There is no purpose built workflow in RME for this task unless you consider detail lines and symbols (that don't exist in the library) as purpose built. I picture a concept where I can use a symbol representation of loaded families in a riser diagram view to define the overall relationship of the design elements.
We can do this now with a Legend View. Hold on, don't get excited...face based based symbols don't work very well in legends because they won't orient to the view correctly and you can't rotate the symbol into the correct orientation. Legend views do not support "rotate view on sheet" either so scratch Legends as a viable approach.
I imagine using "real" symbols of these components at first and then later worrying about placing the "real" element in the model. These real symbols would be complimented with annotation symbols that depict the inner workings of switch gear and fuses for example as well other such detail as needed. Then good old detail lines round out the feature. This way the symbols are not disconnected from the real elements and if they change in either location they will update the model. This makes perfect sense in my head...I'm just not sure it is coming out here...
Now that I've babbled about that here's another thought I've been tossing around for the interim. I can create interior elevation views of electrical equipment rooms. These views can be stripped down to just show the electrical stuff. They can be arranged on a sheet with a basic no frills view title. Once all the required equipment is visible on the sheet detail lines can interconnect all the various equipment "close enough"..."eyeball"... so that when the sheet is printed it looks convincing.
We can eliminate the elevation symbols from cluttering real project views by placing them in a floor plan view that uses a ridiculous scale like 6"=1'-0" since it would never fit on a sheet. The elevation symbol will use the "Hide at scales coarser than" parameter and not show up at any scale coarser than the "nutty" scale I used. Here's an over simplication of the concept...
To compliment this basic layout using the actual model we could create drafting views of the internal workings of fuses and breaker assignments etc, place them on the sheet near by and use detail lines to sketch a "balloon" and leader back to the riser diagram to indicate where the enlarged diagram is referring to. Like this technically incorrect oversimplification.
If needed a 3D view can supplement the diagram but you can't tag the elements in this view (madness!) so text would have to be coordinated against the tags used in the other view(s).