Can I run 2 panels off the same main breaker? Or?

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JohnDS

Senior Member
Location
Suffolk, Long Island
Occupation
Electrician
I have a 200 amp service. The main panel is on the complete opposite side of the basement then where the meter is and there is also a main disconnect outside as well. Recently I had installed an additional 200 amp panel for an apartment. Yes 100 amp or 125 amp would have been fine, but the cost wasn't much more. The kicker is, the apartment panel is right near the meter wall.

Initially I was going to redo the whole service into a 400 amp with two 200 amp meters that would feed each panel. Unfortunately, the multiposition meter I need is not easy to obtain nowadays, so I plan to just temporarily power the apartment panel from my main panel.

Now if you can picture this, the main feed for my main panel comes through the exterior wall from the meter and passes right above the apartment panel and all the way across the basement. It just seems redundant to have to buy a new piece of SER and now go from the main panel all the way back the other way to feed this apartment panel.

So my question: Can't I just tap off the outside 200 amp disconnect with an additional 7ft piece of SEU, run it to the apartment panel and be done with it? I mean I know 2 sets of 2/O copper will not fit inside the 200 amp breaker load terminals, but don't they have some sort of 3way lugs to accomplish this? Or can't I just tap off the SER right above and run a few feet of SER right down to the apartment panel? Really I'd rather tap off the outside disconnect because once I close up the walls in the apartment, the feed is already poked outside for when I get to upgrading to 400 amps.

I know this is a ridiculous idea, but it would really hold me over until I get the service situated. I don't see how this is any more unsafe than the way it is now because everything will still be fused at 200 amps with the appropriate sized feeders.

Thank you for your time.
 
Seems to me that all you're doing is creating an additional set of service conductors. Not much different than if you had a 400 amp meter and two 200 amp panels downstream.
 
I think what you have described is what some services with a trough do. So I agree with Pete, seems okay. As long as the load calulations are up to par.
 
petersonra said:
Seems to me that all you're doing is creating an additional set of service conductors. Not much different than if you had a 400 amp meter and two 200 amp panels downstream.
Click to expand...
Buck Parrish said:
I think what you have described is what some services with a trough do. So I agree with Pete, seems okay. As long as the load calulations are up to par.
Click to expand...

So with disturbing this service as little as possible, what would be the best course of action for now? Should I tap SEU right out the bottom of the meter from the same load lugs as the main panel and directly feed the apartment panel(has its own main breaker)? Or should I just come out of the load side of this disconnect somehow?

*By the way, that's just a coaxial pull box there and has nothing to do with the service.
 

Attachments

  • 20220916_153718.jpg
    20220916_153718.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 14
You won't be able to use 2/0 you will need to use a 200 amp conductor
 
wwhitney said:
Why? It sounds like there will be (2) dwelling units, each one served by a 200A feeder. So each of those feeders would get to use the 83% rule.

Cheers, Wayne
Click to expand...
Maybe but doubtful. Just for fun tell me how the bill will be divided if there are in fact separate dwellings. I guess it's possible that one occupant will be happy to pay for the others usage.
 
roger said:
Maybe but doubtful. Just for fun tell me how the bill will be divided if there are in fact separate dwellings. I guess it's possible that one occupant will be happy to pay for the others usage.
Click to expand...
As you said, it may not need to be, e.g. the apartment could be an in-law unit.

Anyway, if there are two separate dwelling units on one service, then at the point their supplies diverge, the feeders for each individual dwelling unit can each use the 83% rule.

Cheers, Wayne
 
wwhitney said:
As you said, it may not need to be, e.g. the apartment could be an in-law unit.
Click to expand...
Which is not a separate dwelling, it is a basically separate room maybe with a separate entrance but not a separate dwelling, even if it has a kitchen.
 
roger said:
You won't be able to use 2/0 you will need to use a 200 amp conductor
Click to expand...
Am I missing something? Is 2/O copper not a 200 amp conductor? That's all that is used for 200 amp services around here.

roger said:
Maybe but doubtful. Just for fun tell me how the bill will be divided if there are in fact separate dwellings. I guess it's possible that one occupant will be happy to pay for the others usage.
Click to expand...

This is a temporary setup, it's not intended to have the tenant pay for their own electric until the multi position meter is available and installed. For now, electric is included in the rent if it's being done this way.

So with disturbing this service as little as possible, what would be the best course of action for now? Should I tap SEU right out the bottom of the meter from the same load lugs as the main panel and directly feed the apartment panel(has its own main breaker)? Or should I just come out of the load side of this disconnect somehow?
 
You can not use the reduction unless the feeder serves the whole load of the dwelling as in singular.
 
JohnDS said:
So with disturbing this service as little as possible, what would be the best course of action for now? Should I tap SEU right out the bottom of the meter from the same load lugs as the main panel and directly feed the apartment panel(has its own main breaker)? Or should I just come out of the load side of this disconnect somehow?

*By the way, that's just a coaxial pull box there and has nothing to do with the service.
Click to expand...
Remove the disconnect or take the guts out and use it as a j-box for both the apartment and the house.. Make that a "gutter' or j-box set two disconnects beside it. (y)
Don't mess with the meter, unless your in Indiana. Its common to see three or four conduits coming out of a meter base in rual Indiana, no disconnects any where in sight.:oops:
 
Last edited:
roger said:
Which is not a separate dwelling, it is a basically separate room maybe with a separate entrance but not a separate dwelling, even if it has a kitchen.
Click to expand...
I'd say an attached unit with a separate outdoor entrance, and with "permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation" is a separate dwelling. And I'd call that an in-law unit or ADU, assuming it's smaller than the main unit.

Cheers, Wayne
 
roger said:
Maybe but doubtful. Just for fun tell me how the bill will be divided if there are in fact separate dwellings. I guess it's possible that one occupant will be happy to pay for the others usage.
Click to expand...
Billing doesn't matter to NEC that is a POCO issue, the fact it is supplying two separate dwelling units is all that matters in being able to use the 83% rule.
 
wwhitney said:
I'd say an attached unit with a separate outdoor entrance, and with "permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation" is a separate dwelling. And I'd call that an in-law unit or ADU.

Cheers, Wayne
Click to expand...
And unless you can show me you are the governing agency that makes this decision I would tell you to go pound sand.
 
roger said:
And unless you can show me you are the governing agency that makes this decision I would tell you to go pound sand.
Click to expand...
Here's the definition from the NEC which controls the use of (2020) 310.12:

"Dwelling Unit. A single unit, providing complete and independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation."

Would you explain how it's possible to interpret an ADU as other than a second dwelling unit? I'm not seeing it.

Cheers, Wayne
 
roger said:
Which is not a separate dwelling, it is a basically separate room maybe with a separate entrance but not a separate dwelling, even if it has a kitchen.
Click to expand...
Unless you know something OP hadn't posted, we are assuming it does meet art 100 definition of a dwelling, on it's own. If it would have to share say a kitchen or a bathroom with the main unit, then it doesn't fit the definition.
 
kwired said:
Billing doesn't matter to NEC that is a POCO issue, the fact it is supplying two separate dwelling units is all that matters in being able to use the 83% rule.
Click to expand...
You missed the point, how many "main feeders" can you have from one service?
 
roger said:
You missed the point, how many "main feeders" can you have from one service?
Click to expand...
What do you mean by service? If you mean "a set of conductors that lands on a service disconnect" then the arrangement in the OP will be two services, each supply one dwelling unit. If you mean "service conductors, underground" or "service conductors, overhead" then the arrangement in the OP would be two main feeders for two different dwelling units on one service.

Cheers, Wayne
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top