Plan checker strategy: DIN rail

hmspe said:
Sounds like lawyers need to be involved. A notice of claim sent to the jurisdiction's legal department can work wonders.
Click to expand...
It's probably at that point. This is not a one off install, and so far we've lost tens of thousands in bookings due
to the same underlying issue. I am seeking a consultant, legal firm or even war stories of taking legal action or at least threats against an AHJ.
 
brycenesbitt said:
…
They can't get out of their mind that Eaton breakers put on Siemens bus stabs are too loose and get hot and fail.
…
Click to expand...
Ok, maybe legitimate, again, for PANELBOARDS! But this is NOT a panelboard, there is no bus bar involved, so no bus stabs as part of the enclosure!

The enclosure here is just a box, not a panelboard or load center.

If you have used the “comb bus” to feed multiple breakers, then there is a legitimate concern for the fact that the comb bus and breakers must be listed together, and if you used the same brand, they will be. There is also a legitimate concern for the SCCR of this assembly, because most of those mini DIN rail breakers and comb bus systems are only listed at 10kA, which may limit your SCCR for the entire panel.

But there is no requirement for any UL50 listed box to be co-listed with the components that go into it.
 
Jraef said:
If you have used the “comb bus” to feed multiple breakers, then there is a legitimate concern for the fact that the comb bus and breakers must be listed together, and if you used the same brand, they will be. There is also a legitimate concern for the SCCR of this assembly.
Click to expand...
No comb bus (independent circuits).
The given plan checker does not understand SCCR / ACI , so that was not a factor.
These were to be installed downstream of an existing series rated system, downstream of 10k AIC main breakers that are part of the series rated system. I've been looking for 22kAIC DIN rail UL489 breakers for other projects and as you note, "most" are not, possibly "all".

The local UL rep is now involved, trying to educate the AHJ on the above topics. The hope is this will avoid the need to escalate the situation to the point of lawyers.
 
brycenesbitt said:
No comb bus (independent circuits).
The given plan checker does not understand SCCR / ACI , so that was not a factor.
These were to be installed downstream of an existing series rated system, downstream of 10k AIC main breakers that are part of the series rated system. I've been looking for 22kAIC DIN rail UL489 breakers for other projects and as you note, "most" are not, possibly "all".

The local UL rep is now involved, trying to educate the AHJ on the above topics. The hope is this will avoid the need to escalate the situation to the point of lawyers.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a nightmare…
 
Jraef said:
Sounds like a nightmare…
Click to expand...
Success. OP here. It's done. All it took was
  • A letter from the DIN enclosure vendor
  • Engineer review and stamp
  • An email from Eaton, printed out
  • All the data from UL product IQ, printed out
  • A phone call from the local UL rep (who said "nobody asks for this kind of proof").
  • Several plan revisions (mind you this project is dead simple)
  • About $900 in fees
And of course during the process the GC/EC's local business license expired, so that had to be renewed.
And of course there's still a few more days of processing for them to issue the permit, but at least it passed plan check.

This is the spirit that got California AB306 / AB130 passed -- even though that legislation does not prevent local over-interpretation of overly-constraining code.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top