Service Disconnecting Means - Outside

[volt102]

i found out that in 2002 the nec tried to put in a distance on this and it was turned down. so there is no set distance.

Is it that there was no set distance because it can be over 100' away, or is there no set distance so that it can only be 0' away?

I read 230 and see that a disconnect is required for the service. I read 225 and see that outside feeders require a disconnect at the building. I see 225 and 230 applying generally. This is not a case of chapter 5 modifying chapter 2....

I read Part II of the article that Jeff wrote first. I contacted him to get Part I. That article was then brought up to the IAEI meeting for a little debate. Unfortantely Jeff was not in attendance that night.

Just my 2 cents....

 

[don_resqcapt19]

There were a number of proposals on this issue for the 2002 code cycle. You can read the proposals, comments and the draft for the 2002 code here.
There was a proposal that was accepted in the ROP, but did not make it into the code. I didn't have time to take a look at the ROC.

 

[al]

Fred
You live up there in the boonies, so I can understand how you do not understand...:grin:


Art 225 is Outside Branch Circuits and Feeder.

If the service disconnect is far enough away from the building, and on the same property, then the conductors on the loadside of the service disconnect are considered either feeder or branch circuit conductors, and Art 225 would apply.

So...how far is too far or how close is close enough???

Pierre, look at 225.1 Scope: "This article covers ........feeders run on or between buildings, structures, or poles .........

Using this scope, any service not mounted on the subject building is a structure and therefore we have a feeder "between......structures".

This leads to 225.32 Location, which specifies "nearest the point of entrance", leading back to a jugement call.

It also seems that the distance may be different depending on if the feeder is a house, or 480v bus duct, or cable bus, or whatever.

 

[M. D.]

Hows about posting a link to the article,.. ?

 

[M. D.]

I'm not sure if it is the same article ,.. but it seems reasonable to me .


http://www.necplus.org:80/Features/Pages/ServiceDisconnectingMeansI.aspx?sso=0

According to this action by CMP 4, the readily accessible location for a service disconnecting means installed on the outside of a building or structure is specific to a particular service installation and is subject to the approval of the authority having jurisdiction.

The CMP action and statement provides latitude for an outside free-standing service disconnecting means without the need for an additional feeder disconnecting means on or in the building. If the distance between the outside service disconnecting means and the building or structure supplied is deemed to be excessive (using some of the issues identified in the CMP statement as the basis for such a determination), the service disconnecting means ends up being considered as remote from the building or structure supplied, the conductors supplied from the load side of the service disconnecting means to the building or structure supplied are outside feeder conductors, and the disconnecting means requirements for outside feeders and branch circuits contained in 225.32 and 225.52 (for installations rated over 600 volts) are applicable.

The function of the requirement is to have a readily accessible means to disconnect the premises wiring from the service conductors at the building or structure served. If the separation between the building or structure and its service disconnecting means becomes excessive to the point that its location is not clearly evident (particularly to emergency responders), the intent of this requirement is not being fulfilled.