Is this a violation

[nickelec]

I just had an inspector fail me for violating secondary tap 240.21

I say 230.90 allows me to do this 2008 code here

The conductors landing on the bus are coming straight from utlity

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[nickelec]

He's stating the secs do not have ocp

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Coppersmith]

I don't see a tap there. You have a feeder going to a breaker panel with two breakers.

 

[zbang]

Looks more like two service disconnects, but ya. Feeders or services, it looks OK to me.

 

[AC\DC]

If that is straight of the load side of the meter your set up looks like it is not rated as ”service equipment “

 

[nickelec]

This was the exact picture he showed me in his understanding of the NEC book.

I don't agree this is exactly what I have here am I understanding as long as the rating of the two switches in that enclosure do not exceed that of the allowed in ampacity of the SEC I should be okay

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[AC\DC]

A tap can’t feed a tap does not sound like that is what you have

 

[Coppersmith]

A tap is a conductor branched off another conductor without an OCPD. What you have is not a tap.

 

[nickelec]

If that is straight of the load side of the meter your set up looks like it is not rated as ”service equipment “

That is coming right off the meter yes

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[nickelec]

I don't see a tap there. You have a feeder going to a breaker panel with two breakers.

I have a set of SECS not a feeder that's the whole argument I believe

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[wwhitney]

I have a set of SECS not a feeder that's the whole argument I believe

That strap and green screw below the lower breaker, is that a factory neutral-ground bond? So the panel is marked "Suitable for Use as Service Equipment?"

Any chance you are subject to the 2020 NEC?

Cheers, Wayne

 

[AC\DC]

What is SECS I don’t know all the acronyms?

 

[nickelec]

Service entrance conductors and yes enclosure is suitable for use as service equipment

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[AC\DC]

O did not look like it from the pictures

 

[nickelec]

So it seems we are in a agreement. Not a violation now I just have to pen an email to the ahj anyone's have any recommendations to put in that

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Jamesco]

I see the service conductors from the meter socket feeding the bus of the panel. I see two 50 amp main disconnect breakers. Everything looks fine to me. Maybe the inspector looked at what you have wrong.

 

[nickelec]

He definitely did, it's a serious problem here in NYC very under qualified inspectors.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Coppersmith]

There's something weird about that drawing. They call the top breaker the main, but both breakers are in parallel.

 

[Coppersmith]

He definitely did, it's a serious problem here in NYC very under qualified inspectors.

At least he's using Mike Holt as a source of learning. That shows good character . Too bad he misinterpreted what he was looking at.

 

[jim dungar]

There's something weird about that drawing. They call the top breaker the main, but both breakers are in parallel.

The breakers are not in parallel, unless their load sides are connected together.

The equipment circuit drawing is probably referring to the location that needs to be used with a back-fed main breaker.