Control Drawing Limitation - Looking for AHJ Opinions

[Product Safety Guy]

I have noticed that there is an NRTL that requires notation on the control drawing that directs the user/installer to use only <insert same-NTRL name here> approved associated apparatus that is compatible with its entity parameters.

I know this problem can be solved in a number of different ways, but that's not what I am looking for here.

So my question to the AHJ's out there is this: If you see an installation of an IS apparatus approved by NRTL1 connected to an Associated IS apparatus approved by NRTL2, the entity parameters line up properly, but the control drawing for the IS apparatus specifies an NRTL1 approval of the associated IS apparatus, do you reject the installation or approve the installation based upon the accreditation of both NRTL1 and NRTL2, proper markings, and compatibility of the entity parameters?

Thanks!

 

[GoldDigger]

If both NRTL's test to the same standard, it is hard for me to see the justification for making the approval conditional on using the same NRTL for all of the component equipment. That may not stop them from using that language, but I would hope that an AHJ would be able to look beyond that.

 

[mgookin]

It really depends on what it is.

AHJ has every right to reject it. I'd guess some will pass it and some won't.

There are still plenty of inspectors who think there is only one NRTL. As many times as you tell them until you're blue in the face, they still reject installations for not being NRTL1 Listed.

 

[Product Safety Guy]

Thanks for the insight guys!

PSG

 

[petersonra]

You might want to look carefully at what the instructions actually say.

It is not unusual for them to be worded in a way that appears to say one thing while not actually saying it.

I would also point out that for whatever reason there are a lot of CSA approved systems out there that are probably not listed to a US standard.