Thread: Are you ready for this one

This panel is in a cottage complex. Service is seasonal and controlled by Association (somewhere unknown).

We can see lots of problems (it's like going to school here), but It does raise some questions for future reference.

Since this is only a 120V service, is it ok to back feed a 120/240v panel through the main disconnect as shown? It looks like the intent of jumper is to feed 120v breakers on each bus. Is supplying 120 volts to this panel actually a problem?

Also, Can a home legally only have a 120v service??

It's difficult to tell what's going on without knowing the whole story. I assume that it's service equipment (sub panel) downstream of the main service equipment. In this case the ground wires should be isolated and attached to a separate ground bar boned to the panel, also it should have it's own grounding. The back fed 50 amp breaker acts as main disconnect and provides 240 volts to the panel. Correct me if I am wrong here.

The double pole 50 cannot feed 240 into the panel when it is only fed by one leg.

The conductors feeding the panel are too small to be paralleled.

There is more wrong with this setup than there is that is correct.

Woops I did not notice the red jumper wire at first.

Originally Posted by Trent Tarter

... it's service equipment (sub panel) downstream of the main service equipment

That description is a bit confusing, at least to me; my understanding is that a load-side panel (sub panel) is not part of the "service equipment", at least per the NEC:

"Service Equipment. The necessary equipment, usually consisting of a circuit breaker(s) or switch(es) and fuse(s) and their accessories, connected to the load end of service conductors to a building or other structure, or an otherwise designated area, and intended to constitute the main control and cutoff of the supply."

and that the term "main service equipment" is redundant; the equipment is either "service equipment" as defined above, or not (everything else).

Looks to me like this is in a summer cottage in a campground that has been around for years. Originally they had power out to the cottages for lights and possibly a fan, in very small panel with fuse(s). This appears to be the "low cost upgraded wiring" version with breakers to get a few more circuits in the cottage.

Originally Posted by Rich Goeken

Looks to me like this is in a summer cottage in a campground that has been around for years. Originally they had power out to the cottages for lights and possibly a fan, in very small panel with fuse(s). This appears to be the "low cost upgraded wiring" version with breakers to get a few more circuits in the cottage.

And the work was done, as Jim Port pointed out, more incorrectly (most of it) than correctly (not much of it).

Would have been better off to have done it correctly at the time, now it all needs to be changed and done correctly.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

And the work was done, as Jim Port pointed out, more incorrectly (most of it) than correctly (not much of it).

Would have been better off to have done it correctly at the time, now it all needs to be changed and done correctly.

Jerry,

We know there are problems, but if we take all the ground-bond issues and wire size issue away can you tell me if it is OK to use this style of panel (split bus) and back fed as shown (with jumper across service disconnect) as a 120 volt distribution panel? Also, does the code require 120/240 V service to homes?

Ken,

Take away all the other issues, including conductors in parallel which are too small to be in parallel, and that there is an appropriate main service disconnect for this structure (too many things to mention/ask about), then:

Originally Posted by Ken Amelin

can you tell me if it is OK to use this style of panel (split bus) and back fed as shown (with jumper across service disconnect) as a 120 volt distribution panel?

Technically, not okay because it is not in accordance with its listing and labeling and that makes it in violation of NEC 110.3(B).

Also, does the code require 120/240 V service to homes?

Yes ... sort of ...

From the 2008 NEC: (bold is mine)
- 230.79 Rating of Service Disconnecting Means.
- - The service disconnecting means shall have a rating not less than the calculated load to be carried, determined in accordance with Part III, IV, or V of Article 220, as applicable. In no case shall the rating be lower than specified in 230.79(A), (B), (C), or (D).
- - - (A) One-Circuit Installations. For installations to supply only limited loads of a single branch circuit, the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 15 amperes.
- - - (B) Two-Circuit Installations. For installations consisting of not more than two 2-wire branch circuits, the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 30 amperes.
- - - (C) One-Family Dwellings. For a one-family dwelling, the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 100 amperes, 3-wire.

"3-wire" would be 120 volt / 240 volt (or could 120 volt / 208 volt off a 3-phase system)

That panel is not a split bus panel.

@ JA, that property code conflicts with the NEC requirement for a 100 amp service, not the 60. Jerry P had already posted the appropriate article. I don't know why you would post a lesser requirement from a code that is not as accepted as the NEC.

- - - Updated - - -

Ken, the other issue is that the breaker is only listed for one conductor per screw. The breaker also does not have the required breaker hold down either.

Ken,

The International Property Maintenance Code only applies if adopted locally and I doubt that most localities have adopted that as their property maintenance code.

If the local authority has adopted the International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC) then both the NEC applies as applicable.

"as applicable" means:
- Jim Port is correct that the NEC is the applicable code as that is the code which is applicable when the work is done (new work, alteration work, or repair work). Thus the minimum service size is 100 amps. The work is required to meet the NEC edition in effect at the time the work was done and the minimum of 100 amps for a dwelling unit service has been in the NEC for many decades.

- Jim A is only correct to the extent that IPMC applies to work which was done before there were codes which required the same or higher level of work -let's say that you had an early 1900s house which had a 30 amp 120 volt service, the NEC likely was not in affect for that area at that time, thus the IPMC is stating that the service for that dwelling needs to be a minimum of 60 amps. The catch is that when the service is being replaced to meet the 60 amp minimum size, the new work (the new service) is now required to meet the current NEC in affect at the time of the new work, so ... the minimum service size is now required to be 100 amp for the new work.

The IPMC contains some good requirements for safe and sanitary housing requirements, however, when enforcing an older structure to meet the requirements of the IPMC, the new work is required to meet the applicable other codes (Residential Code, NEC, etc.) and the end result is that the IPMC is required to be exceeded, therefore the IPMC is not the minimum requirements, the other codes are the minimum requirements.

Jim Abram will probably respond with hell-fire & brimstone and eternal damnation if we don't believe him or do it his way, but follow what Jim Port says and you will be doing it the right way.

Yawn

Forgive him for he knows not what he speaks of ...

Enough said, no need to continue to bother everyone with continued posts correcting incorrect information from that JA.

Before you guys got off on the tangent of the legality of a 110 volt service (which seems to be a moot point because no utility provides a 110 volt service that I'm aware of) there's the practical issue of the shorted service conductors. I would be at least a little concerned that the possibilty exists that someone could come along and re-feed that panel with both legs of the 240 that is undoubtedly on the other end of that entrance cable.

Originally Posted by Mike Locurcio

Before you guys got off on the tangent of the legality of a 110 volt service (which seems to be a moot point because no utility provides a 110 volt service that I'm aware of) there's the practical issue of the shorted service conductors. I would be at least a little concerned that the possibilty exists that someone could come along and re-feed that panel with both legs of the 240 that is undoubtedly on the other end of that entrance cable.

a) "the possibilty exists that someone could come along and re-feed that panel with both legs of the 240 that is undoubtedly on the other end of that entrance cable"

b) "there's the practical issue of the shorted service conductors"

If someone did a) with the breaker off, b) would trip the breaker as soon as it was turned on.

If someone did a) with the breaker on ... well, there would be some sparking there that might just match the 4th of July. Of course, doing that with the breaker on presents itself with another set of problems, such as who (besides me ) does things like that live anyway? (No, even I would not do that live as I like to know what is on the other end first and I'm not into trying to weld two copper conductors together that way.)

Yawn

sigh

what a waste a time with that JA

For the sake of all readers other than that JA, mums the word.

I'm not saying the panel in the pictures is safe and correct because we all agree it is wrong. We don't know the size of the breaker feeding it. Maybe it is only 15 or 20 amps.

A garden cottage can be supplied with a single 15 amp circuit and be perfectly acceptable.
So I believe 120 volt service can be done 'legally' if you can convince an authority it is safe.

The violations are many. Parallel conductors, double taps, neutral and ground bond at a sub panel...


And seriously, you could literally get the same amount of power with fewer violations turning both hots into 240 volt leads and turing the fourth wire into a ground...

Whom ever did this wasn't thinking.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

A garden cottage can be supplied with a single 15 amp circuit and be perfectly acceptable.
So I believe 120 volt service can be done 'legally' if you can convince an authority it is safe.

Not if it is a "dwelling unit", at least not down here in the states.

A "cottage" seems like it would be a "dwelling unit", except under some conditions, so here is the definition of a "dwelling unit" - Ken can tell us if the "cottage" is a "dwelling unit" by definition:
- From the NEC:
- - Dwelling Unit. A single unit, providing complete and independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation.

It does not take much to meet the definition of a Dwelling Unit as a one-room plus bathroom efficiency is a "dwelling unit" by definition.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Not if it is a "dwelling unit", at least not down here in the states.

A "cottage" seems like it would be a "dwelling unit", except under some conditions, so here is the definition of a "dwelling unit" - Ken can tell us if the "cottage" is a "dwelling unit" by definition:
- From the NEC:
- - Dwelling Unit. A single unit, providing complete and independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation.

It does not take much to meet the definition of a Dwelling Unit as a one-room plus bathroom efficiency is a "dwelling unit" by definition.

It sounds like this is not a dwelling by this definition as it is seasonal use only - does not include "permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation." -​ No heat, and electric and water is shut down for winter.

Originally Posted by Ken Amelin

It sounds like this is not a dwelling by this definition as it is seasonal use only - does not include "permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation." -​ No heat, and electric and water is shut down for winter.

Ken,

The frequency of use is not what is being referred to by "permanent", the "provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation" are what is being referred to.

I had clients who owned 4 or 5 15,000 sf and larger homes and lived in them for two weeks each year, but those homes contained "permanent provisions for" "living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation".

It is very easy to meet "permanent provisions for": living; sleeping; sanitation are easy to meet because the area for "living" and "sleeping" is built in, while the provisions for sanitation are not portable (unless they use a portable toilet).

The key, then, becomes this: are the provisions for cooking permanent? I.e., plug-in portable microwave and/or hotplate or regular built-in/slide-in range/stove.

Unless that cottage only has a portable microwave or portable hotplate, then it likely has permanent provisions for cooking - that finalizes the cottage as meeting the definition of a "dwelling unit".

The length of time the cottage is occupied does not affect whether it is a dwelling unit or not.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

John - You might be correct.

NEC
230.42 Minimum Size and Rating.

(A) General. The ampacity of the service-entrance conductors before the application of any adjustment or correction factors shall not be less than either (A)(1) or (A)(2). Loads shall be determined in accordance with Part III, IV, or V of Article 220, as applicable. Ampacity shall be determined from 310.15. The maximum allowable current of busways shall be that value for which the busway has been listed or labeled.
(1) The sum of the noncontinuous loads plus 125 percent of continuous loads
(2) The sum of the noncontinuous load plus the continuous load if the service-entrance conductors terminate in an overcurrent device where both the overcurrent device and its assembly are listed for operation at 100 percent of their rating
(B) Specific Installations. In addition to the requirements of 230.42(A), the minimum ampacity for ungrounded conductors for specific installations shall not be less than the rating of the service disconnecting means specified in 230.79(A) through (D).

230.79 Rating of Service Disconnecting Means.

The service disconnecting means shall have a rating not less than the calculated load to be carried, determined in accordance with Part III, IV, or V of Article 220, as applicable. In no case shall the rating be lower than specified in 230.79(A), (B), (C), or (D).
(A) One-Circuit Installations. For installations to supply only limited loads of a single branch circuit, the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 15 amperes.
(B) Two-Circuit Installations. For installations consisting of not more than two 2-wire branch circuits, the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 30 amperes.
(C) One-Family Dwellings. For a one-family dwelling, the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 100 amperes, 3-wire.
(D) All Others. For all other installations, the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 60 amperes.

And pigs might fly too.

That panel shows 3 single pole breakers with conductors attached so (A) would not apply. Must be the new math.

And on a side point JA, I thought you said the property code applied, not the NEC. Now you are quoting the NEC. I am going to get some syrup, I smell waffling.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

And on a side point JA, I thought you said the property code applied, not the NEC. Now you are quoting the NEC. I am going to get some syrup, I smell waffling.

Jim P.,

Jim Abram is flipping waffles so much that IHOP stock as dropped 75% in the past couple of months - they just cannot compete with him.

The property maintenance code / NEC waffle is just his latest flavor offering, comes with blue berries/chocolate chips, depends on which side you want up ...

Cue the music (CIRCUS MARCH GLADIATORS (by David Flavin )!!! "Step right up, step right up! Welcome to the Big Top! Watch the clowns, acrobats, trained animals, trapeze acts, hoopers, tightrope walkers, jugglers, unicyclists and amazing feats of legend! The fun is just beginning!!!"

Jim Port,

About the only chance you have to explain that one is to pull out your Electrical Wiring 001 book (not even the more advanced Electrical Wiring 101 book) ... even then, though, you have a known non-learner on the other end of your discussion.

Just a little "what if". What if the two black wires entering the panel went to each of the 50 amp breakers instead of to the splice? Now the panel has 100 amp capacity, the wires are not paralleled and the only thing missing is 240 volts which I don't think is required.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Vern - I will let Jerry explain this because he has the electric wiring 001 book handy but in this Case, 50 + 50 does not equal 100.

This is not the MWBC discussed in previous marathon thread and in this case the two 50's add together.

Wrong highlighting - see black, underlined, bold, italics within the red text for proper highlighting.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jim and Jerry -FYI

From Florida light and Power

2. Ampere Rating
a. Residential
The rating of the service entrance equipment shall satisfy the general requirements stated
above, the NEC and local building codes. Article 230 of the NEC states that the minimum
rating for a one family dwelling with six or more two-wire branch circuits, or an initial
computed load of 10 kVA or more is 100 ampere, three-wire. For dwelling units with less
load, as computed in accordance with NEC guidelines, the minimum may be 60 ampere,
three wire if approved by the inspecting authority. In very special cases where the load is
only one or two two-wire branch circuits, the service disconnecting means may have a rating
of no less than 15 amperes or 30 amperes, respectively, if approved by the inspecting
authority.
As stated previously, FPL recommends that the service entrance have more capacity than
the minimum required by the NEC. Local inspecting authorities shall be consulted, since
some locations may have requirements that exceed the minimum

Link : http://www.fpl.com/doingbusiness/bui...MtrConnect.pdf

The inspecting authority (AHJ) is going to go by the NEC, FPL will, naturally, connect to the dwelling units with minimum 100 amp services as required by the NEC.

Thus, the minimum required service for a dwelling unit is 100 amp 3-wire (which is not 120 volt).

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

This is not the MWBC discussed in previous marathon thread and in this case the two 50's add together.

Hard to know what is on the line side of the blacks feeding that panel, however the neutral would need to be sized for the larger load since everything is on one leg of the panel. The neutral could potentially carry 100 amps. We know everything is on one leg since the breaker did not trip.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

Hard to know what is on the line side of the blacks feeding that panel, however the neutral would need to be sized for the larger load since everything is on one leg of the panel. The neutral could potentially carry 100 amps. We know everything is on one leg since the breaker did not trip.

Each of the black wires has its own neutral.

Originally Posted by Vern Heiler

Each of the black wires has its own neutral.

I did not remember setup as pics do not show on tablet.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

I was wondering how long you thought the 10 gauge wire would carry 100 amps.

That comment was based on the 50+50 comment by VH, nothing else.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

I was wondering how long you thought the 10 gauge wire would carry 100 amps.

Not sure but they look like #6 or #8 to me. 50 amps each conductor.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

I know Jerry , everybody else is wrong You just do not get it.
FYI - Nowhere in the NEC does it require a minimum of a 100 amp service.

Riddle me this JA, how would you protect the service conductors if the disconnect is rated at 100 amps but the conductors are not?

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jim - That is not the issue. But the answer is, if the conductors are rated over 100 amps

The issue is that the size of the service disconnect is not the size of the service. I commonly see 200 amp disconnects on 100 amp services .

And those conductors are not properly protected. Now you are using a non compliant installation as justification to violate the code.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

I am dealing with one project now where the POCO does not have the capacity to supply a 200 amp service without upgrading the supply system.

Power company infrastructure issues do not override the NEC.

Riddle me this JA, how would you protect the service conductors if the disconnect is rated at 100 amps but the conductors are not?

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jim - That is not the issue. But the answer is, if the conductors are rated over 100 amps

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

I know Jerry , everybody else is wrong You just do not get it.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

FYI - Nowhere in the NEC does it require a minimum of a 100 amp service.

So if the disconnect is rated at 100 amps and the conductors are rated at 100 amps that means that we have a 100 amp service. Which is what the NEC requires.

Prior to this you seemed to be saying as long as the disconnect was rated at at least 100 amps it could be feed with something like #6.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Sorry Jerry - Heat is one of the necessary provisions for a dwelling unit.

Sorry Jim - Take that up with the NEC, I posted the NEC definition of a dwelling unit, apparently you do not understand definitions even when their source is provided.

You are also mixing what a dwelling unit is by definition in one code (the NEC) with one of the requirements for a dwelling unit from another code (IRC) - ending up further confirming your lack of knowledge and understanding of the codes.

Especially when you try to apply a utility's regulations as a replacement for code requirements when you do not even understand or comprehend the code.

The NEC also has requirements for the dwelling or room needs to meet otherwise the NEC requirements change or do not apply. A good example is a bathroom that needs certain fixtures before the NEC considers it a bathroom. It does not matter what the building plans call it.

Regardless of other codes, the NEC does not require heat to be present before the living space is considered a dwelling.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jim - Yes and no.

If the disconnect and SEC are rated at 100 amps .Yes, those components are part of a 100 amp service . But if the POCO feed to the service is rated at 30 amps, you do not have a 100 amp service.

And in your experience this under supply is commonly done? Do the customers tolerate this woefully inadequate situation? Lets be practical about this. This is why the power companies require demand load calculations.

Also as I understand it the power company supply to a dwelling is outside the inspection parameters.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jim - The NEC also does not require a roof , doors, windows , a foundation,....

I think that if I were looking for an occupancy certificate , I would not count on satisfying the NEC requirements as key to getting that certificate.
There is a table of authorities for single family dwellings and I think the appropriate authority is the IRC as far as the definition of dwelling is concerned.

After working with Codes for over fifty years, I think it is beyond time to correlate the codes.

Jim Port,

You will find, as I have, that discussing code with Jim Abram is like discussing life with an eight year old - their current level of knowledge, understanding, and ability to grasp concepts is limited to their experiences - and based on the posts made by Jim Abram regarding codes his knowledge, understanding, and ability to grasp concepts of codes are limited by his knowledge ... I.e., he posts non applicable codes, incorrectly tries to apply incorrect codes, and has shown us a total lack of concept of what codes apply to what.

Each successive discussion with Jim Abram about codes only continues to confirm the above.

Kind of like the difference between playing ping pong with*an able person versus playing with one of those paddles with the rubber ball attached to it by the rubber band - you know that dang rubber ball is coming back at you but you have no idea which way it is going to come back or what angle it will take ... you only know that it will not make sense.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jerry - What you fail to understand is that I have FAR more experience with Codes than you.
Maybe you could learn something if you were not so arrogant and abusive.

Just like you are FAR more experience with suspended licenses than I do.

Thanks but no thanks - your kind of experience in the codes is showing as you do not understand what you read (presuming that you actually read the codes you comment on).

You are definitely in a different class with code knowledge than I am ... thankfully.

My arrogance and abusiveness is exceeded by yours, so you don't want to go there.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

That panel is not a split bus panel.

@ JA, that property code conflicts with the NEC requirement for a 100 amp service, not the 60. Jerry P had already posted the appropriate article. I don't know why you would post a lesser requirement from a code that is not as accepted as the NEC.

- - - Updated - - -

Ken, the other issue is that the breaker is only listed for one conductor per screw. The breaker also does not have the required breaker hold down either.

It depends upon WHERE AND WHEN a 60 amp service was installed. Many cities and counties stay even decades behind in codes. At one time there were many properties that had large mains and 60- amp sub panels to feed living quarters, garages, mother in law quarters etc. It was as common as bread.

I am unsure of how the code would relate to lets say changing from a fused system to a breaker system without making any other changes, that depends on the jurisdiction and whether permits were obtained (oviously not). With this much wrong the issue is R&R and meeting current code because one has a permit….or getting an EE to designate and get the permit and install to that Engineering stamp.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Sorry Jerry - But , I should have anticipated your off topic attack . Every time that you are proven wrong, you go into a meltdown.
I have clearly demonstrated that you are incorrect. Man Up , and Learn from the experience instead of having a tantrum . There are many things that you do not know and many things that you think that are incorrect.

Sorry Jim - But the only thing you've proven is that you don't know or grasp codes.

That was not an attack either, simply an acknowledgement of one thing you have more experience in ... YOU brought up that you have more experience than I do - all I did was acknowledge that you do have more experience in that aspect than I do. I agree with you and you don't like that either?

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jerry - This really applies to you You seem fabricate and neglect to pay attention.Charlie's Rules of Technical Reading

Interpreting the NEC
It doesn't say what you think it says, nor what you remember it to have said, nor what you were told that it says, and certainly not what you want it to say. If by chance you are an instructor, it doesn't say what you have been saying, and if you’re an author, it doesn’t say what it’s intended to say.

Then what does it say? It says what it says. So if you want to know what it says, stop trying to remember what it says, don't ask anyone what is says and don’t think it says what you want it to say.

Jim - Thank you for posting what I've been telling you all along "It doesn't say what you think it says, nor what you remember it to have said, nor what you were told that it says, and certainly not what you want it to say."

You make up so many things and try to apply them to things for which they are not applicable - maybe now you will grasp what I've been telling you all this time ... or maybe you did not actually read that just like you don't seem to actually read other things you post or link to either ...

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jerry - This really applies to you You seem fabricate and neglect to pay attention.Charlie's Rules of Technical Reading

Interpreting the NEC
It doesn't say what you think it says, nor what you remember it to have said, nor what you were told that it says, and certainly not what you want it to say. If by chance you are an instructor, it doesn't say what you have been saying, and if you’re an author, it doesn’t say what it’s intended to say.

Then what does it say? It says what it says. So if you want to know what it says, stop trying to remember what it says, don't ask anyone what is says and don’t think it says what you want it to say.

So you now agree that more than the disconnect means needs to be at least 100 amps? Congratulations.

Additional confirmation that Jim Abram does not know, does not understand, and apparently does not care to learn or even read, the code is this:

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

What Jerry missed is that this building may not be a single family dwelling

NEC 23079
(D) All Others. For all other installations, the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 60 amperes.

I previously posted this:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

From the 2008 NEC: (bold is mine)
- 230.79 Rating of Service Disconnecting Means.
- - The service disconnecting means shall have a rating not less than the calculated load to be carried, determined in accordance with Part III, IV, or V of Article 220, as applicable. In no case shall the rating be lower than specified in 230.79(A), (B), (C), or (D).
- - - (A) One-Circuit Installations. For installations to supply only limited loads of a single branch circuit, the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 15 amperes.
- - - (B) Two-Circuit Installations. For installations consisting of not more than two 2-wire branch circuits, the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 30 amperes.
- - - (C) One-Family Dwellings. For a one-family dwelling, the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 100 amperes, 3-wire.

Followed later with posting this:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

- From the NEC:
- - Dwelling Unit. A single unit, providing complete and independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation.

It does not take much to meet the definition of a Dwelling Unit as a one-room plus bathroom efficiency is a "dwelling unit" by definition.

Jim Abram's misinformation would have been, could have been, avoided if only Jim Abram knew how to read and understand the code ... being as he does not, otherwise that JA would also know, and be able to read, this: (note that I previously posted the definition for "Dwelling Unit", note that "dwelling unit" is used in the other three definitions below, thus the definition of "Dwelling, One-Family" is the definition of "dwelling unit" and applied as stated, and that "Dwelling, Two-Family" is the definition of "dwelling unit" and applied as stated, and that "Dwelling, Multifamily" is the definition of "dwelling unit" and applied as stated.
- From the NEC (bold is mine)
- - Dwelling, One-Family. A building that consists solely of one dwelling unit.
- - Dwelling, Two-Family. A building that consists solely of two dwelling units.
- - Dwelling, Multifamily. A building that contains three or more dwelling units.
- - Dwelling Unit. A single unit, providing complete and independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation.

Jim Abram also posted this for Jim Port ... I suppose that Jim Abram may suspect that we might not understand that he (Jim Abram) really does not know and understand the code, so, as further evidence to convince us that Jim Abram does not know and understand the code, Jim Abram proved this gem:

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

But the Code says -" the service disconnecting means shall have a rating of not less than 100 amperes, 3-wire."
It does not say that the service shall have a rating of 100 amps.

Jim Abram - what part of the service must be not greater than any other part of the service? (multiple choice for you)
a) service entrance conductors
b) service disconnecting means
c) service equipment mains rating
.
.
.
.
Answer is b) service disconnecting means. The other parts of the service must be rated the same as, or rated greater than, the service disconnecting means (don't want the service entrance conductors to become a fusible link, right?), and don't want the service equipment mains to become a fusible link either, right?).

Thus, if the service disconnecting means minimum rating is 100 amps ... the minimum service rating is 100 amps.

Jim Abram ... if you don't get that, let the rest of us here know, I am sure that EVERYONE ELSE here understands that part and that any of us here will be glad to either: a) try to help you learn and understand; b) stuff a sock in your mouth to shut you up (in this case, use the sock to tie your hands so you can't keep typing your nonsense and wasting so much of everyone's time).

I choose b).

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

As the OP Ken stated - It sounds like this is not a dwelling by this definition as it is seasonal use only - does not include "permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation." -​ No heat, and electric and water is shut down for winter.

As I understand the codes, IF the INTENT of the building is to allow people to SLEEP IN IT, even live temporarily in it on a REGULAR basis, then it must meet the code for a dwelling or even lets say a bedroom.

Example: one has a basement that has no secondary egress. That can NEVER be considered a bedroom and can never be rented or leased as such. it is NOT dwelling space, it is the same as a closet in other words. Use as a bedroom can NOT EVEN be TEMPORARY AS IT DOES NOT MEET DWELLING (Egress) CODES. The "permanent provisions" are the requirements, not the number of days use per year.

Look at it this way:
I build a summer cabin in the burbs near a lake. I only wish to use it 2 months a year. I plan to use my bbq daily and only need a toilet and a dry place to sleep.

1. Will the county allow me to build a garage or other building and then legally sleep in it
or
2. if I am to sleep in it on a REGULAR basis (2 months a year) does it need to meet dwelling codes, entry, egress, minimal electricity receptacles, sanitation, potable water, lighting at the points of entry etc?

I will guarantee you that ALL those dwelling codes in 2 will need to be met if it is known that one will sleep in it, including WATER and sanitation (not necessarily cooking facility as that is not a requirement in itself that I know of (think of childrens camps and cabins, no cooking there but codes met otherwise)). I have never seen otherwise in any area where permits are issued.

Therefore when inspecting at a sale, the building is either a dwelling or an "outbuilding" like a garage or shed. One can not say that the building is a dwelling of any kind unless it met the codes for such and if modified in recent history at least had proper permits and designated use. Any building regularly used (even 2 months a year ) would need to meet the dwelling requirement, even if the authorities allowed no heat because of the type of use and lack of need.

Variances are another issue., whether or not a kitchen was built into it is another issue…etc. Sleeping in a designated dwelling room has code requirments, period in most jurisdictions.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jerry - As usual you just do not get it , do not listen ,and continue to have the attitude that everybody else is wrong.
For instance :
As the OP Ken stated - It sounds like this is not a dwelling by this definition as it is seasonal use only - does not include "permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation." -​ No heat, and electric and water is shut down for winter.

What part of that do you not understand? This is clearly not a dwelling unit and you still persist

Jim - As I expected, you yet again completely miss what the code is stating.

Ken has not replied (not that I have seen anyway) after I pointed out that "permanent" means "provisions for" and not permanent occupancy, I am sure that is because Ken understands and gets it.

Jim - you - on the other hand, still do not get it.

One can build an apartment building (Dwellings - Multifamily) which contain three or more units (Dwelling Units) and NEVER OCCUPY THE BUILDING ... the dwelling units are still "dwelling units" by definition and for application of the NEC ... HEAT OR NOT HEAT ...

One can building vacation cottages for use during the summer months only, and each cottage is still a "Dwelling Unit" with regards to application of the NEC ... HEAT OR NO HEAT.

The length of a dwelling unit being occupied has no bearing whatsoever whether or not it is a "dwelling unit".

With regard to application of the NEC, the dwelling unit is a dwelling unit WITH OR WITHOUT HEAT.

With regard to application of the other codes (IRC, IBC, etc) dwelling units require additional items (such as heat), however, that has no bearing on the application of the NEC to dwelling units.

Jim - Not sure what is your mental block on trying to combine separate codes and intermingle the SEPARATE requirements of the separate code.

Jim - Not sure what is your mental block on trying to apply a utility minimum requirement which is less than the code's minimum requirement. *IF* FPL required a minimum 125 amps and the NEC required a minimum of 100 amps (as the NEC does), one could then build a dwelling unit and have it pass inspection yet have the utility refuse to connect power to the dwelling unit as it does not meet their minimum requirements. With the utility only having a minimum of 60 amps for dwelling units as their requirement, then once the dwelling unit has been built with the minimum 100 amp service required by the NEC, the utility will connect power to the dwelling unit - the utility is not going to tell you that you must replace the 100 amp service with a 60 amp service.

Jim - You have a screw loose someplace ... actually, from your continued posts exposing your lack of understanding and knowledge of the codes - you must have many screws loose. That is not an attack on you, that is just letting you know that you need help while acknowledging that it is up to you to seek and get that help.

Originally Posted by Ken Amelin

It sounds like this is not a dwelling by this definition as it is seasonal use only - does not include "permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation." -​ No heat, and electric and water is shut down for winter.

Ken, ignoring the seasonal nature of the usage, are you saying there is no living, kitchen, bedroom and bathroom facilities?

RE: Jim Abram

Option b) seems to be the only choice for that wacko.

I have found many who have not yet learned to understand the codes, however, most know that the codes fall under Known Unknowns - with Jim Abram, however, that falls under Unknown Unknowns (he doesn't know he doesn't know ... either that he refuses to accept it).

Regardless, it is a waste of time responding to his out-in-left posts as there is no hope for Jim Abram.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jerry - It is a big world out there,and the NEC does not drive the bus.

News Flash! There is more than one bus.

Standard Jerry Peck procedure - When proven wrong run away.

Not running away, not even walking away, what I am doing is what you are not - respecting the others on this forum who are fed up with you and your posts - my respect for them is to ignore your posts when it becomes painfully obvious that you only want to hear your own voice/read your own posts.

Jim Abram - carry on being on obnoxious, that is what you do best (and is basically the only thing you do).