225.32 - Outside branch circuits

[Mr. Bill]

Add Exception #5: For non-building structures supporting a single receptacle, the disconnecting means shall be permitted to be located elsewhere on the premises.

I read one post awhile ago about how an inspector was requiring someone to install a disconnect switch on a post-mounted recept that was installed for an outdoor pool. I hope this would clear up if it's required or not.

 

[bkludecke]

You may want to change "single receptacle" to "single outlet" this would cover duplex receptacles and lighting outlets as well.

Then you'll need to substantiate the change.

 

[frizbeedog]

Add Exception #5: For non-building structures

.....on a post-mounted recept that was installed for an outdoor pool.

What exactly is a non-building structure? Both are defined in the NEC (Art. 100). And where they are encountered a disconnect is required per 225.32, barring current exceptions.

A post with a receptacle is neither a building or a structure.

 

[iwire]

A post with a receptacle is neither a building or a structure.

I disagree.

A post with a receptacle is by NEC definition a 'structure'

If you do not agree can you explain the need for Exceptions 3 & 4 to 225.32?

 

[frizbeedog]

I disagree.

A post with a receptacle is by NEC definition a 'structure'

Bob, Is a structure or a building, by definition, dependent on whether or not an electrical installation has been attached to it?

Is a post, planted in the ground, "built or constructed?

 

[frizbeedog]

I disagree.

If you do not agree can you explain the need for Exceptions 3 & 4 to 225.32?

Well, the exceptions to 3 and 4 make sense in regards to signs and lighting requiring maintenance, and 600.6 (A) addresses this, and allows this disconnecting means to be within sight, or not, if cabable of being locked.

 

[iwire]

Well, the exceptions to 3 and 4 make sense in regards to signs and lighting requiring maintenance, and 600.6 (A) addresses this, and allows this disconnecting means to be within sight, or not, if cabable of being locked.

Right I agree they make sense. :smile:

But the reason those exceptions are needed is because the code making panel knows that the NEC definition of 'structure' means a simple pole sticking up out of the ground supporting a fixture is a structure. That being the case all light poles would have to have a disconnecting means located at the pole.

To get around that they added the exceptions.

Read the definition of structure. Basically the only items that are not structures are natural items like trees and rocks.

In the OPs case I am not sure his structure is 'served' when it only has an outlet on it, not utilization equipment.

 

[iwire]

Bob, Is a structure or a building, by definition, dependent on whether or not an electrical installation has been attached to it?

IMO, no, I see nothing in the definition of structure about the presence of equipment.

Is a post, planted in the ground, "built or constructed?

Yes.

If it was not built or constructed how did it get there?

Constructed

Main Entry: 1con?struct

Pronunciation: \kən-ˈstrəkt\

Function: transitive verb

Etymology: Latin constructus, past participle of construere, from com- + struere to build — more at structure
Date: 1663

1: to make or form by combining or arranging parts or elements : build ; also : contrive , devise

Certainly the wood was milled.

Some one bought it, cut it, dug a hole and installed it.

If we accept that a light pole supporting a fixture is a structure how can we possibly argue a pole supporting an outlet is not a structure?

IMO, the real issue is contained in 225.30, that sections tells us the rules apply to structures that are 'served by a branch circuit or feeder' Is a post with a receptacle 'served by a branch circuit' or is it the utilization equipment that will be served. I really don't know.

 

[frizbeedog]

If it was not built or constructed how did it get there?

Sometimes it's neither.

410.36 (G), 2008

410.16 (H), 2005

 

[iwire]

Sometimes it's neither.

410.36 (G), 2008

410.16 (H), 2005

Right, IMO the only thing that is not 'built or constructed' is what exists in nature.

 

[frizbeedog]

If we accept that a light pole supporting a fixture is a structure how can we possibly argue a pole supporting an outlet is not a structure?

Because a post is not a structure. Although we must treat it as one? Mabey.

struc?ture
NOUN: 1. Something made up of a number of parts that are held or put together in a particular way:

I didn't even have to look it up to conceptualize it.

I still say a post is not constructed (I know you disagree with that).

But then there is this:

225.1 Scope.

This article covers requirements for outside branch circuits and feeders run on or between buildings, structures, or poles on the premisis; 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.

Receptacle.....Not utilization equipment.

A light on a pole....utilization equipment.


And consider this:

225.32 Location

The disconnecting means shall be installed either inside or outside of the building or structure served......

To be given an option of inside or outside, shouldn't I first have an option? With a pole there is no option of inside.....'cause it's not a structure or a building.

 

[iwire]

Because a post is not a structure. Although we must treat it as one? Mabey.

Regardless of any personally feelings, to the NEC a post is a structure.

That is proved by the exceptions to 222.32, I will not dwell on it any further. IMO it is a fact.

I still say a post is not constructed (I know you disagree with that).

You can say that, but the NEC does not agree. :grin:

But then there is this:

Receptacle.....Not utilization equipment.

A light on a pole....utilization equipment.

Did I not mention that?

Did I not say the key to this may be the fact that a post with a receptacle on it is not served?

IMO, the real issue is contained in 225.30, that sections tells us the rules apply to structures that are 'served by a branch circuit or feeder' Is a post with a receptacle 'served by a branch circuit' or is it the utilization equipment that will be served. I really don't know.

To be given an option of inside or outside, shouldn't I first have an option? With a pole there is no option of inside.....'cause it's not a structure or a building.

Just because you do not have the ability to mount the disconnect inside the post or pole does not mean it is not a structure.

 

[Mr. Bill]

225.1 Scope.

This article covers requirements for outside branch circuits and feeders run on or between buildings, structures, or poles on the premisis; 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.

I never noticed that part of the scope for this article. Maybe my suggestion would not be necessary then. Note to self: Read scope more often.

And I do believe sticking a board in the ground is considered a structure by the NEC because of it's widely generic and broad definition. Only natural items like rocks and trees would not be considered structures.