230.2 violation? Two service drops at a multi family residence (MFR).

F

fandi

Senior Member
Location
Los Angeles
Occupation
Electrical Engineer
Hello All,
1) If there's an existing service drop for a MFR (the main house in the front (separate structure), one separate structure unit in the middle, two units in a separate structure in the rear), can a new service drop be added if the power company says that they will provide the second drop? Total amps of all units together is about 400A or less. There's plenty of space for service equipment accessible to all occupants.
2) Not related to the above question but just for my education, if the two service drops are both existing, can the two existing service drops grandfathered-in and not subject to 230.2?
Thank you.
 
Grandfathered in is a weird term. Utilities might require the services be combined in the future if their rules for service change and you need a service upgrade or something.

230.2 is "A building or other structure served shall be supplied by only one service unless permitted in..." so technically they are not all one building.

Typically, in this scenario one service with multimeter gear situated towards the street. And possibly needed Emergency disconnects for each building. (230.85 or 225.30(B)).
 
So you have three separate buildings? And two services, one for each of two building buildings, and the third is fed off of one of the others? If I am understanding your description correctly, then why do you see 230.2 as an issue? That only applies to multiple services serving ONE building.
 
More info needed to really understand the situation.

Do both existing service drops (note: two weatherheads is not two drops) come to the same building and serve loads in that building? Or do they go to separate buildings? Or do they both go to one building but one of them just passes along the surface of that building on its way to another building?
 
electrofelon said:
So you have three separate buildings? And two services, one for each of two building buildings, and the third is fed off of one of the others? If I am understanding your description correctly, then why do you see 230.2 as an issue? That only applies to multiple services serving ONE building.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. When I wrote the question, I repeated a few times 'separate structure' because my interpretation is this is not a 230.2 violation.
 
jaggedben said:
More info needed to really understand the situation.

Do both existing service drops (note: two weatherheads is not two drops) come to the same building and serve loads in that building? Or do they go to separate buildings? Or do they both go to one building but one of them just passes along the surface of that building on its way to another building?
Click to expand...
Thanks. Each service drop serve each building (one serves the main house, one serves the units in the rear, the unit in the middle is probably fed from either main house or the units in the rear).
 
Are they totally separate structures or are they separate by definition because of firewalls?

Are they separate occupants, tenants, etc.? Even if all have the same owner.

Does any circuits from one "structure" supply or pass through any of the other "structures"?
 
fandi said:
Thanks. Each service drop serve each building (one serves the main house, one serves the units in the rear, the unit in the middle is probably fed from either main house or the units in the rear).
Click to expand...
Agree there is no code issue with such an arrangement.
NEC rules are based on the physical aspects of what makes something a building or structure. Property lines and ownership do not matter to 230.2.
 
kwired said:
Are they totally separate structures or are they separate by definition because of firewalls?

Are they separate occupants, tenants, etc.? Even if all have the same owner.

Does any circuits from one "structure" supply or pass through any of the other "structures"?
Click to expand...
Totally separate structures, separate tenants but same owner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top