# Too bad, So sad



## ICE (Dec 29, 2013)

It's just a shame when this happens.





It's probably not what you are thinking.


----------



## Msradell (Dec 30, 2013)

Okay, I give up, what happened?


----------



## jar546 (Dec 30, 2013)

It was done neatly


----------



## ICE (Dec 30, 2013)

jar546 said:
			
		

> It was done neatly


Yes it was and I expect it to be just as neat when they do it over.

I do see a neutral violation but that would be easy to fix.

Some of the bends are too tight.  But that's not the fatal flaw either.


----------



## gfretwell (Dec 30, 2013)

All those ground wires under 2 lugs?


----------



## chris kennedy (Dec 30, 2013)

Is there a 200.2(B) violation?


----------



## jar546 (Dec 30, 2013)

ICE said:
			
		

> Yes it was and I expect it to be just as neat when they do it over.I do see a neutral violation but that would be easy to fix.
> 
> Some of the bends are too tight.  But that's not the fatal flaw either.


The neutral violation that I see is what Chris pointed out.  If that is not the fatal flaw then I would like to know what is?  Bends like that we mention not to do again but let go.

I am assuming this is not a subfed panel.


----------



## rnapier (Dec 30, 2013)

If those bare wires are GEC than it also is a 250.24(A) violation.


----------



## jar546 (Dec 30, 2013)

rnapier said:
			
		

> If those bare wires are GEC than it also is a 250.24(A) violation.


I believe correcting 200.2(B) will automatically correct 250.24(A)


----------



## chris kennedy (Dec 30, 2013)

It's not 200.2(B), just got a better look at the pic.


----------



## chris kennedy (Dec 30, 2013)

Connectors not listed for damp/wet locations?


----------



## Gregg Harris (Dec 30, 2013)

jar546 said:
			
		

> The neutral violation that I see is what Chris pointed out.  If that is not the fatal flaw then I would like to know what is?  Bends like that we mention not to do again but let go.  I am assuming this is not a subfed panel.


What code section would pertain to the bends?

 I do not believe one exists for this scenario in the NEC.


----------



## jj1289 (Dec 30, 2013)

Don't forget to check the number of mini breakers permitted in the panel by the mfg.


----------



## Span (Dec 30, 2013)

Needs bonding between neutral & grounding, and 210.4


----------



## steveray (Dec 30, 2013)

Where are all of the grounds for the circuits coming in?


----------



## retire09 (Dec 30, 2013)

My guess is that this is NMB cables without proper connectors and no sheath entering the panel.

Plus I would suspect the panel is recessed into the stuccoed wall and not maintaining the 1/4" air gap behind the panel.

The panel is mounted with a lag screw in the back rather than using the mounting holes provided.

Also the openings in the back are above the energized parts and don't appear to be approved.


----------



## mjesse (Dec 30, 2013)

jj1289 said:
			
		

> Don't forget to check the number of mini breakers permitted in the panel by the mfg.


This guy ^

408.54


----------



## TimNY (Dec 30, 2013)

Does the mfr allow field modification of the panelboard?

Would the 200.2(B) violation be corrected by running a conductor from one bar to the other?  Chris says it's not a violation.. so is it an issue or no?


----------



## rshuey (Dec 30, 2013)

So they braided all of the grounding conductors together to look pretty?


----------



## steveray (Dec 30, 2013)

Damnit ICE....Inquiring minds want to know!.....


----------



## rshuey (Dec 30, 2013)

I wanna see a pic of the underside of the service panel.


----------



## steveray (Dec 30, 2013)

rshuey said:
			
		

> So they braided all of the grounding conductors together to look pretty?


But they all come in their own raceway?....300.3?


----------



## chris kennedy (Dec 30, 2013)

TimNY said:
			
		

> Does the mfr allow field modification of the panelboard?Would the 200.2(B) violation be corrected by running a conductor from one bar to the other?  Chris says it's not a violation.. so is it an issue or no?


If you enlarge the pic enough you can see a bus running between the bottoms of the neutral bars.


----------



## TimNY (Dec 30, 2013)

chris kennedy said:
			
		

> If you enlarge the pic enough you can see a bus running between the bottoms of the neutral bars.


Thanks, Chris.  If there were no bus between them, could a conductor be run between them to satisfy the requirement?

Tim


----------



## TimNY (Dec 30, 2013)

steveray said:
			
		

> But they all come in their own raceway?....300.3?


I think this panel is surface mounted.. probably over an existing recessed panel which is probably some violation (looks like a chase nipple there at the bottom).  It looks like the GEC's come up the outside of the building and enter the bottom of the panel.

Might there also be a bonding issue if the panel is over 250v?  The locknut for the chase nipple is on the outside of the enclosure.

Tim


----------



## chris kennedy (Dec 30, 2013)

jj1289 said:
			
		

> Don't forget to check the number of mini breakers permitted in the panel by the mfg.


All good, its a Siemens MC4020B1200S.


----------



## jwelectric (Dec 31, 2013)

does anyone else have a problem with the 3R enclosure having fittings higher than the bus bars? I see two in the lower left side of this enclosure


----------



## Gregg Harris (Dec 31, 2013)

TimNY said:
			
		

> I think this panel is surface mounted.. probably over an existing recessed panel which is probably some violation (looks like a chase nipple there at the bottom).  It looks like the GEC's come up the outside of the building and enter the bottom of the panel.Might there also be a bonding issue if the panel is over 250v?  The locknut for the chase nipple is on the outside of the enclosure.
> 
> Tim


I would agree that it appears to be a panel over a panel.


----------



## ICE (Dec 31, 2013)

Here is another view.





http://www.flickr.com/photos/97859466@N05/11657059036/[/URL]

Thanks for finding the bus bar Chris.

This is a service upgrade.  It is surface mounted over a hole in the wall.  The hole is where the original flush enclosure was located.  I encounter this method on a regular basis.

They always claim that there are no splices in the wall cavity.  This guy cut holes in a bedroom wall to prove it.







http://www.flickr.com/photos/97859466@N05/11657700096/ 

Many times there are no splices and they have to change it anyway.


----------



## Dennis (Jan 1, 2014)

jwelectric said:
			
		

> does anyone else have a problem with the 3R enclosure having fittings higher than the bus bars? I see two in the lower left side of this enclosure


That is the first thing I saw however that is an easy fix with sealing locknuts


----------



## ICE (Jan 1, 2014)

Dennis said:
			
		

> That is the first thing I saw however that is an easy fix with sealing locknuts


What code section applies to that?

Thanks Dennis, you answered my question at Mike Holt's forum.



> 312.2 Damp and Wet Locations. In damp or wetlocations, surface-type enclosures within the scope of this
> 
> article shall be placed or equipped so as to prevent moisture
> 
> ...


----------



## ICE (Sep 23, 2014)

The first one of the week and it's only Monday.


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Sep 23, 2014)

They need less smart phone and more elect....elect...*GACK* electrician. There; choked it out.

Brent.


----------



## ICE (Sep 27, 2014)

ICE said:
			
		

> The first one of the week and it's only Monday.


Well I had just one this week....and they fixed it.




Of course there are a few new violations but all in all the kid is not to bad with tools.

A couple more inspections should do the trick.  They also learned plenty about wall furnaces.


----------



## ICE (Oct 15, 2016)

Makes me wonder how big the hole is behind this one.


----------



## Norcal (Dec 5, 2016)

You should really love the "workmanship" here.









What behind the Murray panel is the remains of a Zinsco/Sylvania semi-flush panel. BTW it passed "inspection" for whatever that is worth.     Just for the record, I did not do it, could not sleep at night if I did.


----------



## ICE (Dec 10, 2016)

That "inspection" was worthless.


----------



## Norcal (Dec 10, 2016)

Your being kind. Probably would have better off getting a aftermarket replacement Zinsco bus kit, replacing the bad breaker(s) & calling it a day, but that still won't fix the # 2 parallel  aluminum that was run without any conduit & that I would bet was left & spliced behind the new panel, somewhere there is a photo of it as it was.


----------



## cda (Dec 10, 2016)

Wonder if the utility company set the meter, or they moved it and utility company was not involved


----------



## ICE (Dec 11, 2016)

The POCO seal is there.


----------



## Norcal (Dec 11, 2016)

That seal that Pacific Graft & Extortion "PG&E" uses is not that hard to remove & replace but it was done by the PoCo not boot leg.


----------



## jetlag1946 (Mar 19, 2017)

I assume thats a main panel and not a sub panel since the grounds and neutrals are on the same bars . It looks like a bonding jumper is needed between the two ground bars . The bar on the right is depending on the bar mounting screws for a ground connection .


----------



## jetlag1946 (Mar 19, 2017)

Also it looks like some one just put a grounding bar on top of the factory flat bar on the left and just popped a screw in  it .I would think it would require a better connection than that .


----------

