230.40 exception number 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

hhsting

Senior Member
Location
Glen bunie, md, us
Occupation
Junior plan reviewer
Attached sketch has incoming utility transformer service conductor to pole where service conductors split to weather head masts P1 to P4. Two views are shown Front View and Side View. Building has four tenant. There is tenant #1 first floor has basement also belong to tenant #1. Same deal with tenant #2 to tenant #4 with basement #2 to basement #4 belong to each respective tenant.

Per NEC 2014 230.40 exception no.1 I can have one set of overhead services to each occupancy. So P1 to P3 each have one set of overhead service conductors to tenants as shown on attached sketch.

However, P4 Side View has conductors on roof to opposite side, go downoutside wall building then half way down into the building common area basement.

So is common area occupancy? Question is does P4 installation comply per Nec 2014 Article 240.40 exception no. 1?
dbd36f9d4a3b77e4a783b6e2871a74d9.jpg


Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

augie47

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee
Occupation
State Electrical Inspector (Retired)
IMO, unless you have fire walls rated to make those separate buildings you are in violation of 230.72
 

hhsting

Senior Member
Location
Glen bunie, md, us
Occupation
Junior plan reviewer
IMO, unless you have fire walls rated to make those separate buildings you are in violation of 230.72
Yes each tenant is separared by fire wall. However what about P4 that does not go to tenant space but common area and nec 2014 230.40 exception no.1 says each occupancy. Can that be done?

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 

hhsting

Senior Member
Location
Glen bunie, md, us
Occupation
Junior plan reviewer
Yes each tenant is separared by fire wall. However what about P4 service entrance conductor does not go to tenant space but common area for house panel and nec 2014 230.40 exception no.1 says each occupancy. Can that be done?




Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 

david

Senior Member
Location
Pennsylvania
Yes each tenant is separared by fire wall. However what about P4 service entrance conductor does not go to tenant space but common area for house panel and nec 2014 230.40 exception no.1 says each occupancy. Can that be done?Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk

What separates the common area from tenant basement # 3 and tenant basement #4?

Who owns the pole that the service conductors are split off and and head to different locations?

Where are the meters for P1, P2 and P4

WHAT loads does P4 supply, Any of them in tenant space P1, P2 , P3 or P4
 
Last edited:

augie47

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee
Occupation
State Electrical Inspector (Retired)
Yes each tenant is separared by fire wall. However what about P4 that does not go to tenant space but common area and nec 2014 230.40 exception no.1 says each occupancy. Can that be done?

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk

a "fire wall" does not necessarily make it a separate building. It mist be a properly rated fire wall (some of the members familiar with building Codes can clarify but I believe it would need to be a 4 hr wall)
 

hhsting

Senior Member
Location
Glen bunie, md, us
Occupation
Junior plan reviewer
What separates the common area from tenant basement # 3 and tenant basement #4?

**** common area and basement tenant space is separated by existing wall not sure fire rating of it if any *****

Who owns the pole that the service conductors are split off and and head to different locations?

**** been told that service point is at each weather mast ****

Where are the meters for P1, P2 and P4

**** yes P1 to P4 each has meters right at the panel location. Panel location shown in sketch but meters are not shown for clarity****

WHAT loads does P4 supply, Any of them in tenant space P1, P2 , P3 or P4

**** P4 supplies House Panel only common loads to all tenants such as common area power and light and HVAC of tenants ****

Please see after **** for response

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

hhsting

Senior Member
Location
Glen bunie, md, us
Occupation
Junior plan reviewer
a "fire wall" does not necessarily make it a separate building. It mist be a properly rated fire wall (some of the members familiar with building Codes can clarify but I believe it would need to be a 4 hr wall)
Each tenant is separated by existing rated firewall. Please see defintion of building NEC 2014 Article 100 it has to be fire rated wall not specify hrs.
 
Last edited:
IMO you really have to talk to your AHJ (electrical and possibly building) about this. The key thing is the word "occupancy" which the NEC does not define. I just mentioned this in another thread, but here in central NY its pretty lax and basically that is interpreted as "occupant" and it doesnt matter if there is any fire separation between units or not. In contrast, in Seattle when I looked into this once, they are very specific about what an "occupancy" is and it gets into a building's classification and even zoning.
 

hhsting

Senior Member
Location
Glen bunie, md, us
Occupation
Junior plan reviewer
IMO you really have to talk to your AHJ (electrical and possibly building) about this. The key thing is the word "occupancy" which the NEC does not define. I just mentioned this in another thread, but here in central NY its pretty lax and basically that is interpreted as "occupant" and it doesnt matter if there is any fire separation between units or not. In contrast, in Seattle when I looked into this once, they are very specific about what an "occupancy" is and it gets into a building's classification and even zoning.
How about uocoming Nec 2020 anything in draft or in Nec 2017?

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 

david

Senior Member
Location
Pennsylvania
Each tenant is separated by existing rated firewall. Please see defintion of building NEC 2014 Article 100 it has to be fire rated wall not specify hrs.

Ok, but as already pointed out that is a building Code Issue and to be a fire wall or a fire assembly type wall would have to meet your areas building code definition

From your drawing it appears that tenant space 3 and 4 service equipment from P3 is installed in what you are defining as a separate common area of basement 3 and 4

From your side view drawing there seems to be a second service P4 also supplying a house panel in that same common area that would be a violation of the number of services that can supply a building

I would think if service for tenant 3 , tenant 4 and house panel P4 could all be supplied by P3 and only have one service for the common area with separate meters as needed you could eliminate service P4 and be in compliance with the NEC
 

hhsting

Senior Member
Location
Glen bunie, md, us
Occupation
Junior plan reviewer
Ok, but as already pointed out that is a building Code Issue and to be a fire wall or a fire assembly type wall would have to meet your areas building code definition

From your drawing it appears that tenant space 3 and 4 service equipment from P3 is installed in what you are defining as a separate common area of basement 3 and 4

From your side view drawing there seems to be a second service P4 also supplying a house panel in that same common area that would be a violation of the number of services that can supply a building


I would think if service for tenant 3 , tenant 4 and house panel P4 could all be supplied by P3 and only have one service for the common area with separate meters as needed you could eliminate service P4 and be in compliance with the NEC

No its actually not that way. P4 is not going in the same common area as P3. There are 2 common areas. P3 common area is in basement of tenants 3 and 4. P4 from side view is outside of Tenant 1 to Tenant 4 space. Totally separate common area. P4 is in common area not occupancy. Would sercive entrance conductors of P4 then be 230.40 exception no. 1 compliant?

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
IMO you really have to talk to your AHJ (electrical and possibly building) about this. The key thing is the word "occupancy" which the NEC does not define. I just mentioned this in another thread, but here in central NY its pretty lax and basically that is interpreted as "occupant" and it doesnt matter if there is any fire separation between units or not. In contrast, in Seattle when I looked into this once, they are very specific about what an "occupancy" is and it gets into a building's classification and even zoning.
I agree. NEC doesn't determine what is required to consider a space to be a separate occupancy. Building/zoning codes will. Places that are pretty relaxed on such codes may let people get away with a lot compared to places that are strict on such requirements.

My guess is two hour separation is a minimum requirement in most places though.
 

hhsting

Senior Member
Location
Glen bunie, md, us
Occupation
Junior plan reviewer
Location of house panel does it matter? Can you have separate meter from P3 service and have house panel in common area of tenants #3 and #4 and elimnate P4 be code compliant post #1 configuration?
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
A common area doesn't belong to any particular tenant.

It may not really be a "tenant space" but for the most part is like a separate tenant space, and building codes would typically treat it like a separate tenant space when it comes to partition ratings.
 

david

Senior Member
Location
Pennsylvania
No its actually not that way. P4 is not going in the same common area as P3. There are 2 common areas. P3 common area is in basement of tenants 3 and 4. P4 from side view is outside of Tenant 1 to Tenant 4 space. Totally separate common area. P4 is in common area not occupancy. Would sercive entrance conductors of P4 then be 230.40 exception no. 1 compliant?

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk

Without any input from your building department i would say it complies with the NEC as long as there are no energized conductors or equipment in an occupancy or group of occupancies after the service disconnect to those respective individual ocupancy/group is placed in the open position
 

hhsting

Senior Member
Location
Glen bunie, md, us
Occupation
Junior plan reviewer
Without any input from your building department i would say it complies with the NEC as long as there are no energized conductors or equipment in an occupancy or group of occupancies after the service disconnect to those respective individual ocupancy/group is placed in the open position
Ok what if following is done then its code compliant:

Have separate meter from P3 service and have house panel in utility room which has no fire rating basement that is common to tenants #3 and #4 and elimnate P4. Utility room post #1 attachment is labeled common area Tenant #3 and Tenant #4 basements and it does not extend to first floor. Would this still be code compliant?
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
Ok what if following is done then its code compliant:

Have separate meter from P3 service and have house panel in utility room which has no fire rating basement that is common to tenants #3 and #4 and elimnate P4. Utility room post #1 attachment is labeled common area Tenant #3 and Tenant #4 basements and it does not extend to first floor. Would this still be code compliant?

I got lost in some of your details, but if it is not part of an individual tenant space then it is a separate space that is equal to being another tenant space, if your building codes allow it to exist then per NEC it is essentially a separate tenant space, IMO.

If it is common space to limited number of tenants, it gets tricky and there could be unlimited number of variable conditions here and you may be best to talk with AHJ on those situations.
 

hhsting

Senior Member
Location
Glen bunie, md, us
Occupation
Junior plan reviewer
I got lost in some of your details, but if it is not part of an individual tenant space then it is a separate space that is equal to being another tenant space, if your building codes allow it to exist then per NEC it is essentially a separate tenant space, IMO.

If it is common space to limited number of tenants, it gets tricky and there could be unlimited number of variable conditions here and you may be best to talk with AHJ on those situations.
I dont know about IBC 2015 and local AHJ has nothing to say about this and is odd. They really need help and qualified people at AHJ where project is I suppose. Appraently chief inspector at this AHJ is mute and not helping.

Post #18 question seems to be ok with Post #12 response toeards the end to elminate P4 and have meter in P3 to house panel in utility room common to tenants #3 and #4.

Not sure how this can get unlimited variables or conditions be tricky like you are saying?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top