240.20(b)

Status
Not open for further replies.
stickboy1375

stickboy1375

Senior Member
Location
Litchfield, CT
1100117809_8.jpg


Just curious, Who has the honor of identifying a handle tie?
 
Last edited:
Identified (as applied to equipment). Recognizable as suitable for the specific purpose, function, use, environment, application, and so forth, where described in a particular Code requirement.
FPN: Some examples of ways to determine suitability of equipment for a specific purpose, environment, or application include investigations by a qualified testing laboratory (listing and labeling), an inspection agency, or other organizations concerned with product evaluation.
Click to expand...
The AHJ makes the call. It is my opinion that the AHJ could(most likely won't, but could) say that the nail or screw is "identified for the purpose". In some cases the nail or screw will make a better handle tie than those sold by the manufacturer.
Don
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
The AHJ makes the call. It is my opinion that the AHJ could(most likely won't, but could) say that the nail or screw is "identified for the purpose". In some cases the nail or screw will make a better handle tie than those sold by the manufacturer.
Don
Click to expand...


In previous code cycles the handle ties must be approved by the AHJ. At that time the AHJ could let you use anything he saw fit.

Now in the 2005 NEC the AHJ shouldn't let anything that isn't identified be used as a handle tie.

The field inspector usually isn't affiliated with a NRTL so it is my opinion that the inspector can not identify handle ties for circuit breakers.

Thats still not to say that he/she might let you use a paperclip, nail, tie wire , or somethingelse that is ready made. Some inspectors do more harm than good, unfortunatly.


ibew441dc
 
ibew441,
There is nothing that says that an identified product must be listed or identified by a testing lab. It implies that in the fine print note, but does not require it.
Don
 
I sometimes identify a nail as an excellent handle tie. At other times, I've identified the fact that some #10 solid bare copper also makes a good handle tie.

Truth be told, if I was an inspector, I would not pass nails as handle ties. I have had nail handle ties pass inspections without mention. Guess it depends on who you get that day, and where you operate.
 
I'm too lazy to look at the moment, but wasn't getting rid of nails as a handle tie one of the stated objectives of the proposal that changed it?

Off the top of my head, that could be way off base...
 
George,
I'm too lazy to look at the moment, but wasn't getting rid of nails as a handle tie one of the stated objectives of the proposal that changed it?
Click to expand...
Yes it was, but they used the word identified and as I said before that does not actually require it to be identified by an outside agency...it does strongly imply that but still leaves it open for the AHJ to "indentify" nails or screws. If they really wanted to prevent that, then they should have used the word "listed". Just another example of code wording not matching code intent.
Don
 
Last edited:
I think it was a good choice of wording - it makes it clearer that they are urging folks to start using the "right stuff", but still leaves the AHJ with an out, in case the AHJ has bigger fish to fry. :D
 
I take "identified" to mean that the breaker manufacturer identifies the handle tie to be the appropriate device for the purpose. Typically, that means it's made by them, similarly to breakers identified by a panel maker to be appropriate for use in their panels.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
I don't see it that way...just a different interpretation of the rule.
Don
Click to expand...


I have to disagree..:) Code says it has to be identified, Mike says you ABSOLUTELY cannot use a nail... where in the code is that said?
 
Last edited:
Stick, whose statement do you take to be absolutely perfect? Mike Holt's material may differ from the NEC Handbook produced by the NFPA, which could vary from Tom Henry's, from the American Electrician's Handbook, from Soares book, from Larry Bobo's, from RBJ's, from Karl Riley's, from my Pop-Up Handbook (due on bookshelves soon ;) ).

I think it's kind of a given that errors and omissions (and interpretations) come with the territory when you buy a Handbook about the NEC, don't you think?
 
George, I'll take three copies of your pop-up book when it hits the presses. One for the office, one for the truck, and one for the guy I work with who needs a book with no words and lots of pictures:wink: :) :D
 
georgestolz said:
Stick, whose statement do you take to be absolutely perfect? Mike Holt's material may differ from the NEC Handbook produced by the NFPA, which could vary from Tom Henry's, from the American Electrician's Handbook, from Soares book, from Larry Bobo's, from RBJ's, from Karl Riley's, from my Pop-Up Handbook (due on bookshelves soon ;) ).

I think it's kind of a given that errors and omissions (and interpretations) come with the territory when you buy a Handbook about the NEC, don't you think?
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree, for some reason that caption under the picture really bothered me... :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top