Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 56

Thread: Two Services for one building

  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Jamaica and london
    Posts
    713
    Quote Originally Posted by ashenafidemissie View Post
    Thank you so much for all your responses. FYI the two buildings are under the same owner and management. It has been decided to upgrade power for one of the buildings not to supply power from the other one as the owners doesn't want this practice to repeat in future. I have learned a lot from your discussion. Special thanks to Charlie b and David!
    the other way to look at that is how the last company I worked for was operating, one owned space and one rented space. Though they could run a feed from the owned space to the rented space for what the rented space could not handle, they decided to upgrade the rented space electric supply, because they figured if business dropped and they had to move out of the rentall, it would cost less to change the electricity back to one site, and they already paid for two meters.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    458
    Quote Originally Posted by david View Post
    it is my opinion article 225 only addresses feeder and branch circuit supplied buildings as well just the article 225 branch circuits and feeders are from a premise established service point

    it is up to the authority to limit the supplies to one unless the justification can be determined in article 230 or article 225 for additional supplies either a service supply, feeder supply or branch circuit supply

    IMO, a building supplied by one service and one feeder is not a code violation. What code article would you cite as a violation?

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,477
    Quote Originally Posted by packersparky View Post
    IMO, a building supplied by one service and one feeder is not a code violation. What code article would you cite as a violation?
    unless permitted in 230.2(A) through (D). 225.30 Number of Supplies.
    Unless permitted in 225.30(A) through (E).

    simple we would site 230.2 or 225.30 you could disagree but we would take the position supply a building by a service the building is allowed one supply = one service as the supply

    supply a building with a branch circuit the building gets only one supply = one branch circuit

    supply a building with a feeder the building only gets one supply = one feeder

    you want to introduce more than one supply we would hold you to the reasons given in 230.2 (A) through (D)

    or the reasons given in 225.30 (A) through (E)

    and since we are the authority having jurisdiction we would find it reasonable that it is our responsibility to make that determination

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,477
    unless permitted in 230.2(A) through (D). 225.30 Number of Supplies.
    Unless permitted in 225.30(A) through (E).

    225.37 Identification.
    230.2 Number of Services. (E) Identification.

    both article 230 and article 225 after defining except able reasons a building could have additional supplies identify the combination of supplies as a service and a feeder or a feeder and a branch circuit or a branch circuit and a service, two or more services or two or more feeders. the combination is not limited in the articles

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    458
    Quote Originally Posted by david View Post
    unless permitted in 230.2(A) through (D). 225.30 Number of Supplies.
    Unless permitted in 225.30(A) through (E).

    225.37 Identification.
    230.2 Number of Services. (E) Identification.

    both article 230 and article 225 after defining except able reasons a building could have additional supplies identify the combination of supplies as a service and a feeder or a feeder and a branch circuit or a branch circuit and a service, two or more services or two or more feeders. the combination is not limited in the articles
    The scoping statement in 230.1 states that the article applies only to services and the scoping statement in 225.1 states that the article only applies to outside branch circuits and feeders.

    The number of supplies covered in 225.30 only applies to outside branch circuits and feeders via the text that follows and the scoping statement. It is the same with 230.2

    You cannot use 225.30 or 230.2 to not allow a building to be supplied with one feeder and one service. Neither apply as the building only has one service and one feeder.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,477
    Quote Originally Posted by packersparky View Post
    The scoping statement in 230.1 states that the article applies only to services and the scoping statement in 225.1 states that the article only applies to outside branch circuits and feeders.

    The number of supplies covered in 225.30 only applies to outside branch circuits and feeders via the text that follows and the scoping statement. It is the same with 230.2

    You cannot use 225.30 or 230.2 to not allow a building to be supplied with one feeder and one service. Neither apply as the building only has one service and one feeder.
    230.2 (E) and 225.37 take you strict scoping provisions right out the window

    230.2 (E) does not deal solely with buildings supplied by multi services nor does 225.37 directs you to only consider buildings with multiple branch circuits or feeders 230.(E) crisscrosses between service supplied buildings and feeder supplied buildings the same as 225.37

    Both articles have a narrow allowance for supplying buildings with multiple supplies taking both articles together it is fair to say it is the codes intention to limit the number of supplies to buildings.

    neither article allows additional supplies without meeting a min criteria for an authority to evaluate the necessity of an additional supply to any given building

    It is it seems your position that the NEC falls short of addressing specifically buildings with multiple supplies when one supply is a utility and the other is a feeder .

    So somehow any other combination of multiple supplies is a safety concern and somehow the feeder / service combination has no concern

    That’s when the Authority having jurisdiction must step in an make that determination

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    19,137
    My reading of 230.2(E) and 225.37 tells me that the code is explicitly acknowledging the possibility that a building might have both a service and an outside feeder. However, the simple truth is that the NEC has no words that would be used to disallow having one service and one feeder. For my part, I think such an installation would be outside the intent of the code's authors. Perhaps this possibility never came into any Code Making Panel's agenda. But the words are what the words are (now citing "Charlie's Rule").

    Bottom line:

    • There are words that essentially say, "only one service, unless you meet the following,"
    • There are words that essentially say, "only one outside feeder, unless you meet the following,"
    • There are no words that say, "if you have a service, then you can't also have an outside feeder," and
    • There are no words that say, "if you have an outside feeder, then you can't also have a service."


    If you think this represents a safety concern, then see if you can get a comment into the 2020 code cycle.
    Charles E. Beck, P.E., Seattle
    Comments based on 2017 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia
    Posts
    23,495
    Reminds me of my recent squabble about the feeder with no neutral. Nothing specifies it's allowed, but nothing specifies it's disallowed. The conclusion was based on the specification that the neutral must be sized per the neutral calculated load; no neutral load means no neutral needed.
    Code references based on 2005 NEC
    Larry B. Fine
    Master Electrician
    Electrical Contractor
    Richmond, VA

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Planet macmikeman
    Posts
    3,480
    Think different: Construct an interior concrete or cement block wall between two sections of the one building , one which extends upwards thru the existing roof for 36" along the entire length of the slice thru the now two halves , and extends 30" beyond each end , with no openings in it's entirety between the two sides , and viola, you now have two buildings and can legally code wise install two services.
    85deg. an Sunny today.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NE Nebraska
    Posts
    38,252
    Quote Originally Posted by david View Post
    225.1 Scope.
    This article covers requirements for outside branch circuits and feeders run on or between buildings, structures, or poles on the premises; and electrical equipment and wiring for the supply of utilization equipment that is located on or attached to the outside of buildings, structures, or poles.

    The scope of article 225 indicates outside wiring on the same premise from the premise service point forward. I am simply saying the service point is already established in article 225 to be on the premise and the article is addressing branch circuits and feeders from that established service point forward.

    All the article 225 branch circuits and feeders on the same premise are from the same service point
    225.1 scope never mentions what the source is, so it doesn't matter if that second source is from service or on site production, a feeder is a feeder, a branch circuit is a branch circuit. There is as mentioned in 225 and 230 the "unless permitted in...." which allows additional supplies in both sections for emergency systems, fire pumps, different characteristics, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by macmikeman View Post
    Think different: Construct an interior concrete or cement block wall between two sections of the one building , one which extends upwards thru the existing roof for 36" along the entire length of the slice thru the now two halves , and extends 30" beyond each end , with no openings in it's entirety between the two sides , and viola, you now have two buildings and can legally code wise install two services.
    Yes, and is an easy way to power a large addition to an existing facility also. Quite often a two hour separation will be required by other codes anyway. You do have to watch so that you don't bring circuits from one "building" into the other though. Common passageway between old and new will need fire doors as well.
    I live for today, I'm just a day behind.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •