Thread: Main panel question

The main panel panel feeds the remote panel by conductors lower left of main panel lugged directly to the buss bars. From there they feed the remote panel and there is no over current protection device in the main or remote panel that would safely shut down the remote panel ( more that 6 hand movements). Shouldn't there be an over current device in the main panel for the remote panel?

Similar Threads:

• Charred Copper wires in Main Panels
• Transformer & Low Volt Wiring in Main Panel
• General Electric Split Main Panel
• Service panel question
• Double at Main

The overcurrent device in the service equipment panel which would feed the remote panel, based on your description of expectation, would be there to protect the feeders to the remote panel, not as a disconnect for the remote panel.

*IF* the feeder conductors are properly rated for the size of the overcurrent protection of the main service disconnect, and *IF* the bus rating of the remote panel (rating of the remote panel) is at least that of the main service disconnect ...

... the the main service disconnect is protecting:
- a) the service entrance conductors on the load end, which is allowed
- b) the service equipment bus on the line side of the bus, which is required
- c) the feeder conductors on the line side of the feeder conductors, which is required
- d) the remote distribution panel on the line side of the bus, which is required

The branch circuits originating at the service equipment panel are protected on their line side by their breakers, as required.

And the branch circuits originating at the remote distribution panel are protected on their line side by their breakers, as required.

Now, if the feeders or the remote distribution panel bus rating was less than the main service disconnect rating - that would be a problem ... and I suspect that the rating of the remote distribution panel may well be less than the main service disconnect rating - did you check that?

Thanks Jerry for the info!
Yes I did, the main service panel is rated at 200 amps. The feeders to the remote panel were the same size as the service entrance cable. The remote panel was rated at 150 amps......

Originally Posted by Gerald Wilcox

Thanks Jerry for the info!
Yes I did, the main service panel is rated at 200 amps. The feeders to the remote panel were the same size as the service entrance cable. The remote panel was rated at 150 amps......

Oops ... unless there is a 150 amp or smaller 'panel' main in the remote distribution panel that panel is underrated for the main service disconnect. (This 'panel' main is not required, but it would solve/correct this problem if there is room for one to be installed - but that panel looks full.)

I suspect someone understood the problem when they installed the feeders of the same size as the main disconnect and service entrance conductors, but forgot why they installed the feeders of that size when they installed the 150 rated panel ... oops!

Maybe they went to lunch, came back and forgot why they had done that?

Ok, I think I am following you on this. The remote panel is underrated for the 200 amp service disconnect.....but a 150 amp disconnect for the remote panel would then make everybody happy . But as you said there might not be enough room.........in which case the electrician will have to be creative.

Originally Posted by Gerald Wilcox

Ok, I think I am following you on this. The remote panel is underrated for the 200 amp service disconnect.....but a 150 amp disconnect for the remote panel would then make everybody happy . But as you said there might not be enough room.........in which case the electrician will have to be creative.

You got it.

Thanks again!

Another simple solution would be to replace the sub-feed tap at the service equipment with a 150 amp breaker ... that would protect the feeders and the remote distribution panel, and there is space for that.

Just remove the sub-feed tap and replace it with a 150 amp breaker ... if ... if the breaker tabs for the breakers are rated for 150 amps, they might not be, in which case that is already a problem.

The rating of the breaker tabs would be shown on the label of the service equipment.

Nothing is as simple as it first may appear.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Another simple solution would be to replace the sub-feed tap at the service equipment with a 150 amp breaker ... that would protect the feeders and the remote distribution panel, and there is space for that.

Just remove the sub-feed tap and replace it with a 150 amp breaker ... if ... if the breaker tabs for the breakers are rated for 150 amps, they might not be, in which case that is already a problem.

The rating of the breaker tabs would be shown on the label of the service equipment.

Nothing is as simple as it first may appear.

The main panel is a 1970's ITE panel, I do not think there is a 150A breaker that was listed to be used as a branch breaker, and it would not meet wire bending space requirements, the breaker I am thinking of was listed in the catalogs to be used in meter centers & 400A loadcenters.


BTW, what was that 30A single pole Bryant breaker feeding??

It looks like the remote distribution panel does not have isolated ground and neutral terminations.

Is this a code violation or is this allowed when connected with metal conduit?

Originally Posted by Ken Amelin

It looks like the remote distribution panel does not have isolated ground and neutral terminations.

Good point, but I cannot tell if the bars are connected or are isolated from each other, in which case the neutrals on the left grounding bar may not even be connected to neutral, but to ground through the enclosure. If that is the case, that is not good.

Is this a code violation or is this allowed when connected with metal conduit?

Correct, that would be a violation regardless of whether or not there was metal conduit.