# Disconnect or not??



## Nosparxsse (Aug 12, 2007)

Residential setting


House with basement.

200 amp meter socket on outside. 
Used knockout in back of meter socket. 
sch 40 PVC 90 down to basement with approx 24 in. of pipe between 90 from Meter socket and panel. total distance on wire, 55" long. 

Code violation or ok?:001_huh:

no disconnect on outside, but within 5 ' of panel???


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Nosparxsse said:


> Residential setting
> 
> 
> House with basement.
> ...


What's your POCO rule? 

It's 10' for me, and that only starts once you get inside the house. You can legally go 'round the house 5 times without a disco if you wanted to.


----------



## chenley (Feb 20, 2007)

10' feet in the county and 36" in the city. <-- Two different POCO's

The way the OP stated I would not see it needing a disconnect. Althought, it is up to the POCO there.


----------



## Nosparxsse (Aug 12, 2007)

picture

5 feet

done this for years like this, but an inspector questioned me on it the other day..

pvc pipe is ok right???



code reference??

230.70 A (1) Everything is good there....



note: the pipe is passing through wood just above the basement wall plate, not concrete.


----------



## kbsparky (Sep 20, 2007)

I'd say from your description that you have installed the Service Disconnect as soon as practical after the conductors have entered the building.

Acceptable to me and the inspectors around here. We've done this type of installation many times.


----------



## gilbequick (Oct 6, 2007)

Here it's 6' total wire length, and I've never run it in PVC or any kind of pipe, I've just used 4/0 AL SE. But to have 6' end to end you've got to be pretty much back to back on your meter and panel.


----------



## Effectively Grounded (Dec 15, 2008)

Unless your Poco has their own rules for what happens AFTER the meter then it is subject to your inspectors opinion.

It sounds reasonable to me. General rule of thumb was always within 5' around these here parts


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

I only have one queston in case I did miss it or not.,,

Did you have LB inside or just a 90° sweep ell ?

However in my area 6 feet is tyical limit but per POCO and Comm 16 { wisconsin state code } it stated 8 feet.

Merci,Marc


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

not.


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

Bkessler said:


> not.


 
Quoi ??? { What ?? }

:confused1:


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

frenchelectrican said:


> Quoi ??? { What ?? }
> 
> :confused1:


My answer to the original question in the subject line.


----------



## Nosparxsse (Aug 12, 2007)

frenchelectrican said:


> I only have one queston in case I did miss it or not.,,
> 
> Did you have LB inside or just a 90° sweep ell ?
> 
> ...


 
meter,
pvc male adapter, 
sweep 90,
coupling ,
18" of pvc, 
male adapter, 
panel. 

in that order.....

The inspector DID finally agree that I was in the right, by the way...:thumbup::laughing: at least this time....


----------



## ralph (Apr 6, 2008)

You dont have any sch 40 exposed to physical damage, so that looks like a pretty good installation to me.


----------



## KayJay (Jan 20, 2008)

frenchelectrican said:


> I only have one queston in case I did miss it or not.,,
> 
> Did you have LB inside or just a 90° sweep ell ?


No LB, at least as far as I can tell from the picture anyway… Hopefully the conduit is plugged with duct seal where it leaves the back of the meter enclosure to prevent condensation and moisture accumulation in the panel below.


----------



## jrclen (Oct 23, 2007)

480sparky said:


> What's your POCO rule?
> 
> It's 10' for me, and that only starts once you get inside the house. You can legally go 'round the house 5 times without a disco if you wanted to.


8' here in state code like Marc said. Last summer I had to install a meter main and eat the cost because the power company said 80 feet was to far from the meter to the panel. On a job in spring with the same power company (different lineman) I was able to run around the house 80' before entering with no problem. So the POCO rules can change from one location to another.


----------



## nap (Dec 26, 2007)

jrclen said:


> 8' here in state code like Marc said. Last summer I had to install a meter main and eat the cost because the power company said 80 feet was to far from the meter to the panel. On a job in spring with the same power company (different lineman) I was able to run around the house 80' before entering with no problem. So the POCO rules can change from one location to another.


POCO rules? Not around here. This is an AHJ situation and the POCO is not the AHJ.

sorry to hear about your grief from yet another entity. The inspectors can generally cause enough on their own.


and; no disco unless AHJ interprets this distance as too far.


----------



## jrclen (Oct 23, 2007)

In this case the POCO just refuses to connect if they don't like something. And code has nothing to do with it. My problem is that the rules change from one neighborhood to another within the same POCO. What it amounted to in this case was a lineman with a big ego. And a supervisor back at the office who blindly backed him up.


----------



## rbic102 (Jan 23, 2009)

Nosparxsse said:


> Residential setting
> 
> 
> House with basement.
> ...


You should be okay because of the 25 ft tap rule


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

rbic102 said:


> You should be okay because of the 25 ft tap rule


There's probably not an AHJ in this land that's going to let you run 25 feet of unprotected service conductors indoors. 

In the original case, I'd call it fine. You installed that disconnect as close as practical after entering the basement. I get 3 feet here, but they'd pass that install too. I'm not sure how you'd even make that any more compact without mounting the panel crazy high (creating another violation).

Seems like the interpretation of how short "short" really is varies a lot. I've heard talk of AHJ's who want an outdoor disconnect for anything longer than a nipple indoors. If I have a case I think is borderline, I'll either install an outdoor disconnect anyhow, or see if I can get the inspector to swing by and look at it if the budget is a concern.


----------



## rbic102 (Jan 23, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> There's probably not an AHJ in this land that's going to let you run 25 feet of unprotected service conductors indoors.
> 
> In the original case, I'd call it fine. You installed that disconnect as close as practical after entering the basement. I get 3 feet here, but they'd pass that install too. I'm not sure how you'd even make that any more compact without mounting the panel crazy high (creating another violation).
> 
> Seems like the interpretation of how short "short" really is varies a lot. I've heard talk of AHJ's who want an outdoor disconnect for anything longer than a nipple indoors. If I have a case I think is borderline, I'll either install an outdoor disconnect anyhow, or see if I can get the inspector to swing by and look at it if the budget is a concern.


I beg to differ with you. Where a panel cannot be placed directly behind the meter serving it you are allowed to run ser cable up to 25 feet without any protection . Been doing it for years and the code hasnt changed that. It is called a 25 foot tap rule where no protection is required on the service entrance conductors that can be no longer than twenty five feet from point of service attachment.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

rbic102 said:


> I beg to differ with you. Where a panel cannot be placed directly behind the meter serving it you are allowed to run ser cable up to 25 feet without nay protection . Been doing it for years and the code hasnt changed that.


Might want to take a gander at 230.70(A)(1), particularly that "...nearest the point..." stuff. This type of language first appeared in the 1923 NEC. It's more restrictive than the more generic 25 foot tap rule. If you've been running SE cable indoors for services without overcurrent protection up to 25 feet, you've just been getting away with it for years.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

rbic102 said:


> I beg to differ with you. Where a panel cannot be placed directly behind the meter serving it you are allowed to run ser cable up to 25 feet without nay protection . Been doing it for years and the code hasnt changed that.


I beg to differ with you. Running 25 feet of unfused service cable indoors is a recipe for disaster and is most definitely a code violation.


----------



## volty (Jan 14, 2009)

rbic102 said:


> I beg to differ with you. Where a panel cannot be placed directly behind the meter serving it you are allowed to run ser cable up to 25 feet without nay protection . Been doing it for years and the code hasnt changed that.


SER?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

volty said:


> SER?


Yeah, I saw that too but didn't want to make the guy feel too bad.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

rbic102 said:


> It is called a 25 foot tap rule where no protection is required on the service entrance conductors that can be no longer than twenty five feet from point of service attachment.


Okay, you just added this part to your original post. I feel compelled to point out that your code book must be different than everyone else's. That language simply doesn't exist. You can run the service entrance conductors a million feet outdoors if you want to, and still be compliant.


----------



## rbic102 (Jan 23, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Might want to take a gander at 230.70(A)(1), particularly that "...nearest the point..." stuff. This type of language first appeared in the 1923 NEC. It's more restrictive than the more generic 25 foot tap rule. If you've been running SE cable indoors for services without overcurrent protection up to 25 feet, you've just been getting away with it for years.


Man to be smart like you. Try article 240-21 and read on ser= short for service entrance cable.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

rbic102 said:


> Man to be smart like you. Try article 240-21 and read on ser= short for service entrance cable.


:laughing::laughing: I'll let someone else show you the error of your ways. Time for bed for marc-o.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

rbic102 said:


> Man to be smart like you. Try article 240-21 and read on ser= short for service entrance cable.


That has nothing to do with running 25' of unprotected service conductors indoors. You're quoting phantom code rules and out right absurdity. I don't know that there's much I can do other than say you're wrong.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

rbic102 said:


> Man to be smart like you. Try article 240-21 and read on ser= short for service entrance cable.


Any conductor installed under the "tap rules" must be protected by an OCPD (over current protective device) on the *line side. *

The tap rules allow you, under certain circumstances, to use a conductor with a lesser ampacity than the OCPD.

Services, on the other hand, are not protected until the service disconnect.

Your jurisdiction might interpret 230.70(A)(1) as 25', but most places interpret it as a _much _shorter distance.


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

rbic102 said:


> I beg to differ with you. Where a panel cannot be placed directly behind the meter serving it you are allowed to run ser cable up to 25 feet without any protection . Been doing it for years and the code hasnt changed that. It is called a 25 foot tap rule where no protection is required on the service entrance conductors that can be no longer than twenty five feet from point of service attachment.


Not in Michigan or California.


----------



## rbic102 (Jan 23, 2009)

thanks John for your input. I was allowed to do this on a townhome project in the mid 80's. The authority having jurisdiction said I could set the panel apprx 20 foot away from the meter base on an inside wall with no oc protection, He quoted to me the 25 foot tap rule in the nec. I admit i dont do that kind of work anymore, so I assumed that was a legal way to approach it. I was offended by Marco and his disciple Peter's response to me. Peter get back in the boat.


----------



## jrclen (Oct 23, 2007)

Some AHD's will allow a lot of stuff that doesn't comply with the code. In Wisconsin we have 8 feet and most of our power companies want to see 6 feet maximum. And for those who say the POCO have nothing to say about it, I say, good luck with your electric service when they refuse to plug in their meter. 25 feet would never fly.

Rbic, there is a lot of good advice and information here if you keep an open mind and don't get an attitude.


----------



## ralph (Apr 6, 2008)

Beaufort county S.C. is probaby one of the few places where service disconnects are allowed to be further than 4 or 5 feet. 35 feet !! Lots of SEU is sold over there.


jrclen said:


> Some AHD's will allow a lot of stuff that doesn't comply with the code. In Wisconsin we have 8 feet and most of our power companies want to see 6 feet maximum. And for those who say the POCO have nothing to say about it, I say, good luck with your electric service when they refuse to plug in their meter. 25 feet would never fly.
> 
> Rbic, there is a lot of good advice and information here if you keep an open mind and don't get an attitude.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

ralph said:


> Beaufort county S.C. is probaby one of the few places where service disconnects are allowed to be further than 4 or 5 feet. 35 feet !! Lots of SEU is sold over there.




I couldn't imagine having that much unprotected (by OCPD) SE cable in a house.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

JohnJ0906 said:


> I couldn't imagine having that much unprotected (by OCPD) SE cable in a house.


Brother, I have changed dozens of split bus panels in Georgia where the weather head was located on a gable and the SE ran through the house to the meter socket on another wall, then from the meter socket to the panel deep in the interior of the house. Maybe 100 feet in some cases of unfused SE running through the interior of a house.

That couldn't happen now, but apparently it was not uncommon in the 60s and 70s.


----------

