Hi Everyone, I am dealing with a double house with two existing services and two different owners (two drops from power co. one to each side)and wondered how long 230.2 has been in the NEC ? If I up grade one of these services the power co will require me to group them on one side to meet 230.2. However property owners do not get along and will not allow the neighbors meter and disconnect on their side of the house let alone the feeder thru their basement. What do you do in situations like this ? P.S. Power co has hundreds of buildings with more than one service drop with the same characteristics and no fire wall to a multi occupancy building.
Iwire,Thank's for your reply. Double house looks like one house with two front and rear doors with a common center wall. I can't find any thing in the NEC to get around this situation,the power co and AHJ are standing strong on 230.2. Any thoughts or code refrences would be a great help. Thank's Dave
Re: 230.2 Number of Services#100722 12/17/0612:57 PM12/17/0612:57 PM
Iwire, The power co and AHJ think I need to group the services on one half of the building,and install a disconnect out side and feed thru neighbors basement to the other half of the building.Neither property owner will allow the neighbors equipment on or in their 1/2 of the building. All in all the AHJ is saying there is available space (on neighbors half) and be accessible if I set a disconnect (on neighbors half) and run feeder through neighbors basement to customers panel. I hope this clears up what I am trying to say. Thank's Dave
Re: 230.2 Number of Services#100724 12/17/0603:19 PM12/17/0603:19 PM
The situation described is one building. Building code refers to them as "multiple single family dwellings". In order to be considered 2 buildings, they would need to have a fire wall between them. i.e. block wall. Not a fire partition which would be 5/8 gypsum, etc.
As far as how to deal with it with utility and inspector, I don't know. I'd fight with the utility. Ask to talk to a supervisor, and then their supervisor. Send a registered letter and get a written response. Tell them your attorney will be fighting them. Often, I get different answers from different people in the same utility. In MA, you would have some ground to stand on with inspector as there is a provision for not increasing the magnitude of an existing violation. Separate ownership makes this situation difficult. If neither owner will cooperate, there is no way to make this completely legal. You can't group the disconnects if one party resists.
Re: 230.2 Number of Services#100725 12/17/0608:08 PM12/17/0608:08 PM
As far as service drops are concerned, the local utility rules trump the NEC. They are the "AHJ."
Just as important, there is already substantial law on the matter. The utility has right of "eminent domain;" if they order the stuff grouped together, the parties will not be allowed to "forbid" anything! Likewise, neither neighbor would have the 'right' to deny the other access to the disconnect.
Now, it's the job of the town, and the PoCo, to solve this mess. You're just the contractor. If there's a problem, it will be up to them to take the necessary steps..
Re: 230.2 Number of Services#100726 12/18/0603:11 AM12/18/0603:11 AM
I am not sure how anyone could compel owner A to have owner B's feeder in his house. It would certainly make stealing power easy tho. Can you say Kupltap? The easy, if ugly answer, is to put the metering and service equipment on the front of the house where the property lines meet.
Re: 230.2 Number of Services#100727 12/18/0608:22 AM12/18/0608:22 AM
If I own one side, (depending on how property is deeded) and I do not want the other guy's equipment on it, good luck. Much will depend on how the property is deeded. Some are "checkerboarded" while others have property line down the middle. If proprty line is down the middle, there will be a trespassing issue. The town can not "make" you do anything. I used to do a lot of work for a utility, and did a lot of work where they would pay to correct an existing situation where there was a trespassing issue. I don't believe that anyone could make the owner of one side give an easement to the other party if he were opposed.
If however, commion area were checkerboarded, one owner would probably be able to install his meter on the other side of the duplex, and pipe around the building to his side. Still might be a code violation if you can't group the 2 disconnects, but inspector might be inclined to overlook it.