How many circuits are allowed in my panel?

[davidmw70]

I recently had a general home inspection done on a house that I am selling. The home inspector stated in his report that the electric panel had too many circuits in it and that it should have it repaired. I am trying to determine if in fact the panel has too many circuits. The home was built in 1982, it has 200 amp service with a Bryant panel. The original inspection stickers are still on the panel from when the house was built and indicate that it passed all inspections. Excluding the main, the panel has space for 16 full-sized breakers. The panel has a combination of full-size and tandem (split) breakers. In the panel there are currently two double-pole breakers, five full size single-pole breaks, and seven tandem (twin single-pole) breakers. To me that totals up to 23 circuits. Based on the sticker on the panel, the panel allows for tandem breakers and appears to have a maximum of 32 circuits. I assume the circuits can be any combination of full size and tandem breakers as long as the total doesn't exceed 32. Based on this, I don't think the inspector is correct when he states that I have too many circuits. Is my thinking correct? Thank you for your time.

[Jerry Peck - Codeman]

The answer to that lies in what the label on your panel states.

The panel will state where the half-size breakers are allowed as they are not allowed 'everywhere' or 'anywhere'. Some panels may not allow any half-size breakers. By "half-size breakers" I am referring to tandem breaker with one handle behind the other and dual breaker with handles next to each other, and, there are also quad breaker which are two half-size breakers connected together, typically with the inner two handles tied together and the outer two handles tied together, making for 2 double pole breakers in the space on 1 double pole breaker (by "pole" that is referring to - for simplicity - each full size breaker which mounts on a single breaker tab from the bus bar the breaker is connected to).

Let's see what you have to start with:
- Excluding the main,
- the panel has space for 16 full-sized breakers.

Okay, there are spaces for 16 full-sized breakers, which means there are potentially 16 circuits, which is reduced for each double pole breaker (a double pole breaker takes up 2 breaker spaces but is only 1 circuit).

The panel has a combination of full-size and tandem (split) breakers.

Which may ... or may not ... be allowed.

In the panel there are currently two double-pole breakers,

This means your available 16 circuits is now reduced to 14 circuits.

five full size single-pole breaks,

This means your remaining available number of breakers is 14 - 5 = 9 breakers.

The above breakers total 7 circuits: 2 double pole breakers for 2 circuits and 5 single pole breakers for 5 circuits. 16 potential circuits - 7 circuits used = 9 potential circuits left

and seven tandem (twin single-pole) breakers.

Therein lies the problem. It is possible that 'NO' half-size breakers are allowed. Only reading the label can answer the question.

Based on the sticker on the panel, the panel allows for tandem breakers and appears to have a maximum of 32 circuits.

You say the panel "allows for tandem breakers", would you post what the panel says, as the panel says it, or, better yet, post a photo of the panel label? That would help answer your question definitively. The panel label 'may' allow for 'some' half-size breakers ... 'may' ... or 'may not' ... or 'may but not in the locations yours are' ... or 'may but not as many as you have' ... it all depends on what the panel says.

[davidmw70]

Thank you, Jerry for taking the time to respond. I have pics of the panel label, but I'm having trouble attaching them to my posts. I will email them to you seperately, please feel free to post them in your reply. Thanks.

David, your photo was too large in size, I reduced it and uploaded it. - Jerry

Bryant_older_electrical_panel_label_smaller.jpg

[Jerry Peck - Codeman]

David,

You are correct, the label of your panel shows that it is listed for dual (half-size duplex) breakers at each breaker location. That means, and states, the potential for 32 circuits is there.

That is "the technical answer".

Now for "the common sense" answer.

That panel was produced before the CTL (Circuit Total Limiting) requirement came into effect. CTL panels either did not allow for those half-size breakers or severely restricted their number and location in the panel.

This was done because so many people were installing small panels (such as that 16 circuit panel) and then installing ALL (or mostly) half-size breakers, in effect making that small panel have twice as many circuits. This created problems due to heat in the panel, and, obviously and naturally, half-sized breakers are more susceptible to heat build-up and damage from heat than full-size breakers are.

Does your panel have too many circuits? Not according to it label. Keep in mind that is no longer allowed - and for good reasons.

Does your panel have too many circuits? For practical purposes, and for todays better knowledge and higher safety standards, yes.

This is like comparing a car of the pre-seat belt years with a car of today with seat belts and air bags ... is the old car "safe" to drive? Well, it was by the standards of the day - and 'the car' has not changed, but ... is it *safe* to drive knowing what we now know and why today's standards are so improved?

Your call.

I like my 1983 Jaguar XJS, it has a lap AND shoulder belt ... it will do 155 mph.

I liked my 1967 Jaguar E-Type (XKE), it had a lap belt ... it would do 150 mph.

I liked my 1954 Jaguar XK 140, no seat belt at all - it was up to the driver to hang on tight and try to stay in the seat ... it would do 140 mph. But - was it "safe" doing so when much of your effort and attention was spent trying to stay in the seat when going around curves?

It is called "progress" and "learning from the past".

Like I said, your call ... it was indeed approved, listed, and labeled for that many circuits in its time.

[davidmw70]

Thanks again, Jerry. I've learned a lot through this and I understand what you mean about meeting standards for the time. I appreciate you reviewing this and getting back to me, it's been very helpful.