# Using a 220 disconnect for a 120 receptacle



## jar546 (Jun 29, 2013)

HVAC receptacle requirements for servicing are often overlooked, whether on a house or on a roof for a commercial job. Here is an interesting situation that an electrician is trying to use for compliance. What do you think?

A 20-A, 240-V nonfused disconnect for an air handler rated for 7.6 amperes is installed in the unfinished attic space of a dwelling unit. The 2-pole breaker is located in the basement panel. To install a duplex receptacle for servicing, can a 3-wire circuit (two ungrounded conductors and a neutral) be run to the nonfused disconnect, and one of the ungrounded conductors as well as the grounded conductor be used to feed the receptacle on the line side of the disconnect?
​


----------



## Dennis (Jun 29, 2013)

If it is the a/c unit then it is possible by using 210.23(A)(2)



> (2) Utilization Equipment Fastened in Place. The total rating of utilization equipment fastened in place, other than luminaires, shall not exceed 50 percent of the branch circuit ampere rating where lighting units, cord-and-plug connected utilization equipment not fastened in place, or both, are also supplied


however article 422.12 would negate that for a central heat equipment



> 422.12 Central Heating Equipment. Central heating equipment other than fixed electric space-heating equipment shall be supplied by an individual branch circuit. Exception No. 1: Auxiliary equipment, such as a pump, valve, humidifier, or electrostatic air cleaner directly associated with the heating equipment, shall be permitted to be connected to the same branch circuit.
> 
> Exception No. 2: Permanently connected air-conditioning equipment shall be permitted to be connected to the same branch circuit.


----------



## jwelectric (Jun 29, 2013)

The receptacle must be supplied from the line side of the disconnect but as worded I see nothing wrong


----------



## jar546 (Jun 29, 2013)

jwelectric said:
			
		

> The receptacle must be supplied from the line side of the disconnect but as worded I see nothing wrong


2 for 2 today.  I agree with you again.  Line side only.


----------



## NMCB13 (Jul 5, 2013)

Sometimes you need to apply common sense to an issue like this, I would install a *GFCI* service receptacle from another source.


----------



## jar546 (Jul 5, 2013)

NMCB13 said:
			
		

> Sometimes you need to apply common sense to an issue like this, I would install a *GFCI* service receptacle from another source.


Most of the time it is done this way.  The point of this thread was the fact that installing as described above would be code compliant whether we like it or not or whether we would have done it that way ourselves.

We must legally approve things every day that I am sure many of us don't agree with.  As far as GFCI, yes, that too but that was not the point of this thread.

It is situations like this where an inspector would fail it without substantiation


----------

