Separate Building off Service Conductors

[Little Bill]

I know that at a dwelling you could run SE conductors to a separate building without having a disconnect on the main building.

What I'm questioning myself on is this. If it is not a dwelling, and you run SE conductors to a separate building, you have to have a disconnect for the separate building at the main building. My confusion is, do you also have to have a disconnect for the main building on the outside in order to meet the requirements for grouping the disconnects?

Or can the disconnect for the main building be inside at the panel and only the separate building needs the disconnect outside at the main building.

Maybe this will clarify what I'm asking in case I didn't word the question right.
There is currently a building undergoing a remodel and they want to upgrade their service from 200A to 400A.
They want to come off the meter with two sets of SE conductors.
One set to a 200A panel in the main building and the other to another 200A panel in a separate building.

How does this need to be done?

 

[hurk27]

You know Bill, I have never understood why 230.40 Exception 3 even stated of single family dwelling, as in many places it was common for a primary metered system at the street, and service entrance conductors would run from this pole to several structures on the property, the only disconnect would be the ones required at each building, but without exception 3 being allowed for other then dwellings, I don't see anything that would allow it, unless I'm missing something?

 

[Little Bill]

You know Bill, I have never understood why 230.40 Exception 3 even stated of single family dwelling, as in many places it was common for a primary metered system at the street, and service entrance conductors would run from this pole to several structures on the property, the only disconnect would be the ones required at each building, but without exception 3 being allowed for other then dwellings, I don't see anything that would allow it, unless I'm missing something?

So, is two disconnects needed at the main building (outside) or just the one for the separate building?

 

[Little Bill]

Bump

 

[Smart $]

So, is two disconnects needed at the main building (outside) or just the one for the separate building?

Overlooking possible POCO or local requirements, two is likely the most cost effective. One could be the inside 200A main building panel with a 200A disconnect for the other building right beside it.

 

[Little Bill]

Overlooking possible POCO or local requirements, two is likely the most cost effective. One could be the inside 200A main building panel with a 200A disconnect for the other building right beside it.

So, simply put, either two inside (grouped)?
Or two outside (grouped) plus the main breaker of the panel in the main building?

 

[texie]

So, simply put, either two inside (grouped)?
Or two outside (grouped) plus the main breaker of the panel in the main building?

You can do it with 2 just inside (assuming your AHJ allows the service disconnect inside)or 2 outside. The run to the outbuilding becomes a feeder and will need an EGC and another disco. at the outbuilding. If do it the way you proposed in your OP you could have the meter on the house and a service disconnect for the house. Then run from the meter to the out building as service conductors (no EGC) and put another service disconnect there at the outbuilding. No service grouping in this case is required as they are separate buildings. While this is NEC compliant, be warned that the POCO might not buy it as many want all disconnects next to the meter.

 

[hurk27]

You can do it with 2 just inside (assuming your AHJ allows the service disconnect inside)or 2 outside. The run to the outbuilding becomes a feeder and will need an EGC and another disco. at the outbuilding. If do it the way you proposed in your OP you could have the meter on the house and a service disconnect for the house. Then run from the meter to the out building as service conductors (no EGC) and put another service disconnect there at the outbuilding. No service grouping in this case is required as they are separate buildings. While this is NEC compliant, be warned that the POCO might not buy it as many want all disconnects next to the meter.

You must not have read the OP?

This is not a dwelling and the exception #3 to 230.40 doesn't apply, which I think is wrong as why should it make a differance if it is a dwelling or not, but code is code:rant:

 

[texie]

You must not have read the OP?

This is not a dwelling and the exception #3 to 230.40 doesn't apply, which I think is wrong as why should it make a differance if it is a dwelling or not, but code is code:rant:

Oops!:weeping:

 

[Little Bill]

You must not have read the OP?

This is not a dwelling and the exception #3 to 230.40 doesn't apply, which I think is wrong as why should it make a differance if it is a dwelling or not, but code is code:rant:

Oops!:weeping:

Now that we're clear that this isn't a dweling, looks like I need to put two disconnects off the meter at the main building, then run to each panel from the two disconnects.

That sound right?

 

[Smart $]

Now that we're clear that this isn't a dweling, looks like I need to put two disconnects off the meter at the main building, then run to each panel from the two disconnects.

That sound right?

Yes.

There are other configurations that would be code compliant, but likely not as cost effective. And on that note, the 200A panel at the main building can be MLO. Using an MCB panel is just a design consideration.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I don't understand why you can't come off the load side of the meter twice. One into the main building and the other side feed the second building. Why would a disconnect be needed at the first building?

 

[Smart $]

I don't understand why you can't come off the load side of the meter twice. One into the main building and the other side feed the second building. Why would a disconnect be needed at the first building?

You'd have two service disconnects not grouped.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

You'd have two service disconnects not grouped.

Oh I understand the NEC rule. I don't understand why there is no exception for this. I don't see any reason that a disconnect needs to be installed at the main structure.

 

[mjf]

Besides the convenience factor of being able to power down the 2 buildings independently, would it be code compliant to come off the meter into a single disconnect that feeds/disconnects both buildings simutaneously?

 

[Smart $]

Besides the convenience factor of being able to power down the 2 buildings independently, would it be code compliant to come off the meter into a single disconnect that feeds/disconnects both buildings simutaneously?

Yes, provided feeder ampacity and tap rules are met.

 

[Little Bill]

Yes, provided feeder ampacity and tap rules are met.

Thanks for the replies!

As has been said, I'll probably need to meet with the POCO engineer to make sure what they want. Especially since the service is being upped to 400A. They may even require underground. I haven't worked with this POCO before, but I do know they have some different requirements then the others I deal with.