Underwriters Laboratories is a money mak'n machine!

That is NOT true. You do NOT have to be a UL licensed lightning protection installer. It will cost a lot more, to have the UL Inspector come out and inspect the system for a certificate.

Not being licensed by the UL, or NOT being on their website listing, it would've cost 4,000 plus expenses for an inspector to come out.

Going through the process of becoming UL "listed" would have cost close to 3,000.00 to join, then 500.00 plus expenses for the inspection.

Even once certified the inspections are priced by size, min 500.00 plus inspectors expenses.

You do not even have to have a UL anything to design the system, you can do it yourself using the NFPA 780 Standard for the Installation of lightning protection. That little bugger is costly, I got my copy from the fire marshall of the city I was a building inspector for.

NFPA 780 is to lighntning protection installation as what the NFPA 70 is to electrical installations.

There are parts suppliers out there that are UL listed for material and they will design the system acccording to the NFPA 780 and include the design when and if you buy the material from them. They only need roof sketches and footage.

UL is only certifing what criteria the NFPA 780 has set up.

UL is a safety machine, but yes want the big bucks......

To take this in a slightly different direction; as an electrician, what would a proper and thorough inspection of a residence that has sbeen struck by lightning entail? And even if the damage (if any at all) appears very isolated or minimal, wouldn't it be prudent to perform a thorough inspection procedure anyway? What is a fair price point for such a procedure?

Thanks and regards,

Nicely written article. Very interesting!

Oh, and by the way,,, The lightning protection system is usually included on the projects as a result of the risk assessment process described in NFPA 780. That risk assessment is then reviewed by who? The owner's insurance carrier, or if appropriate, Factory Mutual. They will evaluate the risk assessment and determine premiums based on whether or not a master label system is installed. If a system is to be installed, then NFPA 780 must be adhered to. Don't blame UL for the cost or requirement.

For conduit or tubing nipples less that 24", does the 60% fill rule apply for Class 1, Division 1 and 2 explosion proof seal fittings that normally require a 25% fill?

This question is based upon infromation obtained from NEC Chapter 9 Tables (4) Where conduit or tubing nipples having a maximum length not to exceed 600 mm (24 in.) are installed between boxes, cabinets, and similar enclosures, the nipples shall be permitted to be filled to 60 percent of their total cross-sectional area, and 310.15(B)(2)(a) adjustment factors need not apply to this condition.

UL now has competition, CSA has moved into the US market as CSAUS, with an office located in Pennsylvania. This may mean that when the NEC requires a "listed" device by an "independent testing laboratory", there will be an alternative.

Well done on the article! Jeffrey J. Basiaga, Jr. P.E. Tampa, Fl