contactor

Status
Not open for further replies.

garrisonm1

Member
Location
Maryland
I mounted a 10 pole contactor in a 12 x 12 jb. THe inspector said this is illegal because it should be in its own approve housing. Has anyone seen this before.

greg
 

roger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Fl
Occupation
Retired Electrician
Re: contactor

Greg, this is one of those inspectors that doesn't understand the meaning or intent of listed and / or approved, and this being the case he takes it to the point of rediculous.

I have been involved with a number of custom contactor assemblies on jobs using hinged Hoffman or others boxes, and this was by design.

The listing issue is being taken to far by missinterpretation of the intent. IMO

Roger

[ April 22, 2003, 08:15 PM: Message edited by: roger ]
 

dcsva@aol.com

Senior Member
Location
Virginia
Re: contactor

Do all terminations within the JB panel land on terminals like phoenix , allen bradley, or the like. OR are some wire-nutted and some on the screw terminals associated with the contactor??
We build Custom UL listed Industrial Enclosed Control Panels, that may be what he is hanging his hat on. If I were installing this JB, I would make all terminations within the enclosure with dedicated terminals of the same type. However, i can't find anything in the code that says what you have is not acceptable.

[ April 22, 2003, 08:24 PM: Message edited by: dcsva@aol.com ]
 

templdl

Senior Member
Location
Wisconsin
Re: contactor

This is the way I understand it.
I assume the box and all of its contents are listed, that the internal wiring and wiring techniques comply with all of the NEC requirements, then there should be no problem. It's when on attempts to duplicate that a UL listed assembly that can cause problems.
Listed assemblies are assembled and tested to meet their listing requirement such as UL for example.
On the other hand it is not all that unusual for an electrical inspector to go the other way and reject a UL listed assembly because wire sizes are smaller than whose allowed by the NEC. However the assembly has been tested and has received the UL listing which is covered by 2002 NEC 90.7 Examination of equipment for safety.
It appears to be that the inspector has expected to see a UL listed assembly. Because of the lack of a listing he should have inspected the assembly to assure that all of the internal and external components and wiring techniques meet NEC requirements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top