Inspected a home today with 100 amp (finished basement) and 150 amp mains. 100 amp main had a sub panel off it which fed a small shop. Sub panel was supplied from main panel, tapped off bus using lugs BELOW main breaker. These Conductors ran to sub with no breaker where it tied into either panel at point of connection, but main breaker was protected by main cut off above tap. Is it illegal to tap off main panel below main breaker without use of individual breaker for feeder wires? Seems conductors to sub would be protected by main 100 amp breaker above tap in main panel. Sub is right next to main. See photos. By the way, I already caught to improper grounding and grounded conductors on same bus. Please advise. Thanks.
sub panel tap from main illegal?
- Thread starter air force
- Start date
- Status
Sierrasparky
Senior Member
- Location
- USA
- Occupation
- Electrician ,contractor
I'd say no, I don't think that those lugs are factory for both breaker and lugs.
A for creativity.
Then as a tap does it follow any of the tap rules as I cannot see from the picture.
A for creativity.
Then as a tap does it follow any of the tap rules as I cannot see from the picture.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
If you put a main in the sub-panel that has a rating not greater than the ampacity of the tap conductors, you would be good to go.
mwm1752
Senior Member
- Location
- Aspen, Colo
without proof Sierrasparky is technically correct about the connections - take 2 circuits out of the full panel, move them to the new panel, breaker the feeder. Looks like the new panel has a dedicated space issue, same piping coule be in the existing panels access space if lower that 6'6" -- looks like plumbing pvc
mbrooke
Batteries Included
- Location
- United States
- Occupation
- Technician
Those taps are not meant for a subpanel, in fact they are not supposed to be there when a main breaker is used.
jxofaltrds
Inspector Mike®
- Location
- Mike P. Columbus Ohio
- Occupation
- ESI, PI, RBO
You example is dangerous. As a Home Inspector you should recommend a Licensed Electrical Contractor or Electrical Inspector examine!
GerryB
Senior Member
- Location
- woodbridge, ct. USA
If that's a GE I wonder how they installed the main breaker kit without taking those lugs off.
mbrooke
Batteries Included
- Location
- United States
- Occupation
- Technician
They stuck the main breaker legs into the lugs and tightened those up. Believe it or not its a common mistake.
mwm1752
Senior Member
- Location
- Aspen, Colo
You also have a grounded conductor on a breaker & not remarked as an ungrounded conductor:thumbsdown:
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
Haven't had to add main breakers all that often to GE panels, but doesn't the main breaker kit have bus structure that lands in the existing main lugs?
I agree that if that is how they go together that this lug is not intended to have additional conductors landed in it.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
Outside the fact the tap probably can't originate in those lugs and the grounded/grounding conductors being landed on same bus in the sub panel other items to consider:
it was not mentioned how long this tap is
for 10 foot tap rule:
1)Ampacity of tap conductor appears to be fine from what we can see. the need for an overcurrent device at the load end of the tap may not be necessary (read 240.21(B)(1)(1) carefully)
2)Tap conductor does not extend beyond the panelboard it supplies.
3)the tap conductors need to be enclosed in a raceway. (they are not)
4)tap conductor ampacity needs to be at least one tenth of overcurrent protection on supply side (which looks like is met)
for 25 foot tap rule:
1) tap conductor ampacity needs to be one third of supply side overcurrent device (looks like this is ok)
2) tap conductor does not extend beyond the panelboard it supplies
3) tap conductors require protection from physical damage - and whether or not these conductors are sufficiently protected is subject to interpretation.
it was not mentioned how long this tap is
for 10 foot tap rule:
1)Ampacity of tap conductor appears to be fine from what we can see. the need for an overcurrent device at the load end of the tap may not be necessary (read 240.21(B)(1)(1) carefully)
2)Tap conductor does not extend beyond the panelboard it supplies.
3)the tap conductors need to be enclosed in a raceway. (they are not)
4)tap conductor ampacity needs to be at least one tenth of overcurrent protection on supply side (which looks like is met)
for 25 foot tap rule:
1) tap conductor ampacity needs to be one third of supply side overcurrent device (looks like this is ok)
2) tap conductor does not extend beyond the panelboard it supplies
3) tap conductors require protection from physical damage - and whether or not these conductors are sufficiently protected is subject to interpretation.
HarleyWideGlide
Member
- Location
- New England
- Occupation
- Helper
Looks like a sloppy job to me.In the 2nd pic looks like 3 unused openings tho there are clamps. Line limit is upside down and the
way that grd wire comes across the corner of the brkrs like
What the. . . I would not put my name on this job. Looks like too much romax entering box. . .
way that grd wire comes across the corner of the brkrs like
What the. . . I would not put my name on this job. Looks like too much romax entering box. . .
HarleyWideGlide
Member
- Location
- New England
- Occupation
- Helper
Seems this could have been worded more clearly but it seems
6744 is sub and it is rated @ a 100 amps but con feeding it are off a 150 amp brkr and sed wites which are feeders do not look like they will handle a 100 amps.
6744 is sub and it is rated @ a 100 amps but con feeding it are off a 150 amp brkr and sed wites which are feeders do not look like they will handle a 100 amps.
LarryFine
Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
- Location
- Henrico County, VA
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor
Let's not forget that a sub-panel should have separated grounds and neutrals . . . and that this is a 4-1/2-yr-old thread.
- Status