Results 1 to 37 of 37
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Daniel Island, SC.
    Posts
    230

    Default Water lines under main panel

    House built in the 60s with some renovations along the way. Current owner bought house four years ago and had it inspected but there was tons of stuff not reported such as the having a washer connection with water lines and drain lines under the main panel. Aside from being wrong, is there a specific code or nomenclature I can quote or reference to. Washing machine was obstructuring panel also.

    Jim

    Similar Threads:
    ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images
    Inspection Referral

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    1,078

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Code says you have to have 30x36 clear working space infront of the panel. Therefore the washing appliances cannot block access to the panel.

    There is nothing about water lines near or around panels.

    "The Code is not a peak to reach but a foundation to build from."

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Daniel Island, SC.
    Posts
    230

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Thanks Bruce, I knew about the clearance but it just seemed odd to me to have water lines that close to a main panel. I found this also which was really scary.

    ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Spring City/Surrounding Philadelphia area
    Posts
    3,473

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    That's not scary Jim. That's natural selection.


  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Rockwall Texas
    Posts
    4,519

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Who says plumbing and electrical aren't compatible?

    ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images

  6. #6
    Michael Greenwalt's Avatar
    Michael Greenwalt Guest

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    I didn't notice a bushing on the nipple (bottom of panel) to protect the cables larger than #4 either.

    As for the light in the shower, who is to say which came first,,,the light or the shower, and why remove a perfectly good light!


  7. #7
    Stacey Van Houtan's Avatar
    Stacey Van Houtan Guest

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Just becuase the connections are under the panel does not mean the appliance must be in front of the main panel, These are also portable appliance and not a permament fixtrue, as such the working space still exist.


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Southern Vancouver Island
    Posts
    4,546

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    It is bad news for another reason - condensation from all that humidity in the electrical panel.


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Posts
    3,746

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Jim
    No, that is not allowed

    Stacey
    I hate to bust you, but what you said is incorrect.

    "Just becuase the connections are under the panel does not mean the appliance must be in front of the main panel, These are also portable appliance and not a permament fixtrue, as such the working space still exist. "


    From the 2006 IRC Bold Added.


    SECTION E3305
    EQUIPMENT LOCATION AND CLEARANCES

    E3305.1 Working space and clearances.
    Sufficient access andworking space shall be provided and maintained around all

    electrical equipment to permit ready and safe operation and

    maintenance of such equipment in accordance with this section
    and Figure E3305.1.


    E3305.2 Working clearances for energized equipment and
    panelboards. Except as otherwise specified in Chapters 33

    through 42, the dimension of the working space in the direction
    of access to panelboards and live parts likely to require examination,

    adjustment, servicing or maintenancewhile energized shall
    be not less than 36 inches (914 mm) in depth. Distances shall be
    measured from the energized partswhere such parts are exposed
    or from the enclosure front or opening where such parts are
    enclosed. In addition to the 36-inch dimension (914 mm), the
    work space shall not be less than 30 inches (762 mm) wide in
    front of the electrical equipment and not less than the width of
    such equipment. The work space shall be clear and shall extend
    from the floor or platform to a height of 6.5 feet (1981 mm). In
    all cases, thework space shall allowat least a 90-degree opening
    of equipment doors or hinged panels. Equipment associated
    with the electrical installation located above or belowthe electrical
    equipment shall be permitted to extend not more than 6
    inches (152 mm) beyond the front of the electrical equipment.


    E3305.3 Dedicated panelboard space.
    The space equal to the width and depth of the panelboard and
    (extending from the floor to a height of 6 feet (1829 mm) above the panelboard,
    or to the structural ceiling, whichever is lower, shall be dedicated to the

    electrical installation. Piping, ducts, leak protection apparatus
    and other equipment foreign to the electrical installation shall
    not be installed in such dedicated space. The area above the dedicated space shall be permitted to contain foreign systems, provided that protection is installed to avoid damage to the electrical equipment from condensation, leaks and breaks in such foreign
    systems (see Figure E3305.1).
    Exception:

    Suspended ceilings with removable panels shall
    be permitted within the 6-foot (1.8 m) dedicated space.


    E3305.4 Location of working spaces and equipment.
    Required working space shall not be designated for storage.

    Panelboards and overcurrent protection devices shall not be
    located in clothes closets or bathrooms.
    E3305.5 Access and entrance toworking space.
    Access shall be provided to the required working space.



    Last edited by Rick Cantrell; 02-12-2010 at 02:46 PM.
    ' correct a wise man and you gain a friend... correct a fool and he'll bloody your nose'.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,246

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Stacey Van Houtan View Post
    Just because the connections are under the panel does not mean the appliance must be in front of the main panel, These are also portable appliance and not a permament fixtrue, as such the working space still exist.
    And YOU are going to be teaching ELECTRICAL to home inspectors in your state?

    Oh ... my ... gawd ... I pity them for what they will be misinformed with by you.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  11. #11
    Stacey Van Houtan's Avatar
    Stacey Van Houtan Guest

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    The key words are in the first post HOUSE built in the 60s

    Yes, By todays standards it is incorrect, I was but a wee one so i do not remember the code a this time but, but due to the many time i see this in hundreds of basements i assume is was approved by the AHJ at this time, What electrical upgrades do we suggest in a HI,

    On older homes this is a huge list of possibles: No afcis all no-gfci circuts, no tamper resistant plugs, no outlet on the outer rim joist of a deck, co detectors, etc.

    This gets to the constant and unanseweable question of; to what level of prescriptive code or industry standard do we inspect. And to this I would say or clients hire us for a risk analysis of the home, givin our knowledge, experience and within the scope of time (read money) aggreed to by all parties. I give my opinion of broken components, suggested upgrades or improvements. A risk anaylsis by a pro.

    When i go to the doc to get a check up it may include many things, blood work, urine, etc.
    (on this site i would suggest some have there BS levels checked) but i rely on him, to a degree, to give his opinion on the cost-benfit ratio of test and procedures for my age and history.

    How I look at a home is the same for a client is somewhat the same.


  12. #12
    Stacey Van Houtan's Avatar
    Stacey Van Houtan Guest

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Oh, to add, correct me if i am wrong (as I say show me) but i think the pipeing etc. languguae was added after 02


  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Posts
    3,746

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Stacey

    "The key words are in the first post HOUSE built in the 60s"
    Do not forget "with some renovations along the way".
    So when were the renovations done?


    "Yes, By todays standards it is incorrect"
    "This gets to the constant and unanseweable question of; to what level of prescriptive code or industry standard do we inspect"
    Today's standards are what most inspectors use.
    Do you report if you find Alum wire?
    How about old homes with little or no insulation?


    "When i go to the doc to get a check up it may include many things, blood work, urine, etc. ... but i rely on him, to a degree, to give his opinion on the cost-benfit ratio of test and procedures for my age and history. "
    And does your Doc do a checkup on you based on what the standard WAS when you were born, or is it by using what is current accepted knowledge and procedures?

    ' correct a wise man and you gain a friend... correct a fool and he'll bloody your nose'.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    On The Mason-Dixon Line
    Posts
    577

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Greenwalt View Post
    I didn't notice a bushing on the nipple (bottom of panel) to protect the cables larger than #4 either.

    I do believe that is a cable coming into that panel, not a raceway.
    If that is a cable then, No bushing is required as the approved cable connector is protection enough.
    The code says where raceways contain 4 awg or larger ........

    As far as the washing machine and associated water lines go report it as wrong.


  15. #15
    Bob Barnett's Avatar
    Bob Barnett Guest

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Quote Originally Posted by JIM MURPHY View Post
    House built in the 60s with some renovations along the way. Current owner bought house four years ago and had it inspected but there was tons of stuff not reported such as the having a washer connection with water lines and drain lines under the main panel. Aside from being wrong, is there a specific code or nomenclature I can quote or reference to. Washing machine was obstructuring panel also.

    Jim
    Code?
    How about safety? I would write it up as a safety issue and explain why. Besides what if you had to lean over the washer to flip a breaker and got a major shock?
    Sort of like the house I did with the main panel in the bathroom above the commode half in the shower stall.


  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,246

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Stacey Van Houtan View Post
    Oh, to add, correct me if i am wrong (as I say show me) but i think the pipeing etc. languguae was added after 02

    First, and foremost, learn to read what was written before defending your comments on it as being okay.

    This is what was written:
    Quote Originally Posted by JIM MURPHY View Post
    House built in the 60s with some renovations along the way.
    Did you bother to even look at the photo accompanying that post? The stuff shown is not 1960s vintage.

    Added with edit: I should have read the post following yours before replying - Rick pointed out the same thing.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  17. #17
    Stacey Van Houtan's Avatar
    Stacey Van Houtan Guest

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    DID I SAY I WOULD NOT REPORT IT

    Back at you peck READ the post peck

    That box is older than 02' which still makes this a correct install at the time.

    RC

    Read the post


    Are you telling me that you report: no afci in each house, No tamperable outlets, no outlet on deck rimjost, etc.

    And as you brought up for, other systems in house, I would ask the same qusetion. What upgrades do you recommend

    For Example:

    2x8 floor joist where the current code calls for 2x10

    2x4 rafters where the code calls for 2x6

    No house wrap on a 10 year old home

    No pan flashing on a 10 year old home

    No air gap on the dishwasher 15 years old

    No fire door to garage - on 75 year old home

    No fire walls in the garage ceiling on a 25 year old home

    12 " soil to wodd Crawlspace clearance on a 50 year old home

    The list goes on

    I challange you to give me a random report on a 50 year old house and i can create 10 items (not broken items) that are upgrades from the code or more current building practices.

    I agree we as inspectors are to give our opinion using the most current code and building practices. There is no way to pick thru the matrix of what code was in effict at the time the house was built and when each remodel was performed.


    This is what the rest of my post was asking in a retorical sense,
    and that i opined what we are hire to do. We are hired to pick from this huge list of upgrades those items we deem the be the most important.

    And this list will have items that are constant; Au wiring, p-traps, lead supplys, etc. Other items will vary depedning on the age of home and the type of client. These item fall into the i may report catagory. A main panel location such as this WOULD report, due to it being low and the washer appears to block the door. The the piping i would only report on a new home.








    I am not trying to degrade you opinon


  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,246

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    houtan, houtan, houtan,

    Quote Originally Posted by Stacey Van Houtan View Post
    That box is older than 02' which still makes this a correct install at the time.
    Apparently you are still not, or simply cannot, read and comprehend what is written and/or what is shown in the photo.

    "The box", as you called it, MAY have been "a correct install at the time" ... HOWEVER ... if you had noticed, there IS NOW *stuff* (keeping it simple for you to go in line with "the box") in front of the panel which makes the installation NOT CORRECT AT THE TIME THE INSPECTOR was there ... which means that IT IS NOT CORRECT AND NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Posts
    3,746

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    "DID I SAY I WOULD NOT REPORT IT"

    Then WHY all the discussion?


    RC

    Read the post
    What post are you refering to?

    Are you telling me that you report: no afci in each house, No tamperable outlets, no outlet on deck rimjost, etc.
    Most often I would not write these items up. see #1

    And as you brought up for, other systems in house, I would ask the same qusetion. What upgrades do you recommend
    If you are refering to Alum wire and no insulation, as far as I know every SOP does say to check for these and to write them up.

    For Example:

    2x8 floor joist where the current code calls for 2x10
    No #1
    2x4 rafters where the code calls for 2x6
    No #1
    No house wrap on a 10 year old home
    No #1
    No pan flashing on a 10 year old home
    More details needed
    No air gap on the dishwasher 15 years old
    Yes #2
    No fire door to garage - on 75 year old home
    Yes #2
    No fire walls in the garage ceiling on a 25 year old home
    Yes #2
    12 " soil to wodd Crawlspace clearance on a 50 year old home
    Yes #3

    #1 From the 2006 IRC
    R102.7 Existing structures.
    The legal occupancy of any structure
    existing on the date of adoption of this code shall be permitted
    to continue without change, except as is specifically
    covered in this code, the
    International Property Maintenance
    Code
    or the International Fire Code, or as is deemed necessary
    by the building official for the general safety and welfare of the
    occupants and the public.

    R102.7.1 Additions, alterations or repairs.
    Additions,
    alterations or repairs to any structure shall conform to the
    requirements for a new structure without requiring the
    existing structure to comply with all of the requirements of
    this code, unless otherwise stated. Additions, alterations or
    repairs shall not cause an existing structure to become

    unsafe or adversely affect the performance of the building.

    #2 Safety issues
    #3 Non accessable area, no recommendation for changes

    It is evident to me that the washer hookup was an "Addition, alteration, or repair" and as such must meet the codes in effect at that time. Not having any evidence (a permit for example) that dates the alteration, then I apply what I belive to be the accepted standard. And by todays standard it is incorrect.
    Even it they did get a permit I would still write this up as a safety issue.



    ' correct a wise man and you gain a friend... correct a fool and he'll bloody your nose'.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    South-West Michigan
    Posts
    469

    Post Re: Water lines under main panel

    The nail squarely smitten: "I would still write it up as a safety issue." And that is exactly what the appropriate action would be, in my opinion. There is not a single "average height" woman who could quickly and effectively de-energize the house given the physical barriers presented in the photograph, regardless of code.

    Randall Aldering GHI BAOM MSM
    Housesmithe Inspection
    www.housesmithe.com

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Manchester, Vermont
    Posts
    298

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Rick Hurst, your post dated 02/11/2009

    Where do you get these code volations, you post to this site, nice picture.

    Keep sending then. L.O.L. and the power company attach this line.


  22. #22
    Stacey Van Houtan's Avatar
    Stacey Van Houtan Guest

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    What is the max height for main disconnect breaker, (6'7") could a ave. height women reach this?


  23. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,246

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Stacey Van Houtan View Post
    What is the max height for main disconnect breaker, (6'7") could a ave. height women reach this?
    Are you deaf, dumb and blind, or just intentionally playing ignorant?

    THAT HEIGHT IS ABOVE THE REQUIRED LEVEL FLOOR OF THE REQUIRED WORKING SPACE, WHICH DOES NOT EXIST IN THAT PHOTO.

    And you are actually thinking you are qualified to teach electrical? Crap, are we going to be in for some real mis-informed newbies.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  24. #24
    Stacey Van Houtan's Avatar
    Stacey Van Houtan Guest

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Let me explain the point I have been trying to make, about this type of defect.

    I beleive we perform risk assasement for our clients. One of the element is in the law, a phrase and action called "reasonable practicability." This is a caculation and measures the risk present in a given situation against the reasonable practicability of mitigating that risk (in time, trouble or money) In other words, we ask if averting the risk was worth the effort it took to negate that risk and additionaly, when weighed aginst the severity of any harm the risk (hazard) might cause.

    If it is that such that the the risk is insignificant in relation to the sacrifice of mitigating the risk or to say another way the cost is grossly disproportionate to the benefit gained.

    So to put this into the context of the HI, Using current building standards as the comparsion of any home we inspect, there is a huge number of systems and componets that do not meet current standards.

    No HI reports all of these systems and components that do not meet current standard. We report what items (disreguarding items that are not functining) that we think that pose a significant hazard, and that the cost of mitigation of that hazard is not grossly disproportionate to the amount of reduction of the risk while considering he potenial of the risk.

    (peck you may need to take a nap now )

    So in this case I would consider the risk leaving the panel compared to that of moving the panel to be disporportionate, in cost to the risk of someone being slowed, when trying to de-enigze the panel and the damage or hazard that might cause. I would however consider the that a HI that did not recommened AFCI breakers be installed on the panel in question to have made a poor risk assesement becuase I think that the cost of adding AFCi's would increase the safety of the homeowner to a much greater level than moving a panel and at a much higher cost benifet ratio.

    You can wake up now jerry


  25. #25
    Roger Frazee's Avatar
    Roger Frazee Guest

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Well I'm gonna give my opinion here for better or for worse. I think this installation has elevated safety risk that negates any cost to correct. So here is what I see. You have a huge metal surface in that washing machine that is likely or hopefully grounded through the egc of the power cord. You have the metal enclosure and cover door in close proximity to that grounded metal frame and it is grounded via the bonding of the cover screws and metal enclosure for the circuit breakers. In order to even operate the breakers your going to have to come in contact with the washer frame and the metal of the enclosure..both are good fault paths. All things correct nothing happens ... all things not correct your going to very likely be in series with the fault path. It's those all things not correct that become statistics. This is the same principle as a 3 wire dryer with neutral and ground bonded and the neutral opens in the dryer branch circuit energizing the metal frame of the dryer when I push the start button. Noticing the dryer motor not running I investigate. I then touch the dryer and the washing machine ... I just gave the neutral current a path to the source and I'm in series with it. I believe the cpsc has some statistics on dryer and washer fatalities from electrocuiton documenting this example..

    What I mean by all things not correct. Homeowners are notorious for modifications...such as installing 3 prong grounding receptacles in branch circuits where an equipment ground is not present. What I see here is an increased risk to humans due to the proximity and accessibility of excellent fault paths to complete a fault circuit if one existed and was not cleared. Throw in water and it gets worse.

    Anyway that's my opinion silly or not.

    Last edited by Roger Frazee; 02-19-2010 at 10:32 PM.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Posts
    3,746

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Stacey
    That was a well worded statement you made. Where did you copy it from?

    ' correct a wise man and you gain a friend... correct a fool and he'll bloody your nose'.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snowbird (this means I'm retired and migrate between locations), FL/MI
    Posts
    4,086

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    SVH,

    Nonsense! TOTAL NONSENSE.

    We have pictured in both posts providing photos SIGNIFICANT LIFE SAFETY ISSUES HERE. Your latest post proves only that you completely miss on EVERY LEVEL! (KC area, KS or MO as I have said before, is NOT "known" for its quality/safety/code comprehension/grasping the "essence", etc.) - small wonder with some one who spouts what YOU do supposedly "Instructing" ("teaching"???) others!!!!!

    The panel is NOT what MUST be moved: The washing machine and the washing machine stand pipe (indirect drain) are what MUST be moved (Obviously most convenient would be 2 feet to the LEFT of the panel (see plumbing vent and unoccupied space to the LEFT!!!).

    The rusting, inappropriately located (height clearance, etc.), inappropriately rated light fixture in the low ceiling shower (bath?) zone, MUST be remediated!

    This is NOT a sixty-year old property - re-read the original post, it is a Circa 1960s home, making it 40 to 50 years old.

    Neither the indirect (washing machine drain stand pipe) nor the washing machine are any where near that vintage.

    A perspective shot would have been helpful - and I don't recall IF the OP indicated a "front loader" or "top loader" machine - but appears to be a FRONT LOADER, flood level rims and proximity as well as the path of travel to the panel being subjected to the overflow outlet drain path for the machine ALSO of issue if the appliance is not on a pan with an overflow drain, since both the receptacle AND the panel (means to disconnect if it is the appliance itself which is the problem) are OBSTRUCTED by the appliance. ALSO appears the Appliance frame itself PREVENTS the Door swing which must not be obstructed to 90 degrees. These tall front loading washing machines (LISTED FOR RESIDENTIAL) are relatively NEW to the marketplace. For the sake of argument lets say its a very old COMMERCIAL tall front loading washing machine - in a residence - STILL a problem since wouldn't be LISTED for use in residential.

    Bottom line on the machine and the stand pipe - it must be moved. Access to a panel requirement is not new - just enhanced as to size (depth & width) of the "footprint" area and height since the 60s.

    Following is a direct link to an article from August 2001 EC&M that Jim Murphy and others might find useful/helpful (less than 600 V installations panel clearances (on or in wall) & historical references to working space requirements). I CAN NOT SUGGEST STRONG ENOUGH THAT YOU READ THE ARTICLE AND CHECK THE REFERENCES "Stacey Van Hoot-"!!! :

    Click LINK: Determining Working Clearances

    Be that a panelboard supplied by a feeder or service entrance; Less than 600V and more likely 150V to ground or less, requirement for space pre-dates 1971 NEC (which enhanced - enlarged the space required of 1965 NEC).



    It is important to understand that the word examination, as used in 110.26(A), includes such tasks as checking for the presence of voltage using a portable voltmeter.

    I'm not going to go into the height changes for space IIRC bumped up mid to late 80s and again in '99 not on topic so not going to check my memory and look those up.

    We have two issues here - working space clearance AND dedicated equipment space with access, ready access, etc.. (Since JM describes a recent history + four years references 2002/2005).

    110.26 Spaces About Electrical Equipment.
    Sufficient access and working space shall be provided and maintained about all electric equipment to permit ready and safe operation and maintenance of such equipment. Enclosures housing electrical apparatus that are controlled by lock and key shall be considered accessible to qualified persons.
    Key to understanding 110.26 is the division of requirements for spaces about electrical equipment in two separate and distinct categories: working space and dedicated equipment space. Working space generally applies to the protection of the worker, and dedicated equipment space applies to the space reserved for future access to electrical equipment and to protection of the equipment from intrusion by non electrical equipment. The performance requirements for all spaces about electrical equipment are set forth in the first sentence. Storage of materials that blocks access or prevents safe work practices must be avoided at all times.
    (A) Working Space. Working space for equipment operating at 600 volts, nominal, or less to ground and likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized shall comply with the dimensions of 110.26(A)(1), (2), and (3) or as required or permitted elsewhere in this Code.
    The intent of 110.26(A) is to provide enough space for personnel to perform any of the operations listed without jeopardizing worker safety. These operations include examination, adjustment, servicing, and maintenance of equipment. Examples of such equipment include panelboards, switches, circuit breakers, controllers, and controls on heating and air-conditioning equipment. (Remember "examination" includes checking voltages with your multimeter! Now, just HOW are you going to operate or cycle a circuit breaker or replace a fuse with the orientation pictured and with the washing machine drain pipe and washing machine there?

    Minimum working clearances are not required if the equipment is such that it is not likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized. However, "sufficient" access and working space are still required by the opening paragraph of 110.26.

    404.8 Accessibility and Grouping.
    (A) Location. All switches and circuit breakers used as switches shall be located so that they may be operated from a readily accessible place. They shall be installed so that the center of the grip of the operating handle of the switch or circuit breaker, when in its highest position, is not more than 2.0 m (6 ft 7 in.) above the floor or working platform.
    Then we have two additional issues - location of both panelboard/SE and receptacle which could argueably could minimally be classified as a damp location with washing machine immediately in front AND unsecured drain hose to OPEN stack/drain pipe, the receptacle and panel face area are arguably a minimally damp location, as it would not be uncommon for water temperature used and discharged from the washing machine would be other than colder than room temperature, etc. Since the drain hose is not secured to the stack pipe drain it arguably may dislodge, while the machine is still energized, the machine out of balance might "walk" and subject the entire panel as well as the receptacle to WATER SPRAY should the machine be in an active spin or drain mode. Should the tall front loader be later replaced with a top loader - splash (opening when full and adding more items - or operating with top open - most machines still fill and agitate just don't spin with lid open - top loaders that is) and spray might be additional hazards potentially subjecting the panel above to a washing or wet condition.

    Additionally, and more importantly, we can also hunt back and find
    Section 110-11, Deteriorating Agents references to protecting panel boards and electrical equipment (including FPNs pointing to same) at

    Article 230-70(a) Location restrictions for disconnecting means and
    240-24(c) Not Exposed to Physical Damage.
    Overcurrent devices shall be located where they will not be exposed to physical damage.

    Rremembering, especially OVERCURRENT DEVICES must be protected from the effects of potential exposure to DETERIORATING AGENTS - (i.e. oxidizing laundry agents, chlorine bleach, ammonia, laundry "soda", water conditioner additives including salts, "calgon", etc.) which, again with OPEN (indirect) discharge of the washing machine immediately below the panel board makes that UNLIKELY that the over current devices are so protected from the vapors/chemicals to air with open drain since I see no gasket, on either door or panel and I doubt it is so rated.

    Last edited by H.G. Watson, Sr.; 02-20-2010 at 10:42 AM. Reason: Got more indignant with SVH and added timely ref's from 2002 for JM

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snowbird (this means I'm retired and migrate between locations), FL/MI
    Posts
    4,086

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Stacey Van Houtan View Post
    Oh, to add, correct me if i am wrong (as I say show me) but i think the pipeing etc. languguae was added after 02
    Of course you are wrong. See the article clickable link regarding access and ready access as well as working space and dedicated equipment space with references going back to at least 1965 NEC in my post above (including quotes from 1971 & 1965 NEC), panelboards, SE, Disconnects, equipment, appliances, etc. 600V or less, esp. 150V to ground or less.

    You might also review NFPA 73 2000 & 2006 editions for a better understanding or at least a "clue" or "guide" on HOW TO (identify, determine what and how to apply, call out, etc.) relative to existing installations in "older" dwellings!

    So in this case I would consider the risk leaving the panel compared to that of moving the panel to be disporportionate, in cost to the risk of someone being slowed, when trying to de-enigze the panel and the damage or hazard that might cause. I would however consider the that a HI that did not recommened AFCI breakers be installed on the panel in question to have made a poor risk assesement becuase I think that the cost of adding AFCi's would increase the safety of the homeowner to a much greater level than moving a panel and at a much higher cost benifet ratio.
    You make no sense at all with your diatribe about risk/benefit OF BASIC LIFE SAFETY ISSUES (obstructed panel by washing machine hazard & deteriorating light installed unsafe SHOWER zone low clearance ceiling).
    AFCI breakers installed in a 1960s panel obstructed by tall front loading washing machine would PROVIDE ABSOLUTELY NO REMEDIATION WHATSOEVER to the two distinctly UNSAFE situations presented by the original poster in his posts and photographs in this topic string. NO ONE BUT YOU has suggested the panel be MOVED! The stand pipe plumbing and washing machine is what MUST BE MOVED! The Shower light/luminaire MUST BE REMEDIATED. An AFCI is NOT a GFCI, cannot fathom WHY you rant on about an AFCI for either of the situations JM discussed/presented!?!

    Unfortunately, common sense are not something which can be "taught" only developed to whatever "limitations" of the individual, it "may" require some "effort on your part" . This of course presumes you are capable of some basic comprehension (not having been evidenced here)!

    It is truly "scary" that you claim to be in a position of "teaching" others!!

    Last edited by H.G. Watson, Sr.; 02-20-2010 at 12:06 PM.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,246

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Quote Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr. View Post
    The panel is NOT what MUST be moved: The washing machine and the washing machine stand pipe (indirect drain) are what MUST be moved

    The more correct and appropriate way to say that is that the panel MUST have the required working space in front of it ... WHETHER OR NOT the panel is moved OR the washing machine is moved.

    There are times, such as last month, when the panel is easier to move than the washing machine. I had an inspection last month where the electrician upgraded the panel and did almost everything wrong they could do wrong, but most important was that they replaced the existing panel with the new panel RIGHT OVER THE WASHING MACHINE.

    I gave them two choices (as the AHJ I do have that say) on how to accomplish providing the required safe working space:
    - 1) move the panel
    - 2) move the washing machine

    After consultation with the owner, the electrician relocated the panel, which was also the service equipment (i.e., it was a service equipment panel) which means that simply using the original panel as a junction box was out of the question as the service entrance conductors had to be separated from all other conductors.

    Was it a rather big job? Yep.

    Would it have been a smaller job had the electrician done it the right way to start with when they replaced the panel? No, it would have been the same amount of work to do it the right way regardless - but at least it would only have had to have been done once instead of twice.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,246

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Quote Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr. View Post
    Of course you are wrong.

    You make no sense at all with your diatribe about risk/benefit OF BASIC LIFE SAFETY ISSUES

    Unfortunately, common sense are not something which can be "taught" only developed to whatever "limitations" of the individual, it "may" require some "effort on your part" . This of course presumes you are capable of some basic comprehension (not having been evidenced here)!

    It is truly "scary" that you claim to be in a position of "teaching" others!!
    I condensed the quote down to the basics as there was no need to repeat all that other information ... I completely agree with H.G. here, and that last part is the truly scary part and deserves repeating:
    It is truly "scary" that you claim to be in a position of "teaching" others!!


    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,246

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Stacey,

    You show your location as Kansas City, is that Missouri or Kansas? Just wondering which state, or both, has given you a license to teach electrical to other home inspectors?

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snowbird (this means I'm retired and migrate between locations), FL/MI
    Posts
    4,086

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Peck View Post
    I condensed the quote down to the basics as there was no need to repeat all that other information ... I completely agree with H.G. here, and that last part is the truly scary part and deserves repeating:
    Thank you JP.

    Realize I came off rambling and forgot to mention when I switched to a late 90s edition at the end (i.e. deteriorating agents, etc. note punctuation of sections identification) but it gets me angry when someone who claims to be instructing others goes off so very wrong (i.e. claiming working space and dedicated equipment space requirements for panel boards, etc. didn't exist until AFTER 2002, and demands to be "shown" otherwise, then suggests AFCI breakers be installed to a vintage panel board will somehow remediate the two challenging life safety issues shown in JM's photo posts!!!).

    Thanks for reinforcing the essential and "short version". Scary indeed.


  33. #33
    Stacey Van Houtan's Avatar
    Stacey Van Houtan Guest

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Although some on the site cannot stick to issue and instead like to attack pepole on a personal level, and it appears do not read the entire post, (or can not comprehend the post) I shall stick to the topic.

    I will try to make this simple for some of the minds involved

    1 All homes will have systems or components that do not meet current code, or other building standards

    2 There are limited resources that buyers and sellers have to complete a realestate transaction.

    3 No Home inspection report will list all of the issues or items that do not meet current code, or other building standards

    4 A Home inspector picks the items that they feel are the most important to the buyer, these items end up on the report

    5 This picking of issues is part of the risk anaylsis performed by the Inspector. (see above)

    6 The Inspector then educates the client via the report so the buyer can make their own risk anaylsis.


    7 Code history is important to know if a issue has always been incorrect or if it is a upgrade. This information would be used during the inspectors risk anylsis.

    8 A HI does not tell the client what MUST be done.

    9 A the Home Inspecition is not a AHJ inspection

    Putting the above system into use on the subject at hand

    A panel behind a portable appliance does pose a safety hazard.
    It has been approved in the past by some AHJs and this puts it into the upgrade comment.

    If one reads the post i did not say that a AFCI would correct the placement issue

    We do not know if there is room to move the appliance

    It is my opinion that with limited resources, this would not be a issue that is a material defect.

    Based on these premises
    Very few people use the breakers on a panel and will call in a electrician if there is a electrical issue. Becuase of this the chance of death or injury by shock, form this issue, is less than the chance of death or injury by Elec. fire,
    Since there are limited, resources, if I were to spend money on some electrical upgrades for this house, (using only the information given) It would make the house safer by installing AFCIs and GFCIs, than from moving the panel or trying to relocate the plumbing,

    SHOW me stats. on deaths or injurys in a residence /1000 (the homeowner - not a repair contractor) from getting shocked. This is a hazard that moving the panel will solve,

    VS

    Electrical fire and shocking deaths and injurys /1000 that installing AFCI and GFCI would solve

    The latter is a larger #

    This is a better cost benifit and like it or not it is what a HI does

    Thanks for all the Stacey Teacher trash talk, my students learned alot from this thread and have developed a better understanding of how many in the industry think. This put together with my thoughts are helping them in developing there own opinions and reporting methods for use in the field.


  34. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,246

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Stacey Van Houtan View Post
    Thanks for all the Stacey Teacher trash talk, my students learned alot from this thread and have developed a better understanding of how many in the industry think. This put together with my thoughts are helping them in developing there own opinions and reporting methods for use in the field.
    If your students learned ANYTHING from your presentation of this thread it was, hopefully, that you have no idea what you are talking about and should not be teaching.

    If you students learned ANYTHING ELSE, then they should not even be students as they would not have enough on the ball to recognize a fraud like you when presented with all the evidence presented here by all other here.

    It is simply amazing to me that you are sticking to your story of ignoring the facts and real life.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,246

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Peck View Post
    There are times, such as last month, when the panel is easier to move than the washing machine. I had an inspection last month where the electrician upgraded the panel and did almost everything wrong they could do wrong, but most important was that they replaced the existing panel with the new panel RIGHT OVER THE WASHING MACHINE.

    I gave them two choices (as the AHJ I do have that say) on how to accomplish providing the required safe working space:
    - 1) move the panel
    - 2) move the washing machine

    After consultation with the owner, the electrician relocated the panel, which was also the service equipment (i.e., it was a service equipment panel) which means that simply using the original panel as a junction box was out of the question as the service entrance conductors had to be separated from all other conductors.

    Was it a rather big job? Yep.

    Here are some before and after photos.

    ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images
    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  36. #36
    Stacey Van Houtan's Avatar
    Stacey Van Houtan Guest

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Peck

    I get some good information from you on many items. I saw your post on another thread explaining copper clad wire was needed to stop a reaction from the rubber insulation. Although you did not back this up with a third party conformation, as you have asked for from others, in this case i beleive what you say. I even said to my students that you know more about electrical issuse and code than I
    .
    BUT

    What you don't know is more about teaching electrical issue as part of a state required 80 hr course, where time limitations allow only a overview of common defects and decriptions.

    AND your knowledge of the home inspection and construction industry is broad but limited in some areas.

    Both are a industries I know well and my knowledge is broad as well and also limited in some areas. Yet with what knowldge it appears you have, as taken from your post, I would to exceed my ability in some areas equal it in some areas and be close in others.



    And last, read your own post, " AS A AHJ " you required the panel moved. I am discussing a Home inspection. Not a code inspections by a AHJ.


    Your street rep, as my kid say, is not being improved unless you keep your ego-manic comments for when you are talking to your wife and dog. Or you may choose not, to me i could care less, i as many on this site will do also, we have waded through a worse stink and deeper doo than what you provide.

    So
    Have a good day and pick up that dog and beat your wife with it to get two thing done at once.


  37. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,246

    Default Re: Water lines under main panel

    Houtan,

    Quote Originally Posted by Stacey Van Houtan View Post
    What you don't know is more about teaching electrical issue as part of a state required 80 hr course, where time limitations allow only a overview of common defects and decriptions.

    Is it more important to meet 80 hours teaching incorrect garbage, or to teach correct information, and cover it better, and stage the information out over two courses?

    If you chose the first ... well ... that is what I expected.

    If you chose the second ... well ... that is what I do, so I'm not sure why you are trying to trash talk it???

    AND your knowledge of the home inspection and construction industry is broad but limited in some areas.
    Absolutely limited in some areas - I say that all the time.

    Both are a industries I know well and my knowledge is broad as well and also limited in some areas.
    I certainly have to agree with you that your knowledge is also limited in some areas.

    Yet with what knowldge it appears you have, as taken from your post, I would to exceed my ability in some areas equal it in some areas and be close in others.
    Huh?

    Never mind, it does not matter.

    And last, read your own post, " AS A AHJ " you required the panel moved. I am discussing a Home inspection. Not a code inspections by a AHJ.
    I am discussing home inspections too.

    I then added that, at this time (versus in the past) I am the AHJ and am offering up an example for others to see, review, and learn from ... if they so chose and are inclined to do so ... or ignore is they so chose and are so inclined to do ...

    Your street rep, as my kid say, is not being improved
    I'm not concerned about my "street rep", nor do I worry about your lack thereof. Your posts are a good example of the old saying "Better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •