Pril
Member
- Location
- Indy, IN USA
Thank you for offering this forum to those of us who struggle with aspects of NEC!
As you can see by the above Articles listed, my question revolves around how to properly interpret and utilize these - actually along with Art. 230.71 and possibly Art. 230.40.
I've spent the last two days researching and see that this topic has been discussed a few times in this forum, and on many websites and articles. However, it seems I don't quite hit the "gist" since I just know enough to be dangerous!
We very often design multi-tenant retail strip centers that require the flexibility to allow for 10-14 or more potential future tenant spaces. Thus meaning we usually need meters and service centers (or tap boxes or CT cabinets) for each grouping of meters.
We've struggled with the aspect of "single service" to a building and (6) Service Disconnecting Means for years. Building code does not always require a true "Fire Wall" to meet aspects of the building code, and with many newer centers Fire Walls are not required at all if the building is sprinklered. So to call one retail center more than one building is almost impossible from the truest sense of the definition of "building" as far as the building code goes in many cases these days.
In most cases we've provided a fire barrier between "services" if that's what we'd like to call what we often do. We often gang 6 or less meters together with a tap box configuration, showing disconnects on each of the 6 or less meters. Then we place another set of meters and a tap box as needed. Most times, these tap boxes are fed once from a single transformer.
I guess I'm trying to understand the intent of 230.2 and 230.71, to better see how I could help my clients maintain the flexibility that they prefer...with the option for separate meters and service to each individual suite.
I am imagining that my lack of full understanding of the following terms and where they really apply in a case like this one - may be holding me back from best designing and helping my clients achieve a solution that will best suit them:
service, service conductors, service entrance conductors, underground system, service equipment, service lateral, service point and possibly feeders, and secondary.
I believe that the Exception 2 in 230.40 would apply for how we've typically seen these installations occur. But as I try to make sense out of this fully - I am struggling to make certain that I am totally correct, before I reply to the reviewer in this particular case.
I will appreciate any insight you may share - and look forward to the dialog! Thank you!
April
As you can see by the above Articles listed, my question revolves around how to properly interpret and utilize these - actually along with Art. 230.71 and possibly Art. 230.40.
I've spent the last two days researching and see that this topic has been discussed a few times in this forum, and on many websites and articles. However, it seems I don't quite hit the "gist" since I just know enough to be dangerous!
We very often design multi-tenant retail strip centers that require the flexibility to allow for 10-14 or more potential future tenant spaces. Thus meaning we usually need meters and service centers (or tap boxes or CT cabinets) for each grouping of meters.
We've struggled with the aspect of "single service" to a building and (6) Service Disconnecting Means for years. Building code does not always require a true "Fire Wall" to meet aspects of the building code, and with many newer centers Fire Walls are not required at all if the building is sprinklered. So to call one retail center more than one building is almost impossible from the truest sense of the definition of "building" as far as the building code goes in many cases these days.
In most cases we've provided a fire barrier between "services" if that's what we'd like to call what we often do. We often gang 6 or less meters together with a tap box configuration, showing disconnects on each of the 6 or less meters. Then we place another set of meters and a tap box as needed. Most times, these tap boxes are fed once from a single transformer.
I guess I'm trying to understand the intent of 230.2 and 230.71, to better see how I could help my clients maintain the flexibility that they prefer...with the option for separate meters and service to each individual suite.
I am imagining that my lack of full understanding of the following terms and where they really apply in a case like this one - may be holding me back from best designing and helping my clients achieve a solution that will best suit them:
service, service conductors, service entrance conductors, underground system, service equipment, service lateral, service point and possibly feeders, and secondary.
I believe that the Exception 2 in 230.40 would apply for how we've typically seen these installations occur. But as I try to make sense out of this fully - I am struggling to make certain that I am totally correct, before I reply to the reviewer in this particular case.
I will appreciate any insight you may share - and look forward to the dialog! Thank you!
April
