Clarify what a system is on fairgrounds.

[mopowr steve]

I am looking for clarification as to properly describe the electrical distribution on probably most if not all fairgrounds.

Since a service is the first means of disconnect from the utility (which in many cases begins/ends near the property line) and may be medium voltage. Is it correct in saying that all other fairgrounds owned transformers, distribution and panels fed from these transformers are seperately derived feeders? Not services?

 

[GoldDigger]

I would say yes.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[Smart $]

+1

 

[kwired]

If they are owned and maintained by the fairgrounds. If they are owned and maintained by the POCO, then you have multiple services on your grounds, POCO very likely has easements to their equipment on those grounds as well.

Not nearly as many medium voltage contractors out there as low voltage contractors, and to hire qualified staff to maintain the meduim voltage equipment (that typically would need little maintenance) is not cost effective compared to paying extra minimum service fees for multiple services from the POCO in most of those situations.

 

[zbang]

I am looking for clarification as to properly describe the electrical distribution on probably most if not all fairgrounds.

Poor and un-maintained . Well, IME it's rather variable.

Since a service is the first means of disconnect from the utility (which in many cases begins/ends near the property line) and may be medium voltage. Is it correct in saying that all other fairgrounds owned transformers, distribution and panels fed from these transformers are seperately derived feeders? Not services?

I'd agree, except I've seen places where there it surely looked like there were multiple services on the property, coming in from different directions (clusters of buildings at different corners of the land, that sort of thing). Since they're usually county or state land, codes don't always apply.

 

[mopowr steve]

Now I'm wondering if these secondaries from transformers should have a seperate EGC to feed panels if we're really calling them separately derived?

Does the same apply whether pole mounted or pad mounted transformers?

Maybe I'm having an epiphany since all I've seen is feeders from all these transformers have been treated as though they were services like from a poco, when in fact since these systems are fairgrounds owned and that their separately derived feeders, at least the ones I'm talking about.

 

[ActionDave]

An egc is a waste of wire. I think it is perfectly legit in a case like this to let the grounded conductor double as an egc. Before 2005 we did it all the time as long as there were no parallel paths and in this case I don't see where anybody is going to connect a water pipe or a phone line between the transformer and any of the buildings.

 

[kwired]

Now I'm wondering if these secondaries from transformers should have a seperate EGC to feed panels if we're really calling them separately derived?

Does the same apply whether pole mounted or pad mounted transformers?

Maybe I'm having an epiphany since all I've seen is feeders from all these transformers have been treated as though they were services like from a poco, when in fact since these systems are fairgrounds owned and that their separately derived feeders, at least the ones I'm talking about.

250.30(A)(1) exception 2 may allow a "system bonding jumper at both the source and the first disconnecting means shall be permitted if doing so does not establish a parallel path for the grounded conductor."

 

[Smart $]

250.30(A)(1) exception 2 may allow a "system bonding jumper at both the source and the first disconnecting means shall be permitted if doing so does not establish a parallel path for the grounded conductor."

Also see 250.30(A)(2) Exception regarding no supply-side bonding jumper.