Main breaker load side tap. Violation?

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RGROGERS

Member
Just installed a new 400a. 240v. 4 wire red leg delta service consisting of 2-200a. 3ph meters & MBs, all mounted on the building exterior.
As one tenant only required single phase for an existing 100a. panel I ran a 3 wire, single phase, 100a. 120/240 feeder from the main breaker load side, about 30' along the exterior wall surface to a 100 amp disconnect mounted immediately upon entry.
Conduit is 1" emt, all fitting are raintite, wire is #3 thhn.

I got a violation for this, without explanation, other than the #3s weren't properly protected on the 200a. MB.

Does the tap rule not apply here? I cited 240.21(b)(5) to the inspector to no avail.
He did seem confused though and said he would investigate further.

Any comments?
Much obliged.
 
Just to be clear I don't see an issue with it but is it technically a tap? That may be where the inspector is coming from.
 
If you're connected on the line side of the service disconnects you do not have a tap you have service entrance conductors. Feeder tap rules are for after the OCPD. Also service disconnects must be grouped.
 
I believe he said "load side" in which case I would not consider it a violation IF the breaker was rated to accept the conductors connected.
 
augie47 said:
I believe he said "load side" in which case I would not consider it a violation IF the breaker was rated to accept the conductors connected.
Click to expand...

After reading it again I believe that you're correct. Should the 30' tap should be a problem if it's on the outside of the building?
 
augie47 said:
I believe he said "load side" in which case I would not consider it a violation IF the breaker was rated to accept the conductors connected.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like he took the #3's off the 200 amp breaker, making it a tap. IMO this install is a bit of a gray area bease he is "mixing and matching" two different tap rules: the unlimited outside tap, and the 10 foot tap rule. Although he may meet the requirements for each, it is not clear yout can do that.

Edit: didn't mean to quote u augie.
 
Looks to me like a clear application of 240.21(B)(5). Perhaps I'm overlooking something..
 
infinity said:
I believe that he has a 200 amp CB and is tapping the load side with 100 amp conductors, sounds like a tap to me.
Click to expand...


I would have to agree. I thought a tap had to be connected to another wire not directly to an overcurrent protective device.

Tap Conductor. 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.
Click to expand...
 
It is a conductor with supply side overcurrent protection that is higher then otherwise allowed. That is what is necessary to call it a feeder tap. No overcurrent protection on supply side is ordinarily a service conductor 240.21 doesn't apply to service conductors.

The fact it is outside - there is no limit to length of said tap.

If improperly landed in a lug that can't accept multiple conductors - that is not violation of 240.21, is a violation of 110.3(B).

If I have a meter - main (200 amp) with three port terminal bar on load side (pretty common around here in a unit made by Milbank) landing 200 amp conductor to go to the house, and 60 or 100 amp conductor to go to an outbuilding is a legal outdoor feeder tap of unlimited length. Installing a sub feed lug kit or a plug on sub feed lug unit into a load center is also a method of creating a feeder tap. You do not have to splice into an otherwise properly sized "conductor" A feeder starts at load side of the feeder overcurrent device. Bus bars in a panelboard are a part of a feeder. Every breaker plugged onto that bar is basically a feeder tap on the line side of breaker.
 
. You do not have to splice into an otherwise properly sized "conductor" A feeder starts at load side of the feeder overcurrent device. Bus bars in a panelboard are a part of a feeder. Every breaker plugged onto that bar is basically a feeder tap on the line side of breaker.
Click to expand...

There was a proposal to add language that a tap may start at device terminals, but it was rejected on the grounds that it was unnecessary.
 
Appreciate all the feedback guys however the sub code official, after some debate, rejected it.
He did however admit its a gray area but just didn't like it, without being able to cite a specific code violation.
He said the idea of taking single phase out of a 3 phase breaker was wrong even though I informed him there will be a 3 phase load connected after construction is done and the temp. 100a feeder is removed.
Out of curiosity I asked if he would approve it if I put a JB, nippled into the MB, run the 3-3/0 from the MB into it and then splice it to the #3s and he said yes. - You figure.
I really didn't feel like going into battle.
It's cheaper just to change the breaker so I can get the final payment.

Thanks again,
 
RGROGERS said:
Appreciate all the feedback guys however the sub code official, after some debate, rejected it.
He did however admit its a gray area but just didn't like it, without being able to cite a specific code violation.
He said the idea of taking single phase out of a 3 phase breaker was wrong even though I informed him there will be a 3 phase load connected after construction is done and the temp. 100a feeder is removed.
Out of curiosity I asked if he would approve it if I put a JB, nippled into the MB, run the 3-3/0 from the MB into it and then splice it to the #3s and he said yes. - You figure.
I really didn't feel like going into battle.
It's cheaper just to change the breaker so I can get the final payment.

Thanks again,
Click to expand...

Just my 2 cents but you gave in too easily. He didn't like it but can't cite a code violation wouldn't work for me. You could always call the DCA and see if they can give you their interpretation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top