Search results

I would run it in the slab, along with a few extra conduits for comms wiring

i thought canada didnt require rods on detached buildings, not that i agree with it.

you can have all kinds of problems with that. it should be removed.

which doesnt secure the NM to the panel. a chase ****** isnt listed for that purpose. ok but what is it?

depends on panel brand. but there isnt any brand that would allow that many grounds under 1 lug. how can you possibly torque it properly to spec? we cant tell you that. it depends on the panel brand. you need to look at the label on the panel. code tells you to follow the listing of the...

you cant get shocked by a meter main with a lost neutral. on a sub with a bonded neutral that is lost, a person touching the panel or stove or anything else that has a bonded neutral in it and say a faucet water line etc has created an alternate pathway for that neutral current to flow back to...

no such mediation process in commiefornia

who runs THHN in a house unless they are in shitcago? the added expense of conduit isnt worth it. also if thats all THHN then conduit fill has most likely been violated.... the issue isnt running it thru conduit, the issue is with it not being clamped to the panel.

All the NM is coming thru a single conduit adapter on the bottom and right side. it should be coming thru listed NM clamps. it needs to be secured to the panel not just ran loose into the panel thru a hole and incorrect fitting an EGC that shouldve been taped green and ran to a ground bar...

a disclaimer doesnt release someone from fraud just like a disclaimer doesnt release someone from liability

to summarize violations 1. bonded neutral 2. paralleled neutrals (smaller conductor needs to go to ground bar) 3. grounds on neutral bars 4. too many grounds under 1 lug (2-3 max depending on brand) 5. comm wire in panel 6. no clamps on NM EDIT: 7. & 8. white tape on neutral missing and green...

bingo larger NM-b cables have solid grounds until you get into the really big NM-b (#4 and larger) but the largest breaker is 40a. so someone screwed up on the grounds as well good catch on the coms wire... not allowed also noticed all the NM is going thru what appears to be conduit...

umm they call out "issues" that are not actually issues or code violations. thats a bogus claim and fraud. thus they should be sued

sounds like some HIs need to be sued

if you lose the neutral connection between the main and subpanel, you have alternate pathways neutral current can flow on such as metal plumbing, gas lines, phone lines, cable lines etc I have seen it happen. This is why code never allowed bonded neutrals in subs in same structure as main...

The HI's report is bogus and therefore invalid. why should deals be negotiated with bogus paperwork and inspections? im not gonna let someone pushed me around with BS.

the code change in 2008 was only for subpanels in DETACHED buildings. It is a subpanel because of the main breaker ahead of it. This is totally incorrect. bonded neutral has NEVER been allowed in a subpanel in the same structure as the main. the code change we are discussing above is for...

so instead of calling out the ignorant inspectors report and staying your ground, the option is to just tell them to pound sand BTW option 1 makes no sense as there is nothing to fix. it is code compliant

yikes :eek: o_O:shocking::scared:

theres no way people are starting 30HP motors. you know what the in-rush current is on those? the voltage sag would be extreme and the main breaker would trip. not to mention dimming of the lights. a 25kVa ****** isnt gonna start a 30HP motor... c'mon now