----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Wheeler" <j...@inconcepts.biz>
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Alex Rubenstein <a...@corp.nac.net> > wrote: > > At least here in JCPL territory (northern NJ), closed transition is > > frowned upon. Too much risk, they think. They are correct, really, > > but the risk is mostly yours. If you lock to the utility > > out-of-phase, you will surely lose and they will surely win. The > > fault you create that they will see will probably not hurt them. > > Unless it is extraordinarily large and you are very close to the > > nearest substation. > > Utilities concern themselves with not only their gear and your gear, > but also your neighbor's gear. I would not like to be next-door to a > large genset that is connected to the grid out-of-phase. My equipment > would be affected by such an event. More to the point, as I note in another reply, you don't want to be *the lineman down the road with his hands on a "dead" wire*. Pretty much the *first paragraph* in NEC 700 (700.6) says this: """ Transfer equipment shall be designed and installed to prevent the inadvertent interconnection of normal and emergency sources of supply in any operation of the trans- fer equipment. """ So, if your transfer switch is *physically* capable of connecting your genset to the incoming power wires, then it violates 700.6, unless you're in a cogen sort of environment, in which case you're following Article 705, and a whole different set of rules apply. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
