6 disconnect rule violation?

[geezer]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

I guess if you write enough red tags they can afford to.If you can sleep knowing your steeling when your righting tags that are for non violations then good for you.Even when you back down on a red tag you already have stole the EC time.

OK lets say that I am wrong, ignorant, AND overpaid and, incompetent. If I made an error in judgment and needed to be educated, does that make me a thief? Is everyone who makes a mistake a thief?

I would not sleep at all if I knowingly red-tagged a job that was done correctly. Not even if you sang a lullaby to me sweetly.

edited because I hit did something wrong and erased the whole thing.

[ November 22, 2005, 06:19 PM: Message edited by: geezer ]

 

[charlie b]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

We're starting to not play nice, and I may have to close this thread. We've no right to insinuate that an Inspector's error is tantamount to theft.

 

[geezer]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Hey, I was just going to reply to mud-shrunks last post and it disappeared! Anyway, I am not the guy you referred to earlier. No apology needed. Sorry about how I slay your name, every time I see it, thats how it comes out in my mind.

[ November 22, 2005, 11:37 PM: Message edited by: geezer ]

 

[marc deschenes]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

quote:
225.33 Maximum Number of Disconnects.
(A) General. The disconnecting means for each supply permitted by 225.30 shall consist of not more than six switches or six circuit breakers mounted in a single enclosure, in a group of separate enclosures, or in or on a switchboard. There shall be no more than six disconnects per supply grouped in any one location.

I think if this section set a limit on the "provisions" for the installation of the switches or circuit breakers in an enclosure such an argument as geezer's might hold water.

But the six switches/circuit breakers can be in a group of separate enclosures ,how would one limit the ability to add another separate enclosure?

 

[amptech]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Websparky wrote:
I disagree. The AHJ has the authority to require a change.
Read this sentence in 90.4:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The authority having jurisdiction for enforcement of the Code has the responsibility for making interpretations of the rules, for deciding on the approval of equipment and materials, and for granting the special permission contemplated in a number of the rules.

In any jurisdiction I have worked in the inspector is not the Authority Having Jurisdiction, the town board, county commissioners, building commissioner, etc. is the AHJ. To enforce something like what is mentioned in the original post there would need to be a local ordinance to ammend the NEC passed into law. In Indiana a local jurisdiction can no longer ammend the NEC as adopted by the State of Indiana. Believe me, several have tried and when called on it they received the smack-down from the State Building Commissioner. That all being said, I think the inspector's call in the original post was wrong.

 

[marc deschenes]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Originally posted by iwire:

Originally posted by websparky:
Let's say the electrician had a spare 42 circuit MLO panel and installed it in the same location with the same breakers as the original post.

Would this also be acceptable?

Absolutely.

The code section limits only the number of disconnects not the potential for disconnects.

I'm not sure I can continue to agree with this broad of a statement thanks to hurk27 who posted a UL guide to panel board markings at a related thread,.

225.36 says the disconnecting means shall be suitable for use as service equipment.
is a 42 circuit main lug panel listed as suitable as service equipment?

Or does 225.36 refer only to the breakers ?

Siemens is a brand that is common where I live and this little note six appears only on Main Lug Panels with a maximum of 6 2pole branch circuit spaces. As far as I can tell.
note 6

 

[marc deschenes]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

I see note six did not appear I'll try again
Note six reads
"Suitable for use as service entrance equipment when not more than six main disconnecting means are provided and when not used as a lighting and appliance branch circuit panelboard.
See article 384.14 of the NEC. "

 

[hurk27]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

By Marc: I'm not sure I can continue to agree with this broad of a statement thanks to hurk27 who posted a UL guide to panel board markings at a related thread,.

Oh sure Marc blame me.
I will blame UL, They wrote it.

20. A panelboard with the neutral insulated from the enclosure may be marked ?Suitable for use as
service equipment when not more than six main disconnecting means are provided? when the following conditions are met:

A. There must be at least one combination of switching units that can be mounted to occupy all available space for switching units ; and, whether by using handle ties or similar devices, not more than six main disconnects will result (including factory-installed disconnects).

This can be found on page 8 item 20HERE

It seems that UL intends that the panels are to only have a certain amount of spaces when there is no main and it is to be used as service equipment?

[ November 23, 2005, 08:12 PM: Message edited by: hurk27 ]

 

[websparky]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Here in Ohio the AHJ is the local Building Commissioner. We as State Certified Electrical Inspectors act on behalf of the AHJ and carry the same authority. If someone wants to challenge our judgement, all they have to do is phone our boss. His decission is final. If someone doesn't agree with him, then you would submit your claim to the State. Until the state decides, the local AHJ's decission is in effect.

Also read #21 on page 8.

 

[marc deschenes]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Hurk27 , I am thankful you posted the link. (pun intended)

21. A panelboard with the neutral factory-bonded to the enclosure is marked ?Suitable only for use as
service equipment. Install no more than six main disconnecting means.?

Websparky , How common is this panelboard ? Not used often in residential around here , in 20 years of doing electrical work I've never seen
one and how would it be used as a sub panel ?

For me it is that little note six , it excludes lighting and appliance branch circuit panelboards.

How many other brands have a note "six"

[ November 23, 2005, 11:50 PM: Message edited by: marc deschenes ]

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Look at item 23 in that source. The wording is not the same for a lighting and appliance branch circuit panel.

23. Class CTL lighting and appliance panelboards without main overcurrent protection usually are not marked suitable for service equipment use. Such panelboards, with not more than 10 percent of their overcurrent devices rated 30 amperes or less, however, may be suitable for use as service equipment. They are marked ?Suitable for use as service equipment when not more than six main disconnecting means are provided and when not used as a lighting and appliance branch-circuit panelboard; see Section 408.14 (384?14) of the NEC.

Don

 

[mdshunk]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

That UL document, while interesting, has me quite confused. Does anyone think they have a handle on it? Maybe somebody could sum up what items 20-23 are saying, because my head is spinning. I think that this document might hold the answer to this dilema.

 

[iwire]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Originally posted by websparky:
Here in Ohio the AHJ is the local Building Commissioner. We as State Certified Electrical Inspectors act on behalf of the AHJ and carry the same authority. If someone wants to challenge our judgment, all they have to do is phone our boss. His decission is final. If someone doesn't agree with him, then you would submit your claim to the State. Until the state decides, the local AHJ's decission is in effect.

How can you call yourself the AHJ if you answer to the AHJ?

That is like police officer saying that because they work as a representative to the police chief that they are the chief.

I sure would like to see the actual laws that you believe give you all this power.

I would not be surprised if the actual laws do not support you position. IMO it is more likely handled the way you describe comes down to "We have always done it that way".

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Maybe somebody could sum up what items 20-23 are saying

I don't think that it can be summed up. The 2 sections are in conflict and it appears that two different people wrote them and did not talk each other.
Don

 

[websparky]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Bob,

I'm sorry that you are used to a different system where you have lived and worked. However you should realize by now that there are many different ways the code is enforced and that just because it isn't your way doesn't make it the wrong way! We have been down this road before and you didn't like it then either. I don't the way your area of the country changes the code to suit their interests but I don't cry about it. Why doesn't your area adopt the code "as is" like most of the rest of the country?

A panelboard load center or even the open slots in either of those are not disconnects, never have been never will.

I am sure the CMPs are well aware of how that section is written as it has been that way for a very long time.

I did know that you were involved with any of the CMPs let alone to the extent that you were qualified to speak on their behalf.

 

[iwire]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Originally posted by websparky:
However you should realize by now that there are many different ways the code is enforced and that just because it isn't your way doesn't make it the wrong way!

Your right I do not like it.

I also agree entirely that my liking it or not does not make it wrong.

I have simply asked for some reference that proves your point. Post the text of the law or put up a link etc.

You have asked that of me in the past over fire alarm system inspections in my area. I provided you with the local laws that backed my position.

Have a great Holiday.

Bob

 

[iwire]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Originally posted by websparky:

A panelboard load center or even the open slots in either of those are not disconnects, never have been never will.

I am sure the CMPs are well aware of how that section is written as it has been that way for a very long time.

I did know that you were involved with any of the CMPs let alone to the extent that you were qualified to speak on their behalf.

You know that I am not so now you are just busting my chops.

Is it your position that the CMP members are not aware of the differences between a disconnect and a panelboard?

 

[websparky]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Yes, I am busting your chops

 

[mpd]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

so it sounds like that 42 circuit MLO panel does not meet the intent of art. 225, and for what its worth in the state I inspect the electrical inspector has the responsibility of making interpretations, if the contractor does not agree, he can take him to board appeals.

 

[iwire]

Re: 6 disconnect rule violation?

Originally posted by websparky:
Yes, I am busting your chops