Is there anything in the NEC that says which way a main panel has to be mounted? Convention seems to be main breaker UP in residential new installs. Since I am retrofitting or upgrading service the existing wiring may not reach to the bottom of the taller 200A panels. They have much more room around (above) the main breaker than a short 100A panel which means the breakers all move down the wall a bit. I notice the boxes all seem to be stamped with "LINE" on the main breaker end with two sets of letters that would read right no matter which end was "UP". Some people would say that I could wire nut the wires to extend them inside the panel but I really do not want another "extra" connection to worry about. -Besides it looks so "tacky". It will also be much easier to bring the main leads down the side and then curve gracefully "up" into the main lugs since my panel is in a basement and the meter is above it outside.

 

I mounted a small trough (commercial item, i belive its 10"x10"x2') Anyway I mounted this above the panel drilled for three 2' pipe nipples with locknuts and plastic bushings. All the wires that did not reach are spliced in the trough. All the ones that are long enough just run straight thru. BTW my service cable also runs through the trough, Very Very neat install. I can take a pic if u like

 

There are several general statements that apply:

Article 110.3(B) "Listed or labeled equpiment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling."

Article 110.12 "Electrical equipment shall be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner

Article 404.8(A) "Switches and circuit breakers used as switches shall be installed ... no higher than 6' 7" above the floor

Some panelboard vendors (for example, Siemens) actively encourage inverting the guts of a panelboard and feeding it from the bottom. They provide features to aid in this:

Their product brochure talks about this very issue: how the panel can be fed from top or bottom, and how the main breaker is arranged to allow this.

The main breaker handle moves horizontally instead of vertically.

The dead front can be disaseembled and flipped so that the main breaker opening is at the bottom, and yet the door is still hinged on the left.

The writing engraved on the dead front runs in such a way that the letters are not upside down after you flip everything.

Other panelboards are clearly not intended to be flipped. If the main breaker handle operates vertically, and you flip the guts over, the down position becomes "ON" and the up position becomes "off". This seems like such a basic safety hazard that it should fail the "neat and workmanlike" test, and such a panelboard should not be inverted in the manner proposed.

Other, lesser, but still possibly significant reasons to not do it:
1) The engraved lettering is upside down after you flip it.
2) The door ends up hinged on the right after you flip it.

The best way to handle something like this is to talk to the inspector before doing it. You can arm yourself with the manufacturer's instructions to bolster your case that this should be allowed.

 

I had to do one "upside-down" due to space limitations and ease of transfering circuits. Looked a little funny but, no problems with inspection.

 

One more code section to look at is 230.70(A)(1) "The service disconnecting means shall be installed in a readily accessible location ... nearest the point of entrance of the service conductors".

If you loop the service conductors down to the bottom of the panel, technically you are lengthening them and they are no longer "nearest" the point of entrance. Additinoally, if the main breaker were down at knee level, it could be argued that it is no longer "readily accessible".

The phrase "nearest the point of entrance" is deliberately left vague in the NEC. Some local jurisdictions have absolute standards like "within 10 feet". It is somewhat unclear whether the length should be measured to the panelboard enclosure or to the main breaker lugs themselves (the termination of the service conductors). The latter is more likely correct.

If this is actually a subpanel (you might have an outside disconnect), then these issues do not apply.

 

Most panels are able to be flipped, and on service changes is very common.
art. 110.3.b would not apply if it does not directly address this issue ON the panel.or cover.

art.404.8.a, USED AS SWITCHES. Circuit breakers now are rated for such use as to use for switching lights etc. which was argued in the past for commercial and industrial applications. So unless he will be using this for his lights or turning off the main breaker every time he leaves this shop, then this would not apply.
art.230.70.a.1 If you were installing a new service in the center of a new (for instance) a factory that has 200,000 sq. ft. and the design calls for the Main distribution center 10' in the air in a room rated for such use in the exact center of the building, Also the feeders must be below ground level, so conduit runs from the T/station to the center of the building, there the conduits run up into this room. This is where the NEC is not intended to be read that the main should be mounted on the floor. This is the first point of entry and disconnecting means are not accessible until it is inside this electrical room. So this is where the first disconnecting means can be made, so therefor is a valid installation per NEC.

I have studied the NEC very much been to many informative classes on understanding the code. Fefarms has a very valid point that the code is very misunderstood, and definetly do not disagree with your thinking, But in this instance exactly is very subject to interpretation. I'm not sure whether your saying it can or can't be done this way,but due to the information that was given to me, I say it is a valid install.

Now to address this issue about the panel flipping, If your panel reads line in the up or down position correctly then it may be flipped and is rated for such use.

 

The service disconnect means (the main breaker in this case) IS a switch. It is used as needed to disconnect the service conductors from the building wiring. The thick "NEC Handbook" published by the NFPA (with added explanator material and annotations) refers you to 404.8(A) from article 230.70(A)

The NEC allows you to consider a raised platform instead of the floor for measuring the 6' 7 inch rule. The point is a short fireman or service guy or whatever should be able to reach a switch or the very important service disconnect without getting a ladder. I omitted the platform part (see the ... in the prior post) because I doubted it applied to the prior poster's situation. It is a fair argument whether branch circuit breakers are "switches" or not, but the main breaker definitely is.

Service conductors run under or within at least two inches of concrete are considered "outside the building", even if they run underneath the floor slab for a considerable distance. See article 230.6. The measurement for "nearest the point of entrance" does not begin until the conductors emerge from under the slab (or from within a solid concrete or brick wall). It would be indeed be reasonable to allow a service disconnect to be in a first floor electrical room 10 or 20 feet directly above the point where the service conductors rise from underground. The point of this rule is that service conductors are not protected by overcurrent means until they reach the far end, and that a minimum amount of wiring should be left live in a building after throwing the main disconnect (or disconnects). Service conductors are considered more hazardous than feeders or branch circuits, and the length of them within a building is to be minimized. (Buried in concrete is not "within" the building).

An inspector that flagged you for 2 feet of extra length of service conductors inside your panelboard would be awfully picky and inflexible, I would agree.

 

I knew I could count on you guys to know the pertinent sections of the code. I get a headache reading the code jumping back and forth and back and forth... Now I can just check out the relevant passages. Some of the code is "open to interpretation" but if you look at it from a point of safety or ease of use the meaning is usually fairly clear.

I will have to check out the direction the main breaker handle operates. UP for OFF would not be acceptable.

While I was checking out new panels at the local box store I noticed that in every one of the 100/200A service entrance panels "LINE" was marked so it could be read when the panel was installed either way.

In my installation I have a panel mounted on a basement wall inside directly below the meter box outside. The concrete basement wall is 7' tall. The service wires run out of the top of the box, over the top of the wall and out thru the floor joist header, then up the outside wall to the meter. It is probably 4' maximum from the top of the breaker panel to the meter can. Most of the wiring to the panel runs up that same wall and up thru the house wall to the attic and then to the rest of the house. Running the service conductors down along the inside of the box to the bottom and then curving back up to the main logs would seem to be a "neat" and "workmanlike" installation to me. In the existing 100A service they have a tight loop at the top (great for clamp on meters) then enter the main lugs on the main breaker. The neutral goes to the main ground lug at the bottom of the box. My existing panel cover is hinged on the right.

 

I flip em all the time. Square D boxes is what I use and they go either way. Of course as long as its in the right spot to start with..


Dick

 

Very good, I should have said service entrance conductors. I don't work with this stuff near as much as I used to. So as argumenative as I am, I just wanted to argue but can't argue with someone that knows the code better than myself, which is severly lacking on 2006 updates also.

You never said what kind of panel this was? Is it SQ. D and has the breaker switch sideways?

Fefarms, What does the code say about adding to existing or wiring say 15yrs old?

Does the 2006 code now say any receptacle,switch or outlet in contact with concrete must be GFI protected?

 

I am looking at a Siemens panel. I looked at the Square-D both the contractor packs and the homeline at the local Home Depot and I did not like the looks of either one. I did not write down the numbers tho since I didn't like what I was looking at.

-Off topic but...

I read one section of code on GFI and I understood it to mean any receptacle for a "mobile" item, but then my NEC is for 2002.

One problem with the code is on submersible sump pumps. Many people believe a GFI is required on a sump pump and I can tell you right now that will not work if it is a submersible sump pump. On that application I might put in a GFI receptacle for the inspection but as soon as the inspector leaves I will replace it. The other work around is to install a pedestal mount sump pump. A thin film of water will eventually work past the cord seal in any submersible pump application which will trip the GFI. This often goes unnoticed until the sump pump fails to operate, -usually at the worst time.

-Sometimes the code is stupid, well meaning, but stupid!

 

Whats wrong with SQ D ? they work well and are priced well. Lots of room and lugs for whatever. Simply put they work.

Dick

 

I did not like the wimpy looking main lugs on either panel. One looked like aluminum and the other one looked like plastic plated with aluminum foil. I just did not see anything good. There may be other Square-D panels but the ones at HD looked like junk. I would not use them for any reason. Sorry just my personal opinion from what I was looking at. I could go to Lowes and see if they have anything different but they are a long ways away. There is an electrical supply house near me but they always treat me like an alien when I go there. There is another electrical supply house way downtown that treats me OK but it is way to far to drive to.

 

The QO panel has the 1/2" thick breakers clip on buss bar and roll lock. They turn Orange when tripped. VERY good breakers and panel, You will not regret it.

The sump pump will not need GFI, The easiest way to do this is use a single round 20A receptacle. NEC says what article?, fefarms would probably know? That receptacles for appliances, or designated equipment that that are not accessable for other uses, Would not need to be GFI protected. I believe? that it also depends on the height of the receptacle, seems like 40" and below do not need GFI protection. But that may be only in kitchen and bath?

 

I will take a look and make sure that panel at Home Depot was a QO. Whatever it was it was not impressive to me.

I have used Siemens motor controls for a long time with good results.

Yeah I can't remember the article number either but if I remember right that is what it said about other uses or something. A sump pump is definitely not really available for other purposes. But then you could lift it out and use it to drain the kiddie pool. But then it would probably be on the end of an extension from another outlet where it would promptly trip the GFI! I have heard of several inspectors around here including my own once saying the sump pump had to be on a GFI. I even got a perfectly good sump pump from a new house where the pump had "failed" and was replaced under the house warranty. It was only about 3 months old but it had "failed" to work and the basement flooded because of some landscaping that was not finished. I bet the new pump fails again because it was on a GFI. -hehe I looked at the new house being built next door and it was wired on a GFI and already tripped. When those pumps are tested by UL they don't test them long enough or maybe they use pure distilled water or something when they should be using saltwater.