Red Tagged, 225.39

[suemarkp]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Some things can be dual purpose, such as grounding and grounded conductors at the service. Multiwire circuits can be one, two, or three circuits depending on the situation. To me, the breakers in the outbuilding are where the transition occurs from feeder to branch circuit so they are dual purpose -- feeder disconnects and inside branch circuit disconnect/OCPD.

With the rules in 225, how could you possibly ever have 6 disconnects on one feeder using your interpretation? Perhaps a bunch of switched feeder taps? But those would be inside feeders too, so that wouldn't apply...

 

[suemarkp]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Originally posted by buck33k:
Mark
I should have asked sooner, but when you were red tagged, what code reference was cited?

I just looked at the tag and he wrote "no disconnect, 225.32", but was saying 225.39 during most of our discussion. I think I had him so twisted around in 225 he wasn't sure which paragraph to cite.

 

[bphgravity]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Originally posted by suemarkp:
With the rules in 225, how could you possibly ever have 6 disconnects on one feeder using your interpretation?

Suppose the separate structure is a 6 bay garage. Each bay will have 2 receptalces and one lighting outlet. You serve the garage with one feeder from the main building. At the garage you install 6 disconnects, one for each unit. From there you serve the 6 L&A panelboards in each bay.

What rating must each of the 6 discos have? See 225.39.

 

[dillon3c]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

[/QUOTE]Suppose the separate structure is a 6 bay garage. Each bay will have 2 receptalces and one lighting outlet. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Sounds like a multi-wire branch circuit to me bryan. Can I apply 225.36 *Exception and get this passed in Florida?

 

[George Stolz]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Originally posted by bphgravity:
What rating must each of the 6 discos have? See 225.39.

So, let's look at this another way.

You're basically stating that the CB's are the disconnecting means--each breaker should be rated for 60 amps, per 225.39.

So are the breakers also supposed to comply with 225.38(C)? Literally speaking, each breaker would either need to disconnect the neutral, or each breaker would need lugs for each neutral conductor it deals with.

Unless the whole can is the disconnecting means.

And add:

Think of a temp service. There are anywhere from three to five circuits on that temp. Two to four 20-amp 120V GFI circuits, and one 240V 30-amp circuit. According to 230.79, this setup would be illegal: none of these breakers are worth 60 amps.

The can and the busbars are.

[ September 05, 2005, 12:18 AM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]

 

[mdshunk]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Mark, I thought Homer cleared this up for you back in June of 2004 in this thread?

http://www.selfhelpforums.com/showthread.php?t=1419

You thought it was silly then to need a minimum of a 60 amp rated disconnect for an outbuilding, and now you get dinged on it.

3 DP breakers (15A, 15A, 40A), a SP breaker (15A)

do not make a 60 amp disconnect.

 

[suemarkp]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Perhaps Homer was right, but that thread went in a lot of circles with a lot of differing opinions. I still see a difference between Disconnecting Means and Disconnect. Perhaps inspectors can't read, or perhaps they didn't write what they meant to write.

Judges can barely agree over what the constitution says and what effect a comma has. The NEC seems impossible since its way longer than the constitution and appears to be less thought out.

I'll hash it out with the head inspector tomorrow and see what he says.

[ September 05, 2005, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: suemarkp ]

 

[dillon3c]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Excellent thread in "Self Help Forum."I'm going to need to soak on this for awhile, in understanding..

 

[normbac]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

I am sure his mentality is that the main disconnect is not within sight of the sub and therefore cannot be serviced safely due to the fact that the buss is still energized with ocpd in off position

 

[mvannevel]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Mark, I can't speak to your requirements in WA, but here in Michigan, the installation you described would be approved. Your 60 ampere feeder to your service rated panel has 60 ampere overcurrent protection. So, you've met the requirements of 225.36 and 408.16. The MLO panel is rated 125 amperes so you meet 225.39(D) as well. You have four breakers installed in the panel so you meet the allowance for not more than six circuit breakers mounted in a single enclosure to act as a disconnecting means in 225.33(A). This is a good, safe installation in my book. We approve these type installations for detached garages, pole barns, and storage sheds here on nearly a daily basis.

Article 230.80 requires that, for services where the disconnecting means consists of more than one switch or circuit breaker, the combined rating of all the switches or breakers used must not be less than the rating required in 230.79 (which are identical to the ratings required in 225.39). But, this is an outside feeder, not a service. There is no such parallel requirement in Article 225. And as such, we're not required to combine the ratings when we use the six disconnects for a separate structure.

I'd be interested in hearing what the Head Inspector had to say when you talked to him.

 

[bphgravity]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

I don't understand you guys can claim that since the panelboard is rated greater then 225.39, that meets the requirement of that section? Disconnecting means is defined in Article 100. A disconnecitng means is a device, not what the devices are connected to.

 

[suemarkp]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Disconnecting Means. A device, or group of devices, or other means by which the conductors of a circuit can be disconnected from their source of supply.

225.33(A) General. The disconnecting means for each supply permitted by 225.30 shall consist of not more than six switches or six circuit breakers mounted in a single enclosure, in a group of separate enclosures, or in or on a switchboard. There shall be no more than six disconnects per supply grouped in any one location.

Seems like it can be more than one device to me, and in the same enclosure...

 

[dillon3c]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Bryan,

I consede ,and truely admit my error, and misunderstanding in judgement.

*As I continue to post,and make these errors.I will always be big enuff to admit it Bryan..

-dillon

Added: *after reading posting in other website.At this point will be observer,in the 100% understanding..

[ September 06, 2005, 11:13 AM: Message edited by: dillon3c ]

 

[dillon3c]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Fellas,

I agree that 225.33(A) can be used,in lew of single main disconnection means @ structure.

*Its where 225.39 *Rating of Disconnect,and the last sentence. Combined 225.39(D)*not less than 60 amperes.

This is my dilemma,and my understanding.*hadn't soaked in yet.

*Homer said he had been caught up in the misunderstanding also.

I just did not pick-up on the total explanation,in thread..

any help?

[ September 06, 2005, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: dillon3c ]

 

[volt101]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Most of the load centers that I see these days(ITE, Square D, GE) have a sticker on the back of the cover that states that it is suitable as use as service entrance equipment when not more than six main disconnection means are provided and when not used as a lighting and appliance branch circuit panelboard.

I would require a main to be installed and site 110.3B

Georgestolz, I also site this on temps.

Jim

 

[mvannevel]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Originally posted by suemarkp:
Disconnecting Means. A device, or group of devices, or other means by which the conductors of a circuit can be disconnected from their source of supply.

225.33(A) General. The disconnecting means for each supply permitted by 225.30 shall consist of not more than six switches or six circuit breakers mounted in a single enclosure, in a group of separate enclosures, or in or on a switchboard. There shall be no more than six disconnects per supply grouped in any one location.

Seems like it can be more than one device to me, and in the same enclosure...

You're right Mark, it can be.

Originally posted by bphgravity:
I don't understand you guys can claim that since the panelboard is rated greater then 225.39, that meets the requirement of that section? Disconnecting means is defined in Article 100. A disconnecting means is a device, not what the devices are connected to.

The permission for this is in 225.33. The disconnecting means in this situation is Mark's four circuit breakers and the enclosure together. As I said earlier, there is no parallel requirement in 225 like there is in 230 to combine the rating of the six circuit breakers to equal or exceed the ratings required in 225.39. And in his case, even if there were, the combined ratings do exceed 60 amperes. Remember, this is a feeder not a service. And although the requirements are similar, they're not the same.

 

[suemarkp]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

I talked to the head inspector today, and he agreed that my installation is code compliant (to both NEC and the WAC). He was hung up on the requirement of 1 or 2 main breakers for a lighting and applilance panelboard. When I mentioned exception 1 of that code section (408.32 I think), it finally sunk in, and he said my (now 5) breakers in the panel may be the disconnecting means.

He also called back later to verify that the panel was labeled as "Suitable for use as Service Equipment" and that it had a statement about may be used as Service Equipment when no more than 6 breakers are installed. I said it contains both parts of that.

He was very nice, and thanked me for bringing this to their attention.

 

[suemarkp]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Originally posted by volt101:
Most of the load centers that I see these days(ITE, Square D, GE) have a sticker on the back of the cover that states that it is suitable as use as service entrance equipment when not more than six main disconnection means are provided and when not used as a lighting and appliance branch circuit panelboard.

I would require a main to be installed and site 110.3B

I don't see this a violating the instructions, it says "suitable when..." and not "unsuitable when...". I'm not using it as Service Equipment, because it is fed from a feeder. The requirements for a disconnect require that it be SUITABLE for use as service equipment. It doesn't say you have to use it as such. The reason the above quote is on the panel is because you must protect a lighting and appliance Service rated panel with one or two main breakers. They're just reading the code back to you with that statement. If it is safe enough to be used a a power panelboard with six disconnects, how can it not be safe for use a lighting and appliance use?

If it was in fact being used as Service Equipment (such as a tempory service panel), then I would demand a main in this panel or in front of it.

 

[bphgravity]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Well, I'm glad it worked out for you. To be honest, I can see it from both sides of the issue. I'm going to have to think about this one for a long while. I've got a Mark Ode seminar coming up in late October. I'll present the issue to him there. In the meanwhile, I will bring up the issue at my next IAEI meeting to see what the other jurisdictions think about this situation.

 

[mvannevel]

Re: Red Tagged, 225.39

Glad that things turned out good Mark. This really is a good installation for structures requiring a limited number of circuits. Also glad that the inspector was a reasonable sort of fellow. That's the way we're supposed to be.

Originally posted by bphgravity:
I'm going to have to think about this one for a long while.

It took me a long time too the first time I installed one of these. It doesn't seem right until you realize that you're not dealing with a service here but, instead, a feeder. If you put all of the rules together and look at the fact that you have overcurrent protection for the feeder itself, an enclosure rated at least 60 amperes and that it contains not more than 6 circuit breakers it begins to make more sense. It's not a service, and you already have overcurrent protection ahead of the panel.

Several years ago on an inspection, I asked the contractor why he always installed a main breaker in these situations. I had a heck of a time convincing him he could do it any other way. I still see contractors who install mains, either just out of habit or because they prefer to do it that way. And that's fine too. In certain situations it might actually be preferable to have a single disconnecting means in a separate structure.