Hi I got this question on test

Tap existing service to new location
1 special permission
2 used approved material for connection I put only no 2 but what do you think.
a) only no 1
b) only no 2
c) both 1 and 2
d) neither 1 or 2 ( I put b but my feeling it is c but I do not find anything in the code that support than
Thanks Jon

230.46 is all I can think Of? 2002 N.E.C.

No. See 230.40 exception 2.
This is kind of a trick question though. A service conductor can never really be "tapped", since there is no way to meet the definition of a tap with a service conductor in 240.2. The only true "taps" allowed in the NEC are for feeders and (under rare circumstance) branch circuits.

If you are asking if you can install a second set of service entrance conductors on one service, the answer is yes, using the above cited reference. Be careful to satisfy the requirement of conductor per terminal in 110.14, as I have not seen a meter enclosure that has provisions for two condutors per leg and per nuetral.

I would answer "D" and then I would jot down the question number to use as a challenge in case you get it wrong, citing 240.2, definition.

[This message has been edited by Ryan_J (edited 10-19-2004).]

Definitions. Service conductors(Service Point to service Disconnecting means)
Say you Run 500s to a Wireway Then (TAP) 4 100 amp SERVICE disconnecting means off The 500s (allowed up to six same location(230.71)
By code that IS allowed and commomly used .

Point of Info See N.E.C. 2002 Analysis of Changes put out by I.A.E.I. Page 90 in reference to 230.46 Shows an Example of what I said in the pervious post.

I do it a lot, and require no special permission, and yep more than six would require a fused main disco. In some areas special permission may be required. So I say #2 is a viable answer.

I usually do it in a gutter, or can, prior to multiple meter/main panels. Our utility only requires provision for a wire seal.

Thanks Its litle confusing but the answer are either b or d but its hard to tell because there is nowhere talked about existing service in the code but 230 33 and 230 46 talk about tapped and after reading 240 2 b.

It is impossible to meet the definition of tap with a service conductor since it is specifically addressed in the definition of tap.

If the question is can I splice, the answer is yes. If the question is can I tap, the answer is no.

Hi and thanks for your response you would say No to tap even after reading 230 33 230 46 where is talk about both spliced or tapped??
Thanks Jon

Come On!! a Splice joining two wires together, a Tap is a Tap! Look in A.E.I.E. book I referenced if that ain;t a Tap I;ll eat my Hat. Tapping a smaller conductor to a smaller is A T A P ..

Yoopersup: You use your definition, I'll use the NEC definition.

2002 nec handbook 230.46 page 138-140 under code section explaining contents of Section says :And TAPS on the line side of the Service disconnecting means.
Notice TAPS for suppplying Up to six disconnecting means.All references in article 240 are for feeders Includeing Taps as it Plainly states.240.1 Tap conductors(OTHER THEN SERVICE CONDUCTORS)Also look under index in Code under TAps Refers you to 230.46 for service conductors.So I would say your Right the code CLEARLY says what a tap is .Splice ya right !

You boys are doing what makes me so crazy about inspectors. Starting a fistfight about whether "tap" is being used as a noun or a verb.
Obviously the 240 "tap" <the noun> rules have no meaning since they refer to overcurrent protection and for all practical purposes service conductors have none.
The real question was whether you could "tap"<the verb>, meaning to splice another conductor to, a service conductor and that is clearly legal.

All I'm doing is using the NEC definition and pointing out that in my opinion, the question is misworded and therefore I selected the best answer. Can you splice? Absolutley. Refer back to my first post and I think you'll agree that I would allow either a splice or a second set of service entrance conductors, but I do believe you could never call a connection to a service conductor a tap.

I'm going to add just a little fuel here.

If you were to talk with someone with a good knowledge of the code, as most of us here possess (and yes, that includes Yoopersup), and said "I'm going to tap a feeder circuit", we would want to know if we were talking 10', 25', outside unlimitted, et cetera. If that person came back and said, "no I don't mean that, I mean I am joining the conductors together with a wire nut", must of us would say "why did you call it a tap instead of a splice?"

Am I wrong in my logic here?

In Michigan, it is not uncommon for a "strip store" type of building to have numerious tenants and each tenant has his own set of Service Entrance conductors. These Service Entrance Conductors originate in what is called around her a "Tap Box". The Service Point is at this tap box that contains bus bars. These buss bars are Service Entrance conductors albeit they are bars. The installer "taps" this supply with smaller conductors and complies with 230.46. Everyone that I deal with would call this a tap. This tap box is on the customer side of the Service Point and is inspected by the AHJ. I agree with the Yooper.

Uh...... I didn't find a definition for "tap" in the code. Or splice either. I believe them to mean the same thing.

American Electrician's Handbook defines it as this:


Funny, I can't find a definition for 'splice' in it?

Of course we all know that most of the content of that book was written in the early 1900's, when language was different than it is now for many things. But I do think we are ALL talking about apples, not oranges, right?

Try 230.82
(Equipment connected to the Supply Side of Service Disconnect)#4
TAPS Another section where TAPS are allowed ahead of the Main Switch. Just another POINT of info to bring into the Discussion. )