ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Underground phone and coax depth?
by libellis - 02/08/23 08:38 PM
Al Hildenbrand - Minneapolis - obituary
by Bill Addiss - 02/03/23 07:38 PM
Violation?
by renosteinke - 01/27/23 09:52 PM
Does NEC 551.71 (F) apply to dwellings?
by BigB - 01/20/23 10:46 AM
New in the Gallery:
Burger King crown sillyness
Burger King crown sillyness
by wa2ise, December 11
240/208 to a house
240/208 to a house
by wa2ise, October 9
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 16 guests, and 17 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
#180445 08/26/08 04:40 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 449
F
Fred Offline OP
Member
I have an inspector who says I cannot have a main breaker in a 200A panel mounted in a building addition fed from a 200A breaker in a 320A meter/main. Feeders are 3/0,3/0,3/0,#2 THHN/THWN copper underground in 2" PVC. The second 200A panel is located back-to-back with the meter/main and has a 200A main as well but he says that is okay. He maintains the panel in the addition must be MLO. I cannot find anything in the 2008 NEC to support his position. Any idea where he is getting this idea?

Stay up to Code with the Latest NEC:


2020 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides
2020 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides
Pass Your Exam the FIRST TIME with these Exam Prep Combos:
 

>> Master Electrician Exam Prep     >> JourneyMan Electrician Exam Prep
 

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 745
E
Member
I'd ask HIM cite the particular code article, whether NEC or a local code addition. He cannot just say "no". He's obliged to provide you with this. No need to be rude about it since you are just asking the basis for his decision.

A cop can't pull you over and write you a ticket just because he feels like it either. They must also cite what you did wrong, by referencing the locally adopted code.

Has the '08 code even been adopted in your area yet?


---Ed---

"But the guy at Home Depot said it would work."
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 449
F
Fred Offline OP
Member
Indiana adopted the 2008 NEC effective 7/16/08 but they still haven't published the ammendments. Rumor has it they deleted the AFCI requirement again and its expansion.

Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,507
G
Member
The inspector might be referencing Article 408 Section 408.36 and miss applying it. In a nutshell you need overcurrent protection for a panelboard and the exception says that it's not needed if the feeder has protection sized to protect the panelboard. The '05 code say it's not required but I guess if you have it it's not a violation. the '08 changes it somewhat but the end result is the same.

That's like saying you need 4 receptacles in a wall space and you decide to install 6, that's not a violation.

There is no hazard with having properly sized feeder overcurrent protection feeding a panelboard and having the same size overcurrent device in the panelboard.

Sometimes a panel with a main is cheaper than a MLO.


George Little
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,213
S
Member
A main breaker in this application is not required, but certainly not prohibited. In this case, the main breaker is not functioning as OCP, but merely as a local disconnect. It could even be larger than the 200A feeder breaker, and not be an issue.


Link Copied to Clipboard
Featured:

Tools for Electricians
Tools for Electricians
 

* * * * * * *
2023 National Electrical Code (NEC)
2023 NEC Now Available!
 
* * * * * * *

2020 Master Electrician Exam Preparation Combos
2020 NEC Electrician
Exam Prep Combos:
Master / Journeyman

 

Member Spotlight
richard
richard
L.I. New York
Posts: 99
Joined: August 2003
Top Posters(30 Days)
triple 2
Popular Topics(Views)
303,312 Are you busy
232,267 Re: Forum
217,023 Need opinion
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5