Can I do this #2

[e57]

The second building is not being supplied by a second service it is being supplied by a feeder or branch circuit. (and in the case of a switch leg is not even being supplied)

Services end at the disconnect.

Would you say your refrigerator is supplied by a service or a branch circuit?

I see this may be one of those things that you have a cemented an opinion on that will not change by anything I would or could ever say - and since I lack the 'qualification' to change your mind - we might as well add it to the ever growing list of things we have agreed to disagree on - is that correct?

If it isn't - A simple yes or no to the two questions posed earlier would be nice...

1. Two services on the same structure without fitting a need by qualification or special permission would be a violation?
2. Two branch circuits or feeders on the same structure without fitting a need by qualification or special permission would be a violation?

If you answer 'yes' to either - do you not see the contradiction?

Anyway - if you followed the OP from thread to thread, sometimes its a 3-way, sometimes it's a sub-panel from one property to another property, across possibly another property. Both buildings have an existing service. It's unorthodox to say the least. Regardless of who they may all be owned by at the moment - should we be advocating such an installation?

For the record: My refrigerator is powered by a branch circuit with OCP, from a panel and feeder, from the OPC for the feeder in a main panel with OCP as the single source of electrical energy to my premises at my single service entrance and disconnecting means.... With no other source from my neighbor across the street...

 

[iwire]

I see this may be one of those things that you have a cemented an opinion on that will not change by anything I would or could ever say - and since I lack the 'qualification' to change your mind - we might as well add it to the ever growing list of things we have agreed to disagree on - is that correct?

No, it has nothing to do with your quilfications, as far as I know we are equells.

If it isn't - A simple yes or no to the two questions posed earlier would be nice...

I dig simple yes or no questions.

Two services on the same structure without fitting a need by qualification or special permission would be a violation?

IMO yes.

Two branch circuits or feeders on the same structure without fitting a need by qualification or special permission would be a violation?

IMO yes.

If you answer 'yes' to either - do you not see the contradiction?

Yes I see a contradiction.

The NEC is chock full of contradictions.

Not being a wise guy, just pointing out a fact.

Now I answered what you asked me can you answer this?

I own a single family home with single service and a detached garage, if I ever get around to installing the conductors in the PVC I ran out there 8 years ago which code Article will apply to that installation?

 

[e57]

No, it has nothing to do with your quilfications, as far as I know we are equells.

What I meant by that - is 'I am not capable of changing your mind' - I'm not sure who could - as you may or may not be just as stubborn or reluctant as I am to change....

I dig simple yes or no questions.

IMO yes.

IMO yes.

Yes I see a contradiction.

The NEC is chock full of contradictions.

Sure 225, and 230 have narrow scopes and IMO are based on traditional property ownership and control. But again IMO the wording of 230.2 opens a wider umbrella. It does not say 'to include a branch circuit from down the road', but does say it can't be "supplied" by an additional "service" unless conditions or special permission are met. IMO it is being supplied by a service located elsewhere. Your answer seems to be that the branch circuit coming across the road is not a "service". (In the narrow scope of what a service is, and what you feel you are limited to define that as.) Well - in that same light - it is not an outside branch circuit or feeder either - it ceased being either of those when it left the property line of where they originate.

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 electric equipment and wiring for the supply of utilization equipment that is located on or attached to the outside of buildings, structures, or poles.​

So what is this unidentified flying source of electrical energy?

Not being a wise guy, just pointing out a fact.

Now I answered what you asked me can you answer this?

I own a single family home with single service and a detached garage, if I ever get around to installing the conductors in the PVC I ran out there 8 years ago which code Article will apply to that installation?

So long as they don't run a freeway between the buildings and you don't sell the property it is on to someone else - 225.

 

[iwire]

So what is this unidentified flying source of electrical energy?

Irreverent, the NEC did not say 'source'

So long as they don't run a freeway between the buildings and you don't sell the property it is on to someone else - 225.

Please note that 225.30 tells us the separate building is supplied by a feeder or branch circuit even though in all likelihood if we go back far enough we will get to a service. Notice they do not say supplied by a service.

So IMO your interpretation does not match the NECs general use of the term supplied.

From one of your own posts

Service. The conductors and equipment for delivering electric energy from the serving utility to the wiring system of the premises served.

Are any of those service conductors at the second building from the first?

No, so the second building is only supplied by one service.

 

[e57]

Ahhhh.... semantics...... :roll:

Is it Branch Circuit or Feeder without the Service?

There is only one service already on the property, the 'UFO' - mysteriously powered and un-named circuit from space has no definition then. it stopped being a branch circuit when it left the premises of the other property. Re-selling power to your nieghbor - even if that neighbor is yourself - doesn't make you a utility - but it doesn't make it right either...

Service. The conductors and equipment for delivering electric energy from the serving utility to the wiring system of the premises served.

'the premises served' by this unidentifiable circuit has its 'conductors and equipment for delivering electric energy from the serving utility to the wiring system' on a different property.

'the premises served' is be fed by two sources of 'electric energy from the serving utility' one being re-sold to it by the neighbor across the street. For all we know - they could be different utilities, or different transformers...

I guess we'll just add this one to the ever growing list then.... But I won't advocate it.