240v sub panel fed 4 wire?

[tadavidson]

I am looking for code section that states a sub panel requires a "4th" wire pulled for ground in lieu of driven rods. I find a section that says building or structure but not simply "any sub panel". I have also tried searching the archive of post. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

[HEYDOG]

You will not find sub panel in the code! I would say look at 250.24(A)(5).

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

Driving ground rods is irrelevant to running an EGC.

 

[HEYDOG]

I would also look at 250.142(A) and (B).

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I am looking for code section that states a sub panel requires a "4th" wire pulled for ground in lieu of driven rods. I find a section that says building or structure but not simply "any sub panel". I have also tried searching the archive of post. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Are you thinking about a feeder to a remote (not attached) structure? I also say that ground rods are not a substitute for an equipment grounding conductor.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

250.32

 

[tadavidson]

Here is the actual job. Homeowner pulls 240v 100amp 3 wire to a panel mounted on side of shed . Pool installer sets pum, switch leg, etc at panel area. I refuse to connect for pool guy because no egc is present. Homeowner says "his electrician" says I full of pow wow. I know it's wrong but trying to give him screenshot of code section. 250.32 says "serving building or structure" which technically this isn't.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

And 250.4(a)5

”The earth shall not be considered an effective ground fault current path”.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

Does the panel have a signed inspection sticker on it?

Bet not.

 

[Barney B]

Here is the actual job. Homeowner pulls 240v 100amp 3 wire to a panel mounted on side of shed . Pool installer sets pum, switch leg, etc at panel area. I refuse to connect for pool guy because no egc is present. Homeowner says "his electrician" says I full of pow wow. I know it's wrong but trying to give him screenshot of code section. 260.32 says "serving building or structure" which technically this isn't.

Unless the raceway enclosing the feeder conductors to the new panel qualifies as an EGC, it is time to walk away from this one.

 

[tadavidson]

You will not find sub panel in the code! I would say look at 250.24(A)(5).

250.24 seems like it to me. Thanks for assistance anybody got argument against this as "it".

 

[ptonsparky]

Here is the actual job. Homeowner pulls 240v 100amp 3 wire to a panel mounted on side of shed . Pool installer sets pum, switch leg, etc at panel area. I refuse to connect for pool guy because no egc is present. Homeowner says "his electrician" says I full of pow wow.

My first thought is to walk away in a hurry, but we really need a full description of the installation. Is this a feeder with overcurrent protection ahead of it? Or what?

 

[tadavidson]

Does the panel have a signed inspection sticker on it?

Bet not.

You'd be correct,it doesn't and unfortunately it could if it was permitted but the local authority lacks Electrical code knowledge

 

[tadavidson]

My first thought is to walk away in a hurry, but we really need a full description of the installation. Is this a feeder with overcurrent protection ahead of it?

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

250.24 seems like it to me. Thanks for assistance anybody got argument against this as "it".

If this is a “sub-panel” fed from a main panel, then it doesn’t have service conductors, it has feeders.

 

[tadavidson]

House has 200 amp meter combo. 100 amp breaker 3 wire 240 v underground direct burial to panel 70' away. Lands on MLO panel. Neutral landed on isolated bar.

 

[wwhitney]

250.32 says "serving building or structure" which technically this isn't.

(2017) 250.32(B)(1) starts off "An equipment grounding conductor, as described in 250.118, shall be run with the supply conductors . . ."

Cheers, Wayne

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

House has 200 amp meter combo. 100 amp breaker 3 wire 240 v underground direct burial to panel 70' away. Lands on MLO panel. Neutral landed on isolated bar.

That’s more than likely a violation of 225.32 as well.

 

[tadavidson]

If this is a “sub-panel” fed from a main panel, then it doesn’t have service conductors, it has feeders.

Agreed

 

[tadavidson]

That’s more than likely a violation of 225.32 as well.

Yessir except 250.32 state serving "building or structure" 2020 cycle.