# Service conductors entering ats enclosure before service disconnect enclosure



## 64pvolvo1800 (Jan 29, 2013)

Electron_Sam78 said:


> I have situation where there is an ATS installed on the supply side of a service. It is a non-service rated ATS and we need a way to disconnect power for service and maintenace of the ATS - and to be code compliant *(this violation was missed by the QA inspector beforethe building was accepted).* I have attached a drawing of what I have now (before) and what I want to do to remedy the situation (after). The only issue that I see might come up is the service conductors entering the ATS enclosure before the retro-installed service disconnect enclosure. Is there something in the NEC about this? I can't seem to find anything. Apparently the guys at MHF don't have any comment on this:001_huh:
> 
> ​


So this is a new install? I wouldnt do anything but RIGHT it. How big a service are we talking? Seems like someone needs to belly up to the bar and buy everyone drinks on this one.


----------



## gnuuser (Jan 13, 2013)

it depends on the size of the service but the entrance cable should route through the disconnect enclosure first through a seperate conduit then to the ats this will do away with splicing conductors in the ats
Ive had to do similar disconnect installs for 3 phase motors in our conveyor systems


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

This is an existing service (refer to the "before" pic) where I want to install the proper service disconnect enclosure. THere's no going back to the original installer and making them do it right on this. That's not an option. I already know that I can't put the service conductors in the same nipple as the feeders so disregard that, I can use 2 separate nipples. The ATS is floor mounted on a concrete slab foundation. To really make it right I'd have to dig the service lateral up outside the building and install the SD there. I just thought I'd run this by you all and see if I could keep from doing that.


----------



## 64pvolvo1800 (Jan 29, 2013)

Electron_Sam78 said:


> This is an existing service (refer to the "before" pic) where I want to install the proper service disconnect enclosure. THere's no going back to the original installer and making them do it right on this. That's not an option. I already know that I can't put the service conductors in the same nipple as the feeders so disregard that, I can use 2 separate nipples. The ATS is floor mounted on a concrete slab foundation. To really make it right I'd have to dig the service lateral up outside the building and install the SD there. I just thought I'd run this by you all and see if I could keep from doing that.


That really is a tossup and subject to the AHJ from day to day  
\
In Florida we had a binch of sites back in the day, where the inspector decided the ATS IS a disconnect. What a nightmare for the maintennce and repair of the ATS in the future. 
Good luck getting an inspector to OK the concept and bless the reality after you reconfigure it.


----------



## gnuuser (Jan 13, 2013)

Electron_Sam78 said:


> This is an existing service (refer to the "before" pic) where I want to install the proper service disconnect enclosure. THere's no going back to the original installer and making them do it right on this. That's not an option. I already know that I can't put the service conductors in the same nipple as the feeders so disregard that, I can use 2 separate nipples. The ATS is floor mounted on a concrete slab foundation. To really make it right I'd have to dig the service lateral up outside the building and install the SD there. I just thought I'd run this by you all and see if I could keep from doing that.


if possible
mount the disconnect switch beside the ats connecting it with short nipples. (making sure your wire will reach the terminals in the disconnect switch)
disconnect the entrance from the top of the contactor and feed them through to the disconnect then run new conductors through the second nipple back th the contactor
this would be similar to the drawing you have with the exception of no possible splices in the conductors

hope this helps


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

64pvolvo1800 said:


> ...the inspector decided the ATS IS a disconnect.


 This would be a violation of 230.94 unless it's a service rated ATS. Ours is not.


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

FYI I am the AHJ in this case. We are not subject to any inspection authorities at this particular area.


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

Here's the update version of what I intend to do. I don't think it will be an issue with the AHJ :laughing:. The service conductors would already be entering the ATS enclosure if it were a service rated ATS. I'm just detouring them


----------



## 64pvolvo1800 (Jan 29, 2013)

Electron_Sam78 said:


> This would be a violation of 230.94 unless it's a service rated ATS. Ours is not.


Wholeheartedly agree witcha! It was a real problem for the service organization. 

If you ARE the AHJ, then havatit! 

From the drawing, I'm curious what brand you have there. If Asco, then the top has E and L and N is on the bottom. Onan and Zenith L is usually on the right and N on top. Is it a CH?


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

It is a Kohler and I just did that from memory so I wouldn't quote me on positioning.


----------



## wildleg (Apr 12, 2009)

as others said, its wrong, fix it. Install a service rated disco before the ATS if you can't figure out another way. I'm guessing that it's just a case of noone bothered to check that the ATS wasn't service rated. maybe you can have it field listed - check with the manufacturer.


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

I am going to fix it, just exploring the options. 230.7 disallows service and feeder conductors in the same conduit but they can share gutter space of an enclosure


----------



## 64pvolvo1800 (Jan 29, 2013)

Electron_Sam78 said:


> It is a Kohler and I just did that from memory so I wouldn't quote me on positioning.


 Kohler would likely be Normal on bottom.


----------



## 64pvolvo1800 (Jan 29, 2013)

Electron_Sam78 said:


> I am going to fix it, just exploring the options. 230.7 disallows service and feeder conductors in the same conduit but they can share gutter space of an enclosure


Unfortunately, you're going to have to polaris those puppies most likely. How many amps? If its an 800 or up Iim pretty sure the main cb for SE Asco 300 series would be in the bottom of the ATS cabinet. Maybe throwing an SE ATS is the correct fix. Unfortunately as well, we're talking many $$$$ for an 800A/


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

it's a 600 amp rated ATS. I just checked and yes the Normal is on the bottom. Yeah either polaris or irreversible compressions with heat shrink


----------



## 64pvolvo1800 (Jan 29, 2013)

Electron_Sam78 said:


> it's a 600 amp rated ATS. I just checked and yes the Normal is on the bottom. Yeah either polaris or irreversible compressions with heat shrink


 So for a replacement Asco in 3R 600A you're looking at about 10-12k and it should drop right in place and all the leads "should" reach.


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

Yeah, not in the budget. I like my idea for around $1,500


----------



## 64pvolvo1800 (Jan 29, 2013)

electron_sam78 said:


> Yeah, not in the budget. I like my idea for around $1,500


 
sold!!!!!!!!!!! 8)


----------



## JohnR (Apr 12, 2010)

Document the original very well, for insurance purposes. But IMO, what you have drawn seems to be the best of not so good options. Would it be possible to install a barrier inside the ATS? Just because I don't like the idea of unfused wiring inside a cabinet that is not service rated.

Other options, could you raise the ATS above the floor and install a gutter underneath so that the compression/ polaris connection is in the gutter? Thus not routing the entrance cables through the ATS.


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

JohnR said:


> Document the original very well, for insurance purposes. But IMO, what you have drawn seems to be the best of not so good options. Would it be possible to install a barrier inside the ATS? Just because I don't like the idea of unfused wiring inside a cabinet that is not service rated.
> 
> Other options, could you raise the ATS above the floor and install a gutter underneath so that the compression/ polaris connection is in the gutter? Thus not routing the entrance cables through the ATS.


Yes it's not ideal. The barrier idea could be feasible but raising the ATS wouldn't be any better because then there's the problem of getting over the 3" EMT that connect the ATS to the MDP - The 3" EMT is surface mounted on the wall . I've never done a saddle bend over 3 inch conduit with a 2.5" conduit


----------



## JohnR (Apr 12, 2010)

Yeah, that takes some space up in the run, not something you would do in a tight area anyway.


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

In my opinion, if every thing is bonded properly then all the enclosures are all one big enclosure electrically. If this was a normal service into a panelboard with the main breaker as the SD there would be feeders and branch circuits all together in the enclosure gutters anyway


----------



## bruce6670 (Apr 27, 2010)

Can someone tell me the difference between a service rated ATS and a non service rated ATS ? I'm not familiar with this.


----------



## 64pvolvo1800 (Jan 29, 2013)

bruce6670 said:


> Can someone tell me the difference between a service rated ATS and a non service rated ATS ? I'm not familiar with this.


 Service Entrance incorporates overcurrent device on the utility input side.


----------



## ceb58 (Feb 14, 2009)

You need to look over 312.8 also


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

what's it say? What's it say? I won't have access to my code book until Tuesday


----------



## butcher733 (Aug 4, 2012)

Electron_Sam78 said:


> FYI I am the AHJ in this case. We are not subject to any inspection authorities at this particular area.


 
Where are you at? Illinois has to be the worst state in the union for inspections!


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

I live in Mt. Vernon but the job is in Benton - it's a federally owned building and they had their own government inspectors (QAI) on the job, while the building was being built, that had almost no idea what the electrical codes were. I work at this building and I've come across several obvious violations and they tell me it's too late to go back and make them do it right since it's already been inspected and accepted and the warranty period is over. For example, we have HAZMAT storage building that has 3 branch circuits coming to it with no panelboard - circuit #1 is a 3 phase unit heater, # 2 is lighting, #3 is a service receptacle. Plus there are several other out buildings that have subpanels but they didn't install grounding electrode systems. I argued the ones I found before it would have been too late but the contractors argued back saying their feeder was really a branch circuit and that 250.32 didn't apply. The engineers and QAs bought their load of crap and now I am fixing the ones I come across - with a limited budget of course. Our tax money at work :wallbash:


----------



## ceb58 (Feb 14, 2009)

Electron_Sam78 said:


> what's it say? What's it say? I won't have access to my code book until Tuesday


 It say this

*



 
312.8 Switch and Overcurrent Device Enclosures with
Splices, Taps, and Feed-Through Conductors. The wiring
space of enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices
shall be permitted for conductors feeding through, spliced,
or tapping off to other enclosures, switches, or overcurrent
devices where all of the following conditions are met:
(1) The total of all conductors installed at any cross section
of the wiring space does not exceed 40 percent of the
cross-sectional area of that space.
(2) The total area of all conductors, splices, and taps installed
at any cross section of the wiring space does not
exceed 75 percent of the cross-sectional area of that
space.
(3) A warning label is applied to the enclosure that identifies
the closest disconnecting means for any feed through

Click to expand...






conductors.
​​​​​

Click to expand...

​*​​​​​


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

64pvolvo1800 said:


> Service Entrance incorporates overcurrent device on the utility input side.


It can but is not a requirement of being service rated.


----------



## 64pvolvo1800 (Jan 29, 2013)

BBQ said:


> It can but is not a requirement of being service rated.


So just a disconnect wo over current?


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

64pvolvo1800 said:


> So just a disconnect wo over current?


The code does not require overcurrent protection to be part of the service disconnect. It can be part of it or it can be directly adjacent to it.

The requirements that make it a service rated ATS are the ability to bond the neutral to the enclosure and an externally operable means to manually disconnect both sources of supply. (This info can be found in the UL general directory also known as 'The white book') 

here is a link to an older addtion of the white book. http://www.mikeholt.com/documents/nec/pdf/ULwhite2003.pdf

That said, most service rated ATS will have overcurrent devices in them.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Electron_Sam78 said:


> Here's the update version of what I intend to do. I don't think it will be an issue with the AHJ :laughing:. The service conductors would already be entering the ATS enclosure if it were a service rated ATS. I'm just detouring them


Where is the meter?


----------



## 64pvolvo1800 (Jan 29, 2013)

BBQ said:


> The code does not require overcurrent protection to be part of the service disconnect. It can be part of it or it can be directly adjacent to it.
> 
> The requirements that make it a service rated ATS are the ability to bond the neutral to the enclosure and an externally operable means to manually disconnect both sources of supply. (This info can be found in the UL general directory also known as 'The white book')
> 
> ...


That's odd because all ats SE models only include the utility side disconnect and not the generator. I guess they get around the code by claiming the E breaker on he machine as a disconnect. I've sold Asco, Kohler, Generac, Znith, and others and one have two disconnects. Not doubting you but that's just the quirks I guess. Just like the locales where they claim the ATS IS the disconnect and go straight in from the meter. That's insane, cheap, and dangerous as hell. Tech arrives to a fried TS coil and we have to wait for FP&L to arrive and kill it just to work. Idiocy.


----------



## Electron_Sam78 (Feb 26, 2010)

BBQ said:


> Where is the meter?


It's CT metered and the meter is mounted to the utility transformer


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

64pvolvo1800 said:


> That's odd because all ats SE models only include the utility side disconnect and not the generator.


I had to look at the requirement for a while before it hit me.

It has to disconect each source _intended to be a service_ per NEC defintion only a utility provides a service so I guess just a switch for the service and not for the generator feeder is OK.



> TRANSFER SWITCHES (WPTZ)
> GENERAL
> This category covers automatic and nonautomatic transfer switches,
> including associated control devices, with maximum ratings of 600 V ac
> ...


There is more but that is where it covers the service rating.


----------

