Service & loadcenter in residential garage?

[olc]

Quick question - Any issues code or otherwise with the main service panel being in the garage of a house?

 

[fmtjfw]

Quick question - Any issues code or otherwise with the main service panel being in the garage of a house?

Attached or Detached?
NO or YES

 

[MasterTheNEC]

Quick question - Any issues code or otherwise with the main service panel being in the garage of a house?

NO.....on neither if the install is done correctly.

Section 230.70(A)(1) permits the Service Disconnection Means to be located outside of a building and when necessary Section 230.40 Ex.3 can assist......it does not specify where outside of that building....others are sure to disagree but thats their prerogative.

I have seen plenty of million dollar homes that had the service for the home in the detached garage with feeders to remote distribution panels in the dwelling structure and have never seen one fail because of it.

Now in a shared wall of garages (like a fire rated wall) then the devil of the placement of the panel is in the details...but in general.....

 

[kwired]

NO.....on neither if the install is done correctly.

Section 230.70(A)(1) permits the Service Disconnection Means to be located outside of a building and when necessary Section 230.40 Ex.3 can assist......it does not specify where outside of that building....others are sure to disagree but thats their prerogative.

I have seen plenty of million dollar homes that had the service for the home in the detached garage with feeders to remote distribution panels in the dwelling structure and have never seen one fail because of it.

Outside of the building is one thing, in or on a separate structure is another, if the only purpose of the structure is to provide support for the equipment - we can argue this for hundreds of posts, but a detached garage is a separate structure to most competent electrical professionals.

Are you suggesting the property monetary value has an impact on the rules with that last statement?

I can't say inspectors here would let it go because I haven't tried to slip this one past them, but am assuming they wouldn't let it go. A garage that has a "breezeway" connecting it to the house is likely considered all one building.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

Outside of the building is one thing, in or on a separate structure is another, if the only purpose of the structure is to provide support for the equipment - we can argue this for hundreds of posts, but a detached garage is a separate structure to most competent electrical professionals.

Are you suggesting the property monetary value has an impact on the rules with that last statement?

I can't say inspectors here would let it go because I haven't tried to slip this one past them, but am assuming they wouldn't let it go. A garage that has a "breezeway" connecting it to the house is likely considered all one building.

No you are suggesting it...I am saying that is where I witnessed it the most.....due to the layout of the properties. Your "interpretation" of where the "outside" limit should be is not founded in the NEC so...If you notice in Section 230.40 Ex. 3....the dog waggin the tail does not matter which end the tail is located on.......now lets assume THAT analogy....

 

[MasterTheNEC]

FYI- That ANALOGY makes no sense......forget it...I need some Coffee....but you get the idea.....In my view the use of 230.40 Ex. 3 has no specific of which comes first...the chicken on the egg.....See I did it again......:weeping:

 

[kwired]

No you are suggesting it...I am saying that is where I witnessed it the most.....due to the layout of the properties. Your "interpretation" of where the "outside" limit should be is not founded in the NEC so...If you notice in Section 230.40 Ex. 3....the dog waggin the tail does not matter which end the tail is located on.......now lets assume THAT analogy....

I don't see how 230.40 exception 3 fits into this discussion at all.

That exception allows us to run service entrance conductors to both structures (for the single family dwelling and accessory buildings in this application) from "a single service drop, set of overhead service conductors, set of underground service conductors, or service lateral."

Maybe I missed something but I thought this discussion was about service equipment in/on the accessory building/structure and branch circuits run to the other building/structure.

 

[david]

..it does not specify where outside of that building....others are sure to disagree but thats their prerogative.

I would think comparing 225.32 location and 230.70 (A) (1) location the building disconnect location has to be closes to where the supply conductors enter the building even if the disconnect is outside of the building.

You may argue that 230.70 is not clear that the exterior disconnect has to be close to where the service entrance enters the building but you cannot argue the same for 225.32 location.

I think from these two sections it can be concluded that a disconnect inside and a disconnect outside needs to be close to where the supply conductors enter the building.


edit to add:
I would approve a service disconnect attached to a building. I would not approve a service disconnect 50 ft from a building.

 

[GoldDigger]

edit to add:
I would approve a service disconnect attached to a building. I would not approve a service disconnect 50 ft from a building.

But just to be clear, you would approve a *service* disconnect 50 ft. from the building as long as there was also a non-service disconnect at the building?

 

[david]

But just to be clear, you would approve a *service* disconnect 50 ft. from the building as long as there was also a non-service disconnect at the building?

yes I would approve a feeder disconnect at the building

 

[MasterTheNEC]

I would think comparing 225.32 location and 230.70 (A) (1) location the building disconnect location has to be closes to where the supply conductors enter the building even if the disconnect is outside of the building.

You may argue that 230.70 is not clear that the exterior disconnect has to be close to where the service entrance enters the building but you cannot argue the same for 225.32 location.

I think from these two sections it can be concluded that a disconnect inside and a disconnect outside needs to be close to where the supply conductors enter the building.


edit to add:
I would approve a service disconnect attached to a building. I would not approve a service disconnect 50 ft from a building.

How about 30'.........do you not observe Section 550.32(A) as well?..which clearly has a defined maximum limit.....which is not expressed in 230.70(A)(1).....we can agree to disagree.

I have no problem with the language on the feeder......we are are talking about the service are we not?

225.32 Location. The disconnecting means shall be installed
either inside or outside of the building or structure
served or where the conductors pass through the building or
structure. The disconnecting means shall be at a readily
accessible location nearest the point of entrance of the conductors.
For the purposes of this section, the requirements
in 230.6 shall be utilized.

The point of entrance I will leave to the AHJ to decide.......

 

[kwired]

Service disconnecting means is not required. If you have a building with no utility company source - there won't be a service disconnect, period. The building still needs a main disconnecting means at/on the building though for whatever feeder/branch circuit is supplying it though. Other rules may allow this to be up to six or even more switches depending on conditions.

The mobile home example requires a disconnect for the feeder supplying the mobile home to be within 30 feet - no requirement of what the source may be (service/non service).

 

[david]

see below

 

[david]

How about 30'.........do you not observe Section 550.32(A) as well?..which clearly has a defined maximum limit.....which is not expressed in 230.70(A)(1).....we can agree to disagree.

I recognize 90.3 in fairness you are referencing special provisions found in article 550 which mandates the building be supplied by a feeder to a main in a distribution panel in the dwelling

Edit:
You indicated others would disagree with you that the location of an exterior disconnect was not required at the building location or as you put it at any specified location. As you predicted some here are going to disagree

 

[MasterTheNEC]

I don't see how 230.40 exception 3 fits into this discussion at all.

That exception allows us to run service entrance conductors to both structures (for the single family dwelling and accessory buildings in this application) from "a single service drop, set of overhead service conductors, set of underground service conductors, or service lateral."

Maybe I missed something but I thought this discussion was about service equipment in/on the accessory building/structure and branch circuits run to the other building/structure.

Just trying to show examples.......and it was a poor one at best.....the point being I do not see where placing the service disconnection means in a detached garage and having a feeder supply the dwelling as a violation of any sorts.

No you did not miss anything......I was reaching for the stars with an analogy...a poor one at best=

 

[MasterTheNEC]

I recognize 90.3 in fairness you are referencing special provisions found in article 550 which mandates the building be supplied by a feeder to a main in a distribution panel in the dwelling

Edit:
You indicated others would disagree with you that the location of an exterior disconnect was not required at the building location or as you put it at any specified location. As you predicted some here are going to disagree

I did...and it is all good my friend.......was just trying to show examples. It is all up to the AHJ to sort out but I know "This" AHJ would sort it differently...

 

[MasterTheNEC]

......yeah I tried to fool people with Asterisks again.....Hey might wanna ban me for Almost cussing:angel: