Bonding jumper in sub-panel

[HEYDOG]

yes, and? my specific question is regarding the wire labeled 'supply side equipment bonding jumper'. It seems to be mislabeled.

Sorry! I combined the two questions! # 20 is correct for 2nd question!

 

[Grouch]

Sorry! I combined the two questions! # 20 is correct for 2nd question!

All good. The title of my post was misleading / incomplete as well.

 

[Grouch]

Thank you all again for the help.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Agree with the second sentence, but for an SDS aren't the transformer secondary conductors also feeders? They are not service conductors, and they are not branch circuits.

Cheers, Wayne

I guess they are feeders, but the code only calls them transformer secondary conductors.

 

[Tulsa Electrician]

I thought the transformer secondary conductors were considered tap conductors.
Secondary tap conductors follow the tap rules.

 

[wwhitney]

I thought the transformer secondary conductors were considered tap conductors.

One could argue that conductors qualifying under 240.21(C) are not tap conductors. Otherwise yes.

But all feeder tap conductors are also feeder conductors.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[Tulsa Electrician]

One could argue that conductors qualifying under 240.21(C) are not tap conductors. Otherwise yes.

But all feeder tap conductors are also feeder conductors.

Cheers, Wayne

Ok I can see that.
So not all taps are treated equally.
Looking at the definition of a feeder it refers to the source of a SDS.
Could be why they refer to them as secondary conductors in the NEC.
This way we know what what we're dealing with.

I'm going to do some more reading.