fire alarm systems.

a sticker is applied to the system panel, much like a vehicle inspectons

you wouldn't believe the boo-boo's we found the first few years, entire zones in schools nfg, on & on...i would wager 20%-30% of the states fire alarm systems to have had major problems.

~sigh~
the latter is an example of Lack of Maintenance

Your photo's are an example of Unqualified Persons, are they not?

Enforcement (or rather lack of it) is the Impact on both

yrs
~S~

sparky:

OK - Right On!!

Most of the pictures I capture and post in the violations area here, and in many other locations, show where the lack of maintenance, repair, replacement (or whatever you want to call it), where the equipment was damaged, or otherwise just old and corroded, rusty, ripped out, and with thieving hands constantly tampering with the stuff people who live in the street!

Unqualified, you bet, lots of the stuff is put in by those who are without any clue whatsoever!

Yes, there are many persons who know nothing about the code, or installation practices who are often responsible for work that can be criticized.

I just returned from shopping in the two "big box stores" because I had to buy something to finish up a "honey do" list.

Whenever I do go into those stores, I always walk down the aisles where the electrical equipment can be found. Today, I stopped behind a person who was holding two device boxes, one of metal and the other of nonmetallic material. He also had a roll of metallic cable, looked like "BX" in his cart.

He said to his partner, I think that I will buy the nonmetallic boxes because they are not as expensive as the metal boxes, and I won't need any connectors.

I said nothing (shook my head) and moved on to the checkout counter!

Joe

Joe,

In NJ as an AHJ I am only allowed to look at new work that is installed under the NEC as adopted by my state. In my case the state of NJ does not adopt the NEC in it's entire condition. The remove sec. 80 of the NEC and they remove section 210.12 that requires arc-fault. (That is a whole other discussion.) I am not allowed to walk into an existing building and cite code violations for things that I see. (That is the job of the Fire Prevention people.) They come in once or twice a year for inspections and they are suppose to cite those violations. YET, Fire prevention people do not enter 1 and 2 family dwellings.(or condo units.)

i might be sorry i bring it up here ....

i've noticed quite a few poco updates, x-formers are closer , and of a higher kva

existing services come to mind....

concerning the arc flash calc, which is done in part with via the poco's Xformer kva and impedance , the AIC then changes....

~S~

More important than the arc flash calculation is the withstand rating of the premise electrical system. As transformers are located closer and upsized only a truly sharp electrician will recognize the hazard that may be created by a newly inadequate withstand rating of the previously installed premise wiring system. I doubt that the idea ever crosses the power utilities collective mind to check for the withstand of installed equipment when they effectively increase the fault current that the served premises wiring systems will be subjected to.
--
Tom Horne