Thread: Copper and AL Service Cable In Same Panel

I saw this is a condo unit I inspected today. One leg of the service cable is stranded aluminum and the other is stranded copper. Assuming they are both sized properly for the panel, is there any issue or problem with this configuration?

And yes, I noted the double taps and lint in the panel.

Similar Threads:

• Copper Gas Line -
• Charred Copper wires in Main Panels
• Electrical service box located in closet
• Electrical cable water heater
• Welcome From F.I.R.E. Service

Are the blue and red wires on the left going somewhere else?
It looks like a repair was made, and one of the leads was spliced. Good chance there is a Copper to Aluminum splice in there somewhere.

The bare ground on the neutral bus is wrong, I believe, but you saw that.

NO: Yet another of Phily's finest . . .

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

I saw this is a condo unit I inspected today. One leg of the service cable is stranded aluminum and the other is stranded copper. Assuming they are both sized properly for the panel, is there any issue or problem with this configuration?

Barring any other issues and any speculation this is perfectly fine. John does make some good points though.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

And yes, I noted the double taps and lint in the panel.

I see only one dreaded double-tap. The other is a twin breaker.
If that were a newer QO breaker the double-tap would be fine. They ARE rated for two conductors of the same size.

Two double taps Speedy. The top two breakers on the right.

more than 6 disconnects too.

Add the common with a ground under one lug.

"more than 6 disconnects too"

Yes, but since this is in a condo, it is not likely to be the SE.
So is the limit still 6?


Looks like lint in the panel. Was this connected to the dryer exhaust or something?

Rick, most likely there is a service disconnect ahead of this panel. In that case the 6 throws would not matter.

Doesn't look like there's any antioxidant on the aluminum terminal ?

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Rick, most likely there is a service disconnect ahead of this panel. In that case the 6 throws would not matter.

JP: If that is the case, then the commons and grounds must be segregated.

"Rick, most likely there is a service disconnect ahead of this panel. In that case the 6 throws would not matter."

Maybe I was to subtle, but thats what I saying.
Then I asked, "So is the limit still 6?",rhetorically.


"If that is the case, then the commons and grounds must be segregated"

Yeah, that to.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Rick, most likely there is a service disconnect ahead of this panel. In that case the 6 throws would not matter.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

I saw this is a condo unit I inspected today. One leg of the service cable is stranded aluminum and the other is stranded copper. Assuming they are both sized properly for the panel, is there any issue or problem with this configuration?

And yes, I noted the double taps and lint in the panel.

Originally Posted by A.D. Miller

JP: If that is the case, then the commons and grounds must be segregated.

And that would make the supply feeder cable not service.

Significant changes in 408 between 2005 and 2008. I'd still call this a Light and Appliance panelboard. Questions about what and where the Blue & Red are going - pass through to another unit or what. Without other information - going with what OP posted (service cable) and as service equipment, requires six or fewer disconnects or a main on this end.

As an AHJ I'm really impressed w/u guys. I don't even have anything to add except getting back to the question of one feeder being Al and the other CU. If there sized properly and no illegal splices, they will work out fine. Does create some other concerns however, most of which have already been brought up.
My concern is what's ahead of this panel board. Possibly a disconnect w/lugs rated cu/al ?? Was the AL or the CU feeder the original conductor?
Is that really an Al conductor or is it an older tin plated copper?

As an AHJ, I could write that situation under ART 90-4, but I refuse to use it except for the most egregious of issues with an immanent danger.
Of course one could write that situation as not being installed 'in a workmanlike manner'. Can't use the parallel conductor rule here but i know of an AHJ who would try. I call him 90-4.

Bob Smit, County Electrical Inspector

Lint in the panel was from the clothes dryer. And it was a condo with a disconnect somewhere else in the building so the 6 throws of the hnd did not apply.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

I saw this is a condo unit I inspected today. One leg of the service cable ...

Nick,

With that being a condo, that should not be "service cable", that should be "feeders", which means the neutrals need to be isolated from ground.

Then, the number of disconnects would not matter.

It has nothing to do with six throws of the hand.

six disconnects or fuses six single pole CBs, three Double poles or if 3-Ph two 3s.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

It has nothing to do with six throws of the hand.

six disconnects or fuses six single pole CBs, three Double poles or if 3-Ph two 3s.

Huh?

You need to add more explanation and detail to what you are trying to say.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

Lint in the panel was from the clothes dryer. And it was a condo with a disconnect somewhere else in the building so the 6 throws of the hnd did not apply.

It has nothing to do with six throws of the hand no such rule. The is the rule of six disconnects: six disconnects or fuses = six single pole disconnects or three Double poles or 2 double poles and two SPs or 1 double pole and four SPs or two 3 Poles, or 1 3-Pole and 3 S-Ps, etc.

A Lighting and Appliance branch-circuit panelboard requires individual over current protection. Yes, this can be back at an upstream power panel - there are rules requiring access or 24/7 on-site maintenance if behind a locked door to which the unit resident or tenant does not have access directly. Yes, this can be the same fuses or circuit breaker protecting the service conductors - as long as the service conductors fuse or circuit breaker rating is not greater than the panel bus rating. There were significant changes in the calculations for OCPD and conductor sizing for L&A bc Panelboards in the 1996 edition (compared to the 1993).

Changes in 408 in 2008 NEC. Lighting and Appliance branch-circuit panelboards /power panels are still discussed in 2005 NEC.

You still have a bare ground on the grounded conductor terminal block and in fact sharing a termination with a white insulated conductor. So something still isn't quite right.

E3501.7 Maximum number of disconnects.

The service disconnecting
means shall consist of not more than six switches or
six circuit breakers mounted in a single enclosure or in a group

of separate enclosures.

The NEC Article would be 230.71. There is not stipulation that a multi-pole breaker counts as more than 1 throw. You could have 6 3-pole breakers and satisfy the code.

Rick,

And that's applicable to a condo? That would be from the IRC based on the 2005 NEC? Its wrong, but as mentioned this issue has been further clarified with the 2008 NEC. Not so sure Phila or the surrounding area has adopted the E chapters of the IRC to be applicable to "Condos".

The rule of six disconnects and the urban myth that it has to do with six swipes of the hand come from the days when one had a knife switch for each hot conductor, and also hails back to the days when every conductor even the grounded conductor was fused on a service.


A 2-pole circuit breaker = TWO OVER CURRENT DEVICES.

The number of overcurrent protection devices is determined by the number of poles on the circuit breaker.

Hence a 2-pole circuit breaker is considered two overcurrent devices.

Disconnecting Means. A device, or group of devices, or other means by which the conductors of a circuit can be disconnected from their source of supply.

Overcurrent. Any current in excess of the rated current of equipment or the ampacity of a conductor. It may result from overload, short circuit, or ground fault.
FPN: A current in excess of rating may be accommodated by certain equipment and conductors for a given set of conditions. Therefore the rules for overcurrent protection are specific for particular situations.

However, Nick originally said service cable (note: not service conductors) also said and continued to say was a Condo. There is no rule of six anything for a Lighting and Appliance Branch Circuit Panelboard (circa 2005 NEC and prior) a Lighting and Appliance Branch Circuit Panelboard requires individual overcurrent protection. Therefore its either a goofed up Service from a power panel or a goofed up Lighting and Appliance Branch Circuit Panelboard (the uninsulated ground on same terminal as a white insulated apparent grounded conductor). This ultimately was my point - either way not originally identified by Nick correctly - and either way not correct and should be reported.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

However, Nick originally said service cable (note: not service conductors) also said and continued to say was a Condo.

Correct ... Nick said "service cable", and the closest thing to that is "service entrance cable".

What I was pointing out was that it was a "condo" ... and being a "condo" it is not allowed to be "service cable" as in "service entrance conductors", that it is required to be "feeders" as in "feeder conductors".

Now, it may be "service entrance cable" with the insulated grounded (neutral) conductor, which is allowed to be used as feeders.

- ARTICLE 338 Service-Entrance Cable: Types SE and USE
- - I. General
- - - 338.1 Scope.
- - - - This article covers the use, installation, and construction specifications of service-entrance cable.
- - - 338.2 Definitions.
- - - - Service-Entrance Cable. A single conductor or multiconductor assembly provided with or without an overall covering, primarily used for services, and of the following types:
- - - - Type SE. Service-entrance cable having a flame-retardant, moisture-resistant covering.
- - - - Type USE. Service-entrance cable, identified for underground use, having a moisture-resistant covering, but not required to have a flame-retardant covering.
- - II. Installation
- - - 338.10 Uses Permitted.
- - - - (A) Service-Entrance Conductors. Service-entrance cable shall be permitted to be used as service-entrance conductors and shall be installed in accordance with 230.6, 230.7, and Parts II, III, and IV of Article 230.
- - - - (B) Branch Circuits or Feeders.
- - - - - (1) Grounded Conductor Insulated. Type SE service-entrance cables shall be permitted in wiring systems where all of the circuit conductors of the cable are of the thermoset or thermoplastic type.
- - - - - (2) Grounded Conductor Not Insulated. Type SE service-entrance cable shall be permitted for use where the insulated conductors are used for circuit wiring and the uninsulated conductor is used only for equipment grounding purposes.
- - - - - - Exception: Uninsulated conductors shall be permitted as a grounded conductor in accordance with 250.32 and 250.140 where the uninsulated grounded conductor of the cable originates in service equipment, and 225.30 through 225.40.

I don't agree that the "closest" to what Nick stated as "service cable" to conclude from the post and picture is service entrance cable as you have. I'd further say the closest thing to draw from Nick's "service cable" phrase is Branch Circuit/FEEDER CONDUCTORS. I'd expect that with a Condo esp using Ex. 2 of 230.40 or 230.2(B). Doesn't look like 1/0 to me. We wouldn't if it is supplied per the Exception to 230.72(C) or 230.70 General, or 230.40 Exceptions 1, 4 or 5.
As I said earlier we don't have a main, we have more than six CBs, I'd expect a feeder circuit in raceway or gutter in a Condo. I do wish we could see the bottom Left of this box and the top.

We know that bare copper can be used for the grounded conductor of service entrance conductors when it is used in a raceway or part of a service cable assembly. and Bare conductors used in an auxiliary gutter (230.41).

Definitions Art. 100

Disconnecting Means. A device, or group of devices, or other means by which the conductors of a circuit can be disconnected from their source of supply.



Overcurrent. Any current in excess of the rated current of equipment or the ampacity of a conductor. It may result from overload, short circuit, or ground fault.

FPN: A current in excess of rating may be accommodated by certain equipment and conductors for a given set of conditions. Therefore the rules for overcurrent protection are specific for particular situations.

Panelboard. A single panel or group of panel units designed for assembly in the form of a single panel, including buses and automatic overcurrent devices, and equipped with or without switches for the control of light, heat, or power circuits; designed to be placed in a cabinet or cutout box placed in or against a wall, partition, or other support; and accessible only from the front.
Service. The conductors and equipment for delivering electric energy from the serving utility to the wiring system of the premises served.
Service Cable. Service conductors made up in the form of a cable.




Service Conductors. The conductors from the service point to the service disconnecting means.

FPN: Where service equipment is located outside the building walls, there may be no service entrance conductors or they may be entirely outside the building.

Service Equipment. The necessary equipment, usually consisting of a circuit breaker(s) or switch(es) and fuse(s) and their accessories, connected to the load end of service conductors to a building or other structure, or an otherwise designated area, and intended to constitute the main control and cutoff of the supply.

Service Lateral. The underground service conductors between the street main, including any risers at a pole or other structure or from transformers, and the first point of connection to the service-entrance conductors in a terminal box or meter or other enclosure, inside or outside the building wall. Where there is no termiinal box, meter, or other enclosure, the point of connection is considered to be the point of entrance of the service conductors into the building.

Service Point. The point of connection between the facilities of the serving utility and the premises wiring..




230.2 Number of Services. A building or other structure served shall be supplied by only one service unless permitted in 230.2(A) through (D). For the purpose of 230.40, Exception No. 2 only, underground sets of conductors, 1/0 AWG and larger, running to the same location and connected together at their supply end but not connected together at their load end shall be considered to be supplying one service.

(B) Special Occupancies. By special permission, additional services shall be permitted for either of the following:

(1) Multiple-occupancies where there is no available space for service equipment accessible to all occupants.

(C) Capacity Requirements. Addtional services shall be permitted under any of the following:

(1) Where the capacity requirements are in excess of 2000 amperes at a supply voltage of 600 volts or less.

(2) Where the load requirements of a single phase installation are greater than the serving agency normally supplies through one service

(3) By special permission

230.40


VI. Service Equipment - Disconnecting Means.



230.70 General. Means shall be provided to disconnect all conductors in a building or other structure from the service entrance conductors.

(A) Location. The service disconnecting means shall be installed in accordance with 230.70(A)(1), (A)(2), and (A)(3).

(1) Readily Accessible Location. The service disconnecting means shall be installed at a readily accessible location either outside of a building or structure or inside nearest the point of entrance of the service conductors.

(2) Bathrooms. Service disconnecting means shall not be installed in bathrooms.

(3) Remote Control. Where a remote control device(s) is used to actuate the service disconnecting means, the service disconnecting means shall be located in accordance with 230.70(A)(1).

230.71 Maximum Number of Disconnects.

(A) General. The service disconnecting means for each service permitted by 230.2, or for each set of service entrance conductors permitted by 230.40, Exception No. 1, 3, 4, or 5, shall consist of not more than six switches or sets of circuit breakers, or a combination of not more than six switches and sets of circuit breakers, mounted in a single enclosure, ina group of separate enclosures, or in or on a switchboard. There shall be not more than six sets of disconnects per service grouped in any one location. For the purposes of this section, disconnecting means installed as part of listed equipment and used solely for the following shall not be considered a service disconnecting means:

(1) Power monitoring equipment

(2) Surge-protective device(s)

(3) Control circuit of the ground-fault protection system

(4) Power-operable service disconnecting means

230.72 Grouping of Disconnects.

(C) Access to Occupants. In a multiple-occupancy building, each occupant shall have access to the occupant's service disconnecting means.

Exception: In a multiple-occupancy building where electric service and electrical maintenance are provide by the building management and where these are under continuous building management supervision, the service disconnecting means supplying more than one occupncy shall be permitted to be accessible to authorized managmeent personnel only.

230.74 Simultaneous Opening of Poles. Each service disconnect shall simultaneously disconnect all ungrounded service conductors that it controls from the premises wiring system.

230.75 Disconnection of Grounded Conductor. Where the service disconnecting means does not disconnect the grounded conductor from the premises wiring, other means shall be provided for tis purpose in the service equipment. A terminal or bus to which all grounded conductors can be attached by means of pressure connectors shall be permitted for this purpose. In a multisection switchboard, disconnects for the grounded conductor shall be permitted to be in any section of the switchboard, provided any such switchboard section is marked.

FPN: See 408.36 Exception No. 1 and Exception No. 3 for service equipment in certain panelboards, and see 430.95 for service equipment in motor control centers.

408.30 General. All panelboards shall have a rating not less than the minimum feeder capaicty required for the load calculated in accordance with Article 220. Panelboards shall be durably marked by the manufacturer with the voltage and the current rating and the number of phases for which they are designed and with the manufacturer's name or trademark.....


408.36 Overcurrent Protection. In addition to the requirement of 408.30, a panelboard shall be protected by an overcurrent protective device having a rating not greater than that of the panelboard. This overcurrent protective device shall be located within or at any point on the supply side of the panelboard.

Exception No. 1: Individual potection shall not be required for a panelboard used as service equipment with multiple disconnecting means in accordance with 230.71. In panelboards protected by three or more main circuit breakers or sets of fuses, the circuit breakers or sets of fuses shall not supply a second bus structure within the same banelboard assembly.

Exception No. 2: Individual protection shall not be required for a panelboard protected on its supply side by two main circuit breakers or two sets of fuses having a combined rating not greater than that of the panelboard. A panelboard constructed or wired under this exception shall not contain more than 42 overcurrent devices. For the purposes of determining the maximum of 42 overcurrent devices, a 2-pole or a 3-pole circuit breaker shall be considered as two or three overcurrent devices, respectively.

Exception No. 3: For existing panelboards, individual protection shall not be required for a panelboard used as service equipment for an individual residential occupancy.

408.36 (A) Lighting and Appliance Branch-Circuit Panelboard Individually Protected. Each lighting and appliance branch-circuit panelboard shall be individually protected on the supply side by not more than two main circuit breakers or two sets of fuses having a combined rating not greater than that of the panelboard.

Exception No. 1: Individual protection for a lighting and appliance panelboard shall not be required if the panelboard feeder has overcurrent protection not greater than the rating of the panelboard.

Exception No. 2: For existing installations, individual protection for lighting and appliance branch-circuit panelboards shall not be required where such panelboards are used as service equipment in supplying an individual residential occupancy

I don't think the breakers on the right top are a problem with two wires terminating on a single circuit breaker - as SP indicated, a Square D QO breaker accepts two wires and it is noted on the side of the breaker - not two separate circuits - it is one branch circuit. This is no different than running a home run accross the house and then pulling lighting and receptacles at the end of the home run.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Correct ... Nick said "service cable", and the closest thing to that is "service entrance cable".

What I was pointing out was that it was a "condo" ... and being a "condo" it is not allowed to be "service cable" as in "service entrance conductors", that it is required to be "feeders" as in "feeder conductors".

.

I believe it may be allowed and was allowable. See prior post. 230.2(B)(1) & 230.40 Ex. No. 2.

Although I don't believe this is the case in Nick's situation.

I didn't realize incorrect use of terminology would generate so much discussion. And yes, it appears the one ground on the neutral bar is wrong.

So what would be the proper terminology to use when talking about the service/feeder cables?

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

So what would be the proper terminology to use when talking about the service/feeder cables?

Service cables would best be referenced in some manner as being service entrance conductors as that specifically identifies their purpose, which comes with allowances for things other conductors are not allowed to have or do.

Feeder cables would best be referenced in some manner as being feeder conductors, which have limitations placed on them which are not placed on service entrance conductors.

*SOME* 'service cables' "may" be allowed to be used for feeders and branch circuits, and those would have the separate and insulated grounded conductor (neutral), while other 'service cables' without the separate and insulated grounded conductor are not allowed for use as feeder or branch circuit cables (except for potentially for a 240 volt only circuit where no grounded neutral conductor is required and then only under some conditions).

Using the term "service" cable first puts forth the idea of "service" conductors until more information is given ... in your photo that 'more information' was the visible separate and insulated grounded neutral conductor, which is what lead me to 'verify' that is what you were referring to ... i.e., what lead me to verify that you were referring to feeder conductors.

In a general layman term; Service Conductors are thought of as conductors prior to or feeding the Main or set of Main disconnect(s).
Feeder Conductors are thought of as conductors after the Main over-current device(s).
Also, Service conductors and/or Feeder conductors can also be in the form of Buss Bars and yes, their cir mil area is computed.
Again, this is a general way of description.
Bob Smit, County Electrical Inspector

HG Watson-
I'll agree with Jim Port on his quote (from his post) Below:


Posted by Jim Port: The NEC Article would be 230.71. There is not stipulation that a multi-pole breaker counts as more than 1 throw. You could have 6 3-pole breakers and satisfy the code.
posted :12-13-2009 08:11 PM

If you have a 2 or 3 pole common trip circuit breaker, with one handle on it, HOW can that be 2 or 3 overcurrent devices ? One handle that opens ALL poles would be 1 overcurrent device.
The same goes for using APPROVED handle ties. They tie the handles together to form 1 handle.

Below is the exact cut and paste from the 2008 NEC:
Underlining,bold highlighting, and Red highlight are by me

230.71 Maximum Number of Disconnects.

230.71(A) General. The service disconnecting means for each service permitted by 230.2, or for each set of service-entrance conductors permitted by 230.40, Exception No. 1, 3, 4, or 5, shall consist of not more than six switches or sets of circuit breakers, or a combination of not more than six switches and sets of circuit breakers, mounted in a single enclosure, in a group of separate enclosures, or in or on a switchboard. There shall be not more than six sets of disconnects per service grouped in any one location.

For the purpose of this section, disconnecting means installed as part of listed equipment and used solely for the following shall not be considered a service disconnecting means:

(1) Power monitoring equipment

(2) Surge-protective device(s)

(3) Control circuit of the ground-fault protection system

(4) Power-operable service disconnecting means


(B) Single-Pole Units. Two or three single-pole switches or breakers, capable of individual operation, shall be permitted on multiwire circuits, one pole for each ungrounded conductor, as one multipole disconnect, provided they are equipped with identified handle ties or a master handle to disconnect all conductors of the service with no more than six operations of the hand.


I guess there is a rule of six operations of the hand, Must not be an Urban Myth after all ?

Originally Posted by ken horak

HG Watson-
I'll agree with Jim Port on his quote (from his post) Below:


Posted by Jim Port: The NEC Article would be 230.71. There is not stipulation that a multi-pole breaker counts as more than 1 throw. You could have 6 3-pole breakers and satisfy the code.
posted :12-13-2009 08:11 PM

If you have a 2 or 3 pole common trip circuit breaker, with one handle on it, HOW can that be 2 or 3 overcurrent devices ? One handle that opens ALL poles would be 1 overcurrent device.
The same goes for using APPROVED handle ties. They tie the handles together to form 1 handle.

Below is the exact cut and paste from the 2008 NEC:
Underlining,bold highlighting, and Red highlight are by me

230.71 Maximum Number of Disconnects.

230.71(A) General. The service disconnecting means for each service permitted by 230.2, or for each set of service-entrance conductors permitted by 230.40, Exception No. 1, 3, 4, or 5, shall consist of not more than six switches or sets of circuit breakers, or a combination of not more than six switches and sets of circuit breakers, mounted in a single enclosure, in a group of separate enclosures, or in or on a switchboard. There shall be not more than six sets of disconnects per service grouped in any one location.

For the purpose of this section, disconnecting means installed as part of listed equipment and used solely for the following shall not be considered a service disconnecting means:

(1) Power monitoring equipment

(2) Surge-protective device(s)

(3) Control circuit of the ground-fault protection system

(4) Power-operable service disconnecting means


(B) Single-Pole Units. Two or three single-pole switches or breakers, capable of individual operation, shall be permitted on multiwire circuits, one pole for each ungrounded conductor, as one multipole disconnect, provided they are equipped with identified handle ties or a master handle to disconnect all conductors of the service with no more than six operations of the hand.


I guess there is a rule of six operations of the hand, Must not be an Urban Myth after all ?

Nope. NOT PERTAINING TO THIS PANEL BOARD. You're citing from the wrong chapter. See Chapter 4, Article 408, which does pertain to this discussion. There is no rule of six for THIS PANEL, it is NOT SERVICE EQUIPMENT. The LIMIT is LESS than SIX and has nothing to do with hand motions. I didn't manually type out 408.36 & 408.36(A) to give my fingers exercise, it was to address the questions raised, which was if there was no six disconnect limitation was there another limitation regarding the number of circuit breakers/fuses allowed to protect this board.

Go back and read what I posted, look for this phrase "a 2-pole or a 3-pole circuit breaker shall be considered as two or three overcurrent devices, respectively." You'll find it at Sec. 408.36 Ex.2. The overcurrent protection on the supply side is limited to two circuit breakers or two sets of fuses, which IS LESS THAN SIX AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HAND MOTIONS, for this panelboard: 408.36 Ex. 2 plus 408.36A First sentances.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

Rick,


The rule of six disconnects and the urban myth that it has to do with six swipes of the hand come from the days when one had a knife switch for each hot conductor, and also hails back to the days when every conductor even the grounded conductor was fused on a service.


A 2-pole circuit breaker = TWO OVER CURRENT DEVICES.

The number of overcurrent protection devices is determined by the number of poles on the circuit breaker.

Hence a 2-pole circuit breaker is considered two overcurrent devices.

.

HG Watson-
This is the quote i based my reply to you on.
I was pointing out that the six operations of the hand IS not an urban Myth. It comes into play with Service Equipment. By just dismissing the rule by telling others it is an urban myth, is passing on False information.

Also that 2 and 3 pole circuit breakers are considered as 1 circuit breaker
UNLESS
You are counting "spaces" in a panelboard as is section 408.36 exception no.2. The code making panels should have written that part of the exception as stating no more then utilizing 42 overcurrent device spaces
not as 42 overcurrent devices. This is just a case of one code making panel contridicting another code making panel.

408.36(A) Has ZERO to do with anything in this topic. It refers to panelboards equiped with snap switches rated 30 amps or less. This reqirement is limited to snap switches and does not apply to panelboards equipped with circuit breakers.

There is not enough information given to draw a proper conclusion on the panel in question. We DO NOT know what or how the panel in question is protected so we can not straight out scream 408.36 EXCEPTION no.2 can we ? NO we can not. It could just be a miswired up sub-panel.

Originally Posted by ken horak

408.36(A) Has ZERO to do with anything in this topic. It refers to panelboards equiped with snap switches rated 30 amps or less. This reqirement is limited to snap switches and does not apply to panelboards equipped with circuit breakers.

There is not enough information given to draw a proper conclusion on the panel in question. We DO NOT know what or how the panel in question is protected so we can not straight out scream 408.36 EXCEPTION no.2 can we ? NO we can not. It could just be a miswired up sub-panel.

Hmmm......

I believe this is most likely a main lug panel. It appears that the 2 breakers on the bottum right side are being back fed. wire appears to be going from 1 breaker to the other.

MY 2 CENTS

As mentioned by Nick there is another disconnect ahead of this panel though I don't think it was verified it is the disconnect being used as service equipment. This panel in question has yet to be determined exactly what is protecting it. So therefore we don't know if it is being used as service equipment or not. If it is... the main bonding jumper is missing or at least I don't see it. I think I see the hole in the neutral bar where it is supposed to be installed...appears to be ' thru hole' if you look closely. If it isn't service equipment and is fed 3 wires it still has no main bonding jumper installed and if there is a Main upstream it will not trip on a case fault.
If it's a panelboard down stream from the service equipment main, then it needs 4 wires feeding it. I don't see 4 wires. I see 3 but the picture does not show things real well other than what Nick wanted to ask his question about ...so maybe a ground bar there somewhere..

As for the six disconnect rule...it ain't a myth.. A single main breaker in a 3 wire 120/240 volt system is " 2 overcurrent devices " but with a integral tie making it one throw to disconnect both ungrounded conductors removing all power supplied by the panelboard or disconnect enclosure.. You could have 12 overcurrent devices (breakers) and if equipped with handle ties you would have 6 sets of breakers with 6 throws of the hand to disconnect all power being supplied by the panelboard. Further for the six handle rule to be correctly used no more than 6 over current devices may be connected to a single bus... And.... there must be at least one combination of breakers (singles or doubles or both) that will occupy all spaces of the panelboard for both busses and only 6 throws of the hand to remove power. For example If I have a 12 space panelboard (like the one in this thread) and it is being used as service equipment under the 6 handle rule. It must have at least one combination of breakers that takes all the spaces and no more than 6 breakers per bus. So that combination is 6 double pole breakers with handle ties common trip or not. This puts 3 double poles on each bus ( 3 sets of breakers or max 6 breakers on that bus) and 6 throws of the hand to disconnect all power supplied by the panel. Also it cannot be a L&ABCP at least under 2005 it can't. No such thing under 2008. You can as you've guessed put more than 6 throws of the hand in a panelboard that qualifies as 6 throw service equipment. If you do this then the 6 throw rule is out the window.

The exception to the above prior to 2008 being a split buss panel. where the power section of the panel would consitute the 6 throw rule and the lower could be considered L&ABCP.

Since this is my first post here I suppose I better provide documentation to back up what I say..please read line 20 and the subsections...this was a joint document with CMP4 and UL.

http://www.ulenvironment.com/global/...2006_Final.pdf

There was an earlier post that was deleted. Its being taken out of context now and getting very annoying.

Ken Horak's post that I quoted and remarked Hmmm is totally wrong as to what a Lighting and Appliance Branch Circuit Panel Board is. Frankly his remarks were outrageous. Perhaps he has no familiarity with editions of the NEC prior to the 2008, I do not know, but I can think of no excuse for his erroneous remarks about such a panel containing only switches and no circuit breakers. Perhaps he doesn't know what a Lighting and Appliance Branch-Circuit Panelboard IS, what it IS NOT, nor what a Power Panelboard IS and IS NOT.

I'll explain again.

THERE IS NO SIX THROW RULE PERTAINING TO LIGHTING AND APPLIANCE BRANCH-CIRCUIT PANELBOARDS. IT IS WRONG TO THINK THAT THERE IS. IT IS AN URBAN MYTH THAT THERE IS A SIX THROW RULE WHICH APPLIES TO LIGHTING AND APPLIANCE BRANCH-CIRCUIT PANELBOARDS.

I have previously cited and quoted the NEC.

The "six" rule applies to POWER PANELBOARDS. THIS PANELBOARD IS NOT A POWER PANELBOARD. It requires protection with a specific lower limit than six, that protection can be back at the panel supplying the FEEDER to this Lighting and Appliance Branch-Circuit Panelboard. I have directed to 408 and made citations and quoted previously.

To understand WHAT a Lighting and Appliance Branch-Circuit Panelboard IS, you must first understand WHAT a Lighting and Appliance Branch-Circuit IS.


A lighting and appliance branch circuit is a branch circuit that has a connection to the neutral of the panelboard and that has overcurrent protection of 30 amperes or less in one or more conductors. The definition of a lighting and appliance branch circuit leads to the identification of circuits with 30A or less circuit breakers.

Alighting and appliance branch-circuit panelboard is one having more than 10 percent of its overcurrent devices protecting lighting and appliance branch circuits. The panelboard can be protected by either an integral main overcurrent device or an overcurrent device protecting the FEEDER to the panel.

If 10 percent or less of the overcurrent devices are protecting lighting and appliance branch circuits on a panelboard, it would be defined as a power panelboard. If the panel is not a lighting and appliance branch-circuit panelboard then it is a power panelboard by default.

A main is not required where a power panelboard is installed in a service entrance application utilizing multiple disconnects (six disconnect rule) in accordance with NEC 230-71.


The "Six Rule" DOES NOT PERTAIN TO LIGHTING AND APPLIANCE BRANCH-CIRCUIT PANELBOARDS.

It is an URBAN MYTH that it would perpetuated by those who do not understand how a split bus panel used as service has the Lighting and Appliance Branch Circuits on a bus which is in series from the Lighting and Appliance Branch Circuit MAIN disconnect.




This panel looks like it was originally all pipe or armored. Its had some bad newer work. There is justification to call it out and recommend further eval by electrician. Possibly related to the lint producing dryer mentioned by the original poster, be that as it may, corrections are needed.

I don't see the "issues" on the lower right claimed by another poster - I think Richard Porter couldn't have opened the picture all the way, because its not seen (what he says he's seeing).

Originally Posted by Richard Porter

I believe this is most likely a main lug panel. It appears that the 2 breakers on the bottum right side are being back fed. wire appears to be going from 1 breaker to the other.

Enough said, esp. as its been distorted by the deletion of an early post.

When I first posted on this thread it was to point out the OPs referring to the feeders as service cable and get the focus on what this panel really was and was not (i.e. NOT a power panelboard, a Lighting and appliance Branch-Circuit Panelboard).

HG Watson

My reply was not directed at you, though I did use your "myth" statement as a base to explain the 6 disconnect rule. I apologize if it came across as saying you were stating there is no such thing as a 6 disconnect rule. In the future though save yourself some time on the key board and just refer me to the subsection you want me to read...I have plenty of resources...

Do you wear gloves??

Originally Posted by Roger Frazee

HG Watson

My reply was not directed at you, though I did use your "myth" statement as a base to explain the 6 disconnect rule. I apologize if it came across as saying you were stating there is no such thing as a 6 disconnect rule. In the future though save yourself some time on the key board and just refer me to the subsection you want me to read...I have plenty of resources...

Do you wear gloves??

And neither was my prior post in any way directed to YOU or to anything YOU posted. I directed it to the Original poster (implied), and: Ken Horak and Richard Porter and named them (and refered to Nick as Original poster) in my prior post. I also directed comments to the now deleted post (the party who did so, and who further contributed to this topic string thereby implied).

Regarding the underlined portions of your most recent contribution, which IMO negate the "apology", No one was talking TO YOU, and as far as the final, go fluff yourself!

Seems we got off to a bad start... I found it odd though after my post on the 6 rule that it wasn't directed to it ... maybe not at me personally. So looks like I was wrong so I apologize again for mistaking your intentions.

You need to get a sense of humor..... (glove comment ) or is that a unkown phenomenum on this board ? I still have you on my buddy list....that's message board humor sir !!

Really, and I mean this as a friendly bit of advice...you need to purchase the discs of the NEC .... it will make your life here much easier.

I might be missing something but the only post I see deleted was mine. I initially started to mention something about this probably not being service equipment. Since Rick asked about the 6 disconnects and a non-service panel in post 8 I decided to answer his question which was post 9. Where is the deleted post?

I too have a feeling that this may be feed by a conduit system and before the use of NM with a grounding conductor. I suspect that the one circuit with the grounding conductor was added at a later date. Again this is all suppositition.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

I might be missing something but the only post I see deleted was mine. I initially started to mention something about this probably not being service equipment. Since Rick asked about the 6 disconnects and a non-service panel in post 8 I decided to answer his question which was post 9. Where is the deleted post?

I too have a feeling that this may be feed by a conduit system and before the use of NM with a grounding conductor. I suspect that the one circuit with the grounding conductor was added at a later date. Again this is all suppositition.

It is deleted but the entry that a post once existed there remains despite your having deleted it. It is after post 7 (A.D.'s) and before the now re-numbered post 8 (Rick). It originally appeared after my first post on this string and before Ricks "question" (now post #8), and prior to your now re-numbered post 9.

I believe that there are two introduced on the Left.

Originally Posted by Roger Frazee

Seems we got off to a bad start... I found it odd though after my post on the 6 rule that it wasn't directed to it ... maybe not at me personally. So looks like I was wrong so I apologize again for mistaking your intentions.

You need to get a sense of humor..... (glove comment ) or is that a unkown phenomenum on this board ? I still have you on my buddy list....that's message board humor sir !!

Really, and I mean this as a friendly bit of advice...you need to purchase the discs of the NEC .... it will make your life here much easier.

If you had even bothered to check a profile, or perhaps you have, and likewise are a clueless cad who further has no idea what humor is and is not.

I find it akin to chastising a blind man for wearing sunglasses indoors/in court/in church, or an amputee (who for all YOU know has other issues ex. paralysis, pain issues, etc.) for using a wheel chair and spouting off about the benefits of using prostetics and walking around. Unacceptable, ignorant, moronic, and unfunny.

Do not presume to tell me what to do or not to do, you haven't a clue beyond your own limitations and you do not know me.

HG-
I know where the confusion came from now. I was looking at the 2008 nEC and you are using the 2005. HMMMM

I was using the 2008 as I keep reading how HI "inspect" to the latest edition of the code as they are not code officials and are not restricted to the "adoption" of any one code. There is no such thing as "Grandfathered".

Now it seems you want to go back and start preaching about something that is not in the latest editon of the nEC but rather in the most recent PAST edition.

So based on the fact that HI's inspect to the latest edition , as clearly expressed on this site many, many, many times, What you are preaching about DOES NOT exist anymore!
There is no such thing a a lighting and appliance panelboard.
So according to that this is JUST another sub panel (or remote panel if you wish) Like I stated in previous post that you find so outragous
As far as my knowledge of the NEC , present and past, I will take you on any day.
So now it's your turn - go ahead type a whole of nonsense and insults
As you were told once before _ GO FLUFF YOURSELF

Originally Posted by Roger Frazee

As for the six disconnect rule...it ain't a myth.. A single main breaker in a 3 wire 120/240 volt system is " 2 overcurrent devices " but with a integral tie making it one throw to disconnect both ungrounded conductors removing all power supplied by the panelboard or disconnect enclosure.. You could have 12 overcurrent devices (breakers) and if equipped with handle ties you would have 6 sets of breakers with 6 throws of the hand to disconnect all power being supplied by the panelboard.

A double pole breaker is ONE overcurrent device as it is configured as either an internal or external trip for both poles, just as a three pole breaker is ONE overcurrent device.

Which means that you can only have SIX (not twelve) overcurrent devices in a main service equipment panel ... because the internal or external trips makes that twelve into six ... not twelve.

I make it a point to speak to the code (if I know) applicable to the jurisdiction of the original poster/question.

That's also why I don't use IRC references for Condo questions, or reference electrical or mechanical chapters of same for a jurisdiction that hasn't adopted them. This is also why I reference the appropriate plumbing code for the jurisdiction (if I know it) as well.

I don't know what you read nor where you claim to hail from Mr. Horak.

However your claiming that a Lighting and Appliance Branch Circuit or a Lighting and Appliance Branch Circuit Panel Board doesn't contain circuit breakers or other overcurrent protection just "switches" be it 2002, 2005, or 2008 was wrong. Your application of a six throw rule on such a panel likewise wrong. Definitions come and go in the NEC and likewise in the IRC. Doesn't change the aspect of safety nor in this case the non-applicability of the "six" rule.

Hello Jerry


I have always been taught that the number of poles on a circuit breaker determines the number of overcurrent devices, so a 2 pole breaker is 2 overcurrent devices. Just because it is handle tied or single toggle, non-common trip or common trip does not change the breaker to one overcurrent device .

If what you say is true then I could have 6 double poles on each bus violating the ul listing for number of overcurrent devices being limited to 6 per bus and violating the number of main disconnects in that I would have 12 not 6 to satisfy the 6 disconnect rule.

I offer this document below to support how I have been taught. I certainly have gone through my career not fully understanding certain things and will welcome any corrections.

Jerry.. the determination of overcurrent devices is about half way down in the article. It is also in the NEC but I don't recall the exact article and sub-section I will try to locate it and post..

http://ecatalog.squared.com/pubs/Electrical%20Distribution/0100DB0708.pdf

Originally Posted by Roger Frazee

I have always been taught that the number of poles on a circuit breaker determines the number of overcurrent devices, so a 2 pole breaker is 2 overcurrent devices. Just because it is handle tied or single toggle, non-common trip or common trip does not change the breaker to one overcurrent device .

If what you say is true then I could have 6 double poles on each bus violating the ul listing for number of overcurrent devices being limited to 6 per bus and violating the number of main disconnects in that I would have 12 not 6 to satisfy the 6 disconnect rule.

Roger,

(underlining and bold are mine)
- 230.71 Maximum Number of Disconnects.
- - (A) General. The service disconnecting means for each service permitted by 230.2, or for each set of service-entrance conductors permitted by 230.40, Exception No. 1, 3, 4, or 5, shall consist of not more than six switches or sets of circuit breakers, or a combination of not more than six switches and sets of circuit breakers, mounted in a single enclosure, in a group of separate enclosures, or in or on a switchboard. There shall be not more than six sets of disconnects per service grouped in any one location.
- - - For the purpose of this section, disconnecting means installed as part of listed equipment and used solely for the following shall not be considered a service disconnecting means:
- - - - (1) Power monitoring equipment
- - - - (2) Surge-protective device(s)
- - - - (3) Control circuit of the ground-fault protection system
- - - - (4) Power-operable service disconnecting means
- - (B) Single-Pole Units. Two or three single-pole switches or breakers, capable of individual operation, shall be permitted on multiwire circuits, one pole for each ungrounded conductor, as one multipole disconnect, provided they are equipped with identified handle ties or a master handle to disconnect all conductors of the service with no more than six operations of the hand.
- - - FPN: See 408.36, Exception No. 1 and Exception No. 3, for service equipment in certain panelboards, and see 430.95 for service equipment in motor control centers.

In the first part, "sets" of circuit breakers means that each multipole breaker (i.e., "sets" of single pole circuit breakers tied together with a proper handle tie or an internal trip circuit breaker) is counted as one.

In the second part, for multiwire circuits, separate breakers "capable of individual operation", i.e., not internal trip - where each can trip on its own, shall be counted as one multipole disconnect as long as a proper handle tie is installed which acts to disconnect all the poles of the multipole breaker at the same time.

Each ungrounded conductor requires overcurrent protection. Supplied by a circuit breaker or fuse - as the overcurrent device.

Perhaps it will make more sense if you think about other than 120/240 1-PH service.

Why keep ignoring the FPN that you paste along with that? The six rule doesn't apply to the panelboard pictured for the condo on this topic.

Ok Jerry....thank you

I see where I am mistaken.. my apologies for the inaccurate description.

• Disconnect in another part of the building, where? Does the fire department know where, then the panel is not correct and the 6 throw rule will apply here. Should be written up
• Lint in panel, what kind of cover was not on the panel? Diffidently needs to be written up, fire hazard.
• Double taps, while I do not have a problem with them as long as the correct wire to breaker is used, I doubt if these are double tap breakers with the exception of the bottom right one but on that one I would surely check the bottom wire type and gauge, could be aluminum or the incorrect wire gauge if it is a 20 amp breaker. The rest should be verified as ok and should be written up if not.
• In the olden days neutral and common were connected to the same bar, the problem here is that if any changes were made in the panel, and it looks like it was with the splices made to the wiring, to me would qualify as such, then the panel would have to be brought up to that days code. Should be written up
• I certainly would write this up as handy man wiring and needs to be further evaluated by a qualified electrician especially the splices
• Was this condo in little Mexico or China Town?

HG -
Slow down and read what was written.

I NEVER said or posted that a lighting and appliance panel board contains switches and not overcurrent protection.

I posted what 408.36 ( A) states in the 2008 NEC.

I already explained that post also.
I was in the '08 NEC - you in the '05

Originally Posted by ken horak

HG -
Slow down and read what was written.

I NEVER said or posted that a lighting and appliance panel board contains switches and not overcurrent protection.

I posted what 408.36 ( A) states in the 2008 NEC.

I already explained that post also.
I was in the '08 NEC - you in the '05

Originally Posted by ken horak

408.36(A) Has ZERO to do with anything in this topic. It refers to panelboards equiped with snap switches rated 30 amps or less. This reqirement is limited to snap switches and does not apply to panelboards equipped with circuit breakers.

Hence my response:

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

Hmmm......

decided to breathe and sleep on it before I responded. Yeah, you did say it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ken horak
HG -
Slow down and read what was written.

I NEVER said or posted that a lighting and appliance panel board contains switches and not overcurrent protection.

I posted what 408.36 ( A) states in the 2008 NEC.

I already explained that post also.
I was in the '08 NEC - you in the '05


Quote:

Originally Posted by ken horak


408.36(A) Has ZERO to do with anything in this topic. It refers to panelboards equipped with snap switches rated 30 amps or less. This reqirement is limited to snap switches and does not apply to panelboards equipped with circuit breakers.



Hence my response:

Quote:

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.
Hmmm......


decided to breathe and sleep on it before I responded. Yeah, you did say it.

So correct I did say that 408.36(A) has ZERO to do with the topic. I also stated that it refers to PANELBOARDS equipped with snap switches.
BUT where in that did you see that I said it referred to LIGHTING and APPLIANCE panelboards ??
I also stated that I was quoting the 2008.

So seeing how I WAS IN THE 2008 code ...(Which by the way I clearly told you two times I was in the 2008 ) There is no Lighting and Appliance panelboard anymore. And the section I was quoting was not in reference to said type of panelboard. Thus I DID NOT say what you so blindly and incorrectly insist I said.
Quit twisting it

Originally Posted by ken horak

Quote:

Originally Posted by ken horak
HG -
Slow down and read what was written.

I NEVER said or posted that a lighting and appliance panel board contains switches and not overcurrent protection.

I posted what 408.36 ( A) states in the 2008 NEC.

I already explained that post also.
I was in the '08 NEC - you in the '05


Quote:

Originally Posted by ken horak


408.36(A) Has ZERO to do with anything in this topic. It refers to panelboards equipped with snap switches rated 30 amps or less. This reqirement is limited to snap switches and does not apply to panelboards equipped with circuit breakers.



Hence my response:

Quote:

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.
Hmmm......


decided to breathe and sleep on it before I responded. Yeah, you did say it.

So correct I did say that 408.36(A) has ZERO to do with the topic. I also stated that it refers to PANELBOARDS equipped with snap switches.
BUT where in that did you see that I said it referred to LIGHTING and APPLIANCE panelboards ??
I also stated that I was quoting the 2008.

So seeing how I WAS IN THE 2008 code ...(Which by the way I clearly told you two times I was in the 2008 ) There is no Lighting and Appliance panelboard anymore. And the section I was quoting was not in reference to said type of panelboard. Thus I DID NOT say what you so blindly and incorrectly insist I said.
Quit twisting it

Yawn, you're the only one who is twisting. you weren't responding to a citation but a quotation as well. Irregardless, your latest excuse isn't valid.

Anyway, your latest excuse doen't "hold water" you quoted my post, and responded, you made no such assertion at the time. Apparently you couldn't read your own post (which included a post quotation of mine).

Try again, if you feel so compelled, go ahead bury yourself..

H.G.,

I believe you are the only one hung up on trying to apply the six breaker rule to a non-service equipment panel ... everyone else has already recognized that the panel in the original post IS NOT SERVICE EQUIPMENT.

You are trying to NOT APPLY something which no one else is trying to apply either, and your effort to NOT APPLY it is falling on deaf ears because the rest of us KNOW IT DOES NOT APPLY and are tired of you trying to defend yourself time and again by continuing to state that it ... yawn ... does not apply ... WE KNOW THAT ... now get a grip and go on to something else.

Jeez.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

H.G.,

I believe you are the only one hung up on trying to apply the six breaker rule to a non-service equipment panel ... everyone else has already recognized that the panel in the original post IS NOT SERVICE EQUIPMENT.

You are trying to NOT APPLY something which no one else is trying to apply either, and your effort to NOT APPLY it is falling on deaf ears because the rest of us KNOW IT DOES NOT APPLY and are tired of you trying to defend yourself time and again by continuing to state that it ... yawn ... does not apply ... WE KNOW THAT ... now get a grip and go on to something else.

Jeez.

Nope. Jim Port and Ken Horak are the ones trying to apply it, as were you. I pointed out from the beginning - albeit originally being too subtle - that it did NOT apply, as THIS WAS NOT SERVICE EQUIPMENT, NOT A POWER PANELBOARD, but a a feeder supplied panel containing more than six circuits and no "main" on the panel - and not supplied with 1/0 or larger. Nick originally referred to supply being service cable - was pointing out it was not.

I pointed out that Light & Appliance Branch-Circuit Panelboards were last defined in the 2005 NEC and that there were significant changes to 408 in the 2008 NEC way back in post 13, said it again in post 19. Was being more than clear 230.71 did NOT apply to this panel, explained why - many times and answered the question regarding the followup question as to what the limits were regarding overcurrent protection ahead of this panel (different in 2005 two sets vs. one set, and 2008).

I'm not the one that continued to insist that 230.71 applied I said it did not - I only mentioned "the six" number to point out that it wasn't a service or a "power panelboard" as originally alledged by the original poster (and likewise mentioned didn't appear to be 1/0 CU feeder condutor either) therefore getting us OUT OF THOSE CHAPTER 2 "Service" citations being bandied about - and away from the chapter 3 references you were making (338) and over to chapter 4 where one needed to START for this PANELBOARD discussion.

Glad to hear you agree now that there is no six rule that applies to THIS panel.

Hope the begining of this post (referencing my posts 13 & 19) which made it clear what I was referencing, and which edition as "I would still call this a.......) for Ken Horak since I ALSO QUOTED the referenced section & subsection before he jumped in with erroneous statements and not having read the topic thread (or simply didn't grasp the references made to changes between 2005 & 2008).

I do not agree that HIs should "inspect to 2008 NEC", if it isn't applicable, just as I do not agree that HIs should "inspect to IRC edition...UNAMMENDED" whatever, when it isn't applicable (especially a different occupancy type!)especially if the jurisdiction has either not adopted it, or has adopted only certain portions of it or ammended it. Just as I do not agree that an HI should "inspect" to the plumbing chapters of the IRC or use the IPC when the jurisdiction is using a different model code (UPC) or their own unique codes. Just as I do not agree that an inspector should inspect to the International Fuel Gas Code if the jurisdiction has expressly adopted the National Fuel Gas Code, or the IMC if the jurisdiction is UMC based.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Correct ... Nick said "service cable", and the closest thing to that is "service entrance cable".

What I was pointing out was that it was a "condo" ... and being a "condo" it is not allowed to be "service cable" as in "service entrance conductors", that it is required to be "feeders" as in "feeder conductors".

Now, it may be "service entrance cable" with the insulated grounded (neutral) conductor, which is allowed to be used as feeders.

Yes it may be allowed for a "condo" (multiple occupancies - even residential). I already pointed out when it is allowed, but as I indicated I do not believe this to be the case for this panel/occupancy/condo building and I've already stated why.

230.2(B)(1) & 230.40 Ex. No. 2 (the exception not listed in the 230.71(B) reference to 230.40).. among others (such as the provisions for special permission).

Wow! This is still going on?

As is typical of you, you are w-a-y off base.

Whether that is due to you not reading what is written, or whether that is simply what you do to try to twist what was written to support your incorrect positions, I do not know.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

Nope. Jim Port and Ken Horak are the ones trying to apply it, as were you.

This is my VERY FIRST post on this thread. If you do not believe it, go back up and re-read the above posts. I will highlight the applicable part in red and bold so you do not miss it.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Nick,

With that being a condo, that should not be "service cable", that should be "feeders", which means the neutrals need to be isolated from ground.

Then, the number of disconnects would not matter.

Jeez, H.G., you really need to learn to read or pay attention better.

Let's see ... WHO was the FIRST PERSON to bring up the matter of 6 disconnects?

Oh, wait, it was ...
12-13-2009, 10:25 AM #6 (permalink)

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

more than 6 disconnects too.

Gosh, all this chest puffing and it was you who brought it up in the first place ... sheesh ...

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

Wow! This is still going on?

Originally Posted by Bill Kriegh

With Watson, he never admits when he is wrong, and it is that comedy of errors he makes which makes pointing them out so much fun.

Just a suggestion .. I just reread this entire thread making use of the ignore feature on the control panel options....you would be amazed how much easier it reads.... I think though with my previous comments it would be best for me to just read and learn a few things about the home inspection process, rather than give comment, as it certainly looks to me like ya all know what is wrong with a panel or electrical installation and where in the NEC to find why it's wrong. Please invite me to the you know what party though....

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

more than 6 disconnects too.

Which I was trying to be discrete in pointing out it was NOT A SERVICE as indicated by the OP and the contributions prior to my post - each pointing out what was contridicting Nicks posted description.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

And that would make the supply feeder cable not service.

Significant changes in 408 between 2005 and 2008. I'd still call this a Light and Appliance panelboard. Questions about what and where the Blue & Red are going - pass through to another unit or what. Without other information - going with what OP posted (service cable) and as service equipment, requires six or fewer disconnects or a main on this end.

Which I posted PRIOR to your first contribution on this topic thread.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Nick,

With that being a condo, that should not be "service cable", that should be "feeders", which means the neutrals need to be isolated from ground.

Then, the number of disconnects would not matter.

Which is WRONG. IT DOES MATTER. It is limited in 2005 and prior and further limited in 2008 (and its LESS THAN SIX IN BOTH INSTANCES). The overcurrent protection and number of disconnects is limited whether ahead of this feeder panel (to disconnect the feeder and its overcurrent protection) AND/OR AT THIS panel. You apparently don't get that - and was responsive to the question If the six limit doesn't apply is there a limitation to the number of disconnects ahead of this panel i.e. the feeder. The answer is yes and the LIMITING NUMBER IS LESS THAN SIX.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

As is typical of you, you are w-a-y off base.

Whether that is due to you not reading what is written, or whether that is simply what you do to try to twist what was written to support your incorrect positions, I do not know.




This is my VERY FIRST post on this thread. If you do not believe it, go back up and re-read the above posts. I will highlight the applicable part in red and bold so you do not miss it.


Jeez, H.G., you really need to learn to read or pay attention better.

There you go re-writing history again Peck.

I am acutely aware of your participation on this thread and the nonsensical direction you again try to twist and distort what was said, in response to what, etc. Further your "particpation" on this thread began AFTER an EARLIER POSTING WHICH HAD SUBSEQUENTLY BEEN DELETED which can STILL BE SEEN WHERE IT HAD BEEN.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Let's see ... WHO was the FIRST PERSON to bring up the matter of 6 disconnects?

Oh, wait, it was ...
12-13-2009, 10:25 AM #6 (permalink)


Gosh, all this chest puffing and it was you who brought it up in the first place ... sheesh ...

TO POINT OUT THAT IT WAS NOT AS NICK WAS PRESENTING, AND FURTHER THAT IF IT WAS AS NICK WAS PRESENTING (i.e. service) it was further pointed out what was additionally wrong.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

With Watson, he never admits when he is wrong, and it is that comedy of errors he makes which makes pointing them out so much fun.

No that would be you, rewriting history yet again. For example carrying on for what seems like eons (scores of posts) how the only code accepted way to reidentify was to use paint or marker. Never admitting you were WRONG and that the very code you claim to know and cut and paste all day specifically details taging, marking, taping and labeling for reidentification of conductors. On the other hand I have mea culpa'd when I have felt i was wrong. Just because YOU declare someone is wrong or TWISTS what was actually said/posted, etc. doesn't mean YOU ARE CORRECT IN YOUR ASSERTION THAT ANOTHER IS WRONG, NOR THAT YOUR OWN TWISTED CONVERSION/CONTORTIONS OF WHAT WAS ACTUALLY STATED MEANS WHAT YOU DECLARE IT MEANT.

This is of course why you are an utter failure at your attempts to elevate yourself and promote yourself as an expert witness or THE "CodeMan".

Green-eyed monster Peck, its boring.

Originally Posted by Bill Kriegh

Bill,

Please pass the popcorn, Watson is really making this twisting tale fun and interesting ...

... delicious ...

... thanks, now let us watch as the cliff hanger approaches its final plot twist.

Merry Christmas guy's. Tis the season for no stress. I put up 53, 400 Christmas lights using 167 amps and 20,000 + watts.

Here's a link to release the stress. http://vimeo.com/2738060 Wish you all a wonderful Christmas and a prosperous year!