3rd Year Anniversary of the Failed Temp

[George Stolz]

Almost three years ago to the day, I was failed for a temp service where the whip came in the bottom and not in the side.

I failed another one. Once again, I came unstuck, because this was in a different jurisdiction.

For the life of me, I can't see the violation. Chalk up another 2.5 hours and $80 down the toilet fixing something that I don't think was broke.

I know this much, from now on I'm building all my new temps to match, and all old ones I buy are getting remodeled in my driveway.

 

[Minuteman]

Dude, let it go and move on.

 

[surf more]

that's a bummer--gotta love it!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ultramegabob]

I took a look at the pics in your original post, I dont think that set up would pass fed from the bottom here either. I have seen similar set ups that have a chase built into it with a divider running top to bottom.

 

[220/221]

Makes sense to me.

I always assumed that all feeder and branch-circuit conductors must be separated from service conductors.

I understand that the wires coming FROM the meter are in there so it's not really a safety thing. Seems more like a tampering thing. Too tempting to steal power if they are right there accessible to the homeowner.

 

[C3PO]

I have done that exact install more times then I can count, I do not see an issue with it.

 

[Smart $]

...

For the life of me, I can't see the violation.

...

Neither can I... at least no NEC violation, at worst a violation of poco requirements. The only way there would be an NEC violation is if the meter main combo had a dedicated entry space (i.e. a permanently partitioned so as to separate line and load sides of the meter, such as in many pedestals). A similar practice occurs all the time when service conductors enter a [service] main breaker panel, especially when entered from the opposite end of the can than the end where the main breaker is located. I don't see any of those instances saying the panel is used as a raceway. An enclosure is only used as a raceway if it has conductors which continue a circuit through the enclosure and make no connection within the enclosure.

BTW, don't forget if you do enter an enclosure, such as the one pictured in the linked post, from the top or side, you will have to use a weatherproof wiring method to maintain the can's NEMA 3R listing (assuming it will be exposed to outdoor weather conditions).

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

poco could refuse it

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Citing 230.7 is bogus. Every se conductor enters a main panel or disconnect with other conductors in it. Now that being said all the new combo boxes I have seen have an area that isolates the poco wire from the rest of the can. So perhaps it is more a poco thing but it definitely isn't 230.7. :smile:

 

[brantmacga]

i use an identical temp service, except if i'm not mistaken there is a separation barrier in the lower half between the service conductors and panelboard.

 

[Jljohnson]

Almost three years ago to the day, I was failed for a temp service where the whip came in the bottom and not in the side.

I failed another one. Once again, I came unstuck, because this was in a different jurisdiction.

For the life of me, I can't see the violation. Chalk up another 2.5 hours and $80 down the toilet fixing something that I don't think was broke.

I know this much, from now on I'm building all my new temps to match, and all old ones I buy are getting remodeled in my driveway.

Here we go again George, isn't this how we finally met 3 years ago?. I'm going to have to buy you lunch and hire you again if you don't calm down. LOL
Seriously tho, I don't think it is an NEC violation of any sort but most utilities will not allow it to be that way, just rebuild em with the flex into the top portion and be done with it. no more failed inspections and no more $80.00/time losses.