NEC 2014 section 225.33

[hhsting]

I have outside feeder going into building. Right where they come up the designer is placing a new MLO panelboard with provision of 12 spaces. Out of those 12 space 2 will be used as breakers.

NEC 2014 Section 225.33(A) says six switches or six breakers but the designer has provision for 12 spaces so anyone can put more than 12 breakers. I advise to put either main breaker panelboard or six breakers panelboard but he says it’s not in code violation at present since he is placing two breakers. Says someone does it in future more than six then they are at fault not him.

My biggest concern is if you put new panelboard 12 spaces that means it is ok put breakers in future as well so designer can get into fault. Someone can place more than six breakers.

Not sure what to do. Is the designer correct or I am correct? Does anyone have any opinion should panelboard be MLO 12 spaces or panelboard have main breaker and 12 spaces?

 

[augie47]

You have no control over someone altering a system in the future in such a manner as to make it a violation.
Document what is existing meets NEC and go to the next drawing.

 

[jim dungar]

12 single pole spaces is only 6 two pole spaces.

This is why MLO equipment usually contains a labeling saying it is the installer's responsibility to not exceed 6 'handles'.

 

[hhsting]

He is putting 2 breakers 3 poles and rest have 10 spaces three poles. He says he can have manufacturer provide bus so that only six breakers can be install. Manufacturer would cut the bus so panel can be customize to install six breakers but still have blank spaces. I never heard about it not sure if it’s safe. Has anyone ever heard of this or done this?

 

[augie47]

Both methods are common. Repeating (a common hhsting practice).. as long as there are no more than six throws of the hand it NEC legal. As noted in Post #3, the labeling likely reinforces that. If the engineer or the AHJ wants to limit the buss as you noted above in order to give someone a warm fuzzy feeling, go for it.
You have had two moderators tell you it's legal.
Don't keep beating a dead horse !

 

[hhsting]

Both methods are common. Repeating (a common hhsting practice).. as long as there are no more than six throws of the hand it NEC legal. As noted in Post #3, the labeling likely reinforces that. If the engineer or the AHJ wants to limit the buss as you noted above in order to give someone a warm fuzzy feeling, go for it.
You have had two moderators tell you it's legal.
Don't keep beating a dead horse !

thanks for all your input

 

[oldsparky52]

Someone else drew it, you brought up your concerns and were overruled, inspection department does not flag it, you are good to go. Just keep your documentation. Written counts, verbal is he said she said.

 

[hhsting]

Someone else drew it, you brought up your concerns and were overruled, inspection department does not flag it, you are good to go. Just keep your documentation. Written counts, verbal is he said she said.

Plans reviewer are part of inspection department that is what I am in electrical side. Fire department reviewers have flagged it IBC code does not allow penetration thru party wall.

I was wondering if their is anything in NEC that say no penetration thru party wall. More importantly all the penetrations, meter stacks are existing conditions shown on plans. However they are upgrading service to existing meter stacks and each dwelling unit panelboard they are replacing aged panelboard with new panelboard. All this because new HVAC equipments is being installed for apartment complex.