• 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

First I thought why does a mobile home need a Double 60?
Then I saw that the mice have been nibbling on the dead front metal to make room for that D60
Then I saw the number 1 below the main breaker, and said $#*%#

By they way, the breaker schedule is worthless.
 
The job started out as twenty-two PV modules. The electric service panel was upgraded prior to the solar company showing up and there was no permit. I required a permit and then commenced with corrections, one of which was to provide GFCI protection for the swimming pool equipment. There has been several subsequent inspections with no progress for the GFCI protection.

This is not the first time that I have had to write a correction related to GFCI protection of pool equipment. The usual remedy is to install GFCI breakers in the panel for the pump motor and if there is a heater, it gets protection too. The light is usually supplied through a GFCI receptacle that is located near the equipment. I don't like the light being supplied through an old receptacle but my hands are tied in that regard with the "it was approved at one time" mantra.

Beyond that is the concept of "We only touched the main panel and whatever is wrong outside of that panel is not our responsibility." I always assure them that I agree and take on the responsibility for them.

In this particular case I expected the 50 amp feeder that supplies the swimming pool sub-panel to be replaced with a GFCI breaker. That didn't happen due to the mentioned "argument". In addition to that was the claim that there is a swimming pool sub-panel and any GFCI protection would be located there. So I asked for a look at the sub-panel. The last correction that I wrote that day was "A licensed contractor shall obtain an electrical permit for a sub-panel that serves the swimming pool."


GetAttachmentThumbnail-8.jpeg


GetAttachmentThumbnail-5.jpeg


The battle will now be me against the contractor, the owner, and my supervisors. Not to worry....no matter what the vote turns out to be...I'll never concede defeat.

Thank-God-Ledge-northwest-face-of-Half-Dome-Yosemite-24997.jpg
 
Last edited:
e hilton said:
Looks like the insulation got dinged when the wires were pulled.
Did you get a picture of the subpanel?
Click to expand...
That is the sub-panel.

Here is another example of a swimming pool sub-panel that was "corrected " by a solar contractor after installing a service panel upgrade. Unfortunately I don't have a picture of what it looks like with the dead-front removed.

IMG_0636.jpeg
 
Last edited:
IMG_1839.jpeg


She must have climbed that ladder in order to be able to take the picture.
 
Last edited:
Why wouldn’t they trim the mounting rails to length? Don‘t worry about the shadows, they are only there on sunny days.
 
Not a first responder but if they have to vent that tile roof, do they bust the tiles, pull them off with a hook or grab a concrete saw? Just curious.

Here we make the solar PV installer give the 36-inch and 18-inch walkway. Just about every design comes in without required access and has to be redone. 75% of the projects in the field are different than what was approved. The solar industry scares me a little.
 
Inspector Gift said:
The wire stirrups for the rebar look like they are in direct contact with the rebar. Not approved here.
Click to expand...
I recall another thread recently where they were discussing that - and really it comes down to the AHJ. The Concrete Manual says "Factory-made wire bar supports are widely used. These may be plain steel wire, galvanized steel wire, or stainless steel wire." But in the section above that, it says "the supports must be... and must not have any other adverse effect in the concrete"

Whether or not they cause an "adverse effect" can be debated either way.

However, we allow it in our jurisdiction.
 
e hilton said:
How do you do it?
Click to expand...
Our region gets a lot of rain, about 83" per year. Our clay soil holds moisture and contributes to rusting and corrosion of any unprotected ferrous material it contacts. Therefore, rebar must not be in contact with the ground to prevent rusting. The use of plastic caps on rebar, or plastic stirrups, or concrete dobies, are just some of the approved methods here.
 
Inspector Gift said:
Our region gets a lot of rain, about 83" per year. Our clay soil holds moisture and contributes to rusting and corrosion of any unprotected ferrous material it contacts. Therefore, rebar must not be in contact with the ground to prevent rusting. The use of plastic caps on rebar, or plastic stirrups, or concrete dobies, are just some of the approved methods here.
Click to expand...
Makes sense. We only get around 34" annually.
 
The problem with dobies is keeping them in place. Not many people take the time to wire them to the rebar, and the6 get kicked out of place when the concrete is placed.
 
This picture was posted earlier and I was asked what was up with the short wire. Today I was able to ask the contractor. He said that he is waiting for Edison to replace the wire. He thinks that Edison will replace the service entrance conductors. I asked him if he has a contractors license. He said yes....just not electrical contractor. The owner pulled the permit and hired this guy. I told him that he shouldn't be doing electrical work. Within ten minutes of hanging up I got a call from my office manager. The contractor must carry his balls around in a pail.....golf balls that is.

IMG_0081.jpeg


IMG_0113.jpeg
 
Last edited:
A solar contractor performed a service panel upgrade. This is the connection to the uffer.....he thinks that this is presentable.

IMG_0153.jpeg
 
Beniah Naylor said:
What is wrong with this? I'm not real knowledgeable about electrical...
Click to expand...
The connection has an access on the inside of the wall. I’m not sure but I suspect it is located in the garage. The original clamp faces away from the outside. The new clamp faces away from the garage access. The hole in the exterior wall needs to be repaired....watertight would be asking for too much.

The fix is turning the clamp towards the access and patching the wall.
 
e hilton said:
Why wouldn’t they trim the mounting rails to length?
Click to expand...
The better question is why would they. I have suggested that before and was asked if it is a code violation. It is a violation if it is on the setback side of the array.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top