Service Disconnects

[alex_713]

Here's what I have that the inspector shot down:

This is the reason we didn't put the panels on the exterior wall:

And this is a sketch done by the homeowner after the chief inspector told him what he should do:

I'm not even going to mention any of the rediculous things he said that go along with this.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Firstly, I hope you are not planning sheetrock on the basement walls because of that LB.

Secondly, art.230.70(A)(1) calls for the disconnects to be readily accessible nearest the point of entrance of the service conductors. Some jurisdictions will allow 10' some 15' while others demand the disconnects on the outside of the building.

The sketch makes me thing the panels must be on the outside in that area. Check and see if they have an amendment to 230.70

This is too bad since your work looks nice and neat. At this point the easiest fix to to add the discos outside.

 

[rickgomes26]

In my jurisdiction we have a lot of old services with the meter socket on the exterior and the main disconnect/fuseholder on the opposite side of the garage wall. The way I see it the nearest point of entrance into the building is immediately upon entry into the building. Our fire dept may be ammending code to have main disconnect on exterior to facilitate easy locating and shut off of power to building without the need to go in the building.

 

[alex_713]

At this point the easiest fix to to add the discos outside.

That's what I reccommended to the homeowner but he was trying to stay away from the extra clutter outside. We've decided to move the meter to the other side of the door in the pics and feed straight through the wall into (2) 200A FDC's inside, then just run SE cable over to the panels from above. I really hate that it came to this though and I think the AHJ's were just being stubborn.

 

[alex_713]

Firstly, I hope you are not planning sheetrock on the basement walls because of that LB.

The panels are actually surface mounted on a wall that will be filled with foam (on the back side). The studs you see were added to add a cover over the wires and such.

But now the LB won't be there at all. So it's okay.

 

[cowboyjwc]

I only ask because it's a reigonal thing.

If you are installing a can that big just for the meter, can't you find a meter/main about the same size?

 

[RB1]

Don,

According to your interpretation would it be allowed to turn a service conduit up from the slab and rise to a service disconnect mounted three feet above the slab?

 

[peter d]

I see no need for those polaris connectors in the sketch.

 

[alex_713]

I see no need for those polaris connectors in the sketch.

My sentiments exactly. Which only makes me think he (chief city inspector) doesn't know what he is talking about and they should have OK'd the original setup to begin with.

 

[peter d]

My sentiments exactly. Which only makes me think he (chief city inspector) doesn't know what he is talking about and they should have OK'd the original setup to begin with.

Which would make the trough unnecesarry too. He is actually saying you need to do this, and that you can't just pipe directly from the meter can into each panel?

 

[alex_713]

I only ask because it's a reigonal thing.

If you are installing a can that big just for the meter, can't you find a meter/main about the same size?

It hadn't crossed my mind before, but that would have been a good way to go. (would have just ended up with a spare 400A UG meter base though)

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Don,

According to your interpretation would it be allowed to turn a service conduit up from the slab and rise to a service disconnect mounted three feet above the slab?

I don't know who Don is but around here that would be acceptable. Each area has their own interpretation of 230.90.

 

[alex_713]

Which would make the trough unnecesarry too. He is actually saying you need to do this, and that you can't just pipe directly from the meter can into each panel?

That's what the AHJ told the homeower. But since then, the homeowner has ran the new idea we came up with by the AHJ and he accepted it (after quietly talking to someone else on the other end of the phone).

 

[LarryFine]

Firstly, I hope you are not planning sheetrock on the basement walls because of that LB.

That would be my only objection to this install.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Don,

According to your interpretation would it be allowed to turn a service conduit up from the slab and rise to a service disconnect mounted three feet above the slab?

I don't see any allowance in the code for that.

 

[alex_713]

This is what we ended up changing it to:

Notice how the POCO showed up the day we moved the meter and ran the wire from the tap can to where the meter was. (Apparently they have an employee that drives around looking to see who has their meter up so they can run wire to it, without the owner's knowledge).

Not very pretty.

 

[LarryFine]

Not very pretty.

I bet it was faster than moving the panels over there would have been.

 

[erickench]

Look's to me that the panels are farther away from the meter/disconnect by the way the feeder cables are routed.

 

[LarryFine]

Look's to me that the panels are farther away from the meter/disconnect by the way the feeder cables are routed.

The problem was there were no disco's before the mains in the panels, so there was a "nearest point of entry" dispute.

The meter enclosure does not contain any disco's. The new cables between the new disco's and the panels are SER's.

Added: The panels' main breakers have been rendered redundant, and have become a now-unnecessary expense.

 

[A/A Fuel GTX]

Added: The panels' main breakers have been rendered redundant, and have become a now-unnecessary expense.

I've found that quite often a MLO panel is more expensive than a MCB panel.