Handle ties for MWBC's

Status
Not open for further replies.
goldstar

goldstar

Senior Member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Electrical Contractor
I'm not sure what is done in other states but here in NJ, as I understand it, I am only required to use 2-pole breakers for MWBC's in NEW construction. If I perform a service upgrade or replace breakers I am not required to use 2-pole breakers for MWBC's. I'm replacing "like" with "like". Now, I'm not saying that it's not a good idea to use the 2-pole breakers but is it required?
 
NEC requires either a dp or 3 pole breaker or sp's with handle ties. Jersey has it's own rules so Trevor may have to help there
 
As Dennis said, it could be handle ties. To elaborate on that a bit, note that a double pole is about the same price as two single poles. so using a handle tie actually might end up costing more than using a double pole. The advantage of handle ties is you can take them off after inspection:lol:. Three pole breakers are way more than 3 singles. Eaton makes a 3X handle tie for both BR and CH, but Siemens doesnt appear to make one. Obviously, overpriced QO has a single handle anyway and homerline isnt available in three phase.
 
Had a conversation with the EI in my home town regarding this. He believes that if I perform a service upgrade I have to use 2-P breakers for all MWBC's. That is not my understanding. So, there's a mis-communication between what we are taught in our CEU classes as EC's and what EI's are taught in theirs. I had a CEU class last night and the instructor (who is also on the licensing board) was in agreement with me. I'm hesitant to call the State DCA because they often know less than all of us but I'll get to the bottom of this eventually.
 
Multi-pole CB's are not required for a MWBC but are one option when you need to comply with the simultaneous disconnect rule. I would just buy a bag of cheap handle ties and use them with SP breakers when needed.
 
electrofelon said:
As Dennis said, it could be handle ties. To elaborate on that a bit, note that a double pole is about the same price as two single poles. so using a handle tie actually might end up costing more than using a double pole. The advantage of handle ties is you can take them off after inspection:lol:. Three pole breakers are way more than 3 singles. Eaton makes a 3X handle tie for both BR and CH, but Siemens doesnt appear to make one. Obviously, overpriced QO has a single handle anyway and homerline isnt available in three phase.
Click to expand...

QO 2 and 3 pole breakers have a single handle, but they do make handle ties for two or three single pole breakers and three single pole breakers and a tie are much cheaper than a three pole breaker. two single pole breakers and a handle tie are about same price as a two pole breaker.
 
We require handle ties on upgrades. If you have to upgrade the grounding, why wouldn't you have to upgrade all the other code requirements? Some jurisdictions around here are requiring AFCI breakers, but I don't believe that a service change triggers any of the requirements for those.
 
kwired said:
QO 2 and 3 pole breakers have a single handle, but they do make handle ties for two or three single pole breakers and three single pole breakers and a tie are much cheaper than a three pole breaker. two single pole breakers and a handle tie are about same price as a two pole breaker.
Click to expand...

Not sure what my thinking was with the "qo has a single handle anyway" comment:dunce: .But good to know sq D makes three pole HT's. Siemens seems to be the odd man out.
 
cowboyjwc said:
We require handle ties on upgrades. If you have to upgrade the grounding, why wouldn't you have to upgrade all the other code requirements? Some jurisdictions around here are requiring AFCI breakers, but I don't believe that a service change triggers any of the requirements for those.
Click to expand...

I understand the Code requirement and I think it's a good idea and regulation. That said, where do you draw the line ? As you mentioned there is no trigger to install AFCI breakers. Should we be going through a residence and replacing receptacles with GFCI's if the area calls for it ? We do a lot of strange things here in NJ - many of which are to our benefit as EC's but some are not. With respect to $$ I have no problem replacing s/p breakers with 2-poles on an upgrade. My question had to do with whether we are required to do so (here in NJ) when a customer is selling his house and an EI picks up on it or performing a service upgrade. Thanks for your response.
 
goldstar said:
I understand the Code requirement and I think it's a good idea and regulation. That said, where do you draw the line ? As you mentioned there is no trigger to install AFCI breakers. Should we be going through a residence and replacing receptacles with GFCI's if the area calls for it ? We do a lot of strange things here in NJ - many of which are to our benefit as EC's but some are not. With respect to $$ I have no problem replacing s/p breakers with 2-poles on an upgrade. My question had to do with whether we are required to do so (here in NJ) when a customer is selling his house and an EI picks up on it or performing a service upgrade. Thanks for your response.
Click to expand...

When someone is selling the house you're not required to upgrade to AFCI, handle ties or multi-pole CB's. A service change is a little gray because of the rehab code, since you're not required to install AFCI's I would use the same argument to say that handle ties or multi-pole CB's are not required either. IMO they should be required, I always install the handle ties because they're cheap and easy and does increase safety for the homeowner.
 
goldstar said:
I'm not sure what is done in other states but here in NJ, as I understand it, I am only required to use 2-pole breakers for MWBC's in NEW construction. If I perform a service upgrade or replace breakers I am not required to use 2-pole breakers for MWBC's. I'm replacing "like" with "like". Now, I'm not saying that it's not a good idea to use the 2-pole breakers but is it required?
Click to expand...
New Jersey has a few NEC amendments in 210 that can be found here under electrical sub code:
https://www.state.nj.us/dca/divisions/codes/codreg/#2
I am not aware of any different requirements for MWBC.
All electrical work including alterations has to conform to the current code, unless you get a variance:
https://www.nj.gov/dca/divisions/codes/codreg/pdf_regs/njac_5_23_2.pdf
 
tortuga said:
New Jersey has a few NEC amendments in 210 that can be found here under electrical sub code:
https://www.state.nj.us/dca/divisions/codes/codreg/#2
I am not aware of any different requirements for MWBC.
Click to expand...

This is the list of Codes that NJ had adopted as of 9/3/2019 with a 6 month grace period

All electrical work including alterations has to conform to the current code, unless you get a variance:
https://www.nj.gov/dca/divisions/codes/codreg/pdf_regs/njac_5_23_2.pdf
Click to expand...
There is nothing in njac_5_23_2.pdf that states that I have to use 2-pole breakers or handle ties on existing residential breaker panels or service upgrades.
Thanks for your reply.
 
infinity said:
When someone is selling the house you're not required to upgrade to AFCI, handle ties or multi-pole CB's. A service change is a little gray because of the rehab code, since you're not required to install AFCI's I would use the same argument to say that handle ties or multi-pole CB's are not required either. IMO they should be required, I always install the handle ties because they're cheap and easy and does increase safety for the homeowner.
Click to expand...

I hear you and for the most part I agree with you. As far as mandating a handle tie installation or a 2-pole breaker replacement I don't agree. Yes, I agree it's a safety issue and we should err on the side of caution but many of these panels have been in existence for years without any documented problems (relating to MWBC's that is). If an inexperienced or unqualified person opens up a breaker panel or a splice box where an MWBC exists and gets whacked or causes damage how can the blame for that be put on the installing EC or the last EC that worked on the job ? Are we now going to be required to be our brother's keeper ?

Anyway Rob, I believe you've answered my question - Thanks.
 
goldstar said:
I hear you and for the most part I agree with you. As far as mandating a handle tie installation or a 2-pole breaker replacement I don't agree. Yes, I agree it's a safety issue and we should err on the side of caution but many of these panels have been in existence for years without any documented problems (relating to MWBC's that is). If an inexperienced or unqualified person opens up a breaker panel or a splice box where an MWBC exists and gets whacked or causes damage how can the blame for that be put on the installing EC or the last EC that worked on the job ? Are we now going to be required to be our brother's keeper ?

Anyway Rob, I believe you've answered my question - Thanks.
Click to expand...

They're not required by any New Jersey code amendment so if they are required it would need to based on the NEC. IMO they're not required under the NEC for a service change but a few $.50 handle ties are worth installing especially if it prevents a call back due to a finicky inspector who insists on them being installed. Given their minimal cost I see no harm in protecting a few dumb homeowners from killing themselves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top