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

Lack of Maintenance and Unqualified Persons—Their Impact on Electrical Installations

Proper maintenance of electrical installations is a key component of ongoing compliance with the NEC.

Modifications to a premises wiring system by unqualified personnel may also impact an initially compliant installation.

Please give me your thoughts so that I can include them in my presentation on these subjects.

Supply all information necessary for credits.

Thanks!

Joe,
The maintenance and repair of existing electrical systems does not appear to be within the scope of the NEC. The scope statement in 90.2(A) seems to indicate that the code only applies to new installations or the installation of new equipment in existing facilities. NFPA 70B covers the preventive maintenance for industrial type electrical systems and equipment. Maybe we need a standard like that for other occupancies.
Don

Don:

See 90.1(B) for ...... "proper maintenance, etc." ........, the term "maintenance" also appears many times throughout the code .. ?

The term "maintenance" was also included in the new Article 80 in many sections as well ... so how can you can say:


The NEC covers a few situations were the term "existing" is considered.

Joe,
90.1(B) actually reinforces my point that the code does not cover maintenance.
If the code does cover maintenance, then why does the wording say that compliance with the NEC when combined with proper maintenance will result in a safe installation?
As far as Article 80 goes, how many places have adopted or would be permitted to adopt that article? In Illinois, I see no way that Article 80 can be adopted because most of the subject matter therein is covered by state law. Local units of government cannot supercede the state laws.
Don

Joe,
It apears that you have changed your position on this issue. Below are a couple of posts from from another thread . Look at your response to me.

resqcapt19 Moderator posted 12-10-2003 1:49 PM
Joe,
I don't think that the correction of problems with the electrical system that occur after the installation of the system are within the scope of the NEC.

quote:
_____

(A) Covered. This Code covers the installation of electric conductors, electric equipment, signaling and communications conductors and equipment, and fiber optic cables and raceways for the following:
_____

It appears that once the installation is complete, the NEC no longer has any jurisdiction over the electrical system. Maybe that is what the panel means when they said that the NEC "doesn't cover this type of wiring".
In the first picture in this thread, it is clear that some parts of the installation were not in compliance with the NEC and should have been red tagged at the time the installation was made.
Don


Joe Tedesco Member posted 12-10-2003 03:41 PM

Don:

I agree, and in the next 2008 Cycle I think that the rule should read as follows:

quote:
_____

(A) Covered. This Code covers the installation and use of electric conductors, electric equipment, signaling and communications conductors and equipment, and fiber optic cables and raceways for the following:
_____

Don:

I suggested that the words "and use" be added to the rule you show.

What does that have to do with the issues surrounding the maintenance of equipment (see Article 100 Definition)? You still have not looked further in the code.

When I searched for that term, it appeared with many "hits" on my CD Version of the 2002 NEC.

You mean to say that the recent installation of switchgear, or cable trays, etc., don't need periodic maintenance on a 6 month or yearly basis?

I am aware of some who are charged with that responsibility in an industrial occupancy, and I cannot imagine anyone who doesn't follow up and "maintain" their equipment?

I found a song titled:

"Maintenance Crisis Song" for everyone to hear! Some very true words, and it's the Bottom Line that is the culprit!
http://www.bin95.com/Download/Maintenance%20Crisis%20Song.mp3

Joe,
First, you said in your post in the previous thread that you agreed with my comment and that the code should be changed to require such maintenance. If the code already requires electrical maintenance, why would you suggest a wording change?
Yes, the word "maintenance does appear in the NEC over 150 times, however I find no NEC rules that require the electrical system to be maintained. Where the word "maintenance" appears it is in rules that are designed to allow maintenance to be performed in a safe manner, or to allow access to the equipment, but these rules in no way require that such maintenance take place.
No, I don't mean to say that periodic maintenance of electrical systems is not needed, I just say that the NEC does not require such activity.
Again, I agree with that statement, but I'm just not aware of any NEC rule that requires this. If you have a specific rule in mind, please cite it for me, I may have missed something.
Don

Don:

For any rule in the NEC where the term "maintenance" is used in a sentence where the word "SHALL" also appears, should not be questioned.

90.5 gives the specifics.

I was advised by NFPA that the title of my presentation in Salt Lake City in May would be changed to what you see above in my very first post. I have modified my presentation accordingly.

Look here for the specifics.
http://www.nfpa.org/ProfessionalDev/necforum/NECtopics/nectopics.asp#sun

I really posted the message to see if anyone want to write a short story to be considered.

I expect that that will happen here in the day to follow.

Are you going to the NFPA annual meeting to vote?

Joe
I'm not a member of the NFPA.
Please cite a code rule that says "you shall maintain your electrical system". I'm not aware of any.
Don

Just what is maintenance? changing a fuse, or the whole disconnect?

the former rates some safety concerns all fine & well...

the latter probably constitues half the trades dilemas. there's a story behind every one of your violation pix right Joe?

here's an idea~
how's an adoption/enforcement spread sheet, all applicable states X (say the last) 20 years

factor % of taxpayer $$$ , adjust for inflation, calc construction growth per capita, divide by incident...

should paint a good pix for any 'state of the maintenance' addy

good luck Joe
~Steve (no violation left behind) aka sparky~

[This message has been edited by sparky (edited 01-05-2004).]