Service Entrance Disconnect

[hammergroup]

I have a project which has 7 meters, disconnects, feeders and panels. It has been my experience that over 6 you need a disconnect. brushing up on my code I cannot find anything that dictates the disconnect. so I am asking do I need it? and will it need to be fused?

 

[augie47]

Check 230.71

 

[hammergroup]

I have read that and its not clear. It does not say I have to install a disconnect.

 

[kwired]

Are you grouping all this at one location?

There are circumstances that allow more than one service location, but each allowed service location is still limited to six service disconnecting means.

 

[Smart $]

Are you grouping all this at one location?

There are circumstances that allow more than one service location, but each allowed service location is still limited to six service disconnecting means.

Though a generally accepted practice, that's not entirely correct for a building with more than occupancy. See the third sentence of 230.40 Exception No. 1 [2011].

OP has yet to qualify the building as multi-occupancy... but with 7 meters I believe we can assume such.

 

[kwired]

Though a generally accepted practice, that's not entirely correct for a building with more than occupancy. See the third sentence of 230.40 Exception No. 1 [2011].

OP has yet to qualify the building as multi-occupancy... but with 7 meters I believe we can assume such.

I may need to chew on those words in that exception for a while, but I think if we have multiple occupancies, and are permitted to supply each occupancy with a separate service, each occupancy is effectively treated like a separate building. Each of these separate buildings still can have six service disconnecting means for each allowed service, plus fire pumps emergency systems and any other exceptions allowed.

Now put all those disconnects in a common location on a multi occupancy building and I believe you need additional service disconnecting means ahead of them configured in a way that there is no more than six mains, but again with exceptions for fire pumps, emergency systems and a few other exceptions.

 

[electrofelon]

I may need to chew on those words in that exception for a while, but I think if we have multiple occupancies, and are permitted to supply each occupancy with a separate service, each occupancy is effectively treated like a separate building. Each of these separate buildings still can have six service disconnecting means for each allowed service, plus fire pumps emergency systems and any other exceptions allowed.

Now put all those disconnects in a common location on a multi occupancy building and I believe you need additional service disconnecting means ahead of them configured in a way that there is no more than six mains, but again with exceptions for fire pumps, emergency systems and a few other exceptions.

It seems pretty clear to me that the 2-6 disconnect rule is for the grouped disconnects at each occupancy not the number of service entrance conductor sets permitted by the exception

 

[Smart $]

It seems pretty clear to me that the 2-6 disconnect rule is for the grouped disconnects at each occupancy not the number of service entrance conductor sets permitted by the exception

Correct. It's a little vague just reading 230.40 Exception No. 1 [2011] but becomes much clearer when one integrates its interpretation with 230.71(A).

 

[augie47]

This has and will always give me a headache.
One thing to keep in mind is that 230.40 is in section IV, Service Entrance Conductors (from the service point).
The multiple occupancy exception does not negate the 230,2 requirement that each building can have only one service (with exceptions, of course)

 

[hammergroup]

reading and understanding this is challenging, what it says is that we are allowed up to 6 services. what it doesn't say is if 7 or more is required you must install a disconnect. now because it doesn't say you must install the switch, it doesn't say the switch must be fused. so let us assume that a switch is required. do I need a fuse or breaker????

 

[GoldDigger]

reading and understanding this is challenging, what it says is that we are allowed up to 6 services. what it doesn't say is if 7 or more is required you must install a disconnect. now because it doesn't say you must install the switch, it doesn't say the switch must be fused. so let us assume that a switch is required. do I need a fuse or breaker????

"The" service disconnect is required to include OCPD.

 

[kwired]

reading and understanding this is challenging, what it says is that we are allowed up to 6 services. what it doesn't say is if 7 or more is required you must install a disconnect. now because it doesn't say you must install the switch, it doesn't say the switch must be fused. so let us assume that a switch is required. do I need a fuse or breaker????

In general you are only allowed one service not six, however you can have up to six disconnecting means for each service that is allowed. And yes it doesn't say that you must install a main when there is seven or more disconnects, but you still are limited to six, meaning you can put in one disconnect sized to handle all seven sub feeds, or two to six mains and any combination of subfeeds you want from those. Example two - 400 amp mains, with three subfeeders on one and four on the other is allowed but you can not make all seven of the subfeeders the service disconnecting means.

 

[Smart $]

In general you are only allowed one service not six, however you can have up to six disconnecting means for each service that is allowed. And yes it doesn't say that you must install a main when there is seven or more disconnects, but you still are limited to six, meaning you can put in one disconnect sized to handle all seven sub feeds, or two to six mains and any combination of subfeeds you want from those. Example two - 400 amp mains, with three subfeeders on one and four on the other is allowed but you can not make all seven of the subfeeders the service disconnecting means.

As I said earlier, under 230.40 Exception No. 1 [2011], seven service disconnects are permitted for a seven-occupancy building... or perhaps a six-occupancy building with "house" panel...

 

[kwired]

Exception No. 1: A building with more than one occupancy shall be permitted to have one set of service-entrance conductors for each service, as defined in 230.2, run to each occupancy or group of occupancies. If the number of service disconnect locations for any given classification of service does not exceed six, the requirements of 230.2(E) shall apply at each location. If the number of service disconnect locations exceeds six for any given supply classification, all service disconnect locations for all supply characteristics, together with any branch circuit or feeder supply sources, if applicable, shall be clearly described using suitable graphics or text, or both, on one or more plaques located in an approved, readily accessible location(s) on the building or structure served and as near as practicable to the point(s) of attachment or entry(ies) for each service drop or service lateral, and for each set of overhead or underground service conductors.

I'm sorry but I am failing to see how that permits 7 disconnects other than if 230.2(A) would allow more than six.

230.2(B)(1) does allow for multiple services on a multiple occupancy building but you can still have only six disconnecting means per set of service entrance conductors.

As I said earlier, under 230.40 Exception No. 1 [2011], seven service disconnects are permitted for a seven-occupancy building... or perhaps a six-occupancy building with "house" panel...

 

[texie]

As I said earlier, under 230.40 Exception No. 1 [2011], seven service disconnects are permitted for a seven-occupancy building... or perhaps a six-occupancy building with "house" panel...

Sorry, but this is not compliant. This would require a main.

 

[Smart $]

I'm sorry but I am failing to see how that permits 7 disconnects other than if 230.2(A) would allow more than six.

230.2(B)(1) does allow for multiple services on a multiple occupancy building but you can still have only six disconnecting means per set of service entrance conductors.

Sorry, but this is not compliant. This would require a main.

Perhaps you would rather see it this way...?

Exception No. 1: A building with more than one occupancy
shall be permitted to have one set of service-entrance
conductors for each service, as defined in 230.2,
run to each occupancy or group of occupancies. If the
number of service disconnect locations for any given classification
of service does not exceed six, the requirements of
230.2(E) shall apply at each location. If the number of
service disconnect locations exceeds six for any given supply
classification, all service disconnect locations for all
supply characteristics, together with any branch circuit or
feeder supply sources, if applicable, shall be clearly described
using suitable graphics or text, or both, on one or
more plaques located in an approved, readily accessible
location(s) on the building or structure served and as near
as practicable to the point(s) of attachment or entry(ies) for
each service drop or service lateral, and for each set of
overhead or underground service conductors.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I'm sorry but I am failing to see how that permits 7 disconnects other than if 230.2(A) would allow more than six.

230.2(B)(1) does allow for multiple services on a multiple occupancy building but you can still have only six disconnecting means per set of service entrance conductors.

But each meter has a set of service entrance conductors....

 

[kwired]

Perhaps you would rather see it this way...?

IMO not compliant if those are grouped at one location, other than exceptions for fire pumps, emergency systems, etc.
If you have one with up to six disconnects at each occupancy go ahead and install however many are needed so that each occupancy has a service.

If the number of service disconnect locations exceeds six, that is when the requirement for a plaque to with service disconnect information is required. The exception is not giving permission to run seven disconnects grouped in one location, and is confirming that only one set of service entrance conductors is permitted for each allowed service, which would be the rule anyway without this exception.

Exception No. 1: A building with more than one occupancy
shall be permitted to have one set of service-entrance
conductors for each service, as defined in 230.2,
run to each occupancy or group of occupancies. If the
number of service disconnect locations for any given classification
of service does not exceed six, the requirements of
230.2(E) shall apply at each location. If the number of
service disconnect locations exceeds six for any given supply
classification, all service disconnect locations for all
supply characteristics, together with any branch circuit or
feeder supply sources, if applicable, shall be clearly described
using suitable graphics or text, or both, on one or
more plaques located in an approved, readily accessible
location(s) on the building or structure served and as near
as practicable to the point(s) of attachment or entry(ies) for
each service drop or service lateral, and for each set of
overhead or underground service conductors.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

It is very clear that you can have up to six means of disconnect for each set of service entrance conductors and that those sets of service disconnects can be at various locations on the building. How is having the sets of disconnects scattered around the building safer than having all of them, no matter how many, grouped in a single location? In the example in this thread, would it be better for the emergency responders if they could go to a single location and operate 7 disconnects, or for them to run around to 7 different locations to operate the disconnects?

Either the total number of service disconnects for a building, no matter how many sets of service entrance conductors there are, should be limited to six, or all of the the sets of service disconnects, no matter how many, should be required to be in a single location. An exception could permit remote sets of service disconnects with a sign giving the locations of all of the other sets.

 

[Smart $]

IMO not compliant if those are grouped at one location, other than exceptions for fire pumps, emergency systems, etc.
If you have one with up to six disconnects at each occupancy go ahead and install however many are needed so that each occupancy has a service.

If the number of service disconnect locations exceeds six, that is when the requirement for a plaque to with service disconnect information is required. The exception is not giving permission to run seven disconnects grouped in one location, and is confirming that only one set of service entrance conductors is permitted for each allowed service, which would be the rule anyway without this exception.

So we are in agreement...??? :happyyes: As depicted, the placque is just a courtesy... but if one or more were remote to the drop, would be required, correct? Additionally, the exception does not say the disconnects must be located remote to each other or the drop in any sense, correct?

Don pretty much covered my other thoughts.