NFPA 70 110.26(D)

[dannyboy]

I am finding a hole between LEED ASHRAE 90.1 and NFPA 70 safety.

NFPA 70 110.26(D) refers to

"...In electrical equipment rooms, the illumination
shall not be controlled by automatic means only."

Definition of "electrical equipment rooms" is missing. I understand the basic intent, but see many ways to address this intended issue of safety.

In rooms that are not just dedicated to Electrical Equipment is where I am most concerned in enforcement of both requirements of having maditory automatic lighting controls and safety.

In dedicated rooms I understand having a building wide lights OFF sweep is definatly an issue and easy to defend. I also feel Occupancy sensors with motion/sound or motion/infrared for example allow the intent of energy savings and do not effect safety, yet a few of my inspectors think these are not adequate.

Any feedback is appreciated.

 

[dannyboy]

Added information

Added information

In reviewing the NFPA 70 2011 it changed the "Electrical equipment room" to "all working spaces about service equipment, switchboards, panelboards, or motor control centers installed indoors".

This basicly does not allow anyone to place panels anywhere else in the building like corridors, offices, kitchens and meet Federal mandated compliance with meeting LEED for federal buildings. The key words are still "shall not be controlled by automatic means only".

 

[infinity]

So you're saying that LEED certified installations would have lights that are automatically controlled, therefore a panel, etc. could not be in any of the rooms or hallways.

 

[Volta]

In reviewing the NFPA 70 2011 it changed the "Electrical equipment room" to "all working spaces about service equipment, switchboards, panelboards, or motor control centers installed indoors".

This basicly does not allow anyone to place panels anywhere else in the building like corridors, offices, kitchens and meet Federal mandated compliance with meeting LEED for federal buildings. The key words are still "shall not be controlled by automatic means only".

I am not very familiar with the various LEED requirements, but I fear you might be right from your paraphrasing. A single wall-switch operated light fixture near the elelctrical equipment will satisfy NEC 70, but I can't speak to the LEED language.

 

[dannyboy]

Supervisor Response

Supervisor Response

My current direction, from my supervisor, is to utilize a keyed switch at the entry into the space or area to bypass the occupancy sensors and force the lights ON. This meets the code and intent for being "green". This way general access can occure with automation controlling the lights, and when safety during work is of concern the maintenance personnel have a way to override the automation.

I still think this code change was not thought through very well and I will be submitting a requested adjustment.

 

[chris kennedy]

In rooms that are not just dedicated to Electrical Equipment is where I am most concerned in enforcement of both requirements of having maditory automatic lighting controls and safety.

Are you referring to mechanical rooms with electrical equipment? If thats the case IMO automatic shut off should not be used as per the exception to 505.2.2.2 2009 IECC.

505.2.2.2 Automatic lighting shutoff.

Buildings larger than 5,000 square feet (465 m²) shall be equipped with an automatic control device to shut off lighting in those areas. This automatic control device shall function on either:
1. A scheduled basis, using time-of-day, with an independent program schedule that controls the interior lighting in areas that do not exceed 25,000 square feet (2323 m²) and are not more than one floor; or 2. An occupant sensor that shall turn lighting off within 30 minutes of an occupant leaving a space; or 3. A signal from another control or alarm system that indicates the area is unoccupied.

Exception: The following shall not require an automatic control device: 1. Sleeping unit (see Section 505.2.3). 2. Lighting in spaces where patient care is directly provided. 3. Spaces where an automatic shutoff would endanger occupant safety or security.

 

[renosteinke]

If you look at the fine print of those 'energy' codes, you will see that they specifically defer to the NEC- and any other building code, for that matter.

I'm just waiting for the NCAA playoffs, where the manual override of the lighting controls times out right as they enter sudden-death ....

 

[dannyboy]

Response On safety

Response On safety

The key here is the intent of both concerns, safety (NFPA) and energy usage (LEED) . So for the few hours in a year the maintenance personnel get in and work on a panel in a corridor justifies not having automatic controls in the corridor? The original ASHRAE 90.1 manditory requirement is federal government building LAW written before NFPA added this text. Would you like to pay the extra utility bills for this lighting? Is the safety concern added by NFPA assuming electricians are not smart enough to have a light on them before getting into a panel? What do they do when the panel they are working on feeds the lights? When I opened panels, I expected to provide my own lighting.

 

[chris kennedy]

Is the safety concern added by NFPA assuming electricians are not smart enough to have a light on them before getting into a panel?

They sure are, just as the NFPA assumes that electricians aren't smart enough to work on MWBC's safely.

 

[pfalcon]

... So for the few hours in a year the maintenance personnel get in and work on a panel in a corridor justifies not having automatic controls in the corridor? ...

As you observe, a lot of money would be wasted that could otherwise have been used for items that provide additional safety. So wasting money would cost lives. Just because we can spend $1 to save 1/100,000th of a life doesn't mean we couldn't better spend that same dollar to save 1/99,999th of a life somewhere else.

They sure are, just as the NFPA assumes that electricians aren't smart enough to work on MWBC's safely.

NFPA is in that lovely political position where they can't acknowledge risk.

... is to utilize a keyed switch at the entry into the space or area to bypass the occupancy sensors and force the lights ON. ...

And this is where that dollar would be better spent. On a keyed or unkeyed bypass switch to the occupancy sensors. You get the ALWAYS ON for service during service and the energy savings the rest of the time. I like this answer.

 

[renosteinke]

This conflict between codes was spotted during the local 'sales pitch' given at our local IAEI meeting. The purpose of the seminar was to educate us as to the California lighting energy codes, as well as the ASHRAE standard.

Buried in the fine print of both- and referenced within LEED- is a declaration that these codes are subsidiary to the 'real' building codes. That is, the NEC trumps ASHRAE 90.

Slightly off point, but I think we need to stress that LEED is NOT just another building code. It does NOT contain specific requirements. Rather, it is a 'point system,' and the scoring is absolutely controlled by the "Green Building Council." Documentation regarding the entire job - everything from counting lights to whether there are shower and bike racks for 'green' commuters- is submitted, with fees, to that organization, and they decide whether to certify the place at all. The certification has a time limit, and must be renewed every few years. With an incremental approach as part of LEED, it is quite possible that today's "gold" building will not be able to get certified at all in a few years, unless changes are made.