ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Potseal 11
Recent Posts
Dimmable LED 2x4 lay in fixtures
by Potseal. 04/23/17 07:18 PM
Old decora style outlets
by Lostazhell. 04/22/17 07:59 PM
Permit Snafus...AHJs and Contractors Jump in
by gfretwell. 04/22/17 01:11 PM
How do you find a good employee?
by HotLine1. 04/22/17 10:44 AM
Electrode boilers question
by SteveFehr. 04/21/17 08:32 AM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
234,654 Are you busy
169,347 Re: Forum
162,687 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 75 guests, and 8 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
#103024 - 03/08/02 06:07 PM Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC  
Joe Tedesco  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Boston, Massachusetts USA
[Linked Image]

http://www.bussmann.com/library/docs/430.102%20Disconnecting%20Means%20Location.pdf


[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 08-10-2002).]


Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#103025 - 03/08/02 08:43 PM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC  
resqcapt19  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
IL
Joe,
While it is correct that the disconnecting means is required by the code to have a "permanently" installed locking device, if the equipment doesn't have such a device the service person is still permitted to install his or her own temporary device as a lockout. There are a number of devices on the market that can be installed on breaker boxes to provide the required permanent lockout means. Here ia a link to one such product: http://multimedia.mmm.com/mws/media...mp;tC9&MC9&&&HcKkbzzzzY-

Would you consider the devices that snap onto the breaker and are held in place by the panel cover a "permanent" means?
Don(resqcapt19)


Don(resqcapt19)

#103026 - 03/08/02 08:48 PM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC  
Joe Tedesco  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Boston, Massachusetts USA
Don:

You raise a good question, and the pen should be put to the paper for a 2005 proposal.

None of the items you describe here are really "permanent" -- so that will be the question -- can they still be used?


Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

#103027 - 03/15/02 12:31 AM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC  
John Steinke  Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 518
Reno,Nv., USA
I really hat it when manufacturers try to use/abuse the code to hawk their latest wares. If Bussman thinks that everybody is going to replace all their fuse boxes, motor disconnects, etc., they must have caught that Mississippi Mosquito virus!
NEC doesn't cover or address temporary or maintenance lockouts- that's a matter for OSHA. OSHA say USE THEM.
It should also be noted that new codes apply only to new installs- so older enclosures, even ones that lack padlock hasps, are still compliant (code at time of install applies)
We've come a long way in ten years; it wasn't so long ago that there were no lock-out devices for fuses and circuit breakers.
I admit to violating OSHA rules on a regular basis. For example, I have purchased my own, rather than relying on my employer to provide an adequate assortment. In doing so, I am violating OSHA rules, which forbid this. So cite me! I also use my toolbox lock for lock-out purposes- another violation! I will do whatever is necessary to protect myself, even if the rules say "no."
I have also used zip-ties to secure lock-out devices. Something about a brass padlock swinging around in a hot box, or somebody banging into a swinging door (that the lock keeps from closing) strikes me as silly.


#103028 - 03/15/02 07:51 PM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC  
electure  Offline


Member
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,259
Fullerton, CA USA
The one on the bottom left of the "Unpermissable" ones is a good one.
Locks out everything from a snap switch to a big breaker. I guess I've got to throw it away?


#103029 - 03/15/02 09:02 PM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC  
resqcapt19  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
IL
John,
John,
Quote
NEC doesn't cover or address temporary or maintenance lockouts- that's a matter for OSHA. OSHA say USE THEM.

When a new installation is made for a motor circuit, the NEC in 430.102 requires that a permanent lockout device be provided as part of the equipment. It is a code violation to install a motor circuit disconnect that can only be locked out by the use of a temporary device. Temporary lockouts will still be required for existing disconnects and non-motor disconnects. Lock out/ tag out is a very important safety issue and we need to follow the rules.
Don(resqcapt19)


Don(resqcapt19)

#103030 - 03/16/02 10:34 PM Re: Lockout Requirements Changed in 2002 NEC  
harold endean  Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
Boonton, NJ
Joe,

Most people don't realize how much this code will enforce. Doesn't this code mean that any well drilled in the front (back) lawn also needs a disconnect outside and within 50' and insight of the well head? How about ejector pumps? attic fans? any motor? etc? This can be far reaching if you think about it.

Harold



Member Spotlight
Scott35
Scott35
Anaheim, CA. USA
Posts: 2,707
Joined: October 2000
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.013s Queries: 14 (0.003s) Memory: 0.7853 MB (Peak: 0.9401 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-04-24 21:09:23 UTC