Residential Service

Status
Not open for further replies.

gigawatt

Member
One of my electrical inspectors made a brief mention of a new code rule having to do with adding a grounding conductor in the service entrance conduit from the transformer to the service disconnect on the house. I have looked and cannot put my finger on it in the 2008 NEC. In the past we were only required to run three wires from the transformer to the service disconnect at the house.
 
gigawatt said:
One of my electrical inspectors made a brief mention of a new code rule having to do with adding a grounding conductor in the service entrance conduit from the transformer to the service disconnect on the house. I have looked and cannot put my finger on it in the 2008 NEC. In the past we were only required to run three wires from the transformer to the service disconnect at the house.

Not sure of the exact install you have there but look at 250.32(B). I believe that is what the inspector is referencing
 
Originally Posted by gigawatt
One of my electrical inspectors made a brief mention of a new code rule having to do with adding a grounding conductor in the service entrance conduit from the transformer to the service disconnect on the house. I have looked and cannot put my finger on it in the 2008 NEC. In the past we were only required to run three wires from the transformer to the service disconnect at the house.

Not sure of the exact install you have there but look at 250.32(B). I believe that is what the inspector is referencing

Dennis, look again at the OP he is saying from the TRANSFORMER to his SERVICE DISCONNECT. 250,32 (B) deals with feeders and branch circ. If you ran a grounding cond. you would be creating a parallel neutral with a undersized wire.
 
ceb58 said:
Dennis, look again at the OP he is saying from the TRANSFORMER to his SERVICE DISCONNECT. 250,32 (B) deals with feeders and branch circ. If you ran a grounding cond. you would be creating a parallel neutral with a undersized wire.


That is why I said the inspector was referencing that art. I did not mean to imply that he was correct.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
That is why I said the inspector was referencing that art. I did not mean to imply that he was correct.

Then I was incorrect in thinking you were incorrect in thinking the inspector was correct which in fact he is incorrect. Correct?:grin:

( it's been a long hot day)
 
I cant see any way of doing this w/o creating parallel paths as ceb stated. If the inspector can't give you a code reference then he can't fail it. He may simply be a little confused.
 
See, I think the inspector was referencing the art. I posted earlier but I am not entirely sure that there wasn't another disco by the trany or what. If it goes from the utility transformer directly to the house then I would agree the inspector is incorrect.
 
Either way, if you are running your conductors from the transformer to the main, then only three conductors are required.

This may clear the smoke. Giga, did your jurisdiction follow the 2005 NEC 250.32(B)?
 
Can anyone tell me if there is an article anywhere in the 2005 code that states that the grounding conductor which feeds a sub fed panel from a main panel must be insulated???? I failed an inspection on a 50A sub today because I fed it with 6-3 ROMEX from the 150A main panel that was 12 inches to the right of it. I would appreciate any insight.:confused:
 
mdmull said:
Can anyone tell me if there is an article anywhere in the 2005 code that states that the grounding conductor which feeds a sub fed panel from a main panel must be insulated???? I failed an inspection on a 50A sub today because I fed it with 6-3 ROMEX from the 150A main panel that was 12 inches to the right of it. I would appreciate any insight.:confused:

If the panel was for a pool then you must use an insulated grounding conductor ,however if it is just for a standard sub panel the inspector is off his rocker. Ask him for a code reference.
 
Thanks everyone, I have been out of town. To answer some of the questions, the disconnect is on the house yes, he has not quoted any code section yet he just made a mention as we were walking through a complex of houses that this was in the new 2008 code. I agree with all of you as to adding a fourth wire would create another path and three should be used. The only other thing would be that the power company allows us to put the main disconnect up to 250' from the house and have main breaker panels in the house. What are your thoughts on that?
Thanks
 
gigawatt said:
. . . the power company allows us to put the main disconnect up to 250' from the house and have main breaker panels in the house. What are your thoughts on that?
No problem with the installation as long as you do not use a MLO panelboard. It sounds like you are following 225, Part II.

I wonder though, how does the serving electric utility set the parameters for serving a second structure (the service structure is one and the home is the second)? :confused:
 
mdmull said:
Can anyone tell me if there is an article anywhere in the 2005 code that states that the grounding conductor which feeds a sub fed panel from a main panel must be insulated???? I failed an inspection on a 50A sub today because I fed it with 6-3 ROMEX from the 150A main panel that was 12 inches to the right of it. I would appreciate any insight.:confused:


None that I'm aware of requires a grounding conductor to be insulated...unless it's pertaining to a swimmimg pool under article 680...


Read 250.118

steve

I must be half asleep....this was already answered.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top