dtontarski

I observed a hot tub install today and have a question about overcurrent protection. This was wired with four 8-gauge stranded copper conductors routed through rigid conduit and protected by a 50 amp GFCI circuit breaker. The standard practice is that 8-gauge requires overcurrent protection by a 40 amp circuit breaker. This stated, it is common for AC condensing units to have a minimum circuit ampacity requirement that allows for the use of smaller gauge conductors. Do hot tubs have similar requirements. Do they have similar tags as AC units which specify the minimum circuit ampacity and min - max circuit breaker requirements? There were no access panels on the skirting of this tub that supported the observation of manufacturer labeling. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks.

I completed a permit search. Not permitted as was expected. My buyer walked away from the deal. They did not wish to purchase a home if a credible disclosure statement was not forthcoming. A new home search is underway, and with luck I'll be booking another home inspection for my client soon. Thanks for all of the good advice.

Marc - The NY State code adheres to the 2002 NEC. Dave

Brandon - No way to determine when it was updated. The equipment looked brand new and if I were to speculate (which as a rule I try to avoid) I would guess that this update was completed just recently to help make the home more marketable. Dave

Erby, I didn't observe a sticker...I usually do, and I did not see any written documentation regarding it being inspected. I received a call from the current owner questioning my findings. He told me that the work was permitted and inspected. I told him that my client would need documentation verifying this. Good advice on trying to track down who signed-off on this. I will try to do this. Thanks! Dave

Greetings.. This message is directed at New York State Home Inspectors that are also qualified to complete electrical code inspections in the Rochester area. But....please...anyone that can share some insight on this - please do. I observed an updated service last week that appeared to be installed by someone totally clueless to state mandated code requirements. I explained to my customer that the work did not appear to be professionally completed, explained several issues that required correction in detail both at the inspection and in my report, and recommended that the work be verified as permitted and inspected. The issues included, but were certainly not limited to: 1. The main service panel was designed for vertical installation. It was installed horizontally, so that the entire upper row of vertically installed circuit breakers were on in the down position. 2. What appeared to be an updated distribution panel (sub-panel) was installed in the attached garage. This was fed by a 3-conductor feeder and the grounded conductors (neutrals) and the equipment grounding conductors (grounds) were bonded. I assumed that because of these two issues and the many additional issues I discovered and reported on, that this work was not permitted and inspected, and that as such the seller would be required to resolve these issues when this was verified. Now I hear that this work was permitted and inspected, and therefore the current owner is not willing to correct these issues. (And therefore of course I look like an alarmist to both the listing and the referring realtor, and foolish to everyone else involved in the transaction) I understand that code inspectors have some room for interpretation, but can these interpretations totally ignore the intent and purpose of the state mandated requirements? Any light that can be shed on this would be much appreciated. Thanks.

Thanks - My situation was that as I was calling out panel issues, I mentioned that dryers generally require a 30 amp 240 volt circuit breaker. As I was recommending a number of other issues be corrected, I recommend that the electrician evaluate this while he was at the home. Then the client called me and wanted me to state that it was wrong and needed replacement. I told them that I could not do that without seeing the dryer's installation manual. I just wanted to assure that I did the right thing. If the majority opinion was that I was remiss for not further investigating this myself so that I could report this as wrong with certainty (due to the manufacturer's requirements), then I wanted to mend my ways. So far the majority opinion seems to be that I should of not have even brought it up. Thanks again.

Chad - I read somewhere that a 30 amp cb was the minimum size, but that some dryers required a 40 or a 50. What I was trying to get a better understanding of was how do I know what the manufacturer's requirements are for a particular dryer? AC manufacturers list min-max cb sizes and these are generally clearly visibly labeled on the units. Seems to me that if a dryer manufacturer listed that their unit required a 30 amp cb and that if a 40 amp cb is installed that this should be considered an issue. Based on your response.....am I hearing that providing the cable has the proper OCP - that is doesn't matter what the dryer manufucturer requires? Or that perhaps dryer manufacturers list a min/max range as well? I'm just looking for a better unstanding. Thanks - Dave

Practically all of the electric clothes dryers I have observed have had 30 amp double pole circuit breakers protecting their circuits, and I have read somewhere that a 30 amp circuit breaker is considered the minimum size required for the dryer circuit. In yesterday's inspection the dryer had a 40 amp double pole circuit breaker and the cable was 6 AL. What should be my standard practice when I observe this? Should this be called out for further evaluation when the electrician is at the home to correct all of the other routine wiring issues? Or is there another standard method I should be using to determine what the proper circuit breaker size is for an installed dryer? For example - should I be going online or contacting the manufacturer? Should I pulling the dryer away from the wall in order to look for listing and labeling?

I realize that I can recommend anything I wish...my question was asked in order for me to gain a better understanding about how to field a question from a client on this topic. Just because it is not a code requirement doesn't reduce this potential hazard. I think it would be pretty lame to just say it isn't required by code. Is there a sound technical explanation for why it isn't? I was just looking for suggestions for an educated response.

I routinely recommend that laundry area 120 volt receptacle outlets be updated and protected by GFCI circuitry, but what about 240 volt electric dryer receptacle outlets? Don't these circuits also provide shock risks? I had an engineer ask me this....why microwaves can have metal racks, and what is natural gas....all on one inspection. I fielded the last two all right....but I wasn't sure how to respond to if the clothes dryer 240 should be updated to GFCI. Dave Tontarski

Thanks - got it.

Jim - Thanks for the quick response. Just so I make sure I have this right. The triplex is o.k. as long as it transitions to something else prior to entering the garage, and the neutrals and grounds should remain bonded and no ground rod should be installed. Do I have it? Thanks, Dave Tontarski

Is it o.k. to run an overhead triplex cable to a separate building as a feeder for a distribution panel providing that the grounds and neutrals are are not bonded in the distribution panel and a ground rod is installed at the separate building? The triplex is protected by a double pole breaker in the home's main service panel. (with proper overcurrent protection) A service entrance cable runs from the main service panel, up the side of the home and connects to the triplex. The triplex then runs through the air from the home to the property's garage, into the garage, across the garage's framing (unprotected) and into the distribution panel. I've never observed this set-up before and it doesn't seem safe. I thought 4-conductor feeders (buried) were required. Please set me right on this. Thanks, Dave Tontarski

Yes...esoteric questions are the spawn of book and online learning. Hansen's book states "If a panel is labeled as a CTL panel, then it would not be proper to install "piggy back" or "twin" breakers that provide two overcurrent devices in the space normally allotted for only one breaker unless the panel label allowed such an arrangement." The book didn't go on to state the common sense advice that you provided. Thus I benefit and greatly appreciate the ability to run these esoteric questions by you and the other forum contributors. Thanks again! Dave Tontarski

Thanks Jim! That's about what I told the electrician who showed up at the home to look at the panel on the listing agent's advice within hours of my inspection. I hadn't even downloaded my photos or started my report and I'm getting a call about the issues I pointed out at the inspection. Of course the electrician wanted to argue (debate) everything I called out, but the engineer who owned the home thought I was making perfectly good sense and he told the electrician to do as I advised. I'm told they call that cooperation....what a cool thing....I never ran into that before. Thanks again...and thanks on the CTL panel advice as well. Any fishermen out there? Check out the small mouth bass my son is holding up in this photo from a St. Lawrence River excursion. Click to Enlarge 72.05 KB Dave Tontarski

Question: What if a panel has a "class CTL" label, but no other labeling or diagrams that clearly state that half-width (wafer) breakers are permitted? And - there is no clear labeling on the circuit breakers themselves identifying these as CTL rated circuit breakers? Should this be called out as requiring further evaluation? Any general advice on this?

My Hansen text states: "cables should not be bundled together and run through a large chase nipple or bushing". "Some bushing are rated for two cables, though most are designed for only one." This text also states: "A common poor practice is to bundle several cables together and enter through one large bushing or clamp into an enclosure." And "Cables can not be bundled together without creating a problem with heat entrapment." My Question: Do forum participants call the installation in my photo out as wrong? All branch circuit cables enter the panel enclosure through 3 bushings. There are 5-6 cables per bundle. If so - any examples of how to word this would be appreciated. Thanks. Dave Tontarski Download Attachment: IMG_8054.JPG 389.04 KB

In thinking about it some more - the Furnace is probably an '07 based on the Unitary Products system of the 3rd letter in the serial number indicating year built. I still can't figure out the Coleman AC? Any help?

Can anyone help me out in determing the age of this Coleman AC unit and this Unitary Products Group Furnace? While trying to figure this out I saw an online posting that Coleman, UPG, and York became a division of Johnson Controls. Did this result in new serial number coding? Coleman AC Model Number: TCGD24S21S1A Serial Number: W0G7014455 UPG Furnace Model Number: GM8S080A12UH11C Serial Number: W0C7506134 NOTE: Both of these units appear to be brand new - thus the UPG/York and the Coleman look up information I found online don't seem to work. Thanks in advance for your help. Dave Tontarski

Richard - I've started to ask my clients for their old panels when I suggest updates. As I never remove breakers, I figured this would be a great way to get the look and feel of this equipment and how the breakers are secured. I've got an immaculate 150 amp FPE Stab-Lok and an equally fine Wadsworth coming my way. These things are immaculate - like new. I'm seeking a nice Bulldog now.....but with Chad in my area, I don't know if I will be able to get one of my own or not.....from his post, I see he's really into these. (Hey Chad!) Dave Tontarski

Thanks guys...great we are seeing the same things and thinking the same thoughts. Yes it's a great place to run things by others. I've been doing 20 hour days and every once in a while my brain just goes numb....and I question what I think my eyes are seeing.....hell, I swore saw a sparkle in the pretty young client's eyes the other day when I recommended 3-ways on the top and the bottom of the stairs.....I'd better get some rest.

Please tell me what I am looking at here. This is in a condo. It does not appear to be properly wired as either a main service panel, or as a distribution panel (sub-panel). I have no clue where a main disconnect might be if one exists. Did Cutler Hammer make a split-buss panel that would support this type of breaker arrangement? Ouch....my head hurts....I've been staring at this for an hour and just can't figure out how this could be right. Download Attachment: Issues.jpg 514.58 KB The double poles running down the left side of the panel are sized as follows top to bottom: 60-30-50,30,30,50

I came across this furnace in a 1987 home. There was no cover on it and no manufacturers labeling that I could find. This was vented as a power vent unit horizontally through a single wall vent connector - is this correct? It wouldn't respond to the thermostat so an HVAC guy was called on the spot, and I had my hands full with a myriad of other issues and I never came back this, but I would like enlightenment on this if anyone can help - anyone know the manufacturer or the model number? Download Attachment: Furnace Identity.jpg 472.44 KB Thanks.

Thanks.