Local AHJ overidding prepackaged UL listed standby gnerator system

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Brendan Conway

Member
Location
Jessup, Maryland, United States of America
We are a dealer for a popular standby generator manufacturer who prepackages generators and transfer switches with complete wiring harnesses which I am sure many here are familiar with. We have one jurisdiction out of 60+/- which we are licensed to work in that will not accept the generator's control wiring to be encased in the same raceway as the feeder, even though it is part of the UL listed wiring provided by the manufacturer. We have several installations in this same jurisdiction which have passed their final inspections, so it is clear that not all of the inspectors know or agree with the final interpretation of the chief inspector. However, after a lengthy conversation, The cheif electrical inspector does not consider this wiring to be "functionally associated" and I am wondering if I can get some input from others on this interpretation.
 
Because it passes UL does not mean it will fly with an inspection simply because UL does not test or look at NEC issues-- I think they should but....

If the low voltage control wiring is a class 2 or 3 then it cannot be in the same raceway-- art.725.136(A)
 
In MA NEC section 90.4 was amended requiring inspectors to accept listed equipment when used as the instructions state.

Unfortunatly without such an amendment the AHJ does not have to accept it.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Because it passes UL does not mean it will fly with an inspection simply because UL does not test or look at NEC issues-- I think they should but....

If the low voltage control wiring is a class 2 or 3 then it cannot be in the same raceway-- art.725.136(A)
Click to expand...

In my opinion the NEC does not apply to listed equipment.
 
iwire said:
In my opinion the NEC does not apply to listed equipment.
Click to expand...

90.7 specifically says this.

My guess is the inspector just does not like this kind of thing so is declining them based solely on his preferences and not anything that is in the code.

Having said that, he has a boss that this can be appealed to.

What does he expect you to do - take it apart and redo it?
 
iwire said:
In my opinion the NEC does not apply to listed equipment.
Click to expand...
The state of NC inspector has turn down generator switches because you had to unscrew the cover to get to the breaker. Not readily accessible and a listed piece of equipment.
 
Brendan Conway said:
In response to Bob. He is saying he has the final say and I am at the end of my chain. Who would I appeal too. I mentioned writting to the electrical board fo Baltimore County but he states the have no control of this. Who would be his boss?
Click to expand...

Most likely the guy who signs his check :D
There has to be someone in the food chain to whom he has to answer, but, in some small jurisdictions the inspector has the last word and is the AHJ.
 
petersonra said:
90.7 specifically says this.

My guess is the inspector just does not like this kind of thing so is declining them based solely on his preferences and not anything that is in the code.

Having said that, he has a boss that this can be appealed to.

What does he expect you to do - take it apart and redo it?
Click to expand...

art. 90 is not enforceable
 
Brendan Conway said:
The inspector is referring to Art. 725.48 (B) (1) and stating that in his opinion the class 1 control wiring is not functionally associated with the power supply wiring.
Click to expand...

Well then I disagree with that as the equipment is functionally associated and the fact that it is class 1 he is off in my opinion. In NC we can appeal to the state inspector who will make a call. Not sure about your state.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
The state of NC inspector has turn down generator switches because you had to unscrew the cover to get to the breaker. Not readily accessible and a listed piece of equipment.
Click to expand...

Yes, the AHJ is charged with the approval of equipment, the AHJ can refuse to accept any equipment for any reason. If they want to refuse equipment based on an NEC section they may choose to do so.

That said the NEC does not apply to listed equipment unless there is amendment stating so.
 
Brendan Conway said:
In response to Bob. He is saying he has the final say and I am at the end of my chain. Who would I appeal too. I mentioned writting to the electrical board fo Baltimore County but he states the have no control of this. Who would be his boss?
Click to expand...

There are no inspectors anywhere regardless of rank that cannot have their decisions reviewed. If he actually said this, he is flat out lying to you as this would amount to a lack of due process and is unconstitutional.

As a practical matter it might turn out to be more or less true.

Why not just ask him what it is he thinks should be done to "fix" whatever it is he thinks is wrong and get him to put it in writing. If he demands that you modify a listed assembly before he will approve it, then so be it.
 
petersonra said:
90.7 specifically says this.

My guess is the inspector just does not like this kind of thing so is declining them based solely on his preferences and not anything that is in the code.

Having said that, he has a boss that this can be appealed to.

What does he expect you to do - take it apart and redo it?
Click to expand...

Generally I find it is stupidity or arrogance or both on the part of an inspector. The point is, is it worth fighting?
 
Brendan Conway said:
I should also add that this installation was completed using an existing conduit recently installed by the builders electrician during the homes construction. There is 60+ feet of finished home that a conduit will need to be installed through and also 90' of yard that will need to be dug up.
Click to expand...

This raises a partial red flag (or maybe yellow) for me: The wiring harness for generator system is prepackaged and presumably part of a listed assembly, so the AHJ has no authority over that. But the issue here seems to be whether wires that the manufacturer has run through a single conduit to a demarcation point on their system can be extended through an additional conduit run to another demarcation point where they come together into a different listed assembly.
In that case, the listing of the equipment does not seem to protect you and the extended wiring becomes subject to the NEC.
That leaves you with the still valid, but somewhat weaker argument that the use does in fact conform with the NEC.
Good Luck, and my sympathy.
 
GoldDigger said:
This raises a partial red flag (or maybe yellow) for me: The wiring harness for generator system is prepackaged and presumably part of a listed assembly, so the AHJ has no authority over that. But the issue here seems to be whether wires that the manufacturer has run through a single conduit to a demarcation point on their system can be extended through an additional conduit run to another demarcation point where they come together into a different listed assembly.
In that case, the listing of the equipment does not seem to protect you and the extended wiring becomes subject to the NEC.
That leaves you with the still valid, but somewhat weaker argument that the use does in fact conform with the NEC.
Good Luck, and my sympathy.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm thinking too, that is probably why he is rejecting it.
 
petersonra said:
There are no inspectors anywhere regardless of rank that cannot have their decisions reviewed.
Click to expand...

:D

Officially yes of course, in the real world not so much.

Here in MA there is a process and it costs about $75 dollars to file a grievance.

It's non refundable and there is little reason to believe that they will not side with the inspector.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top