ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Potseal 11
Admin 5
Recent Posts
Dimmable LED 2x4 lay in fixtures
by Potseal. 04/23/17 07:18 PM
Old decora style outlets
by Lostazhell. 04/22/17 07:59 PM
Permit Snafus...AHJs and Contractors Jump in
by gfretwell. 04/22/17 01:11 PM
How do you find a good employee?
by HotLine1. 04/22/17 10:44 AM
Electrode boilers question
by SteveFehr. 04/21/17 08:32 AM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
234,498 Are you busy
169,165 Re: Forum
162,510 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 58 guests, and 8 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#81646 - 09/04/02 11:55 AM Enforceability of manufacturers written instructions  
tdhorne  Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 345
Maryland, USA
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 Horne

"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous for general use" Thomas Alva Edison

2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#81647 - 09/04/02 12:48 PM Re: Enforceability of manufacturers written instructions  
resqcapt19  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
IL
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


Don(resqcapt19)

#81648 - 09/04/02 02:24 PM Re: Enforceability of manufacturers written instructions  
dana1028  Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 163
San Carlos, CA
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


#81649 - 09/05/02 08:43 PM Re: Enforceability of manufacturers written instructions  
harold endean  Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
Boonton, NJ
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.


#81650 - 09/05/02 09:45 PM Re: Enforceability of manufacturers written instructions  
resqcapt19  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
IL
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


Don(resqcapt19)

#81651 - 09/06/02 07:10 AM Re: Enforceability of manufacturers written instructions  
sparky  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,306
were does the CSPC and NEMA stand on these issues?


are they not our 'trade watchdogs'?


#81652 - 09/06/02 09:13 AM Re: Enforceability of manufacturers written instructions  
tdhorne  Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 345
Maryland, USA
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


Tom Horne

"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous for general use" Thomas Alva Edison

#81653 - 09/17/02 02:24 PM Re: Enforceability of manufacturers written instructions  
George Corron  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 717
Lorton, Va USA
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).]


#81654 - 09/17/02 06:16 PM Re: Enforceability of manufacturers written instructions  
sparky  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,306
hmmm,
it mentions the UL Question corner via the IAEI.....can anyone comment on this?


#81655 - 09/17/02 08:33 PM Re: Enforceability of manufacturers written instructions  
George Corron  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 717
Lorton, Va USA
Sparky,
It was (maybe is) a column in the IAEI news where you wrote in to the UL rep asking questions.


Page 1 of 2 1 2

Member Spotlight
Radar
Radar
Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 349
Joined: April 2004
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.016s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.8169 MB (Peak: 0.9921 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-04-24 03:38:46 UTC