III. Enclosures
240.30 General.
(A) Protection from Physical Damage. Overcurrent devices shall be protected from physical damage by one of the following:
(1) Installation in enclosures, cabinets, cutout boxes, or equipment assemblies
(2) Mounting on open-type switchboards, panelboards, or control boards that are in rooms or enclosures free from dampness and easily ignitible material and are accessible only to qualified personnel
(B) Operating Handle. The operating handle of a circuit breaker shall be permitted to be accessible without opening a door or cover.
230.92 Locked Service Overcurrent Devices.
Where the service overcurrent devices are locked or sealed or are not readily accessible to the occupant, branch-circuit overcurrent devices shall be installed on the load side, shall be mounted in a readily accessible location, and shall be of lower ampere rating than the service overcurrent device.
Man…we are not debating the door…lol…not sure where that started…we are speaking access to the OCPD’s…not if their needs to be a hinged door on the panel…
BUT I have never seen a panel with NO frontal access to the OCPD’s…and no load side protection which is not stated here.
Look I have been doing this for 18 years…lol…and NEC consultant for many of that…I am aware of the enclosure issue…but in this SPECIFIC example I do not see the allowance here…
It is safe to say…NO you cant have a “BLANK” front cover sealing the OCPD’s inside based on the information given…we dont know if their are any Branch OCPD’s anywhere…the question was can the panel have a front cover with no access in it…I believe…heck now I am confused…lol
I dont think in this application it is allowed based on what I am reading from the person posting this…
OK…lets re-examine what is being asked here…cool…this is fun…ok…
“There was no door cover present, the woman who lives in the house stated no children live there, the gentleman stated that the panel is not recessed and no cover needs to be present, is this true on a new panel box install?”
Ok…now I think Mikes first question should have been answered befire I guess we assumed and elaborated…lol…whats that…cart and horse analogy thing…anyway…
1.) No a panel does not have to have a door on it…but I believe it SHOULD have access to the OCPD’s…
2.) Now…230.92 does not apply here in my opinion…I hardly think the items on the load side of this panel will have their own OCPD’s…atleast that is my guess…
3.) Just maybe the question was…does it have to have a door on the front which is NO…but I am sure the breakers are still accessible through the front of the panel…which is the models greg is refering to.
4.) Did we assume…or did me and MIKE assume…lol…that she was saying their was NO frontal access…remember this is a residential application now…how many electricians do YOU know who will do this to comply with 230.92 if it was sealed…lol
Ok…greg threw me a bit…yeah I have installed plenty of panels with no door on the front…thehehhe…but they always had frontal openings for OCPD’s…
Now…we had some locked out and NOT readily accessible panels in some large commerical applilcations I have done…but thats a whole different ball game…
Anyway…seeing what assuming gets…lol…yet I am 100% sure now the question was…does the front need a DOOR with hindge…lol…and not that the panel is sealed up…now that I look at it…lol
BTW- I would STILL say it was wrong if it was a panel with OCPD’s inside and no frontal access to it…
The breaker handles are out in the open. No door over them. I think that is what she was talking about. Usually I see these as surface type covers while flush covers usually have the door.
I think me and mike thought she was saying their was NO access on the front…just OCPD’s in a box with a cover on it…lol…I know…I KNOW greg…dont yell at me fella…been a lONG day…lol
But back to what you were looking for even if it did not pertain to the question, here it is with different bold. If you are an electrical consultant, and I believe you are, you know the definition of readily or ready, right. No LOL involved, don’t find it funny.
240.24 Location in or on Premises.
(A) Accessibility. Overcurrent devices shall be readily accessible unless one of the following applies:
(1) For busways, as provided in 368.12.
(2) For supplementary overcurrent protection, as described in 240.10.
(3) For overcurrent devices, as described in 225.40 and 230.92.
(4) For overcurrent devices adjacent to utilization equipment that they supply, access shall be permitted to be by portable means.
(B) Occupancy. Each occupant shall have ready access to all overcurrent devices protecting the conductors supplying that occupancy.
240.30 General.
(A) Protection from Physical Damage. Overcurrent devices shall be protected from physical damage by one of the following:
(1) Installation in enclosures, cabinets, cutout boxes, or equipment assemblies
(2) Mounting on open-type switchboards, panelboards, or control boards that are in rooms or enclosures free from dampness and easily ignitible material and are accessible only to qualified personnel
(B) Operating Handle. The operating handle of a circuit breaker shall be permitted to be accessible without opening a door or cover.
Accessible (as applied to equipment). Admitting close approach; not guarded by locked doors, elevation, or other effective means.
Accessible (as applied to wiring methods). Capable of being removed or exposed without damaging the building structure or finish or not permanently closed in by the structure or finish of the building.
Accessible, Readily (Readily Accessible). Capable of being reached quickly for operation, renewal, or inspections without requiring those to whom ready access is requisite to climb over or remove obstacles or to resort to portable ladders, and so forth.
Accessible, Readily = Capable of being reached quickly for operation, renewal, or inspections without requiring those to whom ready access is requisite to climb over or remove obstancles or to resort to portable ladders, and so forth.
NEC Handbook Notes = The definitino of readily accessible does not preclude the use of a locked door for service equipment or rooms containing service equipment, provided those for whom ready access in necessary have a KEY ( or lock combination) available.
Example : 230.70(A)(1) and 230.205(A) require service disconnecting means to be readily accessible. Section 225.32 requires that feeder disconnecting means for separate buildings be readily accessible. A commonly used, permitted practice is to locate the disconnection means in the electrical equipment room of an office building or large apartment building to keep the door to that room locked to prevent access by un authorized persons.
Section 240.24(A) requires that overcurrent devices be SO located to be readily accessible.
SO…tell me grasshopper…having a panel with a BLANK front on it with OCPD’s located inside and screwed SHUT is readily accessible to the home owner who MUST have access to the OCPD’s in case of emergency?
It requires disassembly and tools. When there are conflicts in codes, the more stringent shall prevail. Section Section 225.32 is specific to disconnection means, Section 240.24(A) is specific to OCPD’s. Not necessarily in the same location of the disconnect, or service equipment, right?
Oh, and you bet I get paid. I just do not advertise what I am or what I do at the bottom of every post. My seminars are NOT free and start at 3K a day.
Was this a “code” inspection or a general inspection, Laura? If the panel box was manufactured in such a manner that it would allow the attachment of a door, I would note that the door was missing and recommend it be replaced. If this was not a code inspection, references to the code would be irrelevent, in my opinion.
AGAIN…i post code not to think HI’s will QUOTE code…simply to assist in education of WHY the CODE is a safety guideline and that is all. When members call me on the phone I most certainly don’t cite NEC code to them without explaining the aspects of it that pertain to safety.
IN the original issue…I feel it would be a REAL safety issue if the panel had no access to the OCPD’s…but in light of the many posts it appears that was not the case…but a good educational moment it was…
Forgive me if my post led you to believe I was being critical of discussing the code in this case. I’m not. The code was written with safety in mind and is a necessary tool and important to know. In this case, I thought it worthwhile and prudent to revisit the original question and its intent.
By all means, keep the discussions going as you have. I learn much from your posts.
But as you say, in spite of the code, you personally feel that a missing door is, indeed, a safety issue. The absence of a code violation does not preclude a home inspector from addressing it and, in this case, I think she should. Do you agree?
lol…hey brother…I understand…I was not snapping at ya my fine fella…was just again stating why I use code references…lol…I most certainly dont want any HI jumping down my throat as I have seen in some other threads…
Because to be honest with you…if I was not here to answer questions and to help educate…I would spend my time over at the DOITYOURSELF forum where I moderate and can do that all the time…Here I felt I was more needed so that is why…but on to your question…
It is not a door issue thing…as some panels have doors and some have no doors just openings in the front for OCPD’s…both are fine and allowed.
My biggest concern was I think I missunderstoof her…and then when mike asked I got right sided…lol…meaning I think we were asking if their was access on the front via a door or no door to the OCPD’s…and I think it went to possibly a BLACK cover on the front of a panel…making NO access to the OCPD’s at all without removing the cover…if that was the case i think THAt is wrong…
Just the use of a panel with no door on the front BUT the OCPD’s are exposed on the front…I dont have a problem with normally…However if it is a surface mount panel and it is being installed as a recess panel in lets say sheetrock…then I might GRIPE about it…
WOW
I am sorry to stir the pot, guess that is why the man challenged me about that at the time of final inspection.
We inspected work that contractors did for final inspection and just as a safety issue I myself was thinking why no “front door cover over the circuit breakers?” there was nothing left exposed, just wondering if there was hinges for a door, why none? when they charged WAY TOO MUCH for the job they did (remember the "city"is paying for it)
no, I do not quote CODE, that is up to the city inspector for that,
I will say that I have more information here than expected, and thanks everyone for the input and sorry to get all in an uproar, but my question has been answered!
thanks
Never be sorry …it was a GREAT post and if someone reads it from the START they will get some GOOD information from (3) Electrical Inspectors and Electrical Contractors and Electricians as well as some highly knowledgeable Home Inspectors…all of which combine for some GREAT education.
Anything that stirs up debate....is a GREAT learning experience for everyone involved......we LEARN everyday....
I picked the model I showed because that is one than can be ordered with or without a door. There is no code issue here. It is just a design choice. That is the only kind of panel I have in my house but they are in utility areas.
BTW understood you right away. My wife is a builder and I am used to hearing things from the female perspective.
