Code question: With my "contractor" hat on: All jurisdictions in our area have required a switch and light, in addition to the GFI at rooftop HVAC units in commercial applications. We have abided with this for years, no questions asked.
With my "inspector" hat on: Had an inspection, chain hotel, new construction; checked rooftop HVAC units, all was well except "no switch and light".
I can't seem to find the Article in the '99 NEC (NJ still stuck in '99). Anybody have a clue; is it in BOCA?? Who enforces it in your areas.
Check under BOCA mechanical code book. I don't have one here at home but I have one in the office. Also it may be a gas company rule. They want the lights there so that when they have to go up there in the middle of the night to relight a pilot light, they just want to see where to go. The worst part is that they leave the lights on and so that the next time they go up there the bulbs are all burnt out.
Re: Code Help Please#81839 09/24/0209:58 PM09/24/0209:58 PM
NEC 110.26(D) requires illumination for all working spaces about service equipment, switchboards, panelboards, or motor control centers installed indoors.
I have also questioned the need for the work light and agree that one should be installed near the equipment, but it seems that it is not mandatory, however if push comes to a shove the inspector could use 110.3(A)(8)...
We could cite OSHA's rule? calling for a certain amout of footcandles 10? at equipment.
Where is the OSHA man?
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
Re: Code Help Please#81840 09/25/0208:40 AM09/25/0208:40 AM
110.3 Examination, Identification, Installation, and Use of Equipment. (A) Examination. In judging equipment, considerations such as the following shall be evaluated: 8) Other factors that contribute to the practical safeguarding of persons using or likely to come in contact with the equipment
Joe I admit to being quarrelsome on this issue of the limits of inspectors authority. I have to ask do you really think that the power to judge EQUIPMENT for suitability for its intended use gives the inspector the latitude to require the installation of additional outlets. Why does the code enumerate so many required outlets if the intent is to have the inspector require whatever he/she thinks is needed. I am coming to believe that all inspectors need a course in administrative law. Such training would help inspectors to come to understand that the CMP has already written the requirements into the document and the law does not give inspectors the power to use the police authority of the state to impose their personal versions of best practice. The entire section you have referred to is intended to allow the inspector to judge the suitability of the equipment and materials that are used in constructing the installation as required by the codes existing language. If the code does not require a lighting outlet then you cannot force it's installation. What I believe paragraph eight is intended to cover is the installation of items like a porcelain keyless fixture in an area with a low overhead. Paragraph eight would allow the inspector to find the fixture unsuitable for that use do to the exposure to pedestrian traffic so you could turn down the installation as installed. You could not the specify the fixture they must use. They could relocate the fixture, substitute an impact resistant luminaire, or install suitable guarding of the porcelain socket. -- Tom
"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous for general use" Thomas Alva Edison
Re: Code Help Please#81841 09/26/0205:35 PM09/26/0205:35 PM