Service rated automatic transfer switch

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

Well, IMO it’s far from a black and white issue.

Most of these are the kind with wire conductors connected to a backfed breaker as the main.

It’s not much of a modification to remove those conductors from one breaker, and land them on a different one.

 

[Little Bill]

Well, IMO it’s far from a black and white issue.

Most of these are the kind with wire conductors connected to a backfed breaker as the main.

It’s not much of a modification to remove those conductors from one breaker, and land them on a different one.

Aren't you leaving the meter side without a neutral by taking it off the lug? There would be nothing bonding the neutral to the can as it mounts directly to it.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

I’ll draw it up when I get a minute

 

[hillbilly1]

If I have a meter/main. I prefer to remove the bond jumper in the transferswitch, and use Polaris lugs to extend the existing feed to the panel inside, makes it safer to work on the transferswitch because it would be totally dead, but to each his own. Removing the existing breaker does give more room to splice.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

If I have a meter/main. I prefer to remove the bond jumper in the transferswitch, and use Polaris lugs to extend the existing feed to the panel inside, makes it safer to work on the transferswitch because it would be totally dead, but to each his own. Removing the existing breaker does give more room to splice.

Only works on a load side transfer though.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

Here’s my drawing of how I wire a typical panel with a backfed breaker for the main.

The last 2 or 3 I’ve done have been like this. Which is why the breaker in the ATS becomes the first point of disconnect. It’s a supply-side transfer. It’s not possible to do a load side transfer on this panel configuration

Youll have to excuse my drawing. A draftsman I ain’t.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

Well, they may aprove it, but it is not compliant to modify the meter/main. Can't you just simply take down the meter/main and just put a standard meter socket in its place?

I don’t know how many HSBs you install, but I’m wondering, are you saying that any panel configuration that has main and distribution, you would insist on a panel upgrade before you would install the transfer equipment?

And you would never use an SE-Rated switch, because you would always be on the load side of the main?

Not that there is anything wrong with that, I just don’t see that working out, real-world.

And SE-Rated ATS sell as much or more than non-SE-Rated, so I know that more than just myself is utilizing them.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

That sign is missing the word, "not" before service. I think it is supposed to say "Emergency disconnect, not service disconnect" in order to be used as the EM disconnect.

It is Generac's opinion that their service rated ATS can only be used as "Emergency Disconnect, Service Disconnect".
They have stated that it cannot be used as Emergency Disconnect, Not Service Equipment".
What this means is if you install their ATS outside at an existing installation where the service disconnect is inside, you will have to run 4 conductors between the ATS and the inside panel, move the grounding electrode conductor connection to the ATS, and separate the grounding conductors from the neutral at the inside panel.

 

[wwhitney]

It is Generac's opinion that their service rated ATS can only be used as "Emergency Disconnect, Service Disconnect".
They have stated that it cannot be used as Emergency Disconnect, Not Service Equipment".

Is that because it is labeled SOUSE? If so, they are correct under the 2023 NEC. But that 2023 NEC rule is stupid and has no technical basis. It is due to a purely linguistic collision, not any technical incompatibility.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Is that because it is labeled SOUSE? If so, they are correct under the 2023 NEC. But that 2023 NEC rule is stupid and has no technical basis. It is due to a purely linguistic collision, not any technical incompatibility.

Cheers, Wayne

No idea why why generac says that. It becomes a 110.3(B) issue, leading some customers to just use a different brand of service rated ATS that does not have this restriction.

I agree that there is no reason to prohibit the use of switches listed for use as service equipment only as the only difference between service equipment and service equipment only is the permanent bond between the enclosure and the neutral bar in the service equipment only disconnect.

 

[wwhitney]

I agree that there is no reason to prohibit the use of switches listed for use as service equipment only as the only difference between service equipment and service equipment only is the permanent bond between the enclosure and the neutral bar in the service equipment only disconnect.

It was pointed out to me that the other difference is that SOUSE equipment will be labeled as Service Disconnect from the factory. But such a label is easily covered with a field applied label saying Emergency Disconnect, Not Service Equipment.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[fjm]

It is Generac's opinion that their service rated ATS can only be used as "Emergency Disconnect, Service Disconnect".
They have stated that it cannot be used as Emergency Disconnect, Not Service Equipment".
What this means is if you install their ATS outside at an existing installation where the service disconnect is inside, you will have to run 4 conductors between the ATS and the inside panel, move the grounding electrode conductor connection to the ATS, and separate the grounding conductors from the neutral at the inside panel.

I'm up against this issue.. Do you know where I can find this opinion in writing from Generac
Thanks

 

[Birken Vogt]

Here’s my drawing of how I wire a typical panel with a backfed breaker for the main.

The last 2 or 3 I’ve done have been like this. Which is why the breaker in the ATS becomes the first point of disconnect. It’s a supply-side transfer. It’s not possible to do a load side transfer on this panel configuration

Youll have to excuse my drawing. A draftsman I ain’t.

View attachment 2569983

That is how some people used to do it around here but totally not allowed now. You cannot modify a listed service enclosure like that, among other problems.

I do like your isolated neutral though, never seen anybody do that, though they probably should have.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

That is how some people used to do it around here but totally not allowed now. You cannot modify a listed service enclosure like that, among other problems.

I do like your isolated neutral though, never seen anybody do that, though they probably should have.

Nor can I evidently. Local inspectors do not consider that a violation of 100.3(b). The Code states that it must be installed in accordance with its instructions, and there are no instructions that state that that may not be done. And that is how my local inspectors read it.

However, it’s a violation of the private regulations contained in the PG&E GreenBook, and they get fussy about it. So they will no longer approve that connection. So nearly every generator install I do now, will require a panel change out.

 

[Birken Vogt]

We almost never change the panel.

Rather we put a 70-100 amp breaker, or a 225 subfeed lug kit on the bus bars, and relocate all the branch breakers adjacent. Or use a transfer switch with integrated distribution.

 

[farmantenna]

Yes.

The Generac ones I install even come with the label already on it.

Heres the one I’m currently installing.

How do these installations ever get approved? I see photos like this on this site frequently. There in no way any entity in Massachusetts would allow that close placement of gas and electric meter. Never. But this is Massachusetts where every aspect of life is regulated, unless you're a non citizen of America.

 

[Birken Vogt]

7D41 and I are in California which normally regulates way more than Taxachusetts.

But the areas where we work are (used to be) the end of the world so the poco (who is also the gas co) used to overlook stuff like this.

They would not overlook this today and make you move that service, but they would not have been required to be involved on this job, only the local inspector.

In my area the local inspector would not really care about poco rules. Existing non compliant grandfathered and not really changed much on this job.

They know homeowners do not have unlimited funds. Also in a small county their job is not 100% safe, make enough citizens angry and it might come back to you.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

How do these installations ever get approved? I see photos like this on this site frequently. There in no way any entity in Massachusetts would allow that close placement of gas and electric meter. Never. But this is Massachusetts where every aspect of life is regulated, unless you're a non citizen of America.

Yep. As @Birken Vogt says, it's an existing service. Had I changed it, it would have to be 12" from the edge of the meter horizontally, and not above it to a height of 10'.

But the new ATS must be out of the zone.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

We almost never change the panel.

Rather we put a 70-100 amp breaker, or a 225 subfeed lug kit on the bus bars, and relocate all the branch breakers adjacent. Or use a transfer switch with integrated distribution.

That’s how I did this one.

Set a sub panel and moved it all over.

 

[jim dungar]

How do these installations ever get approved? I see photos like this on this site frequently. There in no way any entity in Massachusetts would allow that close placement of gas and electric meter. Never. But this is Massachusetts where every aspect of life is regulated, unless you're a non citizen of America.

My house, built in the 60's, had the electric meter mounted almost directly above the gas meter. About 10 years ago, the gas company added a 36" horizontal pipe to the output vent on their pressure regulator.
Of course the gas meter is still partially blocking the service LB.