# CUL and Ontario Hydro

B

#### Bob Peterson

Lucky me.

I have a panel going to Ontario. Its been a long time since I sent anything to Canada. Can someone there give me a brief rundown of what
approvals are required for installation of the thing?

As I recall, we previously actually had an Ontario Hydro inspector come here and put stickers on the panels, but I am not all that sure this is required, as I believe it can be done on site as well.

I have also been told, but have not verified, that a CUL labeled control panel would be accepted as equivilent to an Ontario Hydro inspection, but this seems unlikely to me as I seem to recall that Ontario Hydro wanted to also inspect the installation as well.

I do not have the time to look at the CEC exhaustively. As I recall from my previous ventures years ago, it is not significantly different from the NEC, but its been awhile and things change. Any gotchas in there that might be handy to know about?

Last but not least - this system contains a number of burner controls. The safeties on the burners are all going to be hard wired (with PLC
monitoring) as we would do here in the states, and I do not see anything unusual in the Canadian Gas Code, but thought I would ask if anyone on the
list has any experience with this type of control and knows if there are some Canadian regulatory wrinkles I should know about.

TIA.

J

#### James Bouchard

Generally speaking equipment must be approved for the purpose for which it will be used. For panels and equipment manufactured in volume the usual
approach is to submit them to the Canadian Standards Association ( CSA ) for type approval. If they are approved then CSA enters into an agreement that allows the manufacturer to put the CSA label on them saying they are approved and you can install them without any further inspection. ( CSA then audits the manufacturer's production on a regular basis to be sure he is
manufacturing the product correctly and under the terms of the agreement ) The CUL label is similar to the CSA label except the inspection is done by
Underwriters Laboratories but to the Canadian standards hence the CUL label. For one of a kind or low volume production the type approval process is not appropriate so you have to go for a special inspection of each panel done by a number of testing laboratories ( CSA, ULC, Warnock Hersey etc ) or other agencies that are acceptable to the inspection authority that has
jurisdiction. Since I am in Quebec I cannot say what is acceptable in Ontario.

We have submitted many pieces of equipment for special approval without too many problems. Our first rule is to have the panel builder use only
components that are already CSA or CUL approved as this eliminates a lot of problems. This includes things like the wire, terminal blocks, fuses, wiring ducts, enclosures etc.

Some changes that have been made in the last few years include requirements for ground wire terminals, increased wire bending space, short circuit withstand rating, and fuse labeling. Another thing to watch for is the use of circuit breakers. There are a lot of small circuit breakers that are approved only for supplemental protection instead of as a "real" circuit breaker and have to be used with fuses. If you install them without the fuses then the inspector will refuse the panel.

Good luck!

James Bouchard

D

#### Dave Murphy - Industrial Computing

You wrote >" Last but not least - this system contains a number of burner controls... thought I would ask if anyone on the list has any experience with this type of control and knows if there are some Canadian regulatory wrinkles I should know about"<

I did Field Service for Siemens Westinghouse Gas Turbines and my wife is a potter. We recently upgraded her propane gas kiln (enclosure only, not the previously approved 2 x 350,000 BTU burner system) and are still in a battle with TECHNICAL STANDARDS & SAFETY AUTHORITY - FUEL SAFETY DIVISION. We paid them $120 for an "application to renew the inspection". I did a Piping &Instrumentation Drawing and an Operator Manual They invoiced us for an additional$499 to review the material and inspect the installation. The guy they sent out did not know his *** from a hole in the ground. My wife showed him how to disconnect the thermocouple input to the safety shutoff valve to prove the system. We have not paid them the additional $499. They threaten to have our propane supplier STOP Delivery. We get collection notices. Please don't judge all of us up here by these jerks. The address is TSSA 4th Floor, West Tower 3300 Bloor Street West Toronto, Ontario Canada M8X 2X4 416 325 1606 Good Luck Dave Murphy Owner Industrial Computing & Control Services M #### Michael Griffin [email protected] wrote: <clip> >I have a panel going to Ontario. Its been a long time since I sent >anything to Canada. Can someone there give me a brief rundown of what >approvals are required for installation of the thing? > >As I recall, we previously actually had an Ontario Hydro inspector come >here and put stickers on the panels, but I am not all that sure this is >required, as I believe it can be done on site as well. <clip> The inspection division of Ontario Hydro has been separated to a separate entity called the "Electrical Safety Authority" (ESA). Also various private labs are licenced to do special inspections. They cannot do certain other types of inspections which ESA does, but that is not something you are concerned with as you want a "special inspection". CSA can also do special inspections (this is distinct from the approvals of mass produced products which most people associate with CSA). This can sometimes be convenient if CSA has a representative who can do this near you. A special inspection can be done at either your facility, or at the customer site, or anywhere else you wish. The customer is simply not allowed to hook the equipment up and turn it on until the inspection is done. Where it needs to be done and who pays for it depends upon what was in the contract between you and the customer. Most customers would rather have it done at your place so that you will fix it before you ship it to them if there is anything wrong. >I have also been told, but have not verified, that a CUL labeled control >panel would be accepted as equivilent to an Ontario Hydro inspection, but >this seems unlikely to me as I seem to recall that Ontario Hydro wanted to >also inspect the installation as well. ESA will inspect the *installation* regardless of whatever approvals may exist with the *equipment*. These are two separate issues. You may have a well designed and fully approved machine which was incorrectly installed. Check your contract to see who is responsible for installation. Many customers prefer to make the connection from the bus duct to the panel themselves. Your customer may be on a program with ESA which allows installations to be inspected later provided the proper records are kept. >I do not have the time to look at the CEC exhaustively. As I recall from >my previous ventures years ago, it is not significantly different from the >NEC, but its been awhile and things change. Any gotchas in there that >might be handy to know about? <clip> If you contact the ESA, they have a list of common problems which they can give you. Electrical codes in Canada, the USA, and Europe seem to be similar enough that you can readily design a machine which is good for anywhere. The same laws of physics apply everywhere. Some problems which you may wish to pay particular attention to though are: 1) Most miniature "circuit breakers" are not recognised as real circuit breakers by CSA, only as "supplimental protectors". This was a rule which was not rigorously enforced until a few years ago. A "supplimental protector" means that you can use it provided it isn't relied upon to protect a circuit or device. The reason for this is that the trip curves of these "supplimental protectors" have such broad tolerances that your wiring may burn up before they trip under overload conditions. 2) Certain types of group motor fusing are different in Canada than in the USA. 3) Pay particular attention to transformer fusing. 4) Make sure the insulation ratings of any conductors are compatable with any voltages from other conductors or devices they may be exposed to. In particular, watch out for wires with 300 volt insulation which are in the same duct as 600 volt conductors. 5) Make sure all the relevant components are approved to CSA standards. Other labs can test to CSA standards, but for example, plain UL does not mean cUL (that is UL with a small 'c' next to it) or CUL. 6) Make sure any enclosures are approved. This may mean being flame proof or self extinguishing (for plastic enclosures). If the enclosure doesn't have the proper approvals printed on the label, be prepared to get the data from the manufacturer to support this. 7) The name plate must include a "maximum short circuit current" rating. That is, a rating for the maximum short circuit current which the panel (disconnect switch, fuses, fuse holders, motor overloads, etc.) can safely withstand while waiting for the fuse to blow. This is required as the customer is not allowed to connect the panel to a source which can deliver more than this rated current. This is one of the reasons why an installation inspection is a separate issue from a special inspection of the panel. 8) Check that the CSA ratings of the components you used are compatable with your design. Some devices are derated when tested to CSA standards. My favourite example is a disconnect switch on a machine which came from Germany (and failed inspection here). In Germany, it was a 25 amp switch. In the USA it was a 20 amp switch. In Canada, it was a 16 amp switch. This data was printed right on the switch, but the machine designers didn't bother to read it. 9) Pay attention to warning labels, conductor colours (white - neutral, green - ground), ground bonding of panel doors with 120VAC components in them, etc. 10) Ground wires connecting to a grounding stud must use ring terminals, not forks. One cause of problems I have seen (which I am sure would not be the case with you) is with designs which wouldn't pass anyone's standards. In the USA, I believe that there is no requirement (at least in most places) to have a machine inspected. In Europe (or at least in Germany) I have been told people can and do self-certify their own work. In both of these cases this means someone can build and ship machines which don't meet their own standards and they will never know because nobody ever checked. In Canada (or at least in Ontario), you can be licenced by CSA to certify your own work (you keep proper records and are audited regularly), but very few companies seem to bother. Most would rather just call an inspector in when they need one. To put your part of the project in a larger perspective, your panel will be part of a larger overall system. This system will require an engineer's report stating that it meets all applicable requirements of the Ontario Health and Safety Act (known as a PSR or Section 7 report). This act does not contain or specify the relevant standards. It is up to the machine designer to pick (and be able to justify the choice) what is applicable from CSA, ANSI, EN, RIA, or any other relevant standards. There are various engineering companies who will prepare these reports. This PSR report is for the entire system as installed, not for individual parts of it. There are exceptions to requiring this report. These exceptions seem to be intended to cover standard series produced equipment which is certified by the manufacturer as meeting the relevant standards. Violations of the Ontario Health and Safety Act are punishable by up to 2 years in jail and fines of up to$500,000. The "employer" (the company
who will own the equipment) is the one who is held responsible. These
penalties would be applied in the event of an accident investigation by the
Ministry of Labour in which the "employer" was found to have violated the act.
What is relevant to you is that whoever is preparing this report
will not approve the equipment if your panel did not pass a special
inspection. The requirements for passing a special inspection are that it
meets all the requirements of the Canadian Electrical Code. Technically, the
act states that it must meet the "Ontario Electrical Code", but I have not
found any differences between the two documents which have any relevance to
machinery.
The above is a *very* brief and incomplete overview. If you ever
become involved in a project which requires you to provide such a report

>Last but not least - this system contains a number of burner controls.
<clip>