Newly installed panel box

[James H. Bushart]

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.

[Paul W. Abernathy]

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...

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by pabernathy

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...

Paul -

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?


Jim

[Paul W. Abernathy]

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.....

[Laura Line]

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

[Paul W. Abernathy]

Originally Posted by Laura Line

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

Laura,

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....

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by pabernathy

Anything that stirs up debate....is a GREAT learning experience for everyone involved......we LEARN everyday....

Absolutely, positively correct, sir. =D>

[Mike Parks]

Laura

If there were hinges I would say show me the manf. specs.

The manf. specs are more specific, as was stated above.

[Greg Fretwell]

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.