Disconnect for detached garage?

[DaveTap]

If the house panel is only 100A are the meter socket and service wires sized large enough for whatever additional load will be in that garage?
(Probably are... but always check before overloading a service)

 

[Dennis Alwon]

So your saying the power company comes out and feeds your temporary with a 60 amp service and then turns around and builds you a 200 amp service after the fact?

You must be thier favorite electrician.

Not around here. The service and wire that they size to feed the temporary is in turn used to feed the permanent.

They will do either depending on the situation. If I want I ask them to run the larger size to withing 10' of the house and roll up the wire long enough to reach the house when the time comes. This gives us the pole close to the house. Sometimes we just put a 60 amp temp within 10' of the trany and they run the conductors from the trany to the house when the meter is set then disconnect the temp.

 

[jap]

They do the roll up thing around here also for overhead services but it is sized for the final connection not 60 then come back and change it all to 200.

On the undergrounds they set a Meter Main w/ 4 circuits pedestal next to thier transformers and the temperary can be fed from it.

JAP>

 

[kwired]

So your saying the power company comes out and feeds your temporary with a 60 amp service and then turns around and builds you a 200 amp service after the fact?

You must be thier favorite electrician.

Not around here. The service and wire that they size to feed the temporary is in turn used to feed the permanent.

They do the roll up thing around here also for overhead services but it is sized for the final connection not 60 then come back and change it all to 200.

On the undergrounds they set a Meter Main w/ 4 circuits pedestal next to thier transformers and the temperary can be fed from it.

JAP>

Most of time temp service is supplied via overhead conductors, permanent service is typically underground. If I supply temp power from permanent underground wiring I am not going to mess around with temp service equipment - permanent service equipment gets installed immediately and is used for construction power also.

If you are in a place where they don't allow energizing permanent power until end of the project then you have other complications to deal with. I don't have that problem. I have placed a few permanent service panels in a basement in my time before there is even decking on the floor. Temp provisions to protect it from weather is acceptable until it is permanently protected.

 

[hurk27]

What the OP want to do is allowed by the NEC and has been for years, no changes in the NEC have removed this allowance as 230.40 Exception #3 is still there.

Here is a recent discussion on this matter with a 320 meter: Click Here

 

[George Stolz]

While the NEC doesn't mind, many power companies would balk at the idea of being responsible for the extra portions of the installation. I had a case where they wanted no part of 20' of underground between a pole and a building, and required a disconnect at the pole.

Always check with the POCO before doing something weird.

 

[hurk27]

After reading many of the responses to this thread I see allot of "what ifs" and "that wouldn't be allowed in my area" responses, we must keep in mind we all live in different ares and these areas may or may not have code amendments that trumps what the NEC may or may not allow, this is up to the person doing the installation to check with there local AHJ and state laws to know what options they might have, including what their utility allows.

So when we answer a question we should base our answer on the NEC not what is allowed or not in our area, we can offer an opinion of it, but it does the OP'er little good if it doesn't apply to his/her location.

Like I said, The NEC allows the installation in the OP if other problems that has to be addressed in existing installs, such as:

Size of the existing service and the new load calculation, which will be a problem either way you do this install, off the meter or adding it to the existing panel

Double wires on the meter lug, could be solved by a tap box below the meter base, or changing the meter to one that allows double lugs on the load side, using a double lug to single pin if you can still find them .

For new installations it will always be a lower cost using the 230.40 Exception #3 method as it allows for less disconnects, wire and other materials, as also the load of the out building is not added to the dwelling service panel so even breaker spaces are freed up,

But in existing installations one must weigh the options to see which one is more cost effective and requires the least repairs to make when doing it, sometimes a home owner might not want drywall removed if it is possible to do so in another way even if it does cost a little more.

This is why the NEC has these little exceptions because it allows us to have options so we can chose which is best for our customer.

Also when we address our local codes we must know the NEC and how it is supposed to apply, one of the more common mistakes I see with the above use of 230.40 Ex. 3 is inspectors tend to try to use requirements in article 255 to disallow it, remember if you are ahead of the service disconnect you are not in article 255, you are in article 230, also even if they get the correct article they tend to not read what the code says, like the example of Grouping of disconnects that only apply to each structure, or that a disconnect is not required if the conductors do not "enter" a structure, they will call these conductors feeders, feeders are after the main service disconnect not before, again remember we are in 230 not 255, a meter can is not a service disconnect, it is nothing but a wide point in the service entrance conductors, SEC's enter it and SEC's leave it.

On another note is the grounding electrode requirements, I have had inspectors try to say I have to bond between two buildings to connect the two grounding electrode systems together, this is not what the code says, again each building or separate structure is required to have all the grounding electrodes bonded together, there is no requirement that requires us to bond these two Grounding Electrode Systems together from separate structures, each building or structure is its own stand alone system.

So be sure if you have an AHJ trying to disallow this 230.40 exception 3 allowance, that they are calling the right codes and properly reading them if they are.

 

[hurk27]

While the NEC doesn't mind, many power companies would balk at the idea of being responsible for the extra portions of the installation. I had a case where they wanted no part of 20' of underground between a pole and a building, and required a disconnect at the pole.

Always check with the POCO before doing something weird.

Why would the POCO be responsible for the conductors after the meter at the pole?
No different then the city water supply where the water company stops at the street tap meter and if a leak happens on our side of the meter we have to pay to fix it. I not disputing that utilities might require this, just thinking of the logic, Here as Indiana utility Commission has ruled, if the POCO is not paying for the installation and the maintenance of it they do not have the right to dictate how we spend our money as long as it meets the codes as it applies in Indiana, from this ruling it has also prompted the water companies to now meter at the curb instead of inside of the house as they are now can not require copper for the water lines up to their point of metering if it is inside of the house and they stop their responsibilities at the curb.

Just a thought to me that make sense?

 

[George Stolz]

Well, I suppose I could have taken it all the way to the Supreme Court, but it wouldn't have gotten the service energized.

 

[hurk27]

Well, I suppose I could have taken it all the way to the Supreme Court, but it wouldn't have gotten the service energized.

LOL well I guess we should know when to pick our battles, I guess I post allot on this because back when we had no such rules that protected us from local interpretations, it was so frustrating that we were at the whim of each and every inspectors wishes and I got involved at state level to stop this kind of abuse, while we still have some inspectors trying to push there own agenda at least now we have laws that we can use that will get the state involved and override the local inspectors up to and including dissolving the local inspection department if they don't wish to comply with the state laws, so yes it may be different in other areas and while it shouldn't be unless there is other differences that require additional codes to add protection of safety from injury, fire and or property damage, from Earthquakes, Storms, or other natural disasters or climate differences that may happen in one place that another might not experience, there is no reason that codes should not be the same nation wide.

 

[jumper]

I doubt that we ever see a national electrical code or licensing; however, I do wish all states would have one statewide code, with or without amendments, and licensing.

The local parochial adoption of codes and licensing is a nightmare.

 

[kwired]

While the NEC doesn't mind, many power companies would balk at the idea of being responsible for the extra portions of the installation. I had a case where they wanted no part of 20' of underground between a pole and a building, and required a disconnect at the pole.

Always check with the POCO before doing something weird.

If you are on the load side of the service point, POCO doesn't have much say in what you do anymore. JMO.

If they are requiring a disconnect anywhere, then the load side terminals of that disconnect seems like the most logical place for the service point. If there is a meter at the pole in your example, most cases that is the service point, whether there is overcurrent protection or not.

 

[George Stolz]

If you are on the load side of the service point, POCO doesn't have much say in what you do anymore. JMO.

In this case, the engineer with the POCO adamantly refused to allow the underground because it didn't match his picture. Considering the tight margins on the job I was on, I really didn't want to buy a 3-pole 600v 3R disconnect because of a stupid picture. I fought it, lost, and then wrote him an a long-winded sarcastic email detailing the 13 services I saw on my way home that looked just like it. He replied simply that those services were not his customers and that I should always check with the POCO before doing an installation.

At the end of the day you can't argue with that. If the POCO refuses to connect to my installation I'd either have to make my own power or change to make the POCO happy, which I did.

 

[kwired]

In this case, the engineer with the POCO adamantly refused to allow the underground because it didn't match his picture. Considering the tight margins on the job I was on, I really didn't want to buy a 3-pole 600v 3R disconnect because of a stupid picture. I fought it, lost, and then wrote him an a long-winded sarcastic email detailing the 13 services I saw on my way home that looked just like it. He replied simply that those services were not his customers and that I should always check with the POCO before doing an installation.

At the end of the day you can't argue with that. If the POCO refuses to connect to my installation I'd either have to make my own power or change to make the POCO happy, which I did.

My argument in that same conversation would have been that once beyond the "service point" the NEC and the electrical inspector apply to what is installed and not the POCO. Especially if the incident happened after the 2011 NEC was adopted.

I think changes to the 2011 NEC have made an attempt to help clarify this kind of issue also. IMO if POCO wants to require a disconnect then it will have to be on their side of the service point, and I have seen many that are on their side and they usually supply and install them.

 

[hurk27]

My argument in that same conversation would have been that once beyond the "service point" the NEC and the electrical inspector apply to what is installed and not the POCO. Especially if the incident happened after the 2011 NEC was adopted.

I think changes to the 2011 NEC have made an attempt to help clarify this kind of issue also. IMO if POCO wants to require a disconnect then it will have to be on their side of the service point, and I have seen many that are on their side and they usually supply and install them.

Unfortunately if you live in a state that allows a utility to dictate control over what we install on our side of the demark point we have very little that we can do to stop this kind of abuse, in these cases they have the right to refuse to supply you service if you don't meet their requirements, many of these laws are very new in a sense as they were adopted for cable utilities as the problem of signal leakage was affecting air traffic, Fire, and police radio bands, and all utilities was lumped into the laws not thinking that it would be abused as it is today, back when I first moved here the utility supplied the meter can and we installed it if they wanted a conduit ran to make their part of the installation easier they supplied it, because it was a system set up back before the cable laws were put on the book and utilities had to pay for something if they wanted it their way, back then if the cost was ours then we had the right to install what we chose as long as it met the codes we had to follow, after the cable laws were in place that gave the utilities the right to refuse service our utility got the idea they didn't have to supply us with the meters any more and stopped the practice but now they could dictate what we had to install by simply just refusing to hook us up.

Well a few of us independent contractors went after them and the Utility Commission and these laws because it violated our Constitutional right by taking away the right for us to chose what and how we installed it above and beyond what the NEC required when we and our customers were footing the bill, The state Attorney General sided with us and we won, and legislation was adopted that stopped this abuse, so the only way to stop this abuse is to get people together and fight it at state level, and a good start is first getting together with your states utility commission to see if they can make the changes as it is against the Constitution if the requirements dictated by the utility are baseless other then to make you install or do something in a more costly way that has no bases on safety, fire protection, or the protection of property, and just using the NEC with the fact that it also allows a different installation can be enough to over throw the requirement, the requirement to allow a cable company to refuse to hook up and or disconnect a service is (for a good reason) based on a safety hazard, but until you get the law changed they may or may not have the power to refuse service depending upon what your laws state and how they apply in your state.

This is why I have stated on here many times that knowing your state and local laws, including federal laws is as much important as knowing the NEC or the version as adopted by your state or local AHJ.

 

[John120/240]

I doubt that we ever see a national electrical code or licensing; however, I do wish all states would have one statewide code, with or without amendments, and licensing.

The local parochial adoption of codes and licensing is a nightmare.

In a perfect world such as that all of the local electricians would be on cloud nine. But we have multiple POCO's within 40

miles of each other and nobody can agree on GEC in the meter can or at the first disconnect. There was talk of a unified county

code with 20 different municplities but when they form a committie to study such matters it goes nowhere.

 

[kwired]

Unfortunately if you live in a state that allows a utility to dictate control over what we install on our side of the demark point we have very little that we can do to stop this kind of abuse, in these cases they have the right to refuse to supply you service if you don't meet their requirements, many of these laws are very new in a sense as they were adopted for cable utilities as the problem of signal leakage was affecting air traffic, Fire, and police radio bands, and all utilities was lumped into the laws not thinking that it would be abused as it is today, back when I first moved here the utility supplied the meter can and we installed it if they wanted a conduit ran to make their part of the installation easier they supplied it, because it was a system set up back before the cable laws were put on the book and utilities had to pay for something if they wanted it their way, back then if the cost was ours then we had the right to install what we chose as long as it met the codes we had to follow, after the cable laws were in place that gave the utilities the right to refuse service our utility got the idea they didn't have to supply us with the meters any more and stopped the practice but now they could dictate what we had to install by simply just refusing to hook us up.

Well a few of us independent contractors went after them and the Utility Commission and these laws because it violated our Constitutional right by taking away the right for us to chose what and how we installed it above and beyond what the NEC required when we and our customers were footing the bill, The state Attorney General sided with us and we won, and legislation was adopted that stopped this abuse, so the only way to stop this abuse is to get people together and fight it at state level, and a good start is first getting together with your states utility commission to see if they can make the changes as it is against the Constitution if the requirements dictated by the utility are baseless other then to make you install or do something in a more costly way that has no bases on safety, fire protection, or the protection of property, and just using the NEC with the fact that it also allows a different installation can be enough to over throw the requirement, the requirement to allow a cable company to refuse to hook up and or disconnect a service is (for a good reason) based on a safety hazard, but until you get the law changed they may or may not have the power to refuse service depending upon what your laws state and how they apply in your state.

This is why I have stated on here many times that knowing your state and local laws, including federal laws is as much important as knowing the NEC or the version as adopted by your state or local AHJ.

So where then does the POCO's authority stop then? At the meter, at the service disconnect, at outlets? Can they tell you no you can not plug in your 60 year old phonograph that belonged to your grandparents?

If they wanted to shut down places because of safety concerns of any type, they certainly could easily shut down at least 75% of their customers around here and maybe even more than that.

 

[hurk27]

So where then does the POCO's authority stop then? At the meter, at the service disconnect, at outlets? Can they tell you no you can not plug in your 60 year old phonograph that belonged to your grandparents?

If they wanted to shut down places because of safety concerns of any type, they certainly could easily shut down at least 75% of their customers around here and maybe even more than that.

I agree as many of these laws were written so openly that they could use it to shut you off if you had extension cords, the only thing I think that kept them somewhat at bay is other laws that would make trespassing a problem, while it was used many times around here if there was any kind of fire in a house they would pull the meter and take it with them even if it didn't damage or have anything to do with the electric, and would not turn the power back on until an inspector inspected the house, which by the way allowed the inspector to pick apart the electric and add requirements as he seemed fit, which was also changed here, it was a free for all, and as you can see why we were so adamant at getting these laws changed that allowed this to happen.

Worse case was when we finally got the state wide building codes adopted at state level, the inspectors started using the line men to try to enforce rules they couldn't any longer thinking that the utility could still refuse to hook up at their whim, one city didn't want PVC riser pipes where the drop wasn't supported by the pipe, and I had a line man who wouldn't hook up the service as he said it was against the city rules, so I got the state to over rule the city then they said it was the utilities rules, I then I had to get the utility commission to over rule the utility which the utility said they had no such rule and investigated it and fired the line man who refused to do the hook up, when it all came out, it was the inspector who originally told the line man to not hook it up so he kept his job but it was a mess, the state made the city reimburse the homeowner who had to rent a motel room all the while they didn't have power, and they were also paid for the loss of food and for having to go through all of this the amount was never disclosed but it had to be a good amount and the inspector was fired.

 

[hornetd]

Demarcation point is were the public utility commision says it is!

Demarcation point is were the public utility commision says it is!

That's exactly right and that's where the dividing line between the service and the feeder are decided upon.

The actual location of the Demarcation point is governed by the rules of the Public Utilities Commission; or equivalent agency; of the State. Neither the AHJ or the Utility can decide different.

It seems to me that some of you are confusing customary local practice with what the NEC requires. The maxim of the law is that silence is consent. If the code does not prohibit the practice then as far as the code is concerned that practice is permissible. When people say that a practice is forbidden it would be helpful to the rest of us if they would quote chapter and verse. Tell us what NEC language forbids the proposed technique and then we will all know what the basis of your position is. Your local practice might even be Best Practice. That does not mean that the NEC requires that it be done that way.

--
Tom Horne

 

[kwired]

The actual location of the Demarcation point is governed by the rules of the Public Utilities Commission; or equivalent agency; of the State. Neither the AHJ or the Utility can decide different.

It seems to me that some of you are confusing customary local practice with what the NEC requires. The maxim of the law is that silence is consent. If the code does not prohibit the practice then as far as the code is concerned that practice is permissible. When people say that a practice is forbidden it would be helpful to the rest of us if they would quote chapter and verse. Tell us what NEC language forbids the proposed technique and then we will all know what the basis of your position is. Your local practice might even be Best Practice. That does not mean that the NEC requires that it be done that way.

--
Tom Horne

Public Utilities Commission very well may set a legal Demarc point. Does that mean they must stop providing equipment and services beyond that point? Or does it simply mean they must provide equipment and services up to that point and anything afterwards is up to them if they wish to do so?

That demarc point set by laws may not be same point as the NEC defined "service point" for a particular installation.

Majority of customers subscribe to a service of 600 volts or less and said Demarc point is generally somewhere on the load side of a less than 600 volts transformer. Then comes the occasional industrial customer that subscribes to meduim voltage service. Where is the legal demarc point for them? One size fits all approach probably is not going to work for the demarc point.