Many in our industry rely on listings, markings and manufacturer’s labeling to determine the suitability of an electrical product for a particular use. Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJ’s) depend on such information to assist in making decisions as to the safety of the wide variety of interlocking componentry that can potentially find itself within an electrical installation. Code sets the table for this endeavor by defining terms in article 100, Chapter 1, Definitions. Perhaps a little-reviewed definition in article 100, “Identified (as applied to equipment)” is the pivotal guide when making a call regarding one product’s suitability and safety with another within an installation. At stake is the AHJ’s liability, because to allow a product to be misused endangers not only families and businesses but also the AHJ itself from a legal standpoint. But Innovation is at stake as well, and the AHJ carries responsibility there also. Without allowing for innovation within its jurisdiction, the AHJ’s constituents would ultimately suffer because improved efficiencies would go unrealized. If the definition of “Identified” is misread and applied incorrectly by the AHJ, the concept completely loses its intention, and it becomes a formidable obstacle to innovation.
