ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues No Main Disconnect Here?

. You are absolutely correct about the #6 connection to the ground rod. 250-94 (a), previous to the '99 code, when it was moved to 250-66. BTW, there is no such thing as the '88 NEC, but the '99 doesn't apply here.
. By the definition, SE conductors must be tapped from or spliced to the DROP. No conductors except the 350s are installed in such a manner. The conductors to the meters are tapped from the 350s, not the drop.

Does anybody else have any input about this 24 meter deal, or should I just go get that lobotomy that everyone keeps saying I need? Don & I could probably go on ad infinitum on this without resolve.




[This message has been edited by electure (edited 07-02-2001).]

I think the intent of 230-40 Exception 1, is to allow for different types of services, e.g., 120/208 3phase, 120/240 1 phase, for building with one or more occupancies. But I do admit it can be read many ways. I wonder what the purpose of saying ...to each occupancy or group of occupancies.

I think the building should have a main outside. After all the reason for the main is to let the firemen go into the building, in the event of a fire, without a risk of electrocution.

A building with common areas does not allow this without a main outside.

Does someone have a definition of occupancy as the NEC uses it?

Maybe 230-70 could be used. It says a means shall be provided to disconnect all the conductors in a BUILDING (sorry don't mean to yell) from the SE conductors. It doesn't say occupancy, it says building. I think this Section doesn't allow the situation you described.

Also in reading 230-72(c), I think that maybe this should say ...each occupant shall have access to the occupant's FEEDER disconnecting means.

Is there a way to accent a word without YELLING?

>Is there a way to accent a word without YELLING?

Yes. You may use italics or bold by inserting the UBB codes around your text as I have done.

DSpark,
Thank you, I've been wondering myself how to add emphasis to particular wording without yelling. Any of my caps have been for the purpose of emphasis only, and I hope nobody has been offended. italics?

For the conductors to be considered outside the building per 230-6(2), it must be encased in concrete or brick not less than 2" thick.
I notice that this building is reinforced block.
Our AHJs will not accept this, as the rebar should be centered in the block's cell, which puts the conduit less than 2" away from the block's face. There also is no way to guarantee the position of the conduit in the cell.
We happen to have an electrician in our co. that was born & raised on Guam. When I asked him about this install he mentioned that the difference in price between a main disco and an inspector was substantial enough to forego the disco. He said that some of their building officials are already in prison.

electure,
The service conduits run under the building and turn up in the wall with the service dicconnect. Under the building should be outside if the building has a concrete floor and up a wall to the service equipment would be "neareast the point of entrance".
Don

Don, I agree with you 100% about the nearest point of entrance. I was only referring to the inspector's comment that all of the conductors were outside the building.
I've really been looking hard for an example of more than 6 meters per weatherhead w/o a main. We have literally tens of thousands of overhead multimeter installations in my area, and as of yet I can't find any, honest.

[This message has been edited by electure (edited 07-08-2001).]

Don,
Please provide us with an example of 230-40's exception as you interpret it. Maybe it's only regional?
Show us an example, please.