Article 230 Services interpretation question

Status
Not open for further replies.

amflou

Member
Situation: Hotel building with a 12.47 primary service. It has primary metering. Service entrance hits a primary fused switch then connects to a 12.47 to 120/208 dry-type transformer. Transformer connects to a panelboard with a main device. My client is installing a cell site on the roof of the building with an equipment room located on the same level as the above service equipment. The client desires a seperate 120/208 volt service from the utility. The AHJ is denying the plans because (his words follow):

"It is my understanding that since the building is served by a primary service the owners have the option of supplying what ever voltage that they

may need from that service. Thus the argument for Article 230.2(D) does not apply. Article 230.2(B)(1) states that additional services may be permitted

for multiple occupancies where there is no available space for service equipment accessible to all occupants. Space is available so that is not an issue.

The building already has 120/208 as the operating voltage therefore a second service is not permitted."

My contention is that the owners ability to supply "what ever voltage that they may need" is not relevant to meeting the standard set by the Article. Article 230 is specific to services, once the primary passes through the main device it becomes a feeder and is no longer subject to article 230. Therefore this case would meet the criteria to apply 230.2.D Different Characteristics which would allow additional services for different voltages, frequencies, or phases, or for different uses...

What do you all think?

Lou
 
I think I would agree with the insp. ( can't believe I said that) From what was posted I cannot see any special reason to justify another service. The only thing I can come up with is the hotel doesn't want to get involved with separate metering for the cell tower.
 
The hotel currently sub-meters two other wireless carriers. The owner does not want to allow any more load to be put onto the existing main panel. He wants a new panel installed because of its condition (40 years old in poor shape). Changing the panel is easy enough, however it is an active hotel and this would require clearing the hotel of guests (which the owner doesn't want to do without compensation). But I don't believe any of this is relevant to the actual question of the article.

Isn't the carrier akin to a tenant in a multi-occupancy building which has multiple services to serve each tenant space?

Lou
 
amflou said:
Isn't the carrier akin to a tenant in a multi-occupancy building which has multiple services to serve each tenant space?

Lou

Lou, Maybe that is the problem the AHJ is having, it's not a multi-occupancy
building, it's a hotel , it only needs one meter.

Say you have a house with 10 big rooms and you decide to rent them out,
the house has one meter, but you want to get a meter for each rented area,
I don't think they will give you the other meters, or at least until some kind of
change in the ' type of building ' can be obtained. jmo.
 
Doesn't it become multi-occupancy when you partition off space with firewalls and lease this space to a tenant.

To your example of the house with big rooms, if I separate the rooms properly (fire walls, etc) and call them apartments (assuming it complied to the zoning) I would certainly be able to provide separate services to each unit.

The hotel is zoned commercial. If there was an empty big box space next door that was being divided into smaller tenant spaces, wouldn't multiple services of the same type be allowed to the one building to serve separate spaces?

Lou
 
amflou said:
?My client is installing a cell site on the roof of the building with an equipment room located on the same level as the above service equipment. The client desires a seperate 120/208 volt service from the utility. The AHJ is denying the plans because (his words follow):

"It is my understanding that since the building is served by a primary service the owners have the option of supplying what ever voltage that they?Thus the argument for Article 230.2(D) does not apply. Article 230.2(B)(1) states that additional services may be permitted?The building already has 120/208 as the operating voltage therefore a second service is not permitted."

What do you all think?

Lou

Maybe the client can apply for 480V or 240V service and use a transformer (if needed), 230.2(D).

Maybe the electrical engineer, or yourself, could say another service is needed to allow existing unused amperage space in the 120/208 gear to remain for the future use, 230.2(B)(2).

Does 230.2(A)(4) apply, Optional standby systems?
 
amflou said:
The owner does not want to allow any more load to be put onto the existing main panel. He wants a new panel installed because of its condition.

Changing the panel is easy enough, however it is an active hotel and this would require clearing the hotel of guests (which the owner doesn't want to do without compensation).
"I want you to do something that requires me to shut down, but I don't want to shut down."

Well, that's too bad! Compensation from whom? They people he wants to hire to do the work?

"Pay me for the privelege of letting you doing my work." Where does that mentality come from?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top