In many threads here and eleswere the subject of the manufacturers written instructions come up. I have come to believe that if the instructions are not part of the listing they are not enforceable by the AHJ. If the lable that bears the listing mark says use only copper wire that is enforceable but the manufacturers admonision in the installation instructions that do not bare a listing mark to use only the manufacturers breakers is not enforceable.

I would like to know were inspectors come down on this issue.
--
Tom

Tom,
I agree with you. One perfect example is the use of classified circuit breakers. All panels come with instructions that state that you must use their brand of breakers, but UL has classified breakers from other manufacturers that can be safely used in the panel.
Don

In our local jurisdictional meetings it is pretty much the understanding that mfrs. with no listing have no status - i.e. their written instructions carry no weight over the NEC

Boy, have you guys hit a hard spot for inspectors. The circuit breaker panels all say to use "Their" breakers in "Their" panels. Yet some other company makes a breaker that is listed for another panel. Do you pass the job? Do you fail it? How do I know how's breakers are listed for who's panels any more. Vutler Hammer bought, Westinghouse, Bryant, American(Federal), and Challenger. I believe, and ITE Siemans bought Murray. Now where does that leave GE and Square D.? Can you use a Square D breaker (Homeline) in an ITE/Siemans panel? Show me some paperwork, and I can accept it. I believe that only Bryant type "BR" breaker is the only one that will fill, GE, Square D homeline, ITE/Siemans, Murray, etc. All of those black square type breakers. While we are on this subject, how about twin breakers? The NEC allows up to 42 breakers in a panel. However does that mean you are allowed a twin breaker in an ITE 4040MB panel? NO, because the manufacture says that this panel is allowed only 40 full size breakers NO twins. Believe me, I am not trying to give anyone a hard time, just trying to do my job and eforce the NEC as I see it written.

Harold,
The "classified" breakers are required to be supplied with a listing of the panels that they can be used in. As far as putting more than 40 poles in a 40 circuit panel, that isn't just a "manufacturer's instruction", that is a listing and labeling requirement.
Don

were does the CSPC and NEMA stand on these issues?


are they not our 'trade watchdogs'?

UL classified breakers have a list enclosed in the package with the breakers to show what panels they are classified for use in. For you to demand to see the list is not unreasonable. I also support you in rejecting the common practice of installing any breaker that physically fits the panel assembly.

The only thing I take issue with is the practice some inspectors have of enforcing the manufacturers unlisted instructions. It is not in cutler hammers best interest to permit the installation of a Thomas & Bettes classified breaker in their panels but that does not make it OK for anyone to use a misapplication of the listed or labeling instructions rule to prevent the installation of a breaker that is laboratory classified for use in that panel. I have had surge arresters turned down on inspection because they were installed in a panel of a different manufacturer. I simply removed the surge arrester and asked for the inspection to proceed without it. The inspector looked at me hard for nearly a minute. He knew that I would reinstall the surge arrester as soon as he was gone. Given that the surge arrester was an intermatic, installed in exact compliance with the instructions, I did not see what else I could do. The inspector wanted me to install the plug on surge arrester that is built by the panels manufacturer. Those units have a much lower dissipation rating than the wire in intermatic that I was installing. On that type of issue were you need inspection to get paid for your work processing an appeal is impractical.
--
Tom

From the IAEI UL corner. Sorry I rang in late on this. http://www.ul.com/regulators/novdec2001.pdf

3rd column

[This message has been edited by George Corron (edited 09-17-2002).]

hmmm,
it mentions the UL Question corner via the IAEI.....can anyone comment on this?

Sparky,
It was (maybe is) a column in the IAEI news where you wrote in to the UL rep asking questions.

UL can't have it both ways. In the document that was linked by George, they say that you must follow the manufacturers instructions, but they classify breakers to be used in panels where the use of these classified breakers is prohibited by the panel manufacturer's instructions.
Don

The code requires us to comply with instructions included in the listing or labeling viz.

110.3 Examination, Identification, Installation, and Use of Equipment.
(B) Installation and Use. Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.

If it isn't on the laboratory label or the white sheet it isn't "included."

Don is right they can not have it both ways.
--
Tom

Don,

See, this seems to be a conflict here. Am I suppose to follow the manufactures instructions and only allow "Their" breakers in their panel? Or should I allow all "UL" breakers in everyone's panels if they say that they are listed?

Harold,
In my opinion, only instructions that are an actual part of the listing and labeling are required to be followed by 110.3(B). Instructions that serve only the manufacturer's interests are not part of the listing process. The problem comes with UL making the statement that they did in the document cited by George Carron in a previous post on this thread.
Don

Don,

I realize that most manufactures only want their breakers in their own panels. I can also accept the fact that Cutler Hammer tpye "BR" breakers are UL listed for use in many panels. However when I fail a job, I usually give the contractor a choice, I tell him that either he has to prove to me that the breaker is listed for that panel or else he will have to use a breaker from the same manufacture of the panel. I have yet to see a Square D breaker listed for for a Siemans breaker. It may be out there, and everyday something else new comes along, but who knows?

Don,

With-out the Standards, how is one to be certain which instructions packaged with panelboards etc., are instructions for the listed product or for the manufacturers interest ?

Gwz,
That is an other problem with this issue. UL should require the manufacturers to clearly state what instructions are part of the listing and which ones are just manufacturer's recomendations.
Don

I only allow the manufacturer's breakers or classified breakers. there are some of those little black breakers that don't fit very well in other manufacturers panels. I also let people know that if you don't use the manufacturer's breakers you void a warranty and anything that happens regardless of the reason will probably have no hope in court. I've seen breakers malfunction and busses melt. A flaw in the manufacturing process of the panel will be much harder to convince a judge if you use unclassified or unlisted breakers in the panel. The panel manufacturer's lawyer will talk his way out of this every time. He may even get away with it even if classified breakers were used.

Does it happen much? Never heard of a case. But I'd hate to be the first guy who gets screwed.