Requirements of 230.2 and grouping of disconnects

[Horst]

Searched the forums and cannot find this, although I am sure it is there. I have an existing strip center with two meter banks in the rear, each bank has a 400A single phase disconnect feeding 8 meters w/ 100A breakers (old). We have a new restaurant going in and they require 400A 3 phase. The engineer put in a 400A meter with overhead riser and two 200A 3 pole disco's feeding 2 interior MLO panels. The new 400 3 phase service was placed on the rear of the building about 100' away from the existing single phase service. The reason for this is because the existing service is underground and is fed from a pad mount transformer. The new service is fed from an overhead bank. The local power authority spotted the meter based on the only location they could squeeze it in due to out buildings and their desire not to cross over a roof. 230.2 specifically authorizes this installation based on "D" since these are different phases. We will install plaques on each service indicating the presence of two sevrice and their whereabouts. The issue my inspector has is the grouping of disconnects; he says that we have to be side by side and that 230.2 does not preclude you from this requirement. But reading and re-reading, I believe it does exactly that in 230.2. Arggggg... :rant: He also stated that he would accept the disco's being moved next to the existing service and the riser and meter could remain, but now I worry about tap length and protected and unprotected conductors.

 

[charlie b]

The inspector is misreading the situation. This is not about 230.2, but rather about 230.71 and 230.72. What they say is that for every service that 230.2 allows you to install, that service can have up to six disconnects, and those six need to be grouped. Nothing requires the disconnects related to one service to be anywhere near the disconnects related to another service. Thus you can have,
(1) A 120/240 volt single phase service that has six disconnects grouped together in one location, and
(2) A 120/208 volt three phase service that has six disconnects grouped together in some other location, and
(3) A 480/277 volt three phase service that has six disconnects grouped together in a third location.

Indeed, you can?t put all eighteen disconnects in this example in the same general area, per the last sentence of the first paragraph of 230.71(A).

 

[Horst]

Itt worked out!

Itt worked out!

Just wanted to follow-up. I went to another inspector who I know well and explained this scenerio to him, and the details of what transpired. He volunteered to intervene on my behalf and took it to the Chief. The Chief allowed it and will speak with the original inspector. I just hope this does not cause a riff, it sucks having to work with inspectors who feel you are questioning their authority. But, I just could not change this without a huge expense and hassle. Thanks!