• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Electrical Violation of Not?

jar546

jar546

Forum Coordinator
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
11,095
Location
Somewhere Too Hot & Humid
This is a step-down transformer. The primary wires come from an underground PVC pipe that you cannot see in the picture, just to give you context. With what you can see in the picture if you were inspecting this transformer, would you pass or fail based on what you can see in the photo? You don't need to ask any questions; everything you need to know to answer the question based on what you can see is there. Is this transformer properly wired?

IMG_5877.jpg
 
The label on the left says to keep all field wiring below the arrow (it's easy to read if you zoom in on the photo). So the spatial arrangement of the secondary wiring Black/Red/Blue/White is a 110.3(B) violation.

Assuming the green conductor that disappears out the bottom is a GEC, then the wiring connectivity pattern is fine. We don't have any information to comment on wire sizing.

Cheers, Wayne
 
not a the sped the electricians work around here, I see a hole that needs to be filled, conduit to be re routed, wires that will be short a large J box and connections, change order, argument with GC that the is what the designer showed
 
Now those are some ugly welds. Not something that local AHJ can call out, but wow, I'm surprised the manufacturer would put this poor quality out. Obvious lack of fusion/overlap.

1705073950446.png
 
And is this ground running through one of the vent slots in the bottom of the enclosure? Sure appears to be.

1705074498495.png
 
jar546 said:
You can't install a terminal lug over the vent holes but I can't find anything that says you can't run a ground wire through it.
Click to expand...
Not an NEC pro at all... but would the following not be applicable? Does it fall under 250.102(E)?

2023 NEC (NFPA 70)

300.3(B)

(B) Conductors of the Same Circuit​

All conductors of the same circuit and, where used, the grounded conductor and all equipment grounding conductors and bonding conductors shall be contained within the same raceway, conduit body, auxiliary gutter, cable tray, cablebus assembly, trench, cable, or cord unless otherwise permitted in accordance with 300.3(B)(1) through (B)(4).
​

(1) Paralleled Installations​

{omitted for clarity}​

(2) Grounding and Bonding Conductors​

Equipment grounding conductors shall be permitted to be installed outside a raceway or cable assembly in accordance with 250.130(C) for certain existing installations or in accordance with 250.134, Exception No. 2, for dc circuits. Equipment bonding conductors shall be permitted to be installed on the outside of raceways in accordance with 250.102(E).​
​
...continues {omitted for clarity}​

250.102 Grounded Conductor, Bonding Conductors, and Jumpers​

...​

(E) Installation​

Bonding jumpers or conductors and equipment bonding jumpers shall be permitted to be installed inside or outside of a raceway or an enclosure.​

(1) Inside a Raceway or an Enclosure​

If installed inside a raceway, equipment bonding jumpers and bonding jumpers or conductors shall comply with the requirements of 250.119 and 250.148.​

(2) Outside a Raceway or an Enclosure​

If installed on the outside, the length of the bonding jumper or conductor or equipment bonding jumper shall not exceed 1.8 m (6 ft) and shall be routed with the raceway or enclosure.
Exception: An equipment bonding jumper or supply-side bonding jumper longer than 1.8 m (6 ft) shall be permitted at outside pole locations for the purpose of bonding or grounding isolated sections of metal raceways or elbows installed in exposed risers of metal conduit or other metal raceway, and for bonding grounding electrodes, and shall not be required to be routed with a raceway or enclosure.​

(3) Protection​

Bonding jumpers or conductors and equipment bonding jumpers shall be installed in accordance with 250.64(A) and (B).​
...continues {omitted for clarity}​
 
classicT said:
Not an NEC pro at all... but would the following not be applicable? Does it fall under 250.102(E)?
Click to expand...

The conductor going out the vent is presumably the Grounding Electrode Conductor or GEC (since one is required, and the purpose of all the other green conductors is clear enough), which is not subject to any of the sections you quoted. It is subject to 250.64(B), but as long as it's #6 or larger, nothing shown in the picture is a violation of that.

BTW, the GEC need not be green; leaving it black would have clarified its purpose.

Cheers, Wayne
 
classicT said:
Not an NEC pro at all... but would the following not be applicable? Does it fall under 250.102(E)?

2023 NEC (NFPA 70)

300.3(B)

(B) Conductors of the Same Circuit​

All conductors of the same circuit and, where used, the grounded conductor and all equipment grounding conductors and bonding conductors shall be contained within the same raceway, conduit body, auxiliary gutter, cable tray, cablebus assembly, trench, cable, or cord unless otherwise permitted in accordance with 300.3(B)(1) through (B)(4).
​

(1) Paralleled Installations​

{omitted for clarity}​

(2) Grounding and Bonding Conductors​

Equipment grounding conductors shall be permitted to be installed outside a raceway or cable assembly in accordance with 250.130(C) for certain existing installations or in accordance with 250.134, Exception No. 2, for dc circuits. Equipment bonding conductors shall be permitted to be installed on the outside of raceways in accordance with 250.102(E).​
​
...continues {omitted for clarity}​

250.102 Grounded Conductor, Bonding Conductors, and Jumpers​

...​

(E) Installation​

Bonding jumpers or conductors and equipment bonding jumpers shall be permitted to be installed inside or outside of a raceway or an enclosure.​

(1) Inside a Raceway or an Enclosure​

If installed inside a raceway, equipment bonding jumpers and bonding jumpers or conductors shall comply with the requirements of 250.119 and 250.148.​

(2) Outside a Raceway or an Enclosure​

If installed on the outside, the length of the bonding jumper or conductor or equipment bonding jumper shall not exceed 1.8 m (6 ft) and shall be routed with the raceway or enclosure.​
Exception: An equipment bonding jumper or supply-side bonding jumper longer than 1.8 m (6 ft) shall be permitted at outside pole locations for the purpose of bonding or grounding isolated sections of metal raceways or elbows installed in exposed risers of metal conduit or other metal raceway, and for bonding grounding electrodes, and shall not be required to be routed with a raceway or enclosure.​

(3) Protection​

Bonding jumpers or conductors and equipment bonding jumpers shall be installed in accordance with 250.64(A) and (B).​
...continues {omitted for clarity}​
Click to expand...
What Wayne said in post 17 above.
 
wwhitney said:
Absolutely.


The OP tells us the underground conduit emerging at the bottom of the page is the primary side, so the jumper in question is on the secondary side.

Cheers, Wayne
Click to expand...
What’s the odds that the underground conduit has been sealed? Or would that be a violation? If it is a violation, who here would write it? Have you ever encountered a flooded building because of an underground conduit that wasn’t sealed? Only once for me.
 
jar546 said:
Yes, but that is not what we are inspecting. What is downstream was not part of this. You can set up the transformer two different ways.
Click to expand...
Not following--the question Mr. Inspector raised was about the jumper from X0 to the terminal block on the case.

If X0 is on the secondary side, then that is an allowable System Bonding Jumper. Since you specified that the underground conduit is carrying the primary side, and that it's a step down transformer, this is the situation we have.

If X0 were on the primary (utility) side (which would make it a step-up transformer), that jumper would be a prohibited neutral-ground connection on the voltage system supplying the transformer. [Also, it would be unwise to provide a primary neutral connection to X0 at all, X0 should be left without any connection.]

So it absolutely matters which side is the primary and which side is the secondary, as far as that appropriateness/inappropriateness of that jumper.

Cheers, Wayne
 
ICE said:
What’s the odds that the underground conduit has been sealed? Or would that be a violation? If it is a violation, who here would write it? Have you ever encountered a flooded building because of an underground conduit that wasn’t sealed? Only once for me.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that it's only a violation if the other end of the raceway is outside the building. If it's a slab-on-grade building, with an underground raceway from one location inside the building to another location inside the building, 300.7(A) doesn't require sealing.

Cheers, Wayne
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top