ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Admin 16
Recent Posts
ESA Arc flash course
by TheShockDoctors. 03/24/17 10:15 AM
fuse rejectors
by HotLine1. 03/24/17 07:53 AM
Another Forum Update
by Admin. 03/22/17 03:04 PM
Dining room plugs
by watersparkfalls. 03/21/17 10:31 PM
TRUE POWER
by jraef. 03/21/17 09:13 PM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
231,369 Are you busy
166,092 Re: Forum
160,560 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 50 guests, and 9 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#83664 - 02/12/03 05:23 PM Tap Rule 2002 NEC Section 240.21(B)(5)  
Joe Tedesco  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Boston, Massachusetts USA
Question for Student:

Why is there no limit on the size of the tap conductor like the other rules in this Section?


Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#83665 - 02/12/03 07:35 PM Re: Tap Rule 2002 NEC Section 240.21(B)(5)  
txsparky  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 552
Magnolia,.Texas U.S.A.
I would venture a guess that it has something to do with the fire hazard being greatly reduced.


Donnie

#83666 - 02/12/03 10:05 PM Re: Tap Rule 2002 NEC Section 240.21(B)(5)  
Ron  Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 582
White Plains, NY
Lobbyists of the industrial plant equipment manufacturers?
Or maybe reduced exposure to hazards of a failure.

[This message has been edited by Ron (edited 02-12-2003).]


Ron

#83667 - 02/12/03 10:25 PM Re: Tap Rule 2002 NEC Section 240.21(B)(5)  
nesparky  Offline
Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 642
omaha,ne
The most common use of this rule that I have seen is for the secondary side of the POCO transformer when one transformer feeds more than one building. In some locations it is the EC's responsibility to install the secondary wiring thru the meter socket to the main disconnecting means of that service. Other locations require us to bury the conduit(s) for the underground service, the thePOCO installs the wire and terminates both ends.
Since the POCO in not under the NEC wire sizes are often different than what an EC would have to run.
My best guess is that the code panel did not want to get into an discussion with the POCOs and the NESC people.


ed

#83668 - 02/13/03 06:27 AM Re: Tap Rule 2002 NEC Section 240.21(B)(5)  
Joe Tedesco  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Boston, Massachusetts USA
Thanks to all for your reply to this question:



[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 02-13-2003).]


Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

#83669 - 02/13/03 09:51 AM Re: Tap Rule 2002 NEC Section 240.21(B)(5)  
resqcapt19  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
IL
In my opinion, 240.21(B)(1) and 240.21(C)(4) were placed in the code to let electrical contractors be more competitive with the utilities. The utility installation was never covered by the NEC and they have not normally provided overcurrent protection for these conductors. Now the electrical contractor comes along and wants to make the same type of installation in a campus or other type distribution system and he has to provide an OCPD for his conductors at the line end of the conductor. With these two tap rules, the electrical installation can be installed in the same manner no matter who installs it. If it is a safe installation for the utility, it is also a safe installation for a contractor.
Don


Don(resqcapt19)

#83670 - 02/21/03 10:51 PM Re: Tap Rule 2002 NEC Section 240.21(B)(5)  
BiggladAnt  Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 13
Kansas
What is POCO?


#83671 - 02/21/03 11:10 PM Re: Tap Rule 2002 NEC Section 240.21(B)(5)  
electure  Offline


Member
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,259
Fullerton, CA USA
POCO= PowerCompany


#83672 - 02/21/03 11:17 PM Re: Tap Rule 2002 NEC Section 240.21(B)(5)  
electure  Offline


Member
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,259
Fullerton, CA USA
Then how come I can't install #6 aluminum for a 200A house service? It seems to work fine in the triplex cable that the POCO uses.

[This message has been edited by electure (edited 02-21-2003).]


#83673 - 02/22/03 03:34 PM Re: Tap Rule 2002 NEC Section 240.21(B)(5)  
harold endean  Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
Boonton, NJ
Lets take this a step farther. You have a 480V feeder to a step down transformer. On the load side of the trans is say a flex. metal conduit feeding a trough with 3 disconnects. Can someone install another metal flex out of the transformer to another disconnect? Will this fall under the 10 foot tap rule? Will it fall under the 25' tap rule? For the sake of convinece make the load calcs all work out for the exisiting feeder. (i.e. the feeder to the trough is the correct size, the wires are the correct size and the disconnects on the existing were all the correct size.) The question basically is, Can you add another feeder cable out of the transformer to pick up one more disconnect in a different pipe?


Page 1 of 2 1 2

Member Spotlight
Attic Rat
Attic Rat
Bergen Co.,N.J. USA
Posts: 524
Joined: December 2003
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.022s Queries: 15 (0.004s) Memory: 0.8157 MB (Peak: 0.9910 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-03-25 04:00:22 UTC