Service entrance conductor

[hhsting]

Attached sketch shows two sets of service entrance conductors in building with one tenant occupancy. Sketch shows power riser and elevation view. One set of service entrance conductors feed second floor Panel P2 with meter inside building and second set of service entrance conductors feed first floor Panel P1 with meter inside building. Panels P1 and P2 have main breaker but they are not grouped. Both floors belong to one tenant one occupancy.

The building is commericial assembly location.

I would guess skerch is not complaint per NEC 2014 Article 230.4 first paragraph. I am confused by 230.4 exception number 2 which says supply separate loads which to me indicates more than one occupancy.

Anyways my question: which of the following ways would make installation complaint with NEC 2014 Article 230.4 or its exceptions:

1. Have two sets of service entrance conductors in building but group Panels P1 and P2 together. If this makes it code complaint then which exception 230.4.

2. Provide two service disconnects one at each of the SRVC Entrance conductors outside over trough and group them. If this makes it code complaint then which exception 230.4.

3. Provide one service entrance conducfor and combine Panels P1 and P2 to one panelboard with main breaker per NEC 2014 Article 230.4

4. Any other ways this could become NEC 2014 Article 230.4 or its exceptions code compliant.

Than kyou for your input

 

[charlie b]

I am confused. NEC 2014 does not have an article 230.4. Please check your references and clarify your question.

Edited to add: Did you mean 230.40?

 

[charlie b]

Your suggestion #2 would satisfy 230.40 exception 2. Another option is to supply only one set of service conductors, use it to power the first floor panel, and sub-feed the second floor panel from the first floor panel. That has the advantage of not needing to deal with any exceptions. It has the disadvantages of needing larger service conductors and a larger first floor panel.

 

[hhsting]

Attached sketch shows two sets of service entrance conductors in building with one tenant occupancy. Sketch shows power riser and elevation view. One set of service entrance conductors feed second floor Panel P2 with meter inside building and second set of service entrance conductors feed first floor Panel P1 with meter inside building. Panels P1 and P2 have main breaker but they are not grouped. Both floors belong to one tenant one occupancy.

The building is commericial assembly location.

I would guess attached sketch is not complaint per NEC 2014 Article 230.40 first paragraph. I am confused by 230.40 exception number 2 which says supply separate loads which to me indicates more than one occupancy.

Anyways my question: which of the following ways would make installation complaint with NEC 2014 Article 230.40 or its exceptions:

1. Have two sets of service entrance conductors in building but group Panels P1 and P2 together. If this makes it code complaint then which exception 230.40.

2. Provide two service disconnects one at each of the SRVC Entrance conductors outside over trough and group them. If this makes it code complaint then which exception 230.40.

3. Provide one service entrance conducfor and combine Panels P1 and P2 to one panelboard with main breaker per NEC 2014 Article 230.40

4. Any other ways this could become NEC 2014 Article 230.40 or its exceptions code compliant.

Thank you for your input

Yes I meant 230.40. I am just curious suggestion number #1 typed for clarity why would it not be code compliant:

If I group the Panels P1 and P2 together inside nearest point of entrance of service entrance conductors and each Panel has one set of service entrance conductor feeding it (this would make total two sets one set for P1 and one set for P2) then which article would it be not code compliant? My service disconnects which in this case main breakers are in separate enclosure one in Panel P1 and second in Panel P2. No?

 

[electrofelon]

Your #1 would be compliant per exception #2.

Your #2 would also be compliant per exception#2 (unless the service point and equipment was arranged such that there are no service entrance conductors in which case 230.40 doesn't apply, but forget I mentioned that).