Why not just go solar and then neither one would have to pay for it.
If the pump costs $15/month to operate on average (probably not even this much), how long to break-even on the conversion?
Why not just go solar and then neither one would have to pay for it.
If the pump costs $15/month to operate on average (probably not even this much), how long to break-even on the conversion?
2008 NEC 225.30 said:Where more than one building or other structure is on the same property and under single management, each additional building or other structure that is served by a branch circuit or feeder on the load side of the service disconnecting means shall be supplied by only one feeder or branch circuit . .
If someone drilled, sunk or otherwise created the well IMO it is a structure per the NEC.![]()
To begin with, looking at just 210.25(B), 210.25(B) doesn't apply because of the list of "a two-family dwelling, a multi-family dwelling or a multi-occupancy building". There is nothing, that I read, in 210.25(B) that also includes a stand alone single dwelling unit.would 210.25 apply?
I feel compelled to inquire about the situation in the opening post (OP).
As the OP presents the situation, the parties involved seem to be exhibiting all the symptoms of the better side of human nature. Using the Code to alter the very process (the shared operation of the well) that results in a living example of cooperative behaviour in a small group of individuals, seems like getting a bad mark for good behaviour.![]()
This is exactly the case -- everyone appears content with the arrangement and is not interested in changing it. However, there is some new construction that will likely result in an inspection of the well. If it's an arguably legal setup, then there should not be a problem and everyone will be happy. On the other hand, if it's not then it's better to find an acceptable alternative solution sooner rather than later.
Jet,I dont remember the code section but running 2 services in the same structure is . . .
Jet,
Take a moment and read the first two pages of this thread.![]()
I have already read and cant believe some are approving of this set up , do they realize a property owner has two hot wires coming into his property that can not be turned off with out going into someone elses house if they are not home. What few double knife switches Ive seen had exposed hot parts , who will get sued if someone gets zapped ? What if the owner wants water himself ? they said when gone they turn both flip the breaker and turn of the valve ?
I feel compelled to inquire about the situation in the opening post (OP).
As the OP presents the situation, the parties involved seem to be exhibiting all the symptoms of the better side of human nature. Using the Code to alter the very process (the shared operation of the well) that results in a living example of cooperative behaviour in a small group of individuals, seems like getting a bad mark for good behaviour.![]()
Look at this from a different direction, it is no different than having a back up generator with a manual transfer switch, it's just that the other homeowner is the generator. I have used this setup, except automatic, using an alternating relay and a motor reversing contactor for a customer that shared a well full time. Many large airports have two utility feeds to one building feeding the same gear and load.
I dont remember the code section but running 2 services in the same structure is a violation except in extreme cases and under certain conditions like when a building is so long it gets a voltage drop at other end. There is surely a pump house of some kind to protect the knife switch even if a submerged pump there are controll boxes to mount. I can tell you if power co gets wind of it they will have to put a service from poco on the well in the owner of property's name. Its a case of people trying to avoid the minimum poco charge by making illegal connections
I have already read and cant believe some are approving of this set up , do they realize a property owner has two hot wires coming into his property that can not be turned off with out going into someone elses house if they are not home. What few double knife switches Ive seen had exposed hot parts , who will get sued if someone gets zapped ? What if the owner wants water himself ? they said when gone they turn both flip the breaker and turn of the valve ?
Exactly, our POCO no longer will set meters for residental wells, The meter readers have a hard time getting to a lot of them due to the terrain, and the payoff of having to run lines and a transformer has a negative payoff, even with a minimum billing rate.B. They could still have a well and not power it from electric utility, why do you think the POCO would get involved, especially over $15-20 per month, they will have more expense in this service than income over the life of the equipment.