230.85 flaw?

Is there some major crisis this new requirement resolves? It seems like we managed to survive for the last 100 years without an outside disconnect being required.

My personal opinion is that it should have been required to be part of the meter assembly. It should also have been required to be not resettable.
 
petersonra said:
My personal opinion is that it should have been required to be part of the meter assembly. It should also have been required to be not resettable.
Click to expand...

The NEC can't require it to be part of a meter assembly because the NEC doesn't require a meter and it would be outside the NEC's scope to do so. It could permit it as an option.
 
electrofelon said:
Ok well that is my point about the flaw. If the emergency disconnect has OCPD, then why not be exempt from the "nearest the point of entry " requirement as it serves no purpose? Perhaps 230.85 and 230.70 could be combined into more simple and logical language that doesn't result in meaningless requirements.
Click to expand...
230.85 is mostly an allowance in 1 & 2 family dwelling, (to bond or not to bond, that is the question).
Either you count the outside disconnect (that happens to also be an OCPD) and call it an "Emergency Disconnect, Service Disconnect" and then bring in separate neutrals and grounding conductor (just like any "subpanel"). (230.85(E)(1))
Or you are allowed to ignore the outside disconnect (that happens to also be an OCPD) and call it an "Emergency Disconnect, Not Service Equipment" and bring in just the Neutral conductor thru into the inside panel that is the service panel and then bonding of the N/G there. (230.85(E)(3))

230.70 is general requirement that might also apply to a dwelling unit 1 & 2 Family. 230.85 amends partially the requirement of 230.70 only related to 1 & 2 Family dwellings. Where 230.85 does not reference distances of the service conductors requirement of 230.70 would stand.
petersonra said:
Is there some major crisis this new requirement resolves? It seems like we managed to survive for the last 100 years without an outside disconnect being required.

My personal opinion is that it should have been required to be part of the meter assembly. It should also have been required to be not resettable.
Click to expand...
This section was given to address the fire personnel issue when arriving on a fire scene, unable to proceed safely until POCO arrive to disconnect power, While still making allowances for 1 & 2 family dwellings that allows for adding an "Emergency Disconnect" without having to fully upgrade the entire system.
 
petersonra said:
Is there some major crisis this new requirement resolves? It seems like we managed to survive for the last 100 years without an outside disconnect being required.

My personal opinion is that it should have been required to be part of the meter assembly. It should also have been required to be not resettable.
Click to expand...
So when the local vandal turns your power off, you can't turn it back on?
 
petersonra said:
You would need to get the power company to turn it back on.
Click to expand...
What is the reason for having it not resettable? I agree if we could start over there would be a convenience/emergency/ I just feel like turning off my power today screw you its a free country disconnect built into a meter socket. But it should be usable by anyone who wants or needs it.
 
MyCleveland said:
David
I tried looking up the UL on this item and seeing it is "Switches, Enclosed Certified for Canada".
Looked at data sheet and no mention of any SCCR, but it does state "Suitable service entrance for USA".

How can you specify or install without SCCR?
Click to expand...
The code says if it is listed for a specific use it is ok regardless of sccr
 
petersonra said:
It is an emergency disconnect. Until the emergency is resolved, it should not be turned back on.

I am thinking some kind of special key that firemen would have like elevator keys. Not something your average vandal would have.
Click to expand...
There is no restriction on who can operate it and even with the current rules in 230.85, it is often the service disconnect. If the device is also the service disconnect a special key only for first responders would not be permitted as the building occupants need to have access the the service disconnect.
 
electrofelon said:
Yeah if we are starting over and coming up with a solution for everything, I would like maximum flexibility, not being locked into any one thing. Have it so that everybody who needs it can use it, have it optionally lockable open or closed
Click to expand...
There is nothing in the current code that would prohibit the disconnect from being locked in the closed position as long as the building occupants had a key. The first responders would just use their universal key also known as bolt cutters.
 
electrofelon said:
No, the emergency disconnect is not service equipment, nor a service disconnect. The service disconnect is inside. Everything before the service disconnect is bonded to the neutral.
Click to expand...
it is still bonded to the grounded conductor just like anything else on supply side of service disconnecting means is. No point of running an EGC if you are going to bond again at the inside disconnect that just puts two grounded conductors in parallel with each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top