I'd like to see the following changes in the NEC:

1) I'd like to see 410.4C delete the word "commercial," and apply to all kitchen range hood lights;

2) I'd like to see 240.50, 51 reworded to say "overcurent protective device," rather than "fuses," as there are Edison-base circuit breakers out there;

3) I would like to see 408.4 edited to remove the requirements that circuits (in panels) be identified "in a circuit directory." This is in conflict with the first sentence, which specifies that such identification be "clear, evident, and specific."
"Directories" provided rarely contain sufficient space, they are often mounted in a position that is difficult to read, and they often have an arrangement that bears no relation to the arrangement of breakers in the panel. I assert that placing a lable directly next to, or even atop, the breaker provides a very clear way of identifying a circuit; in the case of a lable on the breaker, such identification is visible even when the cover is removed- and remains accurate as breakers are re-arranged.

Reno, I note that the existing language calls for "a" circuit directory, not "the manufacturer-provided" circuit directory. You're free to ignore the one provided by the mfg and make your own. Since said directory is permitted to be on the face of a panelboard, I don't see that there's any legal impediment to placing a label "directly next to" each breaker. (On top of the breaker might be a problem, though.)

(Edited to add: I just saw your other post. It sounds like the code guys agree with me. )

[This message has been edited by SolarPowered (edited 07-20-2006).]