Clarification: More Than One Occupancy Buildings 210.25

[Smart $]

210.25(B) essentially says common area branch circuits shall not be supplied from equipment that supplies an individual dwelling unit. It does not specify the equipment be solely for an individual dwelling unit, though it seems to be inferred.

Situation: current service panelboard (1 of 2) supplies all branch circuits to individual dwelling units (6 of 8) and the common branch circuits relative to the 6 units. If new service equipment is installed, can both individual dwelling units and common area branch circuits be supplied from the same panel?


Since this involves dwelling units, I'll likely have more questions... :grin:

 

[Smart $]

......bump

 

[Hendrix]

210.25(B) essentially says common area branch circuits shall not be supplied from equipment that supplies an individual dwelling unit. It does not specify the equipment be solely for an individual dwelling unit, though it seems to be inferred.

Situation: current service panelboard (1 of 2) supplies all branch circuits to individual dwelling units (6 of 8) and the common branch circuits relative to the 6 units. If new service equipment is installed, can both individual dwelling units and common area branch circuits be supplied from the same panel?


Since this involves dwelling units, I'll likely have more questions... :grin:

210.25(B) says no, dosen't it ?

 

[Smart $]

210.25(B) says no, dosen't it ?

Perhaps... perhaps not. That is the question

The "equipment that supplies an individual dwelling unit" could mean said equipment is intended to only to supply an individual dwelling unit (such as a panel accessible only from within the unit)... or it could mean any equipment that supplies one or more individual dwelling units.

FWIW, the existing panel is located in a common area.

 

[C3PO]

210.25 Branch Circuits in Buildings with More Than One Occupancy
B) Common Area Branch Circuits. Branch circuits required for the purpose of lighting, central alarm, signal, communications, or other needs for public or common areas of a two-family dwelling, a multifamily dwelling, or a multi-occupancy building shall not be supplied from equipment that supplies an individual dwelling unit or tenant space


I take that to mean if a piece of equipment (ie panelboard) supplies branch circuits for an individual dweling unit then you can not use it for common loads too regardless of where it is located

 

[cowboyjwc]

Is there one meter or six meters?

 

[Smart $]

Is there one meter or six meters?

One meter for all 8 units.

 

[cowboyjwc]

The reason for my question then is does it really matter where the power comes from. It doesn't sound like the tenents are paying the electric bill. Now I know what the code section says, but that's to prevent things like what happened here in town when some owners in a condo complex found out that they were paying for the laundry rooms.

I would say that if the owner is paying the electric bill and the tenents simply pay $xxx for rent, then it doesn't really matter.

Let the beatings begin.:grin:

 

[Smart $]

I take that to mean if a piece of equipment (ie panelboard) supplies branch circuits for an individual dweling unit then you can not use it for common loads too regardless of where it is located

It's not that I disagree, but it says "an individual dwelling unit" and makes no distinguishment from a panel that supplies branch circuits for more than one individual dwelling unit.

The panel serves what was formerly a section of a by-the-wayside motel. There is currently only one branch circuit to each unit. The remainder of the branch circuits are common to all served.

 

[Smart $]

The reason for my question then is does it really matter where the power comes from. It doesn't sound like the tenents are paying the electric bill. Now I know what the code section says, but that's to prevent things like what happened here in town when some owners in a condo complex found out that they were paying for the laundry rooms.

I would say that if the owner is paying the electric bill and the tenents simply pay $xxx for rent, then it doesn't really matter.

Let the beatings begin.:grin:

This is the same premise I'm leaning towards...

 

[Smart $]

What does the Handbook have to say on the matter?

 

[C3PO]

What does the Handbook have to say on the matter?

From the handbook:

Not only does 210.25 prohibit branch circuits from feeding more than one dwelling unit, it also prohibits the sharing of systems, equipment, or common lighting if that equipment is fed from any of the dwelling units. In addition, common area circuits in other than dwelling occupancies are now subject to this requirement, and "house load " branch circuits must be supplied from equipment that does not directly supply branch circuits for an individual occupancy or tenant space. The systems, equipment, or lighting for public or common areas is required to be supplied from a separate "house load" panelboard. This requirement permits access to the branch circuit disconnecting means without the need to enter the space of any tenants. The requirement also prevents a tenant from turning off important circuits that may affect other tenants.

 

[Smart $]

From the handbook:

Not only does 210.25 prohibit branch circuits from feeding more than one dwelling unit, ...

The current panel arrangement (for 6 units anyway) complies with this, as each unit is served by its very own, single branch circuit.

...it also prohibits the sharing of systems, equipment, or common lighting if that equipment is fed from any of the dwelling units. ...

Again, current arrangement is in compliance, as there is no equipment in any of the 6 dwelling units.

... In addition, common area circuits in other than dwelling occupancies are now subject to this requirement, and "house load " branch circuits must be supplied from equipment that does not directly supply branch circuits for an individual occupancy or tenant space. The systems, equipment, or lighting for public or common areas is required to be supplied from a separate "house load" panelboard. This requirement permits access to the branch circuit disconnecting means without the need to enter the space of any tenants. The requirement also prevents a tenant from turning off important circuits that may affect other tenants.

This is where compliance starts to be debatable. The stipulation is ambiguous. It's as if the only distribution design permitted is separate panelboards for each dwelling unit and one or more additional panelboards for common loads. I can't see that as a problem for new installations.

So I can understand the requirement if that is how the system is designed... but where in the code does it say the system must be designed that way? Furthermore, this is not a new design and installation. It was designed and installed differently and way prior to this section being written into the code. :-?

All that is desired is replacement of an existing service entrance conductor and main panelboard. It had been mentioned by the owner the desire to, at a later date, install panelboards for and in each unit. So its not like they are wanting to get around the code, it simply isn't within the scope of the "initial phase" :roll:

 

[C3PO]

In your situation, I do see most AHJ's having an issue with what you are wanting to do since it is existing. Especially since everything is on one meter anyway. Have you talked to your inspector about it?

 

[Smart $]

In your situation, I do see most AHJ's having an issue with what you are wanting to do since it is existing. Especially since everything is on one meter anyway. Have you talked to your inspector about it?

Is that do or don't? If do, it seems to contradict the remainder of that sentence and the next.

Not yet, but planning on it. It appears to be the only way to get a definitive answer :smile:

 

[C3PO]

Is that do or don't? If do, it seems to contradict the remainder of that sentence and the next.

Not yet, but planning on it. It appears to be the only way to get a definitive answer :smile:

Sorry, it should have been don't