517 Essential Electrial Systems and 700 Emergency Systems

[tom baker]

Art 517 did away with term emergency system and now has the essential electrical system, and the term alternate power source is used.
Then Art 700 has a definition of Emergency Systems with an IN that mentions health care.

I am not very familiar with Art 517 and Health Care NFPA 99, is the emergency system in Art 700 what would be considered an alternate power source?

 

[apprntice]

I just went over this subject in class and this is what I understand, please someone correct me if I?m wrong.

Long story short, the term emergency system where used throughout the NEC typically mandates application of requirements in Article 700, as in 517.26 for essential electrical systems(nec2011), at the same time the NFPA99 Health Care Facilities Code also has requirements for the health care facility essential electrical system, many of which were not consistent with Art.700, For that reason and to promote consistency between both NFPA 70 & 99 the term emergency and it?s definition was deleted and in some cases replaced with the term essential electrical system in Art.517 in the NEC2014.

In 517.30(B)(1) (2011) the essential electrical system was comprised of the emergency system ( which included the life safety branch and the critical branch) and the equipment system (or equipment branch).

In 517.30(B)(1) (2014) there are no emergency or equipment systems, however there are 3 required branches, life safety, critical and equipment, which are basically the same.

In 517.26 (2014) only the life safety branch and not the entire essential electrical system is required to meet the requirements of Art.700 except as amended in Art. 517.

With that being said, generally speaking Article 700 should still apply for emergency systems installed in buildings other than health care facilities, except as amended somewhere else.

Now, to answer to your question (and this is just me) only the power sources from 517.35(B) or 517.44(B) can be considered as alternate power sources for hospitals or nursing homes and limited care facilities, which in many cases some of this sources could also fall under 700.12

 

[raider1]

Tom,

CMP 15 wanted to distance it's self and Article 517 from Article 700 due in large part to the definition of selective coordination that CMP 10 clarified for the 2014 NEC. CMP 15 and NFPA 99 want to limit the requirement for selective coordination to a time period of .1 second (See 517.30(C))

(G) Coordination. Overcurrent protective devices serving
the essential electrical system shall be coordinated for the
period of time that a fault?s duration extends beyond
0.1 second.

700.28 requires that emergency systems be selectively coordinated.

The revised definition of selective coordination can be read to require coordination to below the .1 second time frame.

Chris

 

[MasterTheNEC]

What is interesting about this is I placed a proposal (which I am sure will get shot down, I will know because I will be at Hilton Head, SC in January) It is my belief that we need to have Coordination and Selective Coordination in the scope of 517's Essential Electrical System.

I happen to believe (and you can agree to disagree) that Coordination (.1 sec) is fine for the Equipment Branch, but I would like to see Selective Coordination to a higher degree of action in the Critical Care and Life Safety branch (.01 sec).

I provided my substantiation (probably weak since the NEC follows NFPA 99 but never the less it was submitted) so can't wait to listen to the debate from the experts on the panel.

 

[raider1]

What is interesting about this is I placed a proposal (which I am sure will get shot down, I will know because I will be at Hilton Head, SC in January) It is my belief that we need to have Coordination and Selective Coordination in the scope of 517's Essential Electrical System.

I happen to believe (and you can agree to disagree) that Coordination (.1 sec) is fine for the Equipment Branch, but I would like to see Selective Coordination to a higher degree of action in the Critical Care and Life Safety branch (.01 sec).

I provided my substantiation (probably weak since the NEC follows NFPA 99 but never the less it was submitted) so can't wait to listen to the debate from the experts on the panel.

I agree with your proposal, unfortunately I am not on CMP 15.

I will be at Hilton Head in January as well.

I am on CMP 10.

Chris

 

[Rickyghart]

517 v.700

517 v.700

This has come up in my world recently. The term Life Safety as defined in 517 is missing in 700. The confusion comes into play as to what defines Life Safety in the first place. NFPA 101 does a good job of covering all types of occupancies, structures and uses but does that mean that all occupancies, structures and uses have a Life Safety requirement? If it does, then all non-healthcare occupancies, structures and uses should have Fire pumps, smoke evacuation, "emergency generator" and the duplicate ATS for "Life Safety" lighting.

However, not all occupancies, structures and uses are required to have these "Life Safety" features. A free standing concrete, poured in place, open parking storage structure is an example of no fire pump or smoke evac system requirement. It does have a requirement for "emergency" lighting along the path of egress. The term "Emergency" or "Life Safety" needs to be the same between all NFPA publications.

A high rise residence, on the other hand, would even though it is "residential" and I belive that is where 700 is applied correctly.

 

[Pharon]

I happen to believe (and you can agree to disagree) that Coordination (.1 sec) is fine for the Equipment Branch, but I would like to see Selective Coordination to a higher degree of action in the Critical Care and Life Safety branch (.01 sec).

Well, the Life Safety Branch has to comply with Article 700, so that system is already mandated to be selectively coordinated to .01 sec.

So the only question is whether or not the critical branch should be also. Personally, I would defer to the NFPA 99 committee recommendations on that, since that is their primary function.

Do you work in a hospital? Have you come to this conclusion because of widespread issues?

If not, it sounds to me like a solution in search of a problem.

 

[Maders]

since the NEC follows NFPA 99

This not the case. NFPA 70-517 is responsible for electrical installation practices in healthcare facilities whereas NFPA 99 Chapter 6 is responsible for the performance of the electrical systems in healthcare facilities. Selective coordination is a performance issue not an installation issue so any proposed changes to the requirements of selective coordination in healthcare facilities must be petitioned to NFPA-99 HEA-ELS, not the CMP responsible for 517. This is not an opinion, it is a position that has been re-iterated by the NFPA Standards Council in several rulings concerning this issue.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

This not the case. NFPA 70-517 is responsible for electrical installation practices in healthcare facilities whereas NFPA 99 Chapter 6 is responsible for the performance of the electrical systems in healthcare facilities. Selective coordination is a performance issue not an installation issue so any proposed changes to the requirements of selective coordination in healthcare facilities must be petitioned to NFPA-99 HEA-ELS, not the CMP responsible for 517. This is not an opinion, it is a position that has been re-iterated by the NFPA Standards Council in several rulings concerning this issue.

Maybe you misunderstood my statement....the CMP that deals with 517 followed the direction of NFPA 99 which is (and you can ask NFPA's Mr. Early) imposing the direction onto CMP 15. Also I sit two doors down from an employee of mine who is on CMP15 and he confirms what I just said.

 

[Maders]

Maybe you misunderstood my statement....the CMP that deals with 517 followed the direction of NFPA 99 which is (and you can ask NFPA's Mr. Early) imposing the direction onto CMP 15. Also I sit two doors down from an employee of mine who is on CMP15 and he confirms what I just said.

I am sorry but I do not agree. 99 HEA-ELS does not have the authority to direct CMP15 to do anything.

CMP15 and HEA-ELS did have conflicting views over the ownership of the requirements of selective coordination in health care facilities. This came to a head when in 2011 the Standards Council heard an appeal issued by the National Electrical Fuse Association which sought to return a portion of 99 dealing with selective coordination. The SC ultimately ruled in favor of HEA-ELS and CMP15 was directed (via the TCC) to extract the requirements of 99:6.4.2.1.2.1.

From the SC's ruling: "In this Decision, the Council has concluded that selective coordination (cascading outages) properly falls within the jurisdiction of NFPA 99. The NEC project should proceed, as part of its standards development activities, to harmonize the NEC with the relevant provisions of NFPA 99. "

Your employee two doors down might remember this.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

I am sorry but I do not agree. 99 HEA-ELS does not have the authority to direct CMP15 to do anything.

CMP15 and HEA-ELS did have conflicting views over the ownership of the requirements of selective coordination in health care facilities. This came to a head when in 2011 the Standards Council heard an appeal issued by the National Electrical Fuse Association which sought to return a portion of 99 dealing with selective coordination. The SC ultimately ruled in favor of HEA-ELS and CMP15 was directed (via the TCC) to extract the requirements of 99:6.4.2.1.2.1.

From the SC's ruling: "In this Decision, the Council has concluded that selective coordination (cascading outages) properly falls within the jurisdiction of NFPA 99. The NEC project should proceed, as part of its standards development activities, to harmonize the NEC with the relevant provisions of NFPA 99. "

Your employee two doors down might remember this.

They do....and of what they remember they were directed to follow the logic of NFPA 99 as the authority on the subject. Also it is important to remember that were directed via TCC which goes back to what I was saying. The CMP 15 can debate everything but at the end of the day you see where it went....(.1) in accordance with NFPA 99's desires.