• 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.

You're waiting for what?

ICE

ICE

MODERATOR
Staff member
Joined
Jun 23, 2011
Messages
13,815
Location
California
How often have you heard: "I waited to see what violations you would write." I have asked why and been told: "They don't call that out in Orange County."

The picture is a bootleg service that a house flipper needs blessed so that Edison can energize it. A licensed electrician pulled the permit. He hasn't seen it yet. And yes, he told me he was waiting for his punch list.

DSCN2474.jpg
 
Is this a service panel or a sub panel? If it is a service panel then other then the KO seal I don't see an issue unless the neutral and grounds are not bonded together. If it is a sub panel then it could be compliant. Can you explain more.
 
How about the two conductors under a single breaker?

And, what is the blue wire entering the panel at the mid-left side?
 
fatboy said:
How about the two conductors under a single breaker?
Click to expand...
Some breakers are rated for that, I believe. I know that Cutler Hammer's ground bars are rated for 3 conductors-- egc not grounded conductors.
 
Lower left, conduit entry through an intact concentric ring.

Upper left, two conductors on one circuit breaker.

Lower left, GEC with armor but no bonding fitting.

Blue conductor comes into the cabinet on the left and goes out on the right without landing in the cabinet.

This is a service, so yes there is no neutral/ground bond.

It has already been stuccoed so I haven't seen how it is secured or the Myers hub, if there is one.

I could have included bending radius and contamination with dirt, but hey, I don't want to be perceived as picky.
 
The blue wire does not have to land in the cabinet as long as it is run properly with the conductors of the circuit. I thought the gec was on the right with what looks like a bonding bushing. Hard to make out all those things from the pic.

Is the neutral bar not bonded to the can?
 
You guys are fast. So Dennis, I don't usually give much explanation about the pictures I post. I like to see what others have to say and generate participation. I start too many threads as it is and pointing out all of the violations is more work than I'm willing to do.

I would have sworn that a conductor can't blow through a service panel cabinet. There are two GEC, one is correct. The neutral is bonded to the can but the grounds are on a bar that has no bonding other than a screw.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IMO, if the neutral is bonded to the can then the egc's are fine. You cannot use the can as a path for the neutral but it is okay for the egc.

Now look at 312.8 but read it thru. It allows splices etc in the panel if there is space. That is generally not an issue.
 
Sorry, I should have quoted the article and also stated that it is too bad that the installed did such a hideous install in a panel that size. There is no reason for that mess.

200.2 General.All premises wiring systems, other than circuits and systems exempted or prohibited by 210.10, 215.7, 250.21, 250.22, 250.162, 503.155, 517.63, 668.11, 668.21, and 690.41, Exception, shall have a grounded conductor that is identified in accordance with 200.6. The grounded conductor shall comply with 200.2(A) and (B).

(A) Insulation. The grounded conductor, where insulated, shall have insulation that is (1) suitable, other than color, for any ungrounded conductor of the same circuit on circuits of less than 1000 volts or impedance grounded neutral systems of 1 kV and over, or (2) rated not less than 600 volts for solidly grounded neutral systems of 1 kV and over as described in 250.184(A).

(B) Continuity. The continuity of a grounded conductor shall not depend on a connection to a metallic enclosure, raceway, or cable armor.
Click to expand...
Note we are talking neutral not grounds. However I believe, the GEC needs to land on the grounded bar not the grounding bar. I will check.
 
Since I can't edit my thread I guess I will just have to keep posting...

I think 250.36(F) require the gec to be connected to the service grounded conductor. So either a bonding jumper is needed ot they should move the gec to the neutral bar.
 
ICE said:
How often have you heard: "I waited to see what violations you would write."
Click to expand...
Sometimes without asking I can recognize this tactic; I'll write down just the code sections that are in violation and with appliances write down the pages to see in the manual.

Hope they don't make the same mistake twice then there's a fee for the re-inspection. Good luck!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dennis said:
Since I can't edit my thread I guess I will just have to keep posting...I think 250.36(F) require the gec to be connected to the service grounded conductor. So either a bonding jumper is needed ot they should move the gec to the neutral bar.
Click to expand...
The correction said to move all of the grounds to the neutral bar. Hard telling what I'd get had I asked for a bonding jumper. About the MWBC, I don't know. I know it's not the garbage disposal and dishwasher because there aren't any. Nothing is labeled and there are conductors that are not landed.

The blue wire has me wondering what it's being used for. If it didn't originate in the service, where could it originate? Once I know the answer I'll know if it is a violation.

I think a contribution gets you editing privileges.

I forgot to say welcome Dennis. So welcome Dennis. I look forward to learning from a knowledgeable electrician. Electrical is my weakest discipline so please bear with me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ICE said:
I forgot to say welcome Dennis. So welcome Dennis. I look forward to learning from a knowledgeable electrician. Electrical is my weakest discipline so please bear with me.
Click to expand...
Thank you.. BTW you are doing fine with the electrical.I just noticed that this is an exterior panel. Is it outside? If so where is the meter and how will they seal around the panel where the gap is?
 
Dennis said:
Thank you.. BTW you are doing fine with the electrical.I just noticed that this is an exterior panel. Is it outside? If so where is the meter and how will they seal around the panel where the gap is?
Click to expand...
That is why there is a knockout missing. It is to drain the water from the panel into the wall cavity! :)
 
jar546 said:
That is why there is a knockout missing. It is to drain the water from the panel into the wall cavity! :)
Click to expand...
LOL... It wouldn't surprise me. I am sure we all have seen some wild stuff out there. I am not sure how that cover will be installed as there are 2 screws on the sides that have to be installed to get the cover on. Perhaps the panel protrudes enough in that spot.
 
Here is an example of the type of panel. Note that the stucco is flush with the face of the enclosure. It is difficult to detect in the op picture but the panel does protrude beyond the stucco. The gap is a tooled groove and the stucco does mate with the enclosure to form a seal.

IMG_1903.jpg


This has been a constant battle. My immediate supervisor approves the work when the people complain. Here is an example of what has been approved. There have been many times that I couldn't get the cover open because the stucco sealed it shut.

IMG_1902.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting. IMO that can be considered an illegal install since the power company underground cable is technically in the building. Does the EC install the wiring to the pole or does poco? BTW that is called a meter main combo.
 
It never rains in southern California. When it does rain, water gets inside the wall. It isn't enough water to create a major problem right away but give it ten years and there will be rot. I have seen the rot on demo jobs.

We have almost no underground laterals.

99% of what we do results in a service entrance conduit inside the wall, whether it is underground or overhead. I know that this is seldom done back East but I don't see what the big deal is all about.

The poco owns and installs the service drop/lateral.

The thread below illustrates some of the problems that I encounter but if the appropriate enclosure is installed correctly, there can be a clean outcome. I don't take enough pictures of the correct way to do things so you will have to use your imagination. The other point to consider is that 99.999% of everything here is stucco.

http://www.inspectpa.com/forum/showthread.php?6249-D-B-Cooper-rides-again!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
=

Did we ever get an answer as to whether or not this panel is a

main or a sub-panel?.....If this the Main, then they would

appear to be violating Section E3501.7 [ `06 IRC &

230.70(A) - `08 NEC ], ...too many disconnects!

Also, welcome "Dennis" to The [ Dark Side ] Building Codes

Forum!.........It is unusual that we have anyone from the

electrical forums to visit here.......We DO have some, but

not that many!



=
 
north star said:
=Did we ever get an answer as to whether or not this panel is a

main or a sub-panel?.....If this the Main, then they would

appear to be violating Section E3501.7 [ `06 IRC &

230.70(A) - `08 NEC ], ...too many disconnects!

Also, welcome "Dennis" to The [ Dark Side ] Building Codes

Forum!.........It is unusual that we have anyone from the

electrical forums to visit here.......We DO have some, but

not that many!



=
Click to expand...
Thank you-- I like to stir up trouble every now and then so I came here. :-D

Yes, the OP stated it was a meter main so it is a main panel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top