handle ties

Status
Not open for further replies.

pete m.

Senior Member
Location
Ohio
IMHO, I don't think that it would be required any more than installing AFCI breakers at the time that the service change was made. The only way I see it as being "required" is if you install a new MWBC when you performed the service change.

Pete
 

Finite10

Senior Member
Location
Great NW
210.4,B doesn't have an exception for existing stuff. And since you replaced the breaker, I imagine that's why the AHJ wants it handle tied (or a 2 pole).
Personnel safety

Also, just a Multi Wire Branch Circuit note - splice all neutrals with a wirenut, - not the screw terminal bus on the device. 300.13, B
Voltage unbalances
 

cowboyjwc

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Simi Valley, CA
We require that you install the handle tie breakers for a service change.

Why wouldn't you put them in? Other than cost. Remember inspectors don't care about cost.
 

pete m.

Senior Member
Location
Ohio
We require that you install the handle tie breakers for a service change.

To substantiate my stance on the OP's question I believe that requiring the handle ties or common trip breakers is retroactively enforcing the requirements of the NEC (given, of course, that the original MWBC was installed prior to the requirements of 210.4(B) and that the original installation had received approval).

If the AHJ's have determined that handle-tied or common-trip breakers are required for MWBC's that existed prior to 210.4(B) then I can't see how they can determine that AFCI breakers aren't required for the same service change.

Pete
 

shepelec

Senior Member
Location
Palmer, MA
How is requiring the new installation to conform with the current NEC retroactive?

If you are installing a new panel and breakers I would say it needs to conform to the current code.

Arc-faults may have a problem with the wiring configuration where as handle ties or two pole breaker would not.
 

pete m.

Senior Member
Location
Ohio
How is requiring the new installation to conform with the current NEC retroactive?

If you are installing a new panel and breakers I would say it needs to conform to the current code.

Arc-faults may have a problem with the wiring configuration where as handle ties or two pole breaker would not.

If a new MWBC is installed then I would agree.

The question, as I understand it, is not whether a certain type of breaker would be problematic with existing wiring but whether a new or different type of breaker (i.e. AFCI or Handle-tie) can be required to be installed for existing circuits.

It is simply my opinion that it is not enforcable and would be retroactive.

Pete
 

Twoskinsoneman

Senior Member
Location
West Virginia, USA NEC: 2020
Occupation
Facility Senior Electrician
If a new MWBC is installed then I would agree.

The question, as I understand it, is not whether a certain type of breaker would be problematic with existing wiring but whether a new or different type of breaker (i.e. AFCI or Handle-tie) can be required to be installed for existing circuits.

It is simply my opinion that it is not enforcable and would be retroactive.

Pete

I agree with this post.
Whether or not it is problematic with the exiting wiring shouldn't really have any bearing on NEC compliance.
 

cowboyjwc

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Simi Valley, CA
How is requiring the new installation to conform with the current NEC retroactive?

If you are installing a new panel and breakers I would say it needs to conform to the current code.

Arc-faults may have a problem with the wiring configuration where as handle ties or two pole breaker would not.

That was pretty much what I was gonna say.

I'm going to make you do the panel schedule per the new code, I'm going to make you update the grounding and bonding if it's required, I'm going to require that you put in the correct size riser and service entrance conductors. I don't think a couple of two pole breakers are really going to matter that much.
 

Little Bill

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee NEC:2017
Occupation
Semi-Retired Electrician
That was pretty much what I was gonna say.

I'm going to make you do the panel schedule per the new code, I'm going to make you update the grounding and bonding if it's required, I'm going to require that you put in the correct size riser and service entrance conductors. I don't think a couple of two pole breakers are really going to matter that much.

You wouldn't require that for just a panel change would you? A service upgrade I can see, but not just a straight panel swap.
 

jumper

Senior Member
How is requiring the new installation to conform with the current NEC retroactive?

If you are installing a new panel and breakers I would say it needs to conform to the current code.

Arc-faults may have a problem with the wiring configuration where as handle ties or two pole breaker would not.

That was pretty much what I was gonna say.

I'm going to make you do the panel schedule per the new code, I'm going to make you update the grounding and bonding if it's required, I'm going to require that you put in the correct size riser and service entrance conductors. I don't think a couple of two pole breakers are really going to matter that much.

I agree with these guys. And too add, requiring AFCI would also dictate that only a few certain type of panels could be used if there are existing MWBC because AFAIK only a few mfgs make 2pole AFCIs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top