Electrical Inspector Grabbing At Straws?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

markstg

Senior Member
Location
Big Easy
Hi all,

I restored my Father-In-Laws house after it got flooded with 6" of water. Work was to remove and replace all flooring, woodwork and kitchen cabinets.

The city required that if the kitchen wall were opened up, that the electrical circuits would have to be brought up to Code...Minimum number of circuits and GFCI's.

I got an electrical contractor who gave me a price and he obtained the electrical permit for the work.

When the city electrical inspector came to do the rough-in inspection he said I needed to replace the Service Panel.

The Service Panel was a 60A, 240V with cartridge fuse main and screw base branch circuits.

10 Years prior central air was added to this house. Electric Service for this 30A MAX Overcurrent Protection A/C unit was obtained by connecting #8 wire to the line side of the Service Panel Main, and going to a 30A 2P disconnect mounted right next to the Service Panel.

The Electrical Inspector Said that it was not obvious that there was a 2nd disconnect to Totally disconnect power to the house and therefore failed my inspection.

I screw attached a Sign on the front of the Service Panel and the A/C disconnect (Phenolic, with 3" high letters) saying there were two disconnects to completely disconnect power to the house, Service Main and A/C Disconnect Switch.

Electrical Inspector would not pass the service, and I had to replace the service.

I don't think he had anything to stand on, and all was within Code. There were no electrical loading problem (all appliances are gas and heat is gas).

I think he had a problem with the A/C branch circuit being connected under the lugs with the main service drop feeder, but they fit just fine, and there was no sign of overheating.

Should I have fought this one, or was there a code violation somewhere?
 
Last edited:
I think he had a problem with the A/C branch circuit being connected under the lugs with the main service drop feeder, but they fit just fine, and there was no sign of overheating.
Click to expand...

Were the lugs listed for connecting multiple wires? (110.14(A))

Chris
 
230.66 Marking.
Service equipment rated at 600 volts or less shall be marked to identify it as being suitable for use as service

110.14(A) Terminals. ??Terminals for more than one conductor and terminals used to connect aluminum shall be so identified.

230.81 Connection to Terminals?..The service conductors shall be connected to the service disconnecting means by pressure connectors, clamps, or other approved means.

Approved. Acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction.
 
markstg said:
10 Years prior central air was added to this house. Electric Service for this 30A MAX Overcurrent Protection A/C unit was obtained by connecting #8 wire to the line side of the Service Panel Main, and going to a 30A 2P disconnect mounted right next to the Service Panel.


I think he had a problem with the A/C branch circuit being connected under the lugs with the main service drop feeder, but they fit just fine, and there was no sign of overheating.
Click to expand...

Ok you have a 60 Amp main and then you come in on the line side and add another 30 amp. overcurrent protective device. Now you have the potential to draw 90 Amps total under the right conditions.

What's the current rating on the service cable. Most of those old services had a pretty small cable because it was protected at 60 amps.

I think he could probably get you on the size of the service cable. :wink:


Here people try to sneak a 100 amp main in on that old small cable and you are doing just about the same thing.
 
Last edited:
Thanks All,

Really good answers, but the only one that holds water is the 30A fusible disconnect was NOT Service Entrance Rated.

But then again that is not what the inspector barked at.
 
I agree with the inspector on this one. That A/C circuit was obviously jack-legged in without a permit or inspection, so he was well within his rights and responsibility to flag your project on the current permit.

You'll thank him for it later, when your house doesn't burn down due to bad connections at the mains in the old panel. :cool:
 
Electrical Inspector Grabbing At Straws

Electrical Inspector Grabbing At Straws

You mentioned early on in your initial post that 1]An electrician filed for the permit for this job,2] that your local building dept required that the kitch be installed to code and yet it seems that thats the last I hear fo the electricians involvement in this job--What happened to him and why wasn't he the one dealing with the inspector? You can address this question if you wish.If you don't it sort of answers itself.
In regards to bringing up the kitchen to code-it doesn't just end with the wires hanging in the bsm't from the new kitchen-it ends in the panel-It sounds to me like the Inspector did you a favor-from your brief description of the service that was existing-well I don't know ...,you wanted to keep that service?You're basing that decision on your experience accumulated in the field during your time as an Electrical engineer?...,makes me think .., never mind-if I say what it makes me think this post will never see the light of day.
Most importantly I think that inspector had only the safety of the installation in mind and if it was something I saw in the course of my own inspection I would bet that I could give you a number of Listed nec violations that would back me up.
But I'm not there and haven't seen it so this "bet" is all hypothetical and just based on past experience.
 
growler said:
Ok you have a 60 Amp main and then you come in on the line side and add another 30 amp. overcurrent protective device. Now you have the potential to draw 90 Amps total under the right conditions.

What's the current rating on the service cable. Most of those old services had a pretty small cable because it was protected at 60 amps.

I think he could probably get you on the size of the service cable. :wink:
Click to expand...

There is no code issue with that as long as the calculated load is under the rating of the service cable.

See 230.90(A) Exception 3
 
How about the code issue of inserting the tap conductors into the line lugs of the old service panel? 110.3? 110.14(A)?
 
Last edited:
markstg said:
The Service Panel was a 60A, 240V with cartridge fuse main and screw base branch circuits.

10 Years prior central air was added to this house. Electric Service for this 30A MAX Overcurrent Protection A/C unit was obtained by connecting #8 wire to the line side of the Service Panel Main, and going to a 30A 2P disconnect mounted right next to the Service Panel.
Click to expand...
It's not clear from your wording, but I suspect that you've jammed the #8 into the same lug as the #6 service entrance conductor, no? Now, there were panels manufactured with two lugs for each leg on the line side of the service disconnect of the 60 Amp panel. . . in my area these smaller tap lugs were used for electric water heaters, and, for a while back in the mid-1900s, were metered by the power company at a different rate. . .
markstg said:
Should I have fought this one, or was there a code violation somewhere?
Click to expand...
Chris and TAKelly rightly cite 110.14(A).

In my area, this comes up again and again as the older installations are looked at when properties are refinanced or change hands, or when new circuits are added. "Double lugging" gets called out a lot.

Just try to find the manufacturer's language allowing two conductors into the 60 Amp service disconnect line side lug. You may recall other examples of more than one conductor in a lug, but that doesn't mean the manufacturer made the lug that way.
markstg said:
But then again that is not what the inspector barked at.
Click to expand...
Maybe so, but that is not what you asked us in your opening post.
 
iwire said:
There is no code issue with that as long as the calculated load is under the rating of the service cable.

See 230.90(A) Exception 3
Click to expand...

I agree if the electrician did an actual load calculation. All the OP stated was that here was no load problem because the appliances were gas and the heat was gas. That's an assumption and not a calculation. :smile:

From experience I can say that there are homes that would be grandfathered in and would not need a new service but I can also say that there are homes where the load has increased over the years and a 60 amp service is not adequate. People tend to add loads over the years and not notice. An electric dryer here and an electric water heater there or just a dish washer and a whole house fan. The only way to know for sure is to do a load calculation.

If I were trying to pass inspection on this one I would have a load calculation ready when the inspector shows up because I know they may question it. Any major load added to such a small service is bound to raise questions.

It's a good thing he doesn't live in this area or some jurisdictions would make him bring the new service in underground and he really would have something to gripe about. It's not the NEC but a local ordinance ( the only way around it is with a variance and that takes time, its often cheaper just to go along with it).
 
mthead said:
You mentioned early on in your initial post that 1]An electrician filed for the permit for this job,2] that your local building dept required that the kitch be installed to code and yet it seems that thats the last I hear fo the electricians involvement in this job--What happened to him and why wasn't he the one dealing with the inspector? You can address this question if you wish.If you don't it sort of answers itself.
In regards to bringing up the kitchen to code-it doesn't just end with the wires hanging in the bsm't from the new kitchen-it ends in the panel-It sounds to me like the Inspector did you a favor-from your brief description of the service that was existing-well I don't know ...,you wanted to keep that service?You're basing that decision on your experience accumulated in the field during your time as an Electrical engineer?...,makes me think .., never mind-if I say what it makes me think this post will never see the light of day.
Most importantly I think that inspector had only the safety of the installation in mind and if it was something I saw in the course of my own inspection I would bet that I could give you a number of Listed nec violations that would back me up.
But I'm not there and haven't seen it so this "bet" is all hypothetical and just based on past experience.
Click to expand...


Regarding your questions: The electrician came out to give me a price for the electrical work required. He said the city was requiring that the Kitchen circuits needed to be brought up to Code.

We went to the service panel to see if there were any branch circuits available to add the 2 new circuits required. There was only one spare branch circuit fuse, but there was a dedicated 120V circuit run to a receptacle for a window a/c unit that was removed when the central a/c was installed, so the wire and receptacle to this dedicated circuit was removed, and used for the needed kitchen circuit.

The Electrician did not say, nor did he include in his price a new service panel. I accepted his quote and he got the city electrical permit, installed the circuits and he called for rough-in inspection. At the rough-in inspection the electrical inspector was inspecting the circuit installations in the service, he brought up his concern with how the central A/C unit was wired to the service.
The electrician asked the inspector what he had to do to get his rough-in permit completed, and the inspector told him his concern with the 2 disconnects required to turn off power to the house was not obvious and correct the situation and that a new service with a single Main would solve the problem. My electrician gave me a change order to change the service. I made the signs, installed them and asked the electrician if he would get the electrical inspector to approve this instead of a new service, he would not, so I paid the electrician to change the service.

Regarding the comments that a load calc needed to be done... I placed (actually the electrician did) an ammeter on each of the service mains, and we turned on all the house electrical items, A/C unit, all lights, toaster, microwave, refridgerator, TV's, stereo, washing machine and clothes dryer, and measured 34A and 36A on each leg. I added 15 receptacles at 180VA each getting a total of 48A, AOK for a 60A service. So I wasn't concerned about overloading this service. Other than its age, the service was in good condition.
 
markstg said:
..........
Regarding the comments that a load calc needed to be done... I placed (actually the electrician did) an ammeter on each of the service mains, and we turned on all the house electrical items, A/C unit, all lights, toaster, microwave, refridgerator, TV's, stereo, washing machine and clothes dryer, and measured 34A and 36A on each leg. I added 15 receptacles at 180VA each getting a total of 48A, AOK for a 60A service. So I wasn't concerned about overloading this service. Other than its age, the service was in good condition.
Click to expand...

Load calculations do not involve meters. It involves a codebook, and either pencil and paper or a calculator.
 
why would you want to save that junk service in the first place? if you remodeled the house I'd say you forgot something - like remodeling the electrical. Time after time I see homeowners who frankly are just too cheap to replace their service. welcome to the seventies and get breakers.

did you reuse the old crappy windows and set aside the insulation for reuse too?

sorry to sound harsh but get off the wallet and fix it right before the house burns down. I'm sure you will be blaming the electrician then. it probably isn't grounded or bonded properly either.

I agree with the inspector - wow I think that is a first for me.
 
kbsparky said:
I agree with the inspector on this one. That A/C circuit was obviously jack-legged in without a permit or inspection, so he was well within his rights and responsibility to flag your project on the current permit.

You'll thank him for it later, when your house doesn't burn down due to bad connections at the mains in the old panel. :cool:
Click to expand...

While all that MAY be true, in this country you are innocent until proven guilty. If this is the case the inspector should have checked old permits found none then issued the red tag. Not based upon assumptions.
 
Was this service change really required?

Was this service change really required?

I was abit miffed that the electrician had not warned me that the service may have issues and may not pass city inspection.

It was not a few hundred dollors to change the service, but $1200. New 100A circuit breaker panelboard, and new service drop conduit and wire.

The double lugging bothered me too, but no indication of overheating, and lugs accepted the wires without jamming, no arcing/pitting/black marks, discoloration of lugs.

At the end of the day it was the right thing to do.

It would like to retract my Title (Inspector grabbing at straws?) as it is rerogatory toward the inspector who clearly has Safety as his 1st concern. How about "Was this service change really required"

And from the answers I got It Was, for numerous reasons all identified by ya'll.

Thanks
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top