joe tedesco
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, Massachusetts
Is this an acceptable use of a meter socket enclosure according to the UL Listing for this product?
Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
- Thread starter joe tedesco
- Start date
- Status
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
It could be.
First we can not see if the lugs have been changed to a lug rated for two conductors.
Second the conductors may be tapped with a tap connector, split bolt, couple tap, etc.
Imposable to tell from that photo alone.
It could be.
First we can not see if the lugs have been changed to a lug rated for two conductors.
Second the conductors may be tapped with a tap connector, split bolt, couple tap, etc.
Imposable to tell from that photo alone.
charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
The enclosure is a wide place in the conduit, it is not service equipment. If someone wants to make a splice or tap, they must have enough room and meet the requirements of the Code. I don't see what the listing has to do with the amount of room available in an enclosure. We would not permit that installation on our system but we maintain control of the meter fitting.
Joe, what is the purpose of your posting?
The enclosure is a wide place in the conduit, it is not service equipment. If someone wants to make a splice or tap, they must have enough room and meet the requirements of the Code. I don't see what the listing has to do with the amount of room available in an enclosure. We would not permit that installation on our system but we maintain control of the meter fitting.
Joe, what is the purpose of your posting?
joe tedesco
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, Massachusetts
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
It is a violation and should not be permitted!
Only an inexperienced and unqualified person with little knowledge of wiring and rules as per NEC 90.7 would try to add a line side tap to the lugs on the top of this meter socket enclosure --- let's face it there just isn't enough room no matter how you look at it!Originally posted by charlie:
The enclosure is a wide place in the conduit, it is not service equipment. If someone wants to make a splice or tap, they must have enough room and meet the requirements of the Code. I don't see what the listing has to do with the amount of room available in an enclosure. We would not permit that installation on our system but we maintain control of the meter fitting.
Joe, what is the purpose of your posting?
It is a violation
and should not be permitted!
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
Originally posted by joe tedesco:
Only an inexperienced and unqualified person with little knowledge of wiring and rules as per NEC 90.7 would try to add a line side tap to the lugs on the top of this meter socket enclosure --- let's face it there just isn't enough room no matter how you look at it!
It is a violation
You know the location of this meter why not call the inspector or the power company and discuss your concerns with them?
[ February 18, 2005, 04:09 AM: Message edited by: iwire ]
charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
Joe generally doesn't do that, he just takes pictures so he can post them.
Joe generally doesn't do that, he just takes pictures so he can post them.
jimwalker
Senior Member
- Location
- TAMPA FLORIDA
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
Would the size of wire on second meter perhaps be rather small ? What size service is it ? Maybe less than 50 amps.Open it up then take pic.
Would the size of wire on second meter perhaps be rather small ? What size service is it ? Maybe less than 50 amps.Open it up then take pic.
joe tedesco
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, Massachusetts
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
Charlie:
Yes, I do take and post pictures and indicate their locations in magazines, and there are many times that the problems are corrected.
I am surprised at the way in which the comments here seem to think that the use of the equipment in this manner should be acceptable.
I can't go to the site and remove the meter you know that.
So the best way is to look the other way according to some!
QUESTION: If the AHJ was called to inspect a brand new installation that had the same setup as above with two meters would that be acceptable?
Do you have any specification in your guide that show this as an acceptable way?
I mean no harm, and I am just trying to get some comments from the other members and not always from the Moderators.
Crossing the neutral $$ eh!
Charlie:
Yes, I do take and post pictures and indicate their locations in magazines, and there are many times that the problems are corrected.
I am surprised at the way in which the comments here seem to think that the use of the equipment in this manner should be acceptable.
I can't go to the site and remove the meter you know that.
So the best way is to look the other way according to some!
QUESTION: If the AHJ was called to inspect a brand new installation that had the same setup as above with two meters would that be acceptable?
Do you have any specification in your guide that show this as an acceptable way?
I mean no harm, and I am just trying to get some comments from the other members and not always from the Moderators.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
Joe,
Without seeing the inside of the first meter there is no way to tell if there is a violation. I think that you could make a legal tap on the line side of the first meter. Maybe, a double lug kit was installed on the line side or a small tap device was used. This not an automatic violation.
Don
Joe,
Without seeing the inside of the first meter there is no way to tell if there is a violation. I think that you could make a legal tap on the line side of the first meter. Maybe, a double lug kit was installed on the line side or a small tap device was used. This not an automatic violation.
Don
- Location
- Wisconsin
- Occupation
- PE (Retired) - Power Systems
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
Two meter sockets like this, once were common in Wisconsin and Michigan. The "second" socket was for electric heating, in particular 30A hot water heaters, which was billed at a different rate. I have no idea how the tap was performed, but one recent POCO manual infers it as two wires in one lug.
Forgot to ask:
Joe, why do you care if this installation is in violation of the UL Listing? NRTL listing are guidelines/suggestions not laws/requirements.
[ February 18, 2005, 11:12 AM: Message edited by: jim dungar ]
Two meter sockets like this, once were common in Wisconsin and Michigan. The "second" socket was for electric heating, in particular 30A hot water heaters, which was billed at a different rate. I have no idea how the tap was performed, but one recent POCO manual infers it as two wires in one lug.
Forgot to ask:
Joe, why do you care if this installation is in violation of the UL Listing? NRTL listing are guidelines/suggestions not laws/requirements.
[ February 18, 2005, 11:12 AM: Message edited by: jim dungar ]
sandsnow
Senior Member
- Location
- Southern California
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
I agree, this is a picture where a conclusion cannot be drawn without more info. I would not turn this down based soley on this photo, nor would I accept it based soley on this photo.
Yes it could be OK. I looked up the UL info on this and it is silent on this issue except that terminals for more than one conductor shall be so marked (paraphrased)
The label inside cover may say more.
If you have the room per Art 312, then cool.
Here this would be a dual jurisdiction type thing over the meter socket enclosure unless the Poco sent us a letter taking control.
I agree, this is a picture where a conclusion cannot be drawn without more info. I would not turn this down based soley on this photo, nor would I accept it based soley on this photo.
Yes it could be OK. I looked up the UL info on this and it is silent on this issue except that terminals for more than one conductor shall be so marked (paraphrased)
The label inside cover may say more.
If you have the room per Art 312, then cool.
Here this would be a dual jurisdiction type thing over the meter socket enclosure unless the Poco sent us a letter taking control.
joe tedesco
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, Massachusetts
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
Just trying to find out the answer to the question I asked:
"Is this an acceptable use of a meter socket enclosure according to the UL Listing for this product?"
I imagine that there are some who would agree where the issue related to the use of this equipment was not installed as required by 110.3(B)..... I will research this question.
PS: NRTL's are not usually required in the residential markets. See OSHA rules.
See 90.7, "qualified electrical testing laboratories" what does that section mean to you?
Look here for some images of installations that can be questioned by any AHJ.:
http://themeterguy.com/photogallery/index1.html
Removed advertising link to Joe's web site. Charlie
[ February 18, 2005, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: charlie ]
Jim:
Just trying to find out the answer to the question I asked:
"Is this an acceptable use of a meter socket enclosure according to the UL Listing for this product?"
I imagine that there are some who would agree where the issue related to the use of this equipment was not installed as required by 110.3(B)..... I will research this question.
PS: NRTL's are not usually required in the residential markets. See OSHA rules.
See 90.7, "qualified electrical testing laboratories" what does that section mean to you?
Look here for some images of installations that can be questioned by any AHJ.:
http://themeterguy.com/photogallery/index1.html
Removed advertising link to Joe's web site. Charlie
[ February 18, 2005, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: charlie ]
joe tedesco
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, Massachusetts
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
Charlie:
I am not advertising when I posted a link to the pictures in my gallery.
I am not trying to sell anything!
I have only to try and educate.
Charlie:
I am not advertising when I posted a link to the pictures in my gallery.
I am not trying to sell anything!
I have only to try and educate.
- Location
- Wisconsin
- Occupation
- PE (Retired) - Power Systems
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
90.7 tells me the AHJ must decide if equipment is approved for the application and has been installed correctly. NRTL listings are only a convenience to the AHJ as no further safety examination should be required if standard testing/evaluation has been conducted.
90.7 tells me the AHJ must decide if equipment is approved for the application and has been installed correctly. NRTL listings are only a convenience to the AHJ as no further safety examination should be required if standard testing/evaluation has been conducted.
joe tedesco
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, Massachusetts
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
Please look here for information covering NRTL's
http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html#nrtls
Please look here for information covering NRTL's
http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html#nrtls
joe tedesco
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, Massachusetts
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
Brent: See 110.14(A)
Brent: See 110.14(A)
joe tedesco
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, Massachusetts
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
Search for "Meter Mounting Equipment" see PJSR.GuideInfo
http://database.ul.com/cgi-bin/XYV/template/LISEXT/1FRAME/ccnsrch.html
I found the answer to my question, just as I suspected!
Search for "Meter Mounting Equipment" see PJSR.GuideInfo
http://database.ul.com/cgi-bin/XYV/template/LISEXT/1FRAME/ccnsrch.html
I found the answer to my question, just as I suspected!
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: Is this acceptable according to the UL Listing?
I have to ask all here a question how would the NEC apply to a meter socket that is sealed by the utility taking in to account 90.2(B)(5)(a)?
It's metering.
It's under the control of the utility.
According to 90.2(B)(5)(a) that would put it out of the NECs scope.
What am I missing?
Joe we all know that, what we do not know is the listing of that meter.Originally posted by joe tedesco:
I found the answer to my question, just as I suspected!
I have to ask all here a question how would the NEC apply to a meter socket that is sealed by the utility taking in to account 90.2(B)(5)(a)?
It's metering.
It's under the control of the utility.
According to 90.2(B)(5)(a) that would put it out of the NECs scope.
What am I missing?
- Status