0 members (),
141
guests, and
35
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
OP
Member
|
Sent by Roger: This is a service for an outdoor class room at an elementary school. The service was built prior to the viewing pond being dug. This area around the pond will be landscaped as a nature teaching area, meaning people will be in this damp fertilized (salted) area at any givin time. Now along with the obvious clearance violation, if there was an incident of the POCO neutral being lost, I see an extremely dangerous situation with the voltage on the driven ground. What do you think?
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,716
Member
|
Sparky, agree in the most part. The transformer is 100 yards at least, but in this event, any 110v circuit would be returning to the GEC which most likely would not have the impedence to open any OCPD. The ground being fertilized may help or create more of a hazzard (depending on the circuit ampacity) with this happening. Wouldn't you think 110.3(A)(8) need to be considered closely by the installers and the AHJ?
Roger
[This message has been edited by Roger (edited 05-28-2002).]
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,393
Member
|
Roger; i do agree that better planning would have made for more practical safeguarding here. Simply to flip up the nema 3r panel cover may topple one into the pond. Myself, i'd insist on backfill, or at least some sort of platform to 110.26's spec's...
...did the AHJ see this??
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,716
Member
|
Sparky, that's the kicker. I notified the inspector three weeks ago. This may be a moot point in the end. He may make them move this before it's over. But in the city I primarily work in, this would have been red tagged immediatly per 110(26). I know there is no true violation to the potential problem of a lost neutral, but in any situation where there would be children, or anyone for that matter, I think I would place this service in a more remote location. Thanks for your response.
Roger
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
OP
Member
|
Roger: Any updates on this situation yet?
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
Member
|
Maybe the AHJ approved of the installation before the ground was dug out? When AHJ's go out to a site, we don't always know what is going to happen after we leave. Just like the AHJ can not go back into a house that has a certificate of occupancy. We are only allowed to inspect new construction.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,716
Member
|
Joe, thank you for asking. About a week after we posted this, I came home and notice the cut out had been pulled.
I figured the inspector had made a repeat visit and had this corrected. A week after that I noticed the cut out was connected again. I went and looked and they had filled rock in front of the panel.
I thought this was a joke, but if the AHJ OK'd this what the heck.
Harold, I can understand an inspector not being able to go back into a home, but on public property he would be allowed to cite a violation at any time. He would have a vested intrest to do so.
Roger
[This message has been edited by Roger (edited 08-18-2002).]
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
OP
Member
|
Here's an updated picture sent from Roger:
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 745
Member
|
Joe; I know it's bad to make light of a very dangerous situation such as this...but... I guess this is where you're supposed to plug in that "floating" duplex receptacle extension cord from your other post...
Mike (mamills)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
OP
Member
|
Hey Mike: YES, I did go after that funny cord and when I returned this is what I found, the hard hat! Has anyone seen Roger? Or did the AHJ, fall into the water! Now we have a problem -- a missing person!
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
|
|
|
Posts: 44
Joined: August 2005
|
|
|
|