Thread: Supply for a sub-panel. Is this all kosher?

Hi,

I came across a couple of things that I'm not sure are right in yesterday's inspection. There's a sub-panel that seems to be supplied directly off of the main bus without any over-current protection other than the shut off in the main panel. My first picture shows a 12 gauge wire leading directly off of a screw terminal in the main panel that then feeds the sub-panel. See circled area. Am I correct that this is a direct feed without a breaker? Is this then OK because the sub-panel has less than 6 breakers?

The second picture shows the sub-panel with two 15 amp breakers.

My second question refers to the second picture. Is it OK to have the jumper wire that I've noted with another circled area? Is the jumper supplying power to the second breaker, or are they trying to supply power to both poles in the sub-panel? Something doesn't seem right here.

Thanks,

Dave

Similar Threads:

• duct-tape on supply ducts
• Cardboard supply ducts in slab
• Gas supply line tap
• Supply Air Vent?
• PVC water supply lines in crawlspace

No. There are both wrong.

It looks like he is doing exactly as you said, feeding both legs of the sub panel from one leg of the main. What he at least should have done would be to run a 10-3 or larger and feed the sub-panel properly. The best solution would be to change the whole panel, it looks like there is enough room to do so. It is pretty common to see a sub-panel fed from lugs like that if they are provided, but I am not sure you can undersize the wire.

No, it is all wrong, amateur workmanship and possibly a fire hazard if not a shock hazard too.

The small wire tap in the first pic is taken from the main supply. This is dead wrong. I can't see the main breaker size but it is way too high for that small wire. Imagine that wire with a 60 amp load on it. The breaker will not trip. The wire will overheat and catch the plastic insulation on fire, possibly in a wall somewhere. That is why it is wrong, and no electrician or savvy handyman would do that.

The second pic shows another haywire setup. We think the feed from the main comes into the upper section. But it doesn't matter, because it is all wrong. There are proper ways to create a 120 volt supply panel, and that is not one of them. I agree, call for a new service panel to replace that mess, and in addition the household wiring in general needs a thorough inspection for more of the same handiwork.

Thanks everyone for the replies.

I flagged the feed coming out of the main panel and the wiring in the sub-panel in my report. Told them it was a fire hazard and to bring in a licensed electrician for repairs.

That, along with some other electrical issues in the house is going to give some lucky electrician a nice little payday.

Thanks again.

David

Is this all kosher? If ham is kosher then yes. Just had to say that about the abortion in those pics.

Can't believe Jerry didn't chime in because his favorite term was used - "subpanel." Just pokin' fun at you Jerry, you know I do have the utmost respect for you- Jim

How about calling it an alternate feeder panel, at least the sub won't come up

Originally Posted by Bill Wieczorek

How about calling it an alternate feeder panel, at least the sub won't come up

We've all been corrected on this several times, the correct term is "Remote Panel" so it's a remote panel.

Originally Posted by ken horak

Still waiting on proof of that.

I pointed out the the term ,subpanel is used by the publishers of the NEC in the NEC handbook

Ken, Jerry must be on vacation this week, you'll have to wait for him to return - this is gonna be good !!!