The phrase “a 30-second increment from move 1” has a double meaning. Sometimes this phrase is used to mean simply that the increment is to be in effect throughout the game, as opposed to being in effect only in the final control (of a 2- or 3-control event).
A recent international event in Finland (or somewhere like that) advertised something like “40/120, then 20/60, then SD/60, with a 30-second increment in effect beginning with move 61.” This would mean that the increment is applied only to the 3rd time control, not to the 1st or 2nd.
Having increment only for the final control is an idea that is seriously deprecated by both FIDE and U.S. Chess. For example, U.S. Chess rule 5E1 states:
5E1. Increment or delay with mixed time controls. If a mixed time control includes increment or delay, the increment or delay should apply starting with the first move of the game, and the increment or delay time should be the same for all time control segments in the game.
For example, “40/90 SD/30 inc/30” should be interpreted to mean “40/90 inc/30 for the initial control, then SD/30 inc/30 for the final control”. The organizer could make this more clear by inserting a stronger separator between the final control and the increment than between the initial control and the final control, e.g. “40/90 SD/30; inc/30”. You could say that a semicolon is a stronger separator than a comma, which in turn is a stronger separator than a space.
If the organizer really intends to use the deprecated idea of increment only in the final control, he should write this as “40/90 d/0; SD/30 inc/30”, where “d/0” is a standard abbreviation for the (itself deprecated) idea of having neither increment nor delay.
And now for the “other” meaning of “a 30-second increment from move 1”. This is the meaning you are concerned about, apparently. And this gets a bit technical.
For purposes of comparing time controls with increment against time controls with no increment, both FIDE and U.S. Chess consider a game to consist of 60 moves. This is arbitrary, but reasonable (most games last less than 60 moves, but a few extend beyond that). With this convention, each second of increment time becomes “equivalent to” (perhaps “worth the same as” would be a better phrase) one minute of main time, because there are 60 seconds in a minute.
For example, G/60 inc/30 is regarded as “worth the same as” G/90 with no increment, when it comes to deciding whether a time control is allowable, and under which rating system.
There is (or was) a FIDE rule requiring that, if a tournament includes at least one Master, each game must allow at least 3 hours (90 minutes per player) in order to be FIDE regular-ratable. There is (or was) another FIDE rule that there can be no more than 12 hours of playing time (both players’ times combined) per day. This means, for example, that a 1-day 4-round tournament with a time control of G/60 inc/30 would just barely be FIDE regular-ratable. (FIDE rules mavens, please don’t jump on me if I haven’t stated these rules absolutely accurately. I’m simply addressing a different point here.)
The idea of one second of increment time being considered “equivalent to” one minute of main time also enters heavily into the U.S. Chess definitions of allowable time controls, which use the famous “mm+ss” formula (main time in minutes, plus increment time in seconds) to determine the legality of the tournament and the rating system that will be used. mm+ss must be at least 66 (regular), at least 11 (quick), or at least 5 (blitz). (Again, please don’t get on my case if these numbers are a little off.)
Assume a single control of G/60 inc/30. At the moment white’s clock is started, should the clock’s main time show 1:00:00, or 1:00:30?[b] Let’s say white uses exactly 90 seconds of thinking time on each move [/b](and that black moves faster than that, so that the possibility of black’s time expiring is not a factor). Then, after white plays his 59th move and presses the clock, since G/60 inc/30 is supposedly “equivalent to” G/90 with no increment, white should still have 90 seconds left to play his 60th move, right?
But let’s see what actually happens if the clock initially reads 1:00:00 when the game starts:
When white presses his clock after move 01 his time will jump from 0:58:30 to 0:59:00.
When white presses his clock after move 02 his time will jump from 0:57:30 to 0:58:00.
When white presses his clock after move 03 his time will jump from 0:56:30 to 0:57:00.
When white presses his clock after move 04 his time will jump from 0:55:30 to 0:56:00.
: : : :
: : : :
: : : :
When white presses his clock after move 56 his time will jump from 0:03:30 to 0:04:00.
When white presses his clock after move 57 his time will jump from 0:02:30 to 0:03:00.
When white presses his clock after move 58 his time will jump from 0:01:30 to 0:02:00.
When white presses his clock after move 59 his time will jump from 0:00:30 to 0:01:00.
White now has only 60 seconds, not 90, to play his 60th move. 
Boo hiss.
So, technically, white’s clock (and black’s) should read 1:00:30 when the game starts. Otherwise, each player is being cheated out of 30 seconds of main time.
Some clocks (e.g. DGT), understanding this concept, do add the 30 seconds for move 1 automatically. Others (e.g. Chronos) do not, so should be set manually to 1:00:30 rather than 1:00:00.
But is it really worth all the fuss? The grand total difference between the two settings is just 30 seconds of main time for each player. Mostly likely a tournament director would not want to rule a time forfeit claim invalid just because of an initial 30-second error that, after all, applied equally to both players.
Bill Smythe