Meter Mains

[kwired]

Hey is there a reason that out east you folks usually never use a Meter main or Meter/main combo.
Out here in the west that is basically the standard.

I think it has to do with firefighter access.

Don't you have more houses on a slab or without a basement then is typical elsewhere? Not that one still couldn't put the main panel inside, they just maybe didn't want to give up any floor space that may be required maybe as a general rule and it sort of ends up becoming the standard after a while.

Just a guess.

Meter on the outside is pretty common, and generally no POCO allows a meter inside anymore, though they probably could with smart meters these days - but they still would like access without needing someone to let them in, but still was and is common to have meter outside and service disconnect inside - usually in a basement or garage.

Why do we need basements? Years ago coal burning heating appliances were common, that was dusty and dirty enough just being in a basement. We also get deep frost in the ground in winter so water lines are buried deep and enter in the basement.

Old commercial and retail spaces almost always had basements - probably for the reasons I mentioned above. Today new spaces are on slab, I guess it is hard to do away with the basement in a house as it is a good place to put mechanical areas and storage areas - though many homes get a majority of the basement finished, as it likely cost less to do that then build additional floors above the main floor.

 

[electrofelon]

Hey is there a reason that out east you folks usually never use a Meter main or Meter/main combo.
Out here in the west that is basically the standard. .

You can pry that meter-main into my cold dead hands.....

 

[iwire]

Hey is there a reason that out east you folks usually never use a Meter main or Meter/main combo.
Out here in the west that is basically the standard.

I think it has to do with firefighter access.

Not required here so no need to add cost.

 

[jap]

True, but you will need two grounding electrode systems or a GEC out to the pole from the structures GES.

Not sure what this means.

JAP>

 

[kwired]

Not sure what this means.

JAP>

Same here. If there are two structures, each will need it's own GES.

 

[jap]

If coming from the pole top Xfmr with a 3 wire service and the Meter/Main on the house, the EGS and all of the GEC's will be at the house.
Nothing between the house and the pole for this.


JAP>

 

[iwire]

Same here. If there are two structures, each will need it's own GES.

It would be up to the AHJ if they can share a GES.

 

[iwire]

If coming from the pole top Xfmr with a 3 wire service and the Meter/Main on the house, the EGS and all of the GEC's will be at the house.
Nothing between the house and the pole for this.


JAP>

Ok we seem to have a communication breakdown so I am out of here.

 

[jap]

Ok we seem to have a communication breakdown so I am out of here.

In post #10 it sounded like you were talking about a GEC from the house to the Utility Pole.

That's what threw me.

JAP>

 

[kwired]

In post #10 it sounded like you were talking about a GEC from the house to the Utility Pole.

That's what threw me.

JAP>

I think he was. He recently mentioned sharing an electrode between two structures as well, which might be OK, but there is no requirement to bring a GEC to an electrode that is primarily associated with another structure.

Two structures just a short distance apart - I see no problem sharing same ground rod (or most likely two rods if you don't want to prove the resistance of one), or even tying a required GEC on a post to the CEE in an adjacent building instead of driving a rod - especially since the CEE likely has lower resistance. The inspector may not see it that way though - NEC doesn't really mention anything about sharing an electrode between two structures.

Put some distance between the two structures and I don't feel you gain much for what you spend in most situations trying to share an electrode, regardless of what code may allow.

 

[jap]

I think he was. He recently mentioned sharing an electrode between two structures as well, which might be OK, but there is no requirement to bring a GEC to an electrode that is primarily associated with another structure.

Two structures just a short distance apart - I see no problem sharing same ground rod (or most likely two rods if you don't want to prove the resistance of one), or even tying a required GEC on a post to the CEE in an adjacent building instead of driving a rod - especially since the CEE likely has lower resistance. The inspector may not see it that way though - NEC doesn't really mention anything about sharing an electrode between two structures.

Put some distance between the two structures and I don't feel you gain much for what you spend in most situations trying to share an electrode, regardless of what code may allow.

Which would possibly be the case here.
The new shed that will require electrical fed from the meter main on the house if that's where it goes will need a GES also and will be very close to the 2 rods driven for the Meter Main at the house.
If the ditch is still open I don't see a problem with sharing in that case.


JAP>

 

[kwired]

Which would possibly be the case here.
The new shed that will require electrical fed from the meter main on the house if that's where it goes will need a GES also and will be very close to the 2 rods driven for the Meter Main at the house.
If the ditch is still open I don't see a problem with sharing in that case.


JAP>

I agree. Will also say if each structure has a CEE - then a 4 AWG to the CEE in each structure is all that is needed - unless there is building steel or water pipe that also qualifies as an electrode.