230.71(A), 90.4, and a MLO panel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well guys, I am recovering from rotator cuff surgery. 1st thread I've looked at in a while. I love this place......everyone so nice and polite and rational all of the time.

Dnem: you come across as an arrogant a** h*** at times, but I like your posts. It forces me to read and learn a bit more at times. I believe it was a code compliant installation, but you had valid concerns ie. load calc.

I am interested in finding out how many people would have done such an installation. Being code compliant can be done in many different ways at times. (some being better IMO than others)

Mike (bulldog): How long does it take to make a phone call? Couldn't you on occasion make the learning process a little easier on an inspector or anyone else for that matter.

George: I still want to know what your score was.

It is a b**** trying to use keyboard and mouse both when your arm is in a sling. I won't be doing much of this for a while.

Iwire Bob: hope you have a great vacation.

Got my fix for now. I'll be back!
 
wow, I can't beleive I read it all in one setting !

David, the installation was compliant with current code as worded

Many of us would have done as your EC did, cheaper to abide by what you say- even- if- wrong
 
I've just re-read all of the posts again too.
The UL info gives me pause for consideration as it apparently doesn't allow empty spaces in a main after all of the (6) disconnects are installed.
Right or wrong?
steve
 
UL does not prohibit space after 6 mains are installed.
UL requires only that the manufacturer have at least one possible combination that will use up all of the space.
 
For the application of the NEC we must apply the definitions as found in the NEC. There is nothing in the NEC that would prohibit the empty space. The UL standard does not change this.
Don
 
jim dungar said:
UL does not prohibit space after 6 mains are installed.
UL requires only that the manufacturer have at least one possible combination that will use up all of the space.
Click to expand...

"UL requires only that the manufacturer have at least one possible combination that will use up all of the space."
I'm still waiting for someone to explain what this means.

Is it 12 slots for 6 2poles ?
Maybe 14 slots so that a 2pole surge arrestor could be included, if desired ?
I don't know what "possible combination" means.

David
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
For the application of the NEC we must apply the definitions as found in the NEC. There is nothing in the NEC that would prohibit the empty space. The UL standard does not change this.
Don
Click to expand...

"The UL standard does not change this."
How about 110.3(B) ?
If you can't get it listed, you can't use it.

David
 
dnem said:
How about 110.3(B) ?
If you can't get it listed, you can't use it.

David
Click to expand...


Can you post any manufacturers instructions that are included with any of their panels "Listing or Labeling" information that would support you using 110.3(B)?

Roger
 
Who Cares?

Who Cares?

.

Gentelman, HO's have no knowledge or training to have an orderly shut down.

Fireman have some training to "YANK" a meter out of its socket, from the outside,{ having nothing to do with a MD or MB} of a home prior to entering.

The more I look at this electrical inspecters concerns here, I go back to his athourity to "allow" other installasions that meet the intent if not the letter of the code.

Where is the hazord in this odd and goofey set up with this panel? Is there one?"

How would there be one if a seventh or more CB would be added?

This hallmark of the NEC is and has much to do about nothing in regards to resindential properties.

Its all about hazords. My 2cents. I dont see one here at all. I dont care if they add more CB's.

A good fireman will pull the meter. The HO will not know otherwise, so whats the point?

P.S. I didnt read all post, so if I repeated others, I will buy a round, even one for that electrical inspector who started this mess in the first place.
 
Last edited:
dnem said:
I don't know what "possible combination" means.

David
Click to expand...

It really does mean any possible combination of devices (including handle ties) regardless how extreme or unlikely.

For example;
Extremely unlikey,
If there were a handle tie available for (10) 1-pole breakers, then it would be possible to fill up all the spaces in a 42 circuit panel.

Actually possible,
A standard 2-pole breaker with an external alarm contact takes up three spaces, so it would be easy to find a combination of (6) devices that fills up an 18-circuit panel. Add a 2-pole surge arrestor and (4) 1-pole dummy breakers, now you can fill a 24 circuit panel.
 
I will add that I have installed this sort of setup before in washington dc commercial applications and never got anything but approved

the warning "Only qualified personel" means just that
 
Last edited:
The UL marking Guide requires that there be a combination of "switching units" that occupy all available space for switching units. I am not sure how surge suppressors and alarm contacts are viewed as switching units.

Roger, As far as the reference to 110.3(B), it is the UL Marking Guide for Panelboards we are discussing. These panelboards are conditionally marked as "suitable for use as service equipment". Failure to comply with the conditions of the marking would result in a violation of 230.66 and 110.3(B) in my opinion.
 
RB1 said:
Roger, As far as the reference to 110.3(B), it is the UL Marking Guide for Panelboards we are discussing. These panelboards are conditionally marked as "suitable for use as service equipment". Failure to comply with the conditions of the marking would result in a violation of 230.66 and 110.3(B) in my opinion.
Click to expand...

RB1, how does that have anything to do with 110.3(B) which is talking about instructions included in the listing or labeling?

B) Installation and Use Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.
Click to expand...

Please post an example of any manufacturers instructions that are included in the listing or labeling of their panels.

BTW, As an aside, where is the requirement or what requires a panel to be listed? There are only two types of breakers required to be listed as far as any NEC wording.

Roger
 
dlhoule said:
I am interested in finding out how many people would have done such an installation.
Click to expand...
I doubt many here would do so. I haven't heard anyone chime in saying "What are you talking about? That's a fantastic way to build a service!" :)

dlhoule said:
George: I still want to know what your score was.
Click to expand...
You and me both - the state of CO will not release that information. :(

Take it easy on that arm, Larry. :)
 
roger said:
Can you post any manufacturers instructions that are included with any of their panels "Listing or Labeling" information that would support you using 110.3(B)?

Roger
Click to expand...

There's one that comes to mind because I see it almost everyday. . There's nothing in the NEC that requires a exhaust fan over a shower to be GFCI protected but if you pop the cover off the unit, the label inside says it must be GFCI protected. . If it's not on a GFCI, there no violation of 210.8, it would be a 110.3(B) violation.

David
 
roger said:
Can you post any manufacturers instructions that are included with any of their panels "Listing or Labeling" information that would support you using 110.3(B)?

Roger
Click to expand...

I just thought of another one. . This one is a panel restriction. . Use of minis. . Panel instructions dictate where minis can be used in the panel and how many can be used. . The NEC doesn't limit the use of minis, it's the panel manufacturer that had the panel tested and allows certain configurations based on things like heat dissipation.

Going against their limits on minis would be a 110.3(B) violation.

David
 
David, how does a shower fixture apply to 230.71(A), 90.4, and a MLO panel?

As far as the mini's, that wouldn't change anything either.

Now, are these instructions part of the Listing and Labeling of the equipment or just the manufacturers CYA?


Roger
 
Gmack said:
.Where is the hazord in this odd and goofey set up with this panel? Is there one?"

How would there be one if a seventh or more CB would be added?

This hallmark of the NEC is and has much to do about nothing in regards to resindential properties.

Its all about hazords. My 2cents. I dont see one here at all. I dont care if they add more CB's.
Click to expand...

My confusion over the reason for the various different panel restrictions is the subject that I brought up on the followup thread to this one.
http://www.mikeholt.com/code_forum/showthread.php?p=614087#post614087
It?s hard to understand what is required when the rules aren?t clear and no reasoning is given to explain the rules that are written down.

Gmack said:
P.S. I didnt read all post, so if I repeated others, I will buy a round, even one for that electrical inspector who started this mess in the first place.
Click to expand...

Some of these threads are real marathons. . There have been a couple threads that I started reading that I wanted to add a comment but I couldn?t get up the desire to hang in there and read page after page. . I?m not a fast reader and long threads take me some time. . Plus I keep finding comments that I want to reply to and it can take hours of posting to make your way thru a thread like this one if you stick with it day after day and keep posting.

David

PS. . I?m not going to forget that you offered to buy a round. . Causing this level of mayhem isn?t as easy as it looks. . I need to be rewarded for this kind of dedication. . Just ask Mike, he?ll ?put in the good word? for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top