Compliant with 240.21(C)(6) ??

[Ken In NJ]

Rough wire on this job was inspected, service was not. But the inspector made a comment to the GC that has me confused. "Tell the electrician. that the secondary conductors better be less then 10' or he will need to add a disconnect on the secondary side"

Here is how the service is built .. I assumed that we complied with 240.21(C)(6) and that 25' is the max length for the secondary conductors.

100 amp 277/480 volt from service head to meter socket in RMC #2 THHN conductors.

3R 100 amp 3 fused disco below meter socket ( Bonded and grounded in disco)

Conduit and #2 THHN from outside disco to un-fused in-site disco in basement (as requested by inspector at plan review) then Greenfield with # 2's to a 75 KVA Transformer. 480 volt primary 120/208 secondary

Out of transformer with 4 - 3/0 THHN and one # 4 green through 2.5" greenfield which adapts to 2.5" EMT then through the floor into a 200 amp Main Breaker panel. Length of secondary conductors is roughly 15'

Please give your thoughts and or comments on this installation .. do we in fact need to add a secondary disco .. or shorten the conductors ?

County is still using the 2002 Code ..

Thanks

 

[infinity]

25' rule could apply so you seem OK to me.

 

[jim dungar]

Your installation seems to be compliant with the 25' rule.

Under your 2002 code, there is absolutely no requirement for a disconnect to ever be 'in sight' of a transformer.

 

[Ken In NJ]

Thanks Guys

HOPEFULLY the inspector will agree when its inspected early next week .. I will be sure to have the Code Book there and opened to that page to show him if he dont

 

[Pierre C Belarge]

408.36(B) Supplied Through a Transformer.
Where a panelboard is supplied through a transformer, the overcurrent protection required by 408.36 shall be located on the secondary side of the transformer.