# 6 disconnect rule... oops!



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

How's this for getting caught with your pants down. 

Went to do a partial service change today for some work that was looked at several weeks ago. Five-gang meter can, overhead fed, that was getting water in it pretty bad. Panels are undamaged, so the plan was to change the meter can, line side riser conduit, and load side SE cables to each panel. The panels were all in a line in the basement, and there were only 5 of them, so I thought I was good to go. Inspector arrives this morning while I'm still working, and goes in the basement (I'm still outside). I just assume he's looking over the water bonding situation and such, and expected he'd be out in a few minutes and wave goodbye. Well... the guy just looks as me with a bit of a sad face. It seems he noticed something I didn't. All five of those panels were split-buss panels. How could I have missed that fact? I even had the covers off and everything. I guess everyone has a bad day once in a while. There were only 5 panels, sure, but there were probably 20-25 disconnects total in those 5 panels. Oops! The last inspection sticker was still there, from September of 1980. I'm not even sure that was legal then. The inspector's name on that old inspection sticker I recognized right away, because the guy used to work for me (Hi Austin!), so I sorta understand why it passed. He'd pass anything for a 20 dollar handshake, some people believe. 

Anyhow, there's my story for today. Maybe someone else won't get caught with their pants down like I did today. Luckily, the customer is super-cool, and doesn't mind a bit that he'll have to pay more for panel changes now. The inspector was cool about it too. He let me do my work as planned, and will let me swap out the panels when it can get worked in the schedule. I just left the cables long so they'll be long enough for whatever new panels go in.


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

Wow Marc, I would have missed that also!

Thanks, I will be on the lookout for that situation in the future!

Can you add a main disconnect, maybe outside by the meter bank?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Roger123 said:


> Wow Marc, I would have missed that also!


Well, I'm not especially ashamed that I missed it, but I am disappointed with myself. I'm usually pretty sharp on the oddball stuff that can bite you. I've run into this before, so there really wasn't any excuse for missing it. 



Roger123 said:


> Can you add a main disconnect, maybe outside by the meter bank?


Sure, I could have put a main disco before the meter can, but it was a true 400 amp riser. That would have been one expensive disco. Replacing 5 panels is much cheaper, since they don't have very many circuits in them, they're surface mounted on a piece of plywood in the basement, they're all in a row, so it should just be a few hour job. 

The other problem that crops up if I would have added a disco before the meter can is that the panels would have had to be subfed now. Each panel contains an old 3-wire range circuit. The 3-wire range circuits aren't permitted to originate from a subpanel, so the range circuits would have to be re-run. Just too many issues. Better to get rid of the old split-buss crap. Even if I'd have used 5, 100 amp weatherproof disco's outside (one for each panel), I'd still be in the position of subfeeding the existing panels and the range circuit problem crops up again.


----------



## Roger123 (Sep 23, 2007)

Yes, agreed.

Easiest to replace the panels.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

Every once in a while we all miss something,I/we just hope it does not cost us the farm to fix/repair or convince the customer this was an unforseen circumstance requiring extra dollars.


----------



## te12co2w (Jun 3, 2007)

What a bummer. It is easy to miss those split buss panels though, especially with everything else going on.


----------



## kbsparky (Sep 20, 2007)

I disagree with your inspector. EACH meter is its own service[230.2(D)]. EACH service is allowed to have up to 6 disconnects. The installation was _Code_ compliant in 1980, and still is today.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

kbsparky said:


> I disagree with your inspector. EACH meter is its own service[230.2(D)]. EACH service is allowed to have up to 6 disconnects. The installation was _Code_ compliant in 1980, and still is today.


That's okay, but I disagree with you and agree with the inspector. It's one service, that happens to be metered 5 times. These meters were all the same voltage, frequency, and rate schedule. There was one service drop, one service riser, then it just hit a meter can. That doesn't magicly make it 5 services now.


----------



## kbsparky (Sep 20, 2007)

How many folks are getting billed for those 5 meters? All to the same person, or for 5 different occupancies???

You know, I spend lots of time and money attending those continuing education classes, and have done so over the past 20 years. One of the things that was brought up at one of those classes was this very subject.

Each meter can be considered its own service, since it has a unique customer, who gets their own unique electric bill (which can have different rates, BTW), and further so long as that customer has access to his or her own service disconnect(s), it can be considered _Code_ compliant.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

kbsparky said:


> How many folks are getting billed for those 5 meters? All to the same person, or for 5 different occupancies???
> 
> You know, I spend lots of time and money attending those continuing education classes, and have done so over the past 20 years. One of the things that was brought up at one of those classes was this very subject.
> 
> Each meter can be considered its own service, since it has a unique customer, who gets their own unique electric bill (which can have different rates, BTW), and further so long as that customer has access to his or her own service disconnect(s), it can be considered _Code_ compliant.


I think the code language could be more clear. I think we could both be correct, and I think (or rather, know) that this is interpreted differently in different areas. I don't see the fact that different people get power bills as a reason to get 230.2(D) relief. 

Look at exhibit 230.3 in the '05 handbook. It shows "two services", according to the text, which each have 6 meters. They don't call this "twelve services".


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

Marc {MDShunk}:

Thanks for head up with this info in case i run into the apartment complexes.

I almost got my pants down on one commercal location but lucky the inspector almost overlook one item the total number of disconnects.

For the split buss panel box that something i useally dont run into not too often but glad that you remind us about that 

Merci , Marc


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

I did a service change once on an overhead service, and missed the pool the overhead wires were too close to. Although there was no water in the pool and it was debatable if it were ever to be used again. oh well no excuse.


----------



## gilbequick (Oct 6, 2007)

What does the code say about the pool and overhead wires?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

gilbequick said:


> What does the code say about the pool and overhead wires?


There's a diagram and a chart in 680.8, but basicly the conductors need to be at least 22-1/2 feet from the water if it's secondary, and 25 feet from the water in any direction if it's primary. It's a smidge more involved than that. You really got to look at the diagram and the table, but that's the condensed version.


----------



## bigredc222 (Oct 23, 2007)

I did a 60 unit apartment complex last summer. It had a 3000 amp service that then fed 60 meters, all billed separately from the power Co. to the renter. Your saying I could have had 360 disc. to turn off the building. I'm all for saving money by interpreting the code to our advantage, but this one doesn't hold water. The idea is for a firefighter or other emergency personal, to be able to shut the building down in no more than 6 moves. It goes by the building. I'm not saying you can't find an inspector to slap a sticker on it. I don't think is safe


----------

