80 amp cord on 100 amp plugs, inspector said NO!?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Smart $ said:
... However, what if we considered this as a feeder tap instead??? I think that would allow the installation as is...
Click to expand...
...subject to the tap requirements of 240.21(B).

Pondering this consideration, it too may not be permitted. It would be subject to approval by AHJ... latter part of 240.21(B)(2)(3) or 240.21(B)(4)(5)...
 
Last edited:
What about temporary wiring....

What about temporary wiring....

Smart $ said:
Technically, no. As I stated before, your cord is ahead of the supplementary OCPD.

However, I also noted earlier that it would have to qualify as a tap... but since you mentioned supplementary OCPD from the get go, I had only considered it as a branch circuit "extension" to this point. However, what if we considered this as a feeder tap instead??? I think that would allow the installation as is...
Click to expand...

Im going crazy, i went through this about 20 years ago and the inspector actualy showed me where I was ok with these installs. I think it was in temporary wiring rules in some exception or under "supervised and qualified persons only..." . He compared it to rules for welders where you can have a 10x2 welding cord pluged into a 50 amp recepticle.... Or something about "proper rating for the device being serviced"...
I bet it was in the same old code book that OSHA quotes from for temporay wiring...

Thanks again for all your help. My boss is going to freak when I tell him we need to buy 80 amp fused disconnects to ship with our cords....Thats 2 plugs at 180 each.........Ide probaly have to mount the disconnect on a stand..... and we have 8 of these rigs to fix... Or I can replace 5000' of our 6x4 W with 4x4, oh ya only about 30k$
And then again, 6x4 is rated for 77amps, can I use the "next larger" breaker rule?
 
Last edited:
Waynehof said:
...I install a 80 amp main (or suplemental) breaker in our heater. ...
The outlet i plug into has a 100 amp CB.
...
Click to expand...

Change the numbers and you're describing my garbage disposal.

I think your installation is fine. But my opinion doesn't matter.
 
Seems to me the 80A breaker is considered supplementary and can be located on the load side of the cord for its protection


Overcurrent Protective Device, Supplementary. A device intended to provide limited overcurrent protection for specific applications and utilization equipment such as luminaires and appliances. This limited protection is in addition to the protection provided in the required branch circuit by the branch-circuit overcurrent protective device.

The definition of supplementary overcurrent protection device makes two important distinctions between overcurrent protective devices. First, the use of a supplementary device is specifically limited to a few applications. Second, where it is used, the supplementary device must be in addition to and be protected by the more robust branch-circuit overcurrent protective device.

240.5(A) states; Supplementary overcurrent protection, as covered in 240.10, shall be permitted to be an acceptable means for providing this protection.
and the way 240.10 reads it is not replacing the requirement but protecting as if it were the OC. It just does not have to be readily accesssible IMHO
 
mwm1752 said:
Seems to me the 80A breaker is considered supplementary and can be located on the load side of the cord for its protection


Overcurrent Protective Device, Supplementary. A device intended to provide limited overcurrent protection for specific applications and utilization equipment such as luminaires and appliances. This limited protection is in addition to the protection provided in the required branch circuit by the branch-circuit overcurrent protective device.

The definition of supplementary overcurrent protection device makes two important distinctions between overcurrent protective devices. First, the use of a supplementary device is specifically limited to a few applications. Second, where it is used, the supplementary device must be in addition to and be protected by the more robust branch-circuit overcurrent protective device.

240.5(A) states; Supplementary overcurrent protection, as covered in 240.10, shall be permitted to be an acceptable means for providing this protection.
and the way 240.10 reads it is not replacing the requirement but protecting as if it were the OC. It just does not have to be readily accesssible IMHO
Click to expand...
What you are leaving out of your assessment is the fact that the supplementary OCPD is at the load end of the cord. With a 100A branch (or feeder) -circuit OCPD, that would make a 77A-rated cord a tap... and thus would have to qualify as a tap before being considered protected.
 
I enjoy a good discussion and in no way is my intent to antagonize you --- A device intended to provide limited overcurrent protection for specific applications and utilization equipment -- some SOC are intergal to equipment as the OP is stating in which the supply cord cannot be on the load side of SOC. There can never be a load from the individual unit that can exceed the SOC rating. I do get your point but the reason for using the SOC as the wire protection for cords does appear to be a specific application. By the way, Happy Holidays & Merry Christmas 240.21(C)(4) originate at the service equip.
 
Last edited:
mwm1752 said:
I enjoy a good discussion and in no way is my intent to antagonize you --- A device intended to provide limited overcurrent protection for specific applications and utilization equipment -- some SOC are intergal to equipment as the OP is stating in which the supply cord cannot be on the load side of SOC. There can never be a load from the individual unit that can exceed the SOC rating. I do get your point but the reason for using the SOC as the wire protection for cords does appear to be a specific application. By the way, Happy Holidays & Merry Christmas 240.21(C)(4) originate at the service equip.
Click to expand...
I understand how you are interpreting the requirement(s)... and I'll not say it is totally wrong... but you'll have to cite other definitions and requirements which back up your interpretation in order for me to say you are totally correct. Under the NEC, only service and tap conductors can be protected by a load-end OCPD. In all other cases, the OCPD only protects conductors on the load side of the OCPD.

Happy holidays and merry Christmas to you and yours...:D
 
PetrosA said:
So, just because I'm confused by this I'll ask...

Why is this 80A cord and 100A plug setup any different from a 16 AWG lamp cord with a male end on it or a 16 AWG
extension cord plugged into a 20A 120V receptacle? Are there extenuating circumstances for the smaller circuit cords?
Click to expand...

the smaller cord won't make as big a fire, so it's not as dangerous..... :dunce:
 
I think this was mentioned already, but we have lamps, computers, TV's, small appliances of all sorts with small gauge cords plugged into 15 or 20 amp circuits all the time. I have also seen welding equipment that has only a 12 AWG cord with a 50 amp cord cap on it. Now most of this equipment mentioned does have a listing with the cord attached, but obviously someone has decided they don't need cords that match the overcurrent device in those applications. Is the OP's situation code compliant, I really don't know. I can probably find about as many ways to accept it as I can to reject it myself, with none of them being crystal clear IMO.
 
kwired said:
I think this was mentioned already, but we have lamps, computers, TV's, small appliances of all sorts with small gauge cords plugged into 15 or 20 amp circuits all the time. I have also seen welding equipment that has only a 12 AWG cord with a 50 amp cord cap on it. Now most of this equipment mentioned does have a listing with the cord attached, but obviously someone has decided they don't need cords that match the overcurrent device in those applications. Is the OP's situation code compliant, I really don't know. I can probably find about as many ways to accept it as I can to reject it myself, with none of them being crystal clear IMO.
Click to expand...

+1
And adding a reset button to any of those appliances does not create a violation.
 
Smart $ said:
I understand how you are interpreting the requirement(s)... and I'll not say it is totally wrong... but you'll have to cite other definitions and requirements which back up your interpretation in order for me to say you are totally correct. Under the NEC, only service and tap conductors can be protected by a load-end OCPD. In all other cases, the OCPD only protects conductors on the load side of the OCPD.

Happy holidays and merry Christmas to you and yours...:D
Click to expand...

Acually reasonable doubt mght be good enough - bear with me-----

240.21 Location in Circuit
Overcurrent protection shall be provided in each ungrounded circuit conductor and shall be located at the point where the conductors receive their supply except as specified in 240.21(A) through (H). Conductors supplied under the provisions of 240.21(A) through (H) shall not supply another conductor except through an overcurrent protective device meeting the requirements of 240.4. Any where in 240.21(A)-(H) the OC can be located on the load side of the conductors.
(A) Branch-Circuit Conductors. Branch-circuit tap conductors meeting the requirements specified in 210.19 shall be permitted to have overcurrent protection as specified in 210.20.
Branch Circuit, Individual. A branch circuit that supplies only one utilization equipment.
Tap Conductors. As used in this article, a tap conductor is defined as a conductor, other than a service conductor, that has overcurrent protection ahead of its point of supply that exceeds the value permitted for similar conductors that are protected as described elsewhere in 240.4. Both definitions apply to 240.21(A) and the OP design.
240.4 Protection of Conductors
Conductors, other than flexible cords, flexible cables, and fixture wires, shall be protected against overcurrent in accordance with their ampacities specified in 310.15, unless otherwise permitted or required in 240.4(A) through (G).

(B) Overcurrent Devices Rated 800 Amperes or Less.
The next higher standard overcurrent device rating (above the ampacity of the conductors being protected) shall be permitted to be used, provided all of the following conditions are met:
(1) The conductors being protected are not part of a branch circuit supplying more than one receptacle for cord and
plug-connected portable loads.
(2) The ampacity of the conductors does not correspond with the standard ampere rating of a fuse or a circuit breaker without overload trip adjustments above its rating (but that shall be permitted to have other trip or rating
adjustments).
(3) The next higher standard rating selected does not exceed 800 amperes.
Saitsfies protection described in tap conductor definition per OP design.
210.19 Conductors ? Minimum Ampacity and Size
(A) Branch Circuits Not More Than 600 Volts.
(1) General. Branch-circuit conductors shall have an ampacity not less than the maximum load to be served. Where a branch circuit supplies continuous loads or any combination of continuous and noncontinuous loads, the minimum branch-circuit conductor size, before the application of any adjustment or correction factors, shall have an allowable ampacity not less than the noncontinuous load plus 125 percent of the continuous load. Meets the requirement of 240.21(A) per OP design.
210.20 Overcurrent Protection
Branch-circuit conductors and equipment shall be protected by overcurrent protective devices that have a rating or setting that complies with 210.20(A) through (D).
(A) Continuous and Noncontinuous Loads. Where a branch circuit supplies continuous loads or any combination of continuous and noncontinuous loads, the rating of the overcurrent device shall not be less than the noncontinuous
load plus 125 percent of the continuous load. Meets the requirement of 240.21(A) per OP design.
(B) Conductor Protection. Conductors shall be protected in accordance with 240.4. Flexible cords and fixture wires shall be protected in accordance with 240.5.
Full circle to previous post ---
Overcurrent Protective Device, Supplementary. A device intended to provide limited overcurrent protection for specific applications and utilization equipment such as luminaires and appliances. This limited protection is in addition to the protection provided in the required branch circuit by the branch-circuit overcurrent protective device.

The definition of supplementary overcurrent protection device makes two important distinctions between overcurrent protective devices. First, the use of a supplementary device is specifically limited to a few applications. Second, where it is used, the supplementary device must be in addition to and be protected by the more robust branch-circuit overcurrent protective device.

240.5(A) states; Supplementary overcurrent protection, as covered in 240.10, shall be permitted to be an acceptable means for providing this protection.
and the way 240.10 reads it is not replacing the requirement but protecting as if it were the OC.

A device intended to provide limited overcurrent protection for specific applications and utilization equipment -- some SOC are intergal to equipment as the OP is stating in which the supply cord cannot be on the load side of SOC. There can never be a load from the individual unit that can exceed the SOC rating. I do get your point but the reason for using the SOC as the wire protection for cords does appear to be a specific application.

I do see a path thru code -- I could have missed something here and await the crossfire --
 
mwm1752 said:
Acually reasonable doubt mght be good enough - bear with me-----

...


I do see a path thru code -- I could have missed something here and await the crossfire --
Click to expand...
The only part you are missing is qualifying the cord between plug and S-OCPD as a branch-circuit tap conductor, which for this scenario are through 210.19(A)(4) exceptions... and I don't see any applicable excepted condition to qualify it as a branch-circuit tap conductor. Do you?
 
Smart $ said:
The only part you are missing is qualifying the cord between plug and S-OCPD as a branch-circuit tap conductor, which for this scenario are through 210.19(A)(4) exceptions... and I don't see any applicable excepted condition to qualify it as a branch-circuit tap conductor. Do you?
Click to expand...
But is it a branch circuit tap or a feeder tap? It has overcurrent protection at the load end of the tap, which should fit all the feeder tap rules.

That said, 10 foot feeder tap rule does require the tap conductors to be contained in a raceway though and 25 foot feeder tap rule mentions a raceway or other approved means for physical protection of the tap conductors.
 
Smart $ said:
The only part you are missing is qualifying the cord between plug and S-OCPD as a branch-circuit tap conductor, which for this scenario are through 210.19(A)(4) exceptions... and I don't see any applicable excepted condition to qualify it as a branch-circuit tap conductor. Do you?
Click to expand...

So , if the cord was hardwired it could considered branch circuit conductors?
 
kwired said:
But is it a branch circuit tap or a feeder tap? It has overcurrent protection at the load end of the tap, which should fit all the feeder tap rules.

That said, 10 foot feeder tap rule does require the tap conductors to be contained in a raceway though and 25 foot feeder tap rule mentions a raceway or other approved means for physical protection of the tap conductors.
Click to expand...

and as your aware a feeder tap takes 240.4 (B) out of the picture

and that has changed since the op started doing this years ago
 
Last edited:
david said:
and as your aware a feeder tap takes 240.4 (B) out of the picture

and that has changed since the op started doing this years ago
Click to expand...

240.4 also doesn't apply to flexible cords unless specifically permitted or required in the rest of 240.4 Says this in first sentence of 240.4, yet I fail to see any specifically permitted or required applications for flexible cords in the rest of the section.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top