One of the questions in my electrical inspection exam was
“ * The inspector _____________ report all electrical splices observed within the panel as defects.”
I answered “shall mark defect/ incorrect and report splices observed within the panel as defects”
I got the answer incorrect the exam says.
Here’s the problem: My husband is an electrician and my father was an electrician and my grandfather was an electrician. I install photovoltaic systems in my spare time. I know FOR A FACT that splices in an electrical panel is a huge NO NO. And it must be marked as defect. Any splices MUST have a junction box and the junction box cannot be located in the panel. Therefore all splices must be reported and marked defect.
So why is the exam saying I’m wrong? A glitch with the curriculum software?
I made no mistake. It hasn’t changed. My husband is a current licensed Master electrician. That’s the current code. He’s licensed in Idaho, Alaska, Hawaii. I doubt those three states have a different code than the other 47 states.
Pigtails are not acceptable in service panels in both states I own homes in and not the state I inspect in. It’s an extra connection in a place there shouldn’t be. I have a master electrician for a husband telling me absolutely not. He would never allow one of his apprentices to pigtail anything in a panel, he would require the panel to be redone correctly. He said the county inspector won’t pass that if he did that here in Hawaii. Or in Idaho where he holds a master license in both states. Furthermore, Google is not something any licensed tradesman would tell you to get your answers from. It’s not a code book. It’s not fact. It’s just Google. Thanks though. I guess the curriculum is just out of date.
You honestly think you can sucker me into a debate with you defending those two/three people as an intimidation factor? You be wrong!
One more quick Google search to help you see the errs of your ways… and then I am done with you. Good luck getting the majority of the US to change the NEC becuase you don’t agree with it.
As for YOUR state(s)… that’s their right to ammend Codes to their liking, although that won’t help you with your passing an Internachi course or exam!
If you wish to continue your argument with anyone else that may chime in… begin with posting your Code reference that your entire family is citing as your justification. Be sure to specify if they are citing National Codes, or Local AHJ modified codes.
The Mike Holt reference to splices is 2011 NEC 312.8. If you think that is OLD code and not relevant today consider 2020NEC 312.8:
312.8 Switch and Overcurrent Device Enclosures. The wiring
space within enclosures for switches and overcurrent devices
shall be permitted for other wiring and equipment subject to
limitations for specific equipment as provided in 312.8(A) and (B).
(A) Splices, Taps, and Feed-Through Conductors. The wiring
space of enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices shall be
permitted for conductors feeding through, spliced, or tapping
off to other enclosures, switches, or overcurrent devices where
all of the following conditions are met:
(1) The total of all conductors installed at any cross section of
the wiring space does not exceed 40 percent of the crosssectional
area of that space.
(2) The total area of all conductors, splices, and taps installed
at any cross section of the wiring space does not exceed
75 percent of the cross-sectional area of that space.
(3) A warning label complying with 110.21(B) is applied to
the enclosure that identifies the closest disconnecting
means for any feed-through conductors.
Since everyone in your family is an electrician you should be able to look this up!
Unless there is a local code amendment splices are permitted in panels. Sorry but all of your sources of information regarding this code section are incorrect. Here is the wording directly from the 2020 NEC:
312.8(A) Splices, Taps, and Feed-Through Conductors.
The wiring space of enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices shall be permitted for conductors feeding through, spliced, or tapping off to other enclosures, switches, or overcurrent devices where all of the following conditions are met:
(1) The total of all conductors installed at any cross section of the wiring space does not exceed 40 percent of the cross-sectional area of that space.
(2) The total area of all conductors, splices, and taps installed at any cross section of the wiring space does not exceed 75 percent of the cross-sectional area of that space.
(3) A warning label complying with 110.21(B) is applied to the enclosure that identifies the closest disconnecting means for any feed-through conductors.
I don’t want to get political here… but damn… funny thread and a shameful one, too. Comes here to argue instead of learning, I can never figure these people out.
At what point in time did the wording change? Older versions of 312.8 says (nonverbatim) “shall not be permitted, unless…”; newer versions say “shall be permitted as long as certain conditions are met.”
Perhaps there is confusion with the “older” K&T systems, (which is based on the use of splices), as mostly every single one I have seen, utilized a splice box prior to the ‘Fuse’ Panel.
The wording changed several times over the past two decades to add clarity but the intent (splices are permitted in cabinets that contain overcurrent protection devices) has not changed. Here’s the wording from the 2005 NEC. It was confusing because many people only read the first sentence.
2005 NEC:
312.8 Enclosures for Switches or Overcurrent Devices
Enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices shall not be used as junction boxes, auxiliary gutters, or raceways for conductors feeding through or tapping off to other switches or overcurrent devices, unless adequate space for this purpose is provided. The conductors shall not fill the wiring space at any cross section to more than 40 percent of the cross-sectional area of the space, and the conductors, splices, and taps shall not fill the wiring space at any cross section to more than 75 percent of the cross sectional area of that space.
Here’s some history as to how this section has evolved starting with the 1975 NEC:
NEC 1975:
373-8. Enclosures for Switches or Overcurrent Devices. Enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices shall not be used as junction boxes, auxiliary gutters, or raceways for conductors feeding through or tapping off to other switches or overcurrent devices. Exception Where adequate space is provided so that the conductors do not fill the wiring space at any cross section to more than 40% of the cross-sectional area of the space, and so that the conductors, splices, and taps do not fill the wiring space at any cross section to more than 75% of the cross-sectional area of the space.
2005 NEC:
312.8 Enclosures for Switches or Overcurrent Devices
Enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices shall not be used as junction boxes, auxiliary gutters, or raceways for conductors feeding through or tapping off to other switches or overcurrent devices, unless adequate space for this purpose is provided. The conductors shall not fill the wiring space at any cross section to more than 40 percent of the cross-sectional area of the space, and the conductors, splices, and taps shall not fill the wiring space at any cross section to more than 75 percent of the cross sectional area of that space.
NEC 2008:
312.8 Enclosures for Switches or Overcurrent Devices.
Enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices shall not be used as junction boxes, auxiliary gutters, or raceways for conductors feeding through or tapping off to other switches or overcurrent devices, unless adequate space for this purpose is provided. The conductors shall not fill the wiring space at any
cross section to more than 40 percent of the cross-sectional area of the space, and the conductors, splices, and taps shall not fill the wiring space at any cross section to more than 75 percent of the cross-sectional area of that space.
NEC 2011:
312.8 Switch and Overcurrent Device Enclosures with Splices, Taps, and Feed- Through Conductors
The wiring space of enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices shall be permitted for conductors feeding through, spliced, or tapping off to other enclosures, switches, or over-current devices where all of the following conditions are met:
(1) The total of all conductors installed at any cross section of the wiring space does not exceed 40 percent of the cross-sectional area of that space.
(2) The total area of all conductors, splices, and taps installed at any cross section of the wiring space does not exceed 75 percent of the cross-sectional area of that space.
(3) A warning label is applied to the enclosure that identifies the closest disconnecting means for any feed-through conductors.
NEC 2020:
312.8(A) Splices, Taps, and Feed-Through Conductors.
The wiring space of enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices shall be permitted for conductors feeding through, spliced, or tapping off to other enclosures, switches, or overcurrent devices where all of the following conditions are met:
(1) The total of all conductors installed at any cross section of the wiring space does not exceed 40 percent of the cross-sectional area of that space.
(2) The total area of all conductors, splices, and taps installed at any cross section of the wiring space does not exceed 75 percent of the cross-sectional area of that space.
(3) A warning label complying with 110.21(B) is applied to the enclosure that identifies the closest disconnecting means for any feed-through conductors.
The wording of the rule started as an exception but was later changed to a requirement that needed to meet certain criteria. The actual content of the rule which always (at least since 1975) allowed splices in a panel cabinet did not change.
One thing this thread has proved is that the wording in the NEC is often very confusing, even to “Master Electricians”. And that people do not read through it clearly enough to fully understand the meaning.
I agree. It is still possible the “master electrician” is correct but from what I have gathered from above, this would almost certainly be a local requirement. Or a conflicting/misinterpreted section of code.
I mentioned that I my first post, unless there is a local code amendment the NEC has permitted splicing in a panel cabinet for decades. The original poster was adamant that the code prohibited splices but never mentioned a local code amendment which brings us back to the question which is referring to the NEC.
