• We will be performing upgrades on the forums and server over the weekend. The forums may be unavailable multiple times for up to an hour each. Thank you for your patience and understanding as we work to make the forums even better.

Can someone please answer this for me once and for all about the emergency disconnects

Merry Christmas
Status
Not open for further replies.

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
I thought the original intent was to have outside place for emergency services (like firefighters) to be able to disconnect electrical service from the dwelling?

Seems they are making this a lot more complex than it needs to be to meet that original intention. IMO a simple button on exterior to operate a shunt trip main should be an allowable option to meet this intent, but CMP's like to complicate things from the start with certain changes, then figure out all the potential misunderstandings, make a change or two the next cycle and then repeat again in the third cycle for many topics that have come up in more recent editions.
A serious, although hypothetical problem with that is the following scenario:
1. The POCO power is off (outage)
2. A need arises to safely disconnect the building.
3. Without power, the shunt trip has no effect.
4. POCO power is restored.
5. OUCH

And please do not try to tell me that if POCO is currently off, there is no need to disconnect.
 

jaggedben

Senior Member
Location
Northern California
Occupation
Solar and Energy Storage Installer
The scope of 230 permits it to specify where the service disconnect is located.
But there's no reason for 230 to prohibit the service disconnect for a feeder-supplied dwelling to be more than 50ft away. It's just a mistake.

You have plenty of time to work up a Public Input for the 2029 code to fix this perceived problem...they will be due in September of 2026.
I sure hope they get it right in the 2026 code.
 

shortcircuit2

Senior Member
Location
South of Bawstin
The code making panel has come to realize that the rule in 230.85 can be difficult to deal with and is confusing.
230.85 will be removed from the 2026 code and new language in 230.70(A)(2) will simply require that the service disconnect for one and two-family dwellings be outside.

Note that this also clears up the question of how far the service disconnect can be from the dwelling by requiring it within sight of the dwelling.
The language is 110.29 tells us that within in sight is no more than 50' from the dwelling.
(this is the first draft language, but it appears very likely this will be in the 2026 code.)
And in 2026 - In Sight From or "within sight" will be removed from article 100 definitions and remain only in 110.29 with added NEW language regarding within sight of a building or structure...as now within sight is equipment to equipment. First Draft
 

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
Silly to follow the listing of equipment? If we disregard the listing here, can we disregard the listing of all equipment?

It might be a hard line, but IMO it is the right one and UL would agree.
If it's listed as only for use as service equipment then the neutral is factory bonded. If you use it as Emergency Disconnect, Not Service Equipment the neutral is bonded. So it may violate the actual wording but electrically there is no difference therefore it's IMO silly.
 

jaggedben

Senior Member
Location
Northern California
Occupation
Solar and Energy Storage Installer
And in 2026 - In Sight From or "within sight" will be removed from article 100 definitions and remain only in 110.29 with added NEW language regarding within sight of a building or structure...as now within sight is equipment to equipment. First Draft
What? So the various uses of 'within sight' throughout different articles will be left hanging undefined?
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
What? So the various uses of 'within sight' throughout different articles will be left hanging undefined?
It is found in 110.29. The correlating committee has flagged that definition as containing requirements, and definitions are not permitted to have requirements. 110;29 was added in the 2023 code and will be expanded with additional wording to include buildings and structures in the 2026 code .
For all references to "within sight" you will refer to 110.29 in the 2026 code, much like you refer to 110.25 for lockable disconnects. It is a general requirement and belongs in Article 110.
110.29 In Sight From (Within Sight From, Within Sight).
Where this code specifies that one equipment shall be “in sight from,” “within sight from,” or “within sight of” a building or structure or other equipment, the specified equipment shall be visible and not more than 15 m (50 ft) from the building, structure, or other equipment.
That is from the first draft report and since the only PC was to delete this and return it to Article 100, that is likely to be the 2026 language.
 

jaggedben

Senior Member
Location
Northern California
Occupation
Solar and Energy Storage Installer
Ok but it belongs in article 100. And 110.29 is unnecessary.

IMO it should also be alphabetized under 'Within Sight' as this phrase is used more often than 'in sight of'.
 
Came to realize?? It was obvious from the start.
And the number of times this kind of thing happens is completely unacceptable. And It's not like it's usually just subtle grammatical issues like location of a comma or obscure crazy scenarios or interpretations that someone points out that never occurred to me - many times I read something they publish and am like "Huh?!?!". They really need some sort of language and wording committee.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Ok but it belongs in article 100. And 110.29 is unnecessary.

IMO it should also be alphabetized under 'Within Sight' as this phrase is used more often than 'in sight of'.
There is a public comment that says that, but it is very unlikely within sight will ever be returned to Article 100.
 

Fred B

Senior Member
Location
Upstate, NY
Occupation
Electrician
Now Ive seen that you can use SEU for the entire install so,
Most Municipalities I've dealt with have the understanding that wording is limited to when you are updating equipment but not the wiring or service size. If either applies then it is traditional thought of SEU to first disconnect then SER to panel. Also new construction it is also SEU to SER.
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
Occupation
EC
The intent is that there are no energized conductors inside the structure when you open the emergency disconnect. An exterior button that operates a switch or breaker inside the structure does not accomplish that. The worst case for the first responders is energized service conductors inside the building and the external disconnect eliminates those.
Makes sense, until you consider it is only required to have the outside disconnect on dwellings.

There is no such thing as fires or other emergencies where power may be desired to be disconnected in non dwellings?
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
Occupation
EC
A serious, although hypothetical problem with that is the following scenario:
1. The POCO power is off (outage)
2. A need arises to safely disconnect the building.
3. Without power, the shunt trip has no effect.
4. POCO power is restored.
5. OUCH

And please do not try to tell me that if POCO is currently off, there is no need to disconnect.
How often is power already off (from grid side of things) when fire department arrives? Maybe after a storm or other wide area disaster situation but that's about it.
 

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
Most Municipalities I've dealt with have the understanding that wording is limited to when you are updating equipment but not the wiring or service size. If either applies then it is traditional thought of SEU to first disconnect then SER to panel. Also new construction it is also SEU to SER.
Even on a new installation the NEC would permit SEU all the way to the panel. So meter -SEU to EM disconnect-SEU to panel. Is there a local amendment that would require the SER in the run?
 

Buff3003

New User
Location
Beaumont Texas
Occupation
Texas licensed Electrician
Ever since the 2020 code update I have always done residentrial services upgrades as followed.
  • SEU from underground or from a service drop in the meter.
  • From the meter's load side SEU leaves and enters a 200Amp disconnect like these .
  • Then it converts to SER to the panel inside the house
  • All grounds from the GEC are ran to the disconnect and bonded together with the grounded neutral conductors.
  • All grounds and neutrals are separated for the inside panel.
Now Ive seen that you can use SEU for the entire install so,
  • SEU to meter
  • SEU to disconnect
  • Instead of converting to SER on the load side of the disconnect it stays as SEU
  • SEU into the panel
  • The disconnect can is bonded to the grounded neutral conductors with those little ground conductor that turn horizontal and connect to the ground bar.
  • The panel inside get all the neutrals and grounds bonded together along with the gas and water EGCs and the GEC
  • The disconnect gets labeled "EMERGENCY DISCONNECT"
What is right, wrong, why is it OK to do the later install just because you change the label to emergency disconnect instead of service disconnect?

Why is it OK to do the later install if the grounds need to be terminated at the first means of disconnect?

Does labeling the disconnect "EMERGENCY DISCONNECT" create a work around?
It sounds like you're seeking clarification on the requirements for emergency disconnects versus service disconnects in electrical installations, particularly in light of code updates and best practices. Here's a breakdown of your questions and some insights that might help:

1. **Service vs. Emergency Disconnect:**
- A **service disconnect** is essentially the main disconnect for the electrical service. It is typically located at or near the meter and is used to quickly disconnect power to the entire service.
- An **emergency disconnect** is designed to allow first responders to disconnect power in case of emergency situations, often located outside of or near the building.

2. **Use of SEU vs. SER:**
- Using **SEU (Service Entrance Cable)** is acceptable for the entire run from the meter to the panel if it is appropriately rated for the installation. SEU is typically used when it's necessary to have a weatherproof cable that can be run outside.
- **SER (Service Entrance Multi-Conductors)** may be used inside the building but can be less convenient in some installations.

3. **Grounding and Bonding:**
- Grounds should be properly terminated at the first means of disconnect. If using SEU, you would normally need to ensure that the grounding electrode conductor (GEC) is appropriately bonded at the disconnect. This is crucial for safety and to meet code requirements.
- If all grounds and neutrals are separated in the panel, that's also a standard practice for maintaining safety and avoiding ground loops in a residential installation.

4. **Labeling and Code Compliance:**
- Labeling a disconnect as "EMERGENCY DISCONNECT" does not change the requirements for how the system is grounded and bonded. It should still comply with grounding and bonding requirements as established by the National Electrical Code (NEC) and local amendments to it.
- The ability to use SEU throughout versus converting to SER could depend on various factors like the specific installation scenario, local code interpretations, and manufacturer guidelines.

### Summary:
It's essential to adhere to the NEC and any local regulations when determining whether to use SEU or SER, how to label your disconnects, and how grounding and bonding should be handled. If you're unsure about specific local code requirements or best practices, it might be beneficial to consult with a local inspector or an electrical code expert. Maintaining safety and compliance is the priority in any electrical installation.
 
It sounds like you're seeking clarification on the requirements for emergency disconnects versus service disconnects in electrical installations, particularly in light of code updates and best practices. Here's a breakdown of your questions and some insights that might help:

1. **Service vs. Emergency Disconnect:**
- A **service disconnect** is essentially the main disconnect for the electrical service. It is typically located at or near the meter and is used to quickly disconnect power to the entire service.
- An **emergency disconnect** is designed to allow first responders to disconnect power in case of emergency situations, often located outside of or near the building.

2. **Use of SEU vs. SER:**
- Using **SEU (Service Entrance Cable)** is acceptable for the entire run from the meter to the panel if it is appropriately rated for the installation. SEU is typically used when it's necessary to have a weatherproof cable that can be run outside.
- **SER (Service Entrance Multi-Conductors)** may be used inside the building but can be less convenient in some installations.

3. **Grounding and Bonding:**
- Grounds should be properly terminated at the first means of disconnect. If using SEU, you would normally need to ensure that the grounding electrode conductor (GEC) is appropriately bonded at the disconnect. This is crucial for safety and to meet code requirements.
- If all grounds and neutrals are separated in the panel, that's also a standard practice for maintaining safety and avoiding ground loops in a residential installation.

4. **Labeling and Code Compliance:**
- Labeling a disconnect as "EMERGENCY DISCONNECT" does not change the requirements for how the system is grounded and bonded. It should still comply with grounding and bonding requirements as established by the National Electrical Code (NEC) and local amendments to it.
- The ability to use SEU throughout versus converting to SER could depend on various factors like the specific installation scenario, local code interpretations, and manufacturer guidelines.

### Summary:
It's essential to adhere to the NEC and any local regulations when determining whether to use SEU or SER, how to label your disconnects, and how grounding and bonding should be handled. If you're unsure about specific local code requirements or best practices, it might be beneficial to consult with a local inspector or an electrical code expert. Maintaining safety and compliance is the priority in any electrical installation.

Here we go with the AI responses again with incorrect information :rolleyes:
 

hornetd

Senior Member
Location
Maryland
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician, Retired
But there's no reason for 230 to prohibit the service disconnect for a feeder-supplied dwelling to be more than 50ft away. It's just a mistake.
What is it that makes it a mistake in your eyes. It wouldn't be because you want the feeder breaker in service equipment further away would it. How many feet would you want the code to allow the Feeder Breaker to be from the supplied single family home? Feeder supplied structures have needed a building disconnect for decades now. The change to in sight of would allow the fire marshal to require it to be off the building so that the firefighters can access it without exposing themselves to flame impingement or a backdraft explosion. The idea is to minimize the firefighters needless exposure to injurious of fatal events. You have made it clear that you want the feeder breaker at the Service Equipment 100 feet of more from the fire involved structure to be code acceptable to reduce your costs. You refuse to see the value of firefighters lives as possibly more important to public interest than the cost of a building disconnect.

Tom Horne
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Makes sense, until you consider it is only required to have the outside disconnect on dwellings.

There is no such thing as fires or other emergencies where power may be desired to be disconnected in non dwellings?
Baby steps in changing a major code rule...give it time.

However, I expect if it is expanded to all occupancies, there will still be energized conductors in the building as I expect if this happens, you will be permitted to use a remote switch to shunt trip breakers for commercial and industrial occupancies.
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
Occupation
EC
Ever since the 2020 code update I have always done residentrial services upgrades as followed.
  • SEU from underground or from a service drop in the meter.
  • From the meter's load side SEU leaves and enters a 200Amp disconnect like these

  • 1729468934949.png
  • Then it converts to SER to the panel inside the house
  • All grounds from the GEC are ran to the disconnect and bonded together with the grounded neutral conductors.
  • All grounds and neutrals are separated for the inside panel.
Now Ive seen that you can use SEU for the entire install so,
  • SEU to meter
  • SEU to disconnect
  • Instead of converting to SER on the load side of the disconnect it stays as SEU
  • SEU into the panel
  • The disconnect can is bonded to the grounded neutral conductors with those little ground conductor that turn horizontal and connect to the ground bar.
  • The panel inside get all the neutrals and grounds bonded together along with the gas and water EGCs and the GEC
  • The disconnect gets labeled "EMERGENCY DISCONNECT"
What is right, wrong, why is it OK to do the later install just because you change the label to emergency disconnect instead of service disconnect?

Why is it OK to do the later install if the grounds need to be terminated at the first means of disconnect?

Does labeling the disconnect "EMERGENCY DISCONNECT" create a work around?
Just a FYI, that particular breaker enclosure is no longer rated suitable for use as service equipment. I think the main reason is they do not make a line barrier that fits it. Otherwise it is still the same thing that used to be rated for use as service equipment. One would think the ones that fit the same breaker in a load center would work but they do not fit without modifications.

Some other Square D single breaker enclosures that used to be rated for service entrance are no longer rated for it, basically ever since 2020 NEC came out. Like the Q22200xxx series enclosures and the QO2100Nxxx, QO2125Nxx and QO3100Nxxx series enclosures. Also guessing because of no line barrier being made for them. There is ones that takes Q frame breakers that is suitable for service entrance use that have similar catalog numbers as the old but have "MRBE" at the end of the catalog number. Not certain just what the differences are, they include line barriers and emergency disconnect and service disconnect labels according to the catalog - appears to only be available in the N3R version as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top