Disconnect location

Originally Posted By: mpatton
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



IRC 2003


E3604.7 Feeder and branch-circuit conductors.


Feeder and branch-circuit conductors shall be protected by over current protective devices connected at the point the conductors receive their supply.


![icon_biggrin.gif](upload://iKNGSw3qcRIEmXySa8gItY6Gczg.gif)


--
Michael Patton
AA Home Inspection
Serving Northern KY & Greater Cincinnati OH

AA@AAHomeInspection.net
www.AAHomeInspection.net

Originally Posted By: rmoore
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



jmyers wrote:


The disconnect for the sub panel is not required by the codes to be located at the main service panel, at least to my knowledge. I believe it is safer and with the low cost of double pole breakers, rather inexpensive.

For instance, if you have a main lug panel which already follows the six breaker, switch rule and has six breakers, switches already in use to disconnect the power, it would be illegal to install another breaker or switch since you have already reached the limit.

Joe Myers


Joe...You can't have unprotected feeders running on the load side of the service panel to a "sub" panel elsewhere in the home. Therefore the "sub" panel feeders have to be protected by a breaker in the service panel.* In a split bus service panel it would not really matter if this breaker was "above the gap" or not...the same 6 throw rule would apply there. Even if the "sub" panel had a main breaker (not required but OK) it would still need a breaker in the service panel. Besides protecting the feeders, how else are you going to attach the conductors at the service panel?

*In Russel's photo the feeders are rated for the full 200amp (I believe) and therefore adequately protected by the main breaker in the service panel. Once again, no need for a "sub" panel disconnect but OK to have one.


--
Richard Moore
Rest Assured Inspection Services
Seattle, WA
www.rainspect.com

Originally Posted By: rray
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



What if the “subpanel” is on the 40th floor of a condo? This is a 6,400 SF penthouse with 360? views of San Diego Bay. There are 32 circuits, no main disconnect except in the basement electrical room 44 floors below under lock and key with maintenance. This subpanel does not need to meet the six-throw rule?


I just find such a set-up unconscionable. However, if I inherited that penthouse, I probably wouldn't complain too much.

I always thought that any panel with more than six circuits required a main disconnect in the panel. And even if it doesn't, my own standards would require it.

![icon_twisted.gif](upload://xjO326gspdTNE5QS3UTl0a0Rtvy.gif)


--
Home inspections. . . .
One home at a time.

Originally Posted By: dvalley
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Russel,


Let me give this a shot.

The service disconnect means shall be installed at a readily accessible location either outside of a building (40 floors down) or inside nearest the point of entrance of the service conductors.

As long as the service disconnect is present, whether it be in the basement or in the penthouse that is 40 floors up, it's legit.
![](upload://qFmolxc9QZ5xuDZTe21e7GGQAta.gif)


--
David Valley
MAB Member

Massachusetts Certified Home Inspections
http://www.masscertified.com

"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go."

Originally Posted By: jdigiacomo
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Hi Joe M.


Not sure I fully understand your point completely, however I proceeded the way the inspector instructed me to and he inspected and passed it…so I know I didn’t misunderstand him. As far as if he is wrong…well I learned it’s not worth arguing with them. I did install a disconnect at the sub panel only for my own convenience. I am not an electrician by trade but have down my fair share in new construction and renovations. I like to be sure that what I am doing is to code and safe. But let me tell you something, I have been told by 2 different inspectors over the years that they have local jurisdiction and final say, and that the code is a base line but not the bible. Two different times I had a conflict in what I KNEW was to code and what the inspector wanted me to correct, trust me, it was alot easier just tweaking it the way they wanted it. The point I am trying to make is that the electrical inspector is free to interpret the code the way he wants depending on the situation at hand.


Originally Posted By: rmoore
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Quote:
I always thought that any panel with more than six circuits required a main disconnect in the panel. And even if it doesn't, my own standards would require it.


Russel...no it's not required for anything other than the service equipment panel.

While I understand and admire your concern, I think it's a little misguided. The idea of the six-throw max is so that all power can be disconnected to a building, or unit, quickly by those that need to do so. I believe that in reality that is only the fire department, who surely have a schematic of the 40 story building showing where the disconnects are. I can't quite picture a scenario where someone is being constantly electrocuted within the unit and it would make much difference if it took an extra second or two to throw all the breakers AFTER deciding to go to the panel, open it, and turn things off. In the case of, say an elderly couple, it may even be quicker as a 200 amp breaker takes some "muscle" to throw. As long as the client is made aware that all breakers need to be thrown to disconnect all power to the unit, I think you could sleep easy.

If someone does leave you the penthouse, can I come and visit? ![icon_biggrin.gif](upload://iKNGSw3qcRIEmXySa8gItY6Gczg.gif)


--
Richard Moore
Rest Assured Inspection Services
Seattle, WA
www.rainspect.com

Originally Posted By: jmyers
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Michael,


Thanks for the code reference although I follow the NEC, not the IRC.

Richard,

Not only can you have the sub feeder cable running off the load side, you could also run it off the line side, like I said that would be more dependent on the lugs and the configuration of the panel.

As a case in point, the power company around here runs those off peak meters for water heaters off the line side of the first meter panel into a second meter just for the water heaters. If it is illegal or could not be done, they would not be doing it.

I personally have seen several 200 amp main service panels (main breaker) with a dozen breakers in them which another 200 amp sub panel (main breaker) was lugged to the buss on the main service panel. Both used 4/0 aluminum and was perfectly safe and code compliant.

I have also seen the same thing with 100 amp main breaker panels.

I do agree that the photo is code compliant and safe, maybe you were misunderstood that I was simply stating that I like to see a breaker at both points, not just at the main service panel.

Russel,

Why not just splice into the feeder cables and add a disconnect. It would be much cheaper and much safer. That would be pretty cheap, peace of mind! ![icon_biggrin.gif](upload://iKNGSw3qcRIEmXySa8gItY6Gczg.gif)

Joe D.

You did not state whether the sub panel was a lower amperage than the existing main service panel. One would have to assume that since he made you place the breaker at the main service panel, it was a lower amperage.

Joe Myers


Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



jdigiacomo wrote:
200 A main panel ... He said, "100 A breaker must be installed in main panel, and no disconnect nor main breaker required at sub panel ...

I think he is correct

Mike Parks wrote:
Robert and others ... You must read Bob's post carefully. He is correct, this time!

I agree with Bob's assessment about the panel Russel posted, as the 200A sub-panel feeders are also protected at the service panel by the 200A MD (in addition to the sub-panel main breaker he indicated was present). I think Joe is also talking about the case where the sub-panel feeder is rated the same as the service panel main breaker.

However, I also read that the converse of his statement would be true, and if the sub-panel feeder was less than 200A it would require an individual breaker at the service panel sized for those feeders, per NEC 240.21 ... thats my story, and I am sticking to it ... ![icon_lol.gif](upload://zEgbBCXRskkCTwEux7Bi20ZySza.gif)

rkirk wrote:
I always thought that any panel with more than six circuits required a main disconnect in the panel. And even if it doesn't, my own standards would require it.

You might be on a very slippery slope there.

Also, about the other comments ... IMHO that install is fine. The wires are protected at both the service panel and the sub-panel. If the homeowner wants to do something at the sub-panel (ahem) then he can shut power down with the main sub-panel breaker. Yes, that will still leave the feeders energized, but if anything needs to be done with those he should call a sparky who will just shut the power off at the service panel MD (hopefully ... lol) ...


--
Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee

I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong

Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



mpatton wrote:
IRC 2003
E3604.7 Feeder and branch-circuit conductors.
Feeder and branch-circuit conductors shall be protected by over current protective devices connected at the point the conductors receive their supply.

Correct reference, and in general you are on the money. Except E3301.2 basically states that you can go to the NEC for things not covered by the IRC ... which just means the inspector can ask you to justify that. IMHO the IRC is good enough as a reference for an HI ... but (there is always a "but") NEC 240.21 has some exceptions to that requirement. Plus, in Russel's case the feeders are protected at the service panel where they "receive their supply" ... ![icon_wink.gif](upload://ssT9V5t45yjlgXqiFRXL04eXtqw.gif)

One other thought here ... what if the AHJ says that the feeders are not protected where they "receive their supply", which he interprets to be the tab on the panel ... hmmmmmmm. After all the "code" is not what is written in the book ... the "code" is what the AHJ says is written in the book, unless you go over his head ... usually not a good thing ... ![icon_wink.gif](upload://ssT9V5t45yjlgXqiFRXL04eXtqw.gif)


--
Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee

I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong

Originally Posted By: rmoore
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Joe M…


I'm not trying to be a smartass (don't know enough to be the first part of one ![icon_biggrin.gif](upload://iKNGSw3qcRIEmXySa8gItY6Gczg.gif) ) but I have to discuss this further.
Quote:
As a case in point, the power company around here runs those off peak meters for water heaters off the line side of the first meter panel into a second meter just for the water heaters. If it is illegal or could not be done, they would not be doing it.

We dont have those around here (to my knowledge) but if it's off the line side of the meter to a seperate meter it's awfully close to being a "seperately derived system". I assume there is an accessible service disconnecting means (breaker) which services the water heater circuit itself.(?) How does the water heater get switched back and forth between the peak and off-peak meter? Some type of timed switching device?

Quote:
I personally have seen several 200 amp main service panels (main breaker) with a dozen breakers in them which another 200 amp sub panel (main breaker) was lugged to the buss on the main service panel. Both used 4/0 aluminum and was perfectly safe and code compliant.

I have also seen the same thing with 100 amp main breaker panels.

In that situation (which is the same as Russel's photo) the bus-bar, and therefore the "same-sized" feeders lugged to it, are being protected on the load side by the main service disconnect. The next panel would still be regarded as a "sub" panel and wouldn't need a main breaker, even though I agree that it's a good idea.

BTW...I've taken to putting the "sub" in quotes to avoid Jerry's wrath. He is correct that there is no such beast as a sub-panel in the NEC, just service equipment and panelboards. But...as even Code-Check does use the term sub-panel, I see no harm in using it here for clarification. The quotes are my compromise.


--
Richard Moore
Rest Assured Inspection Services
Seattle, WA
www.rainspect.com

Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



rmoore wrote:
BTW...I've taken to putting the "sub" in quotes to avoid Jerry's wrath. ![icon_wink.gif](upload://ssT9V5t45yjlgXqiFRXL04eXtqw.gif)

Give me a break ... that means you Jerry (duck) ...

Rich ... I think we agree ... ![icon_wink.gif](upload://ssT9V5t45yjlgXqiFRXL04eXtqw.gif)


--
Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee

I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong

Originally Posted By: rray
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



All the thoughts notwithstanding, I still cannot fathom having the main disconnect to my townhouse on the 40th floor located 44 floors below me under someone else’s lock and key and only available from 8-5 or 30 minutes after I call maintenance to report an emergency.


So, very loosely, keeping in mind that homeowners can basically do anything they want to their own homes (and often do), if I have insomnia (and I'm posting this at 2:00 a.m.), and decide to install those track lights that I bought last week on a new circuit, I either have to consider it an emergency and call the emergency maintenance number to have them shut off the electricity to my townhouse, I have to wait until normal business hours of 8-5, or I can just take a chance and hope for the best.

I think the location of this MD should be something that should be changed in whatever code books that cover it. I think an MD in the 40th floor instance should be required at the main panel in the maintenance room four floors below the street (for protective services and maintenance) AND AND AND in the subpanel on the 40th floor. And if I were buying the place, I would request such a "repair" of the seller.

We all know that people very often don't think clearly in an emergency. If I have an electrical emergency, I sure don't want to go to the electric panel and try to figure out which circuit I should shut down for that emergency. I like to find that big ol' MD and just turn it off. Ask questions later.

![icon_twisted.gif](upload://xjO326gspdTNE5QS3UTl0a0Rtvy.gif)


--
Home inspections. . . .
One home at a time.

Originally Posted By: Bob Badger
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



WOW, I thought I had done a good job with my second post, I guess not. icon_lol.gif


First when I respond it is generally from a "what is required" perspective.

You think the NEC is confusing try to get agreement on what is the best/right way to wire things above and beyond code.

In short one house can use up to 6 switches or less grouped at one location to shut off all the power.

In the picture above one breaker shuts down the entire house, code compliant no more to be said.

Jerry mentioned pulling more than 100 amps from the breaker tabs, this lug kit in this panel prevent the installation of a breaker opposite it, and uses both 'sides' of each of the breaker tabs, used in this way you can get 200 amps off this panel.

Do I think it would be more convenient to have a main at the sub? Yeah most likely, but that has nothing to do with the NEC.

The members here bring up some good questions and some great discussion.

We regularly install one 225 to 400 amp feed to one to three 42 circuit panels (42 to 126 circuits) no main at these panels.

We do this as many office building have a lot of very lightly loaded circuits, and for breakers of this size 225 to 400 amp 3 phase prices depending on the AIC ratings and type of breaker can range from $300 to $2000 so cost is a big factor.

I gotta say something about "Sub" you all know Jerry is correct, the only sub panels are installed in submarines.

Panels are either service panels or 'load side equipment'.

I do say sub panel all the time but you will not and probably never will see "sub panel" in the NEC.

Bob


--
Bob (AKA iwire)
ECN Discussion Forums
Mike Holt Code Forum

Originally Posted By: Bob Badger
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



rkirk wrote:
I still cannot fathom having the main disconnect to my townhouse on the 40th floor located 44 floors below me under someone else's lock and key and only available from 8-5 or 30 minutes after I call maintenance to report an emergency.


Perfectly code compliant, you will have the branch circuit breakers in your unit, why do you need the main?

One way of feeding panels in buildings like this is feed through design.

Say a 200 amp feeder running vertically through the building running many panels as it passes through, your main may be 6 other peoples main.

It is very important to remember that the NEC rule are the minimum, the least you have to do, going beyond it is optional and some builders expect that some builder want to ride the edge of the minimum, it comes down to what people want to pay for.

Here is the purpose of the code.

Quote:
90.1 Purpose.

(A) Practical Safeguarding.
The purpose of this Code is the practical safeguarding of persons and property from hazards arising from the use of electricity.

(B) Adequacy. This Code contains provisions that are considered necessary for safety. Compliance therewith and proper maintenance will result in an installation that is essentially free from hazard but not necessarily efficient, convenient, or adequate for good service or future expansion of electrical use.

(C) Intention. This Code is not intended as a design specification or an instruction manual for untrained persons.


This to me says it all, you need job specifications or contract language that spells out the quality part of the installation.

Bob


--
Bob (AKA iwire)
ECN Discussion Forums
Mike Holt Code Forum

Originally Posted By: rray
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



I probably will forever use the terms “main panel” and “subpanel” simply because my Clients understand what they are and what they mean. And electricians and home inspectors, egos notwithstanding, truly do also understand what they are and what they mean.


I think one of the main reasons why my company's current status after 2?years in operation (beyond my wildest expectations) is because I don't talk down to Realtors, Clients, other home inspectors, etc. Nor do I talk up to them. I specialize in telling my Clients in language they can understand the condition of their home and then I help them understand the condition of the home.

When I was growing up in South Texas in the '60s, we did all our own electrical work (and looking back on those fond electrical memories, I'm surprised I'm still alive--LOL). We had a bazillion subpanels everywhere (exterior, master bedroom, barn one, barn two, workshop, pool, etc.) with disconnects in those subpanels if the number of circuits got too complicated. We're talking what would be only a slight inconvenience (insert vocal inflection indicating sarcasm) when one had driven one's tractor across six acres of land, had an electrical problem out at that barn, and had to jump back on one's tractor and cruise over to the main panel to shut off the electricity to the subpanel. Ain't gonna happen. Disconect in the subpanel, thank you.

Obviously, I guess, if disconnects are not required now, they probably (although not necessarily) were not required 40 years ago.

Now that might bring up a thread drift to another topic. In rural lands like where I grew up, is a disconnect required in that subpanel that is six acres away from the main panel? Are there any specific codes relevant to rural areas for these disconnects and the panels? Am I trying to bring my rural sense to the city needlessly?

I still just feel much safer if I have an MD in my own residence and in subpanels where the number of circuits starts getting out of hand.


--
Home inspections. . . .
One home at a time.

Originally Posted By: rmoore
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Russel…


I think that my problem with your logic is that you make it sound like throwing the main breaker in the "sub" panel makes that panel completely safe when in fact the feeders to, and the main lugs in, the panel are still live. Granted you have killed power to the bus-bars but in a worse case scenario, with smoke and flames coming out of the panel, I wouldn't be touching anything in the panel including the main breaker. I'd be running down the 40 flights to kill power to the feeders in case the insulation had meletd and the whole damn panel was energized.

Yes, it may be nice to have a main breaker but I don't think not having one makes it that much less safe. As far as working on the panel, I doubt many electricians shut down a whole panel, and the home, just to add or change a breaker.


--
Richard Moore
Rest Assured Inspection Services
Seattle, WA
www.rainspect.com

Originally Posted By: Mike Parks
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



“Not only can you have the sub feeder cable running off the load side, you could also run it off the line side, like I said that would be more dependent on the lugs and the configuration of the panel.”


Joe please explain what you mean by"off the line side". Where are you doing this?

Bob

Subpanel is in the NEC. I can not reference it quickly but I think it is in a FPN.

Mike P.


Originally Posted By: jmyers
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Richard,


I did not think you were trying to be a smarta$$ at all.

The power company around here runs off peak meters for electrical appliances, such as water heaters, off an additional meter. That means you now have two electric meters on the exterior of your house.

If the power company, or electrician was to run those off the load side of the first meter you would be paying for that electric twice, after it goes through the first meter, then again after it goes through the second meter. Therefore, they connect the feeder cables for the second meter to the line side of the first meter (where the service cable drops into the meter base). This is not a switched setup, both meters are read and you pay only for the electricity that you use, although with the off peak meter the power company provides you with a discounted energy rate.

The seperate disconnect for this setup is required and is typically installed by the main service panel. I have seen them installed by the water heater but I frown upon it because you can easily have 20 to 50 feet of live cable in the house with no means to de-energize it, other than to pull the meter.

Mike P,

Read the above post, I believe I explained it well enough for you to understand. BTW...I don't do it, the power company around here does it, along with the electricians.

Bob O,

I was agreeing that this setup is ok but didn't I already say that? Sorry I did miss the part where Joe D, wrote that it was a 200 amp panel with a 100 amp sub, in which case the inspector was correct in requiring the disconnect, overcurrent protection at the source panel.

Joe Myers


Originally Posted By: Bob Badger
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Mike Parks wrote:
Bob

Subpanel is in the NEC. I can not reference it quickly but I think it is in a FPN.

Mike P.


I tried a search of my 2002 NEC Handbook no subpanel(s).

rkirk wrote:

I probably will forever use the terms "main panel" and "subpanel"


Yeah me too. ![icon_lol.gif](upload://zEgbBCXRskkCTwEux7Bi20ZySza.gif)

Just wanted to set the record straight.

rkirk wrote:
In rural lands like where I grew up, is a disconnect required in that subpanel that is six acres away from the main panel? Are there any specific codes relevant to rural areas for these disconnects and the panels? Am I trying to bring my rural sense to the city needlessly?


Needlessly? heck no! The code seems to agree with you on disconnects for separate structures.

Rural, suburban, city, there are rules for what you are talking about.

It could be a shed 5' behind my house or the barn 1/2 mile away in both of these instances one to six disconnects are required at the remote panel to shut down all power (other then the panel itself) in the separate structure.

Quote:
225 II. More Than One Building or Other Structure

225.30 Number of Supplies.
Where more than one building or other structure is on the same property and under single management, each additional building or other structure served that is on the load side of the service disconnecting means shall be supplied by one feeder or branch circuit unless permitted in 225.30(A) through (E). For the purpose of this section, a multiwire branch circuit shall be considered a single circuit.


Quote:
225.31 Disconnecting Means.
Means shall be provided for disconnecting all ungrounded conductors that supply or pass through the building or structure.


Quote:
225.32 Location.
The disconnecting means shall be installed either inside or outside of the building or structure served or where the conductors pass through the building or structure. The disconnecting means shall be at a readily accessible location nearest the point of entrance of the conductors. For the purposes of this section, the requirements in 230.6 shall be permitted to be utilized.


Quote:
225.33 Maximum Number of Disconnects.
(A) General. The disconnecting means for each supply permitted by 225.30 shall consist of not more than six switches or six circuit breakers mounted in a single enclosure, in a group of separate enclosures, or in or on a switchboard. There shall be no more than six disconnects per supply grouped in any one location.


Sorry if this was kind of long and boring but there had been a lot of questions asked about number and locations of disconnects.

As I said the members here ask some good questions.

Bob


--
Bob (AKA iwire)
ECN Discussion Forums
Mike Holt Code Forum

Originally Posted By: rray
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Not long and boring at all, but then, who I am to talk? LOL


But very informative. Thanks.

![icon_twisted.gif](upload://xjO326gspdTNE5QS3UTl0a0Rtvy.gif)


--
Home inspections. . . .
One home at a time.