Whirlpool tub bond lug

[iwire]

M.D. I am not disagreeing with you but Don's point is still a good one.

Based on the UL statements you provided I can not legally install a classified breaker in an existing panel as that will be a violation of the panels labeling.

But UL says I can.

:-?

 

[M. D.]

Bob ,I'm not sure U.L. is the A.H.J. when it come can or can't , they evaluate and test equipment. Listing itself is not required ,, is it??
I'm not sure it violates anything to use these breakers . They have been around for 20 years, plus or minus, and there seems to be little information , that I can find anyway , that demonstrates that using them is a violation.
This is from Siemens

Code Compliance
What about the requirements of 110-3(b) of the National Electrical Code? This Code Section requires that products be used in accordance with instructions included in their listing and labeling and the use of Classified circuit breakers does present a dilemma to some inspectors.

The panelboard is marked to indicate the only circuit breakers to be used in the panelboard are the specific Listed circuit breakers with which the panelboards were evaluated and Listed by the panelboard manufacturer. The Classified circuit breakers, on the other hand, also have instructions included in their listing and labeling indicating the specific Listed panelboards for which they have been evaluated for use in. These are not in conflict with each other. Each manufacturer is listing and marking in accordance with the testing they have done. The Classified circuit breaker manufacturer has done testing in addition to the testing done by the panelboard manufacturer.

The final decision on acceptance of Classified circuit breakers, as with any issue, rests with the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ).

 

[M. D.]

Don has a good point to be sure, I'm just not sure how to evaluate it though


This is from the "UL Question Corner"

When inspectors evaluate UL Classified circuit breakers,
the panelboard marking will sometimes specify that only
circuit breakers made by a certain manufacturer be used, but instead,
the inspector finds another brand of circuit breaker has been installed.
What can an AHJ accept?​

UL Classifies circuit breakersthat have been investigated and found suitablefor use in place of other circuit breakers specified by certain Listed
panelboards, in accordance with the requirements described in the Classification Marking. Included as part of the Marking on the circuit breakers is the statement: ?For Catalog Numbers of Compatible Panelboards, refer to Publication No. ______, provided with the circuit breakers. If additional information is necessary, contact the factory.?
The referenced publication is a Compatibility List which indicates the
company name, catalog number, number of poles and electrical ratings
of the Classified circuit breaker. This list also includes the company name
and model number of the applicable UL Listed panelboards and
corresponding UL Listed circuit breakers that can be used in place of
the Classified circuit breakers specified on the panelboard, and is
provided in accordance with Section 110-3(b) of the NEC. The Compatibility List also specifies the maximum permissible voltage and maximum available short circuit current of the supply system to the panelboard. This information can be found under the product category ?Circuit Breakers, Molded-Case, Classified for use in Special Equipment?
(DIXF), on page 11 of the 1999 UL General Information for Electrical
Equipment Directory (white book).
Classification of circuit breakers for use in the panelboards means
that the product has been evaluatedand tested in every combination of
circuit breaker and panelboard indicated on the Compatibility List.
Such Classification indicates that the referenced combination of panelboard and Classified circuit breaker
has met the same minimum requirements as the panelboard and the
Listed circuit breaker cross-referenced on the compatibility list.
Acceptance by the AHJ can be based on this information which is provided​

 

[iwire]

MD, I see this

The final decision on acceptance of Classified circuit breakers, as with any issue, rests with the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ).

As nothing more than a shameless cop out.:roll:

Every other question we can ask UL they will tell us the inspector must follow 110.3(B) until we get to this classified breaker question suddenly the tune changes it's up to the AHJ

Really I find it takes the shine off my view of UL.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

M.D.

I'm not sure it violates anything to use these breakers..

You have been telling us that we must follow the instructions that are provided by the manufacturer. The instructions with every panel I have ever seen specify the use of breakers that are made by the panel manufacturer. How can we be permitted to use classified breakers?
Don

 

[M. D.]

What I have been doing is sharing information that I have found , It is not U.L. that tells us to follow the instructions it is the NEC. I am not an expert , and I don't really understand how they eat the cake and have it too,myself. But when the sheite hits the fan I want to be as protected as possible from getting hit by it.

I have yet to see any information that leads me to take Don's position that the only instrctions that 110.3(B) contemplates are those in the u.l. white book.
Bob , I agree that U.L. has lost some luster or maybe it looked shinier when we were not so consumed with litigation and finding fault .

Don. what I have been demonstrating is that there are many involved at U.L. and those involed in the inspection arena ,that believe that the instructions supplied are critical in regard to 110.3(B). I have attended many seminars held by Joe Ross and he as well as Mike Holt, has made it a point to stress this as an important part of installing equipment and devices. It might be time to change 110.3(B) but it says what it says and the sheer weight of the information I have looked at in the past three days leads me to conclude ,that should I not follow the instructions supplied and harm results from my installation , those who will sit in judgement will have a truck load of information all saying that the instruction must be followed including the instructions themselves ,in many cases.

Can anyone find one expert , article from a trade mag., ,or code making panel statement that says the only instructions contemplated by 110.3(b) are those in the U.L. white book . I can not.

 

[George Stolz]

Can anyone find one expert...

I found one: Don Ganiere.

Seriously, I'm not going to go hunting for snipe. There probably is none. The thing is, it is a reasonable rule of thumb, I can understand the thought process that begets the idea of going by the White Book.

The classified breakers, the fixture screws/wirenuts, they all point to the deficiencies in mindlessly following instructions to death.

What good does the #8 bonding conductor serve, when connected to a remote panelboard? It was clearly written by someone who flatly did not understand the requirements of 680, what they're trying to accomplish. Why should we educate ourselves when we are forced to become stupid because somebody at the factory wrote some instructions before their morning coffee, or simply hasn't kept up with standards?

It represents an error that would go unnoticed to the unlearned, and actually contributes confusion as to what the NEC is trying to accomplish.

Is ignoring instructions a step to be taken lightly? Of course not.

Are instructions to be followed at all costs? No, not that either.

Don's premise is a good middle ground, IMO. In the end, it is up to the AHJ to determine compliance, so the factory and the UL can make their mistakes without generating an electrical WWIII.

 

[M. D.]

I wish it were as simple as the Whie Book too ,...the middle is exactly where we , as electricians are....always the middle.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

It is not U.L. that tells us to follow the instructions it is the NEC.

The NEC only tells us to follow the instructions that are "included in the listing or labeling". It is UL that is saying all instructions provided with the product or by the manufacturer are part of the listing and labeling, but they don't really mean it because they have "classified" breakers for use in violtation of the manufacturer's instructions. It is my opinion that the only instructions that are part of the listing and labeling are those that were used when the product was tested.
We need the original proposals and comments for the wording in 110.3(B). I have no idea when that wording was placed into the code. My ROPs and ROCs only go back to the 1983 code.
Don

 

[M. D.]

The NEC only tells us to follow the instructions that are "included in the listing or labeling". It is UL that is saying all instructions provided with the product or by the manufacturer are part of the listing and labeling, but they don't really mean it because they have "classified" breakers for use in violtation of the manufacturer's instructions.

Don , I'm not sure because a "mistake" by U.L. in one set of listing instructions , nullifies the agency.

You said it is U.L. that is saying all instructions provided with the product or by the manufacturer are part of the listing and labeling...

That is exactly my point should the NEC put this kind of faith in U.L. Should the NEC rely on testing agencies to evaluate the millions of instruction sets , to the point of 110.3(B) ,Notice the word "any" in that particular section. It would seem that it is the testing agency that decides what is and is not part of the listing ., which means that I am stuck in the middle.
I think 110.3 (B) is a cop out in and of itself and needs to be changed .. I might just give it a try ,, it should be a piece of cake.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

M.D.

I'm not sure because a "mistake" by U.L. in one set of listing instructions , nullifies the agency

It is not a mistake, it is an intentional change in the rules that leads to a lot more testing fees for UL. This change tells me that UL doesn't really believe that all of the manufacturer's instructions are "listing and labeling" instructions. This all leads me to my conclusion that the only "listing and labeling" instructions are those published by the listing agency. If some provided instructions are 110.3(B) instructions and others are not, how is any one to know what is what??? That in turn leads to two different conclusions...the one I hold and the one that you and others hold.

It would seem that it is the testing agency that decides what is and is not part of the listing

They do when they test the product. The method(s) they use when they install the product for testing are the "listing and labeling" instructions, and the closest access that we have to that type of information is the White Book.
Don

 

[M. D.]

With more amd more reliance on listed equipment , I'm not sure U.L. or any testing outfit for that matter, is hurting for things to test.

Don , the opinion I hold is based in part on the fact that I can not find any information that backs up your opinion . I have found, even more than I have posted, statements from experts as well as those involved in the listing process and the inspection community , that lead me to believe that the consensus , is to view the instructions supplied with the equipment as part of the listing , and as such 110.3(B) tells me to follow them. This is what is being taught.

I don't know how to reconcile the classified breaker issue that you raise. I
may dig a little more and see if there is any reasoning for the madness .

In the meantime I will do my best.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I don't know how to reconcile the classified breaker issue that you raise.

That is the sticking point for me. As long as they exist, then UL is on record as saying not all supplied instructions are listing and labeling instruction. If they are not all listing and labeling instructions we have no way of knowing what is and what isn't required by 110.3(B), so I take the opposite extreme and suggest that only the White Book information is listing and labeling information. Yes, I know that not a lot of code "experts" agree with me, but I really don't care. I read the rules as I see them written and not as others tell me they are written.
Don.

 

[M. D.]

.. .If they are not all listing and labeling instructions we have no way of knowing what is and what isn't required by 110.3(B), so I take the opposite extreme and suggest that only the White Book information is listing and labeling information. ...Don.

It seems to me the problem is 110.3(B) by not prohibiting the installation instructions and using the word "any" they have fastened a yoke from me , as an electrician, to the whim of a testing angency not just U.L.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

M.D.

... using the word "any" they have fastened a yoke from me

It doesn't say "any instructions", it says "any instructions included in the listing or labeling". Instructions not included in the listing and labeling are not covered by 110.3(B). The issue is really what instructions are included in the listing and labeling. Given that UL tells us some are and some aren't, how is anyone to know?
Don

 

[M. D.]

M.D.

It doesn't say "any instructions", it says "any instructions included in the listing or labeling". Instructions not included in the listing and labeling are not covered by 110.3(B). The issue is really what instructions are included in the listing and labeling. Given that UL tells us some are and some aren't, how is anyone to know?
Don

That is exacly my point it is the testing agency that decides what is and is not a part of the listing requirements.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

M.D.

That is exacly my point it is the testing agency that decides what is and is not a part of the listing requirements.

But they don't tell us what is really a part of the listing. They can't say all because they have classified breakers for use in violation of the provided instructions.
Don

 

[George Stolz]

I am closing this thread, as it is similar to two others currently in progress.

Please reply in this thread.