• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

An average day

The Siemens breakers have no business in there unless there is paperwork that Siemens is UL classified to be used in that panel which is either Challenger, or a Westinghouse, Cutler-Hammer BR, Current Eaton BR is marked as BR120, or has C120, for example, for use in either BR or Challenger panels, all of them are Challenger design interiors, which is one of the reasons I call them "Zinsco II".

Is that panel near a coastal area, or chemicals stored nearby? That would be a couple of reasons for the corrosion, but not the only ones.


The whole UL listed vs UL classified thing is about clear as mud, IMO, they either need to be listed for the panels or made non interchangeable as it is not simple to determine if a competitive make can be used in a panel, made even more difficult because of mergers, & name changes of manufacturers & brands.
 
Since can't edit, if anyone is interested, can zoom in on that Eaton 2-pole 30A breaker on the bottom, it is marked as BR230 & C230.
 
Norcal said:
So Cal Edison I doubt will be amused, and I hope you were not either. :eek:
Click to expand...
I doubt that Edison would have a problem with this. The picture came from another inspector. We both got a good laugh out of it. He said that the contractor was a no show. He plans on meeting the contractor and asking him to open up the old enclosure.
 
How does the contractor propose to secure the old meter opening? Hopefully something better than a piece of cardboard.
 
e hilton said:
How does the contractor propose to secure the old meter opening? Hopefully something better than a piece of cardboard.
Click to expand...
We require a metal meter blank. Some inspectors will not allow any panel enclosure to be converted to a junction box. I am mostly okay with the conversion if the existing enclosure is surface mounted and can drain water. This setup is a lot of work to be so completely wrong.
 
The inspection was for an electric service panel upgrade. The first picture was how it was presented. I exclaimed that the stucco needs to be removed for inspection.

20210309_215300936_iOS.jpeg


The contractor exclaimed, "I have a picture from before the stucco was finished". He sent this next picture.

20210306_225135964_iOS.jpeg


20210306_225135964_iOS 2.jpeg
 
He had a photo from before the stucco was finished. Meaning he knew it was a required inspection, he was just hoping not to get called out on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ICE
our elec. insp. is always having issue with panels in stucco walls. Not sure why the contractors don't use panels like that here. Maybe price or they just don't know. If is listed to use that way, it would be a great alterative.
 
Last edited:
We have particular requirements for roofing material with regards to solar heat gain. As a result of that we can't approve a sheathing inspection unless the material is verified to match the permit. I only do virtual inspections and therfore I request an batch of pictures, one of which is the shingle bundle label. The guide that I send to the contractor has a list if pictures and although the label is mentioned, I neglected to include the proviso that the material has to be at the site. This has not been an issue for the fourteen months that I have been using the guide until now.


GetAttachmentThumbnail.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top