# Electrical panel location?



## Pcinspector1 (Oct 31, 2014)

I have a SF residential structure with the main service breaker panel inside the attached garage. The house is rented but the occupants do not have access to the panel in the garage. If an emergency or problem arises the occupants have no access to shut off the main breaker or circuit breakers. I can't find where this is not allowed?

I'm thinking an outside disconnect should be installed but I need a code to enforce if required.

pc1


----------



## Builder Bob (Oct 31, 2014)

Article 230.70(A)(1) of the 2011 NEC.... read the definition of readily accessible in article


----------



## chris kennedy (Oct 31, 2014)

Also 240.24(B).


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Oct 31, 2014)

Chris,

Do you think the landlord that owns the SF residential structure and does the maintenance would qualify for 240.24(b) exception 1?

The landlord does not want the tenant in his part of the garage where the breaker panel is located mainly to prevent thievery and didn't consider the electrical panel location as a safety issue.

Thanks and "Happy B-Day!"

pc1


----------



## ICE (Oct 31, 2014)

If The building and it's electrical service were legal when built, I don't see how you can cite a violation if the garage is locked.


----------



## Dennis (Oct 31, 2014)

ICE said:
			
		

> If The building and it's electrical service were legal when built, I don't see how you can cite a violation if the garage is locked.


My guess is that it was built as a single family residence and there was no lock on the garage.  Now that they are renting it they have violated tenant access to the service disconnect.  I find it interesting that art. 230.72 requires access to the service disconnect but that is only for multi occupancy buildings.

240.24(A) & (B) seem to be the correct articles  -- of course readily accessible is hard to define especially since many panels have locks.

I don't think 240.24(B)(1 or2), which allows service disonnects to be under lock and key, comes into play here


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Oct 31, 2014)

Landlord has confirmed that he will provide the occupant a key to the garage exterior walk-in door for access to the elect-panel. I believe I could sign off on this with that understanding.

Option #2 was to provide access with a pass-through door into the garage, that would could still be locked creating the same issue, no access unless a key was provide.

Option #3 was to install an exterior disconnect that the tenant could throw in in case of emergency.

pc1


----------



## cda (Oct 31, 2014)

Pcinspector1 said:
			
		

> Landlord has confirmed that he will provide the occupant a key to the garage exterior walk-in door for access to the elect-panel. I believe I could sign off on this with that understanding. Option #2 was to provide access with a pass-through door into the garage, that would could still be locked creating the same issue, no access unless a key was provide.
> 
> Option #3 was to install an exterior disconnect that the tenant could throw in in case of emergency.
> 
> pc1


So just a question

Why were you there in the first place?????


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Oct 31, 2014)

Rough-in inspection


----------



## ICE (Oct 31, 2014)

In my locale, most residential service panels are located on the outside of the building.  Most new construction and upgrade panels have hardware that accepts a padlock.  Considering the cost of AFCI breakers, I understand.  That false sense of security appeals to some folks.

240.24(B) states that each occupant shall have ready access.  "Readily accessible" allows a locked door and/or a padlock.  Where it all falls apart is "capable of being reached quickly for operation". Now and then I can't complete an inspection because the husband has the key to the panel.  That's the way it will be....only the husband is allowed to open the panel.

Another oddity is the "each occupant".  Children, old people, the oblivious...all of them may be denied access to overcurrent devices because they are too short, bent over, or didn't know there was such a thing.

When will the ADA lobby think of lever operated breakers?

Knee high....with Braille.

I bet that they could come up with several more pages just on breakers.


----------



## cda (Oct 31, 2014)

Pcinspector1 said:
			
		

> Rough-in inspection


Otay..........


----------



## ICE (Oct 31, 2014)

Pcinspector1 said:
			
		

> Landlord has confirmed that he will provide the occupant a key to the garage exterior walk-in door for access to the elect-panel. I believe I could sign off on this with that understanding. Option #2 was to provide access with a pass-through door into the garage, that would could still be locked creating the same issue, no access unless a key was provide.
> 
> Option #3 was to install an exterior disconnect that the tenant could throw in in case of emergency.
> 
> pc1


Unless there were two separate addresses, the building was compliant with or without any agreement.  I am not a fan of agreements as a means of code compliance.  It's either compliant on its own or it's not.  Agreements don't change that.


----------



## Builder Bob (Nov 3, 2014)

remember, somebody has to live with the decision you made today........ we have an apartment complex where planning allowed owner lockout units to be built in the early 70's...... we routinely have to play code cops and ensure access to the main electrical panel from the lockout unit.... never should have been allowed in the first place.


----------



## mark handler (Nov 3, 2014)

ICE said:
			
		

> When will the ADA lobby think of lever operated breakers?Knee high....with Braille.
> 
> I bet that they could come up with several more pages just on breakers.


ADA does Not cover Residential.

In Non-Residential,

http://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-sites/about-the-ada-standards/ada-standards/chapter-2-scoping-requirements

205 Operable Parts

205.1 General.

EXCEPTIONS:  1.  Operable parts that are intended for use only by service or maintenance personnel *shall not be required to comply with 309.*

Advisory 205.1 General.  Controls covered by 205.1 include, but are not limited to, light switches, *circuit breakers*, duplexes and other convenience receptacles, environmental and appliance controls, plumbing fixture controls, and security and intercom systems.


----------



## cda (Nov 3, 2014)

mark handler said:
			
		

> ADA does Not cover Residential.In Non-Residential,
> 
> http://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-sites/about-the-ada-standards/ada-standards/chapter-2-scoping-requirements
> 
> ...


How about fire sprinkler valve operation and location????


----------



## steveray (Nov 3, 2014)

Does it look like this too?


----------



## mark handler (Nov 3, 2014)

cda said:
			
		

> How about fire sprinkler valve operation and location????


"...Operable parts that are* intended for **use only by service or maintenance personnel** shall not be required to comply with 309*

*When have You designed a fire sprinkler valve for everyone's use*

*Once again we go to the extremes.*


----------

