760.121(B) Branch Circuit.
The branch circuit supplying the fire alarm equipment(s) shall supply no other loads. The location of the branch-circuit overcurrent protective device shall be permanently identified at the fire alarm control unit. The circuit disconnecting means shall have red identification, shall be accessible only to qualified personnel, and shall be identified as “FIRE ALARM CIRCUIT.” The red identification shall not damage the overcurrent protective devices or obscure the manufacturer’s markings. This branch circuit shall not be supplied through ground-fault circuit interrupters or arc-fault circuit interrupters. The fire alarm branch-circuit disconnecting means shall be permitted to be secured in the “on” position.
10.6.5.2.5
The circuit disconnecting means shall be accessible only to authorized personnel.
10.6.5.4 Circuit Breaker Lock.
Where a circuit breaker is the disconnecting means, an approved breaker locking device shall be installed.
Painted lock-off device.
Section 240.83(A) requires the breaker to be marked with their ampere rating in a manner that is durable and visible after installation.
Paint can interfere with lock-out operations.
Ampacity and manufacture not plainly visible.
Refer to a licensed electrical contractor for posable replacement.
Just my 2 cents.
I know this isn’t the question being asked, but just to clarify on its purpose:
The lock prevents someone from turning off the breaker without removing the device. This prevents an “unintentional” shut off of the fire alarm system. The lock does not prevent the breaker from tripping during an overcurrent situation.
Yeah, I mean they have “breakers” designed simply as taps that do not have overcurrent protection. You would use that if you want to tap off the bus without overcurrent protection.
As long as the lock-on device is a listed device it is permitted and would be the code complaint way to do it. The paint wouldn’t change the functionality of the CB unless it somehow got inside of the circuit breaker.
