My understanding, based on a public letter from Siemens, is that Siemens brand products that are approved to be used in Murray panels...I agree with Norcal. The panel is listed for ITE breakers so just use a Siemens. ITE=Siemens, just name change.
Most old Murray load centers list ITE and many list Bryant too.
Curt Swartz said:10-08-03, 07:53 PM #4 curt swartz
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: San Jose, CA
Re: Circuit Breaker Compatibility
Crouse Hinds distribution equipment was renamed back to Murray when Siemens acquired the line. Murray breakers with the same part number can be used in Crouse Hinds equipment. Crouse Hinds equipment was named Murray before it was Crouse Hinds.
Cutler-Hammer acquired the Westinghouse distribution line which included Challenger. A Cutler-Hammer BR circuit breaker is the replacement for Westinghouse (Bryant) BR circuit breakers and Challenger C breakers. If you look at a BR breaker you will notice that it has both the Westinghouse and Challenger part numbers on it.
Jraef said:Aug-12, 2017, 11:17 AM #9
Join Date Jul 2006
Location San Francisco, CA, USA
First off, circuit breakers can only be UL Listed by testing them IN the panels they are designed to go with, which ultimately boils down to the same mfr. But years ago, mfrs started designing panels for residential use where the mounting and connections were virtually the same. We used to collectively refer to this type of breaker as "interchangeable"; you could plug a Bryant breaker into a Murray panel or a GE breaker into a Sylvania panel, as long as they were the same style of breaker. But some time in the 80s, a lot of field failures took place and in ensuing investigations it became clear that unless specifically tested, these mfr mismatches did not always perform as expected, then created a conflict in determining who's fault that was, the panel mfr, the breaker mfr or the person who did it.
Since the lawyers only wanted to go after deep pockets, and it was unclear which mfr had the issue, a lot of homeowners insurance companies ended up holding the bag. That then prompted them to get UL involved, who came up with a new process by which otherwise UL listed breakers could also be "classified" to be used in some specific panels, so long as the BREAKER mfr tested them in those specific panels and listed those specific panels in their installation instructions. This system by the way NEVER includes "series ratings" for higher AICs, so if you are in an area that requires 22kAIC or higher, Classified Breakers are immediately eliminated as a possibility.
So technically, if the specific panel that you are looking at is on the specific list of tested panels in the Classification certification of those Homeline breakers and 10kAIC is acceptable in your area, they are perfectly legal. If not, they are illegal. That level of detail is virtually ignored in the retail industry, because if a homeowner installs something themselves, they assume their own risks. Electrical Contractors however cannot ignore the liability associated with willy-nilly use of Classified breakers, just as we cannot ignore any other portion of the NEC, and the misuse of a Classified breaker would violate 110.3 no matter what.
So now we come up against the kind of situation you are involved in; YOU did not originally install them, but now YOU have seen them, so does that then shift responsibility for investigating whether they are appropriately applied over to you? Good question. The SAFE BET, as others have said, is to just replace them, because the time and hassle to investigate them is worth more than the breakers themselves in most cases. But with smart phone access now, it might only take a minute or two to find and download the list of approved panels for Homeline breakers to find out. So that makes it a judgement call.
Of course if you are in an area that requires more than 10kAIC, you don't need to bother checking, it's an automatic fail.
Many people are shocked when they discover I am not a good electrician...
Except for some removable lugs & bus contacts, never seen a riveted MCCB (Molded Case Circuit Breaker) intended to provide recondition access prohibited by design and 110.3(B)...I was pointed in the direction of some refurbished Type EP
I believe 2020 NEC has this.Didn't either '17 or '20 do something about that? I remember reading somewhere that they introduced a definition of "refurbished" but something about it having to be recertified by UL.
Stop looking at that letter! It has nothing to do with the loadcenter you are working on. Your load center lists ITE(Siemens) as listed breakers. You don't need a cross reference to use breakers that are already listed for your loadcenterMy understanding, based on a public letter from Siemens, is that Siemens brand products that are approved to be used in Murray panels...
are only approved for a certain few Murray panels manufactured after Jan. 2002.
There is a weird piece of this puzzle though that Siemens makes Replacement Only - Non-CTL breakers, which only make sense to me for the older panels the aforementioned letter says should NOT accept Siemens cross overs.
With respect, I think that's wishful thinking. A panel made by a company in the 1960's.. and said company being purchased by another company (i.e. Siemens) 30 years later... does not necessarily equal justification for using those later dated breakers in said panel. There needs to be something more substantive.Stop looking at that letter! It has nothing to do with the loadcenter you are working on. Your load center lists ITE(Siemens) as listed breakers. You don't need a cross reference to use breakers that are already listed for your loadcenter
The letter you are using is for Murray loadcenters than only list Murray breakers and don't list Siemens breakers on the label.
So every ITE and Gould panel must be replaced if adding a new breaker because the company changed names?With respect, I think that's wishful thinking. A panel made by a company in the 1960's.. and said company being purchased by another company (i.e. Siemens) 30 years later... does not necessarily equal justification for using those later dated breakers in said panel. There needs to be something more substantive.
The letter I'm referring to absolutely applies to this panel. It explicitly states that Siemens cross-reference breakers for Murray panels are only UL approved for panels made after Jan. 2002. ... and it's blatantly clear via the NI Class that this is a panel from the 50's-60's.
You're conflating the idea of an instantaneous name change w/ the one that, in my case, took place 30 years after the panel was made.So every ITE and Gould panel must be replaced if adding a new breaker because the company changed names?
By your reasoning I guess that also means I can't install a new SquareD QO breaker in a QO panel that was build prior to Schneider purchasing SquareD?
..Your load center lists ITE(Siemens) as listed breakers. You don't need a cross reference to use breakers that are already listed for your loadcenter
It's common knowledge that Siemens are the same as the old ITE. Google it or see for example here: https://forums.mikeholt.com/threads/siemens-breaker-compatible-with-ite-panel.136456/...
IMHO if one of the breaker types listed on the panel can be connected to a current model via name changes only, that is a different valid chain.
And those 38 years could most certainly be valuable, which is why I'm on here writing this, instead of just puffing my chest out and pretending the input received on this forum is below me. At the same time, length of time in the trade can also be detrimental to critical thinking skills and result in stubborn, uninformed positions resistant change (not that yours is).I have been in the trade 38 years. I have experienced many of the mergers, buyouts, name changes. I have purchased and installed, Gould, ITE, Bryant, Challenger, Westinghouse, Cutler Hammer, Crouse Hinds (old name for Murray).
Nor do I. But Siemens did not buy Murray yesterday... or a few years ago.. or even a decade ago.I don't tell my customers that I need to replace their equipment every time a company changes names.
If the cross over is approved, they should put both model numbers and/or types on the breaker. I agree.I do not know why Siemens doesn't put both Q and MP on the breaker labels (the way Eaton puts both BR and C for the old Challenger panels) but there cannot be a good reason for it.