Article 700 Legally Required Emergency Systems

[Strathead]

This code has always confused me a little bit, for several reasons:

First, which comes first, the designation or the loads? If a decision is made on the design level, to provide a generator that feeds the egress lighting (as a sole secondary power supply, no batteries) does that make it a Legally Required Emergency System? Or Does the AHJ have to designate it as required to be one?

Isn't an emergency "Bug-eye" light with a remote head, in fact, a code 700 emergency system?

I have seen many places at a University that I work, that have emergency lights fed from a conduit system designated "emergency", but the panels also feed things like refrigerators and freezers they don't want shut down. Is this just a blatant violation of article 700 or is there a different, legal, interpretation? If this is, in fact, illegal, why doesn't the NEC require better marking designation and control of emergency power?

 

[iwire]

This code has always confused me a little bit, for several reasons:

First, which comes first, the designation or the loads? If a decision is made on the design level, to provide a generator that feeds the egress lighting (as a sole secondary power supply, no batteries) does that make it a Legally Required Emergency System? Or Does the AHJ have to designate it as required to be one?

If a generator is chosen to supply the required egress lighting then that generator must conform to article 700.

Isn't an emergency "Bug-eye" light with a remote head, in fact, a code 700 emergency system?

Yes it is.

I have seen many places at a University that I work, that have emergency lights fed from a conduit system designated "emergency", but the panels also feed things like refrigerators and freezers they don't want shut down. Is this just a blatant violation of article 700 or is there a different, legal, interpretation? If this is, in fact, illegal, why doesn't the NEC require better marking designation and control of emergency power?

When you use a battery unit the supply to it is not article 700 emergency the supply to t is normal power.

Article 700 applies to the output of a battery unit so if it has say remote heads those would be emergency circuits.

 

[Strathead]

"I have seen many places at a University that I work, that have emergency lights fed from a conduit system designated "emergency", but the panels also feed things like refrigerators and freezers they don't want shut down. Is this just a blatant violation of article 700 or is there a different, legal, interpretation? If this is, in fact, illegal, why doesn't the NEC require better marking designation and control of emergency power?"

When you use a battery unit the supply to it is not article 700 emergency the supply to t is normal power.

Article 700 applies to the output of a battery unit so if it has say remote heads those would be emergency circuits.

Can't figure out how to multi quote, sorry.

That last part of mine, refers to this:

700.15 Loads on Emergency Branch Circuits. No appliances and no lamps, other than thosespecified as required for emergency use, shall be supplied by emergency lighting circuits.

Again confusing wording because the title is emergency branch circuits, but the last words of the section are emergency lighting circuits. I take this to mean that you can't supply loads that are not essential for safety to human life. .

 

[iwire]

Can't figure out how to multi quote, sorry.

That last part of mine, refers to this:

700.15 Loads on Emergency Branch Circuits. No appliances and no lamps, other than thosespecified as required for emergency use, shall be supplied by emergency lighting circuits.

Again confusing wording because the title is emergency branch circuits, but the last words of the section are emergency lighting circuits. I take this to mean that you can't supply loads that are not essential for safety to human life. .

An article 700 system can only supply loads that an AHJ says it must. There are no choices, a load is either required to be on an article 700 supply or it cannot be.

A customer cannot decide the break room coffee machine is an emergency load, or the bosses desk lamp etc. Those would be article 702 optional loads and could be powered from the emergency generator but through a separate transfer switch and distribution system.

700.2 Definitions.

Emergency Systems. Those systems legally required and
classed as emergency by municipal, state, federal, or other
codes, or by any governmental agency having jurisdiction.
These systems are intended to automatically supply illumination,
power, or both, to designated areas and equipment
in the event of failure of the normal supply or in the event
of accident to elements of a system intended to supply,
distribute, and control power and illumination essential for
safety to human life.

 

[steve66]

This code has always confused me a little bit, for several reasons:

First, which comes first, the designation or the loads? If a decision is made on the design level, to provide a generator that feeds the egress lighting (as a sole secondary power supply, no batteries) does that make it a Legally Required Emergency System? Or Does the AHJ have to designate it as required to be one?

Codes require emergency lighting for egress, supplied by an emergency system that meets article 700. So if the designer uses a generator (without any battery powered lights), it is a legally required em system.

Isn't an emergency "Bug-eye" light with a remote head, in fact, a code 700 emergency system?

Yes, as Iwire stated, and in this case the lights could also be supplied with generator power, but the generator power would be non-emergency.

I have seen many places at a University that I work, that have emergency lights fed from a conduit system designated "emergency", but the panels also feed things like refrigerators and freezers they don't want shut down. Is this just a blatant violation of article 700 or is there a different, legal, interpretation? If this is, in fact, illegal, why doesn't the NEC require better marking designation and control of emergency power?

I just recently looked at this also (because I have seen a lot of these installations), and an older NEC (maybe the 1988 version?) did not have the same requirement for separate transfer equipment. It did have a requirement for separate branch circuits to serve emergency lighting.

 

[Strathead]

Thank you both, I guess I had a better grasp of the interpretation than I was willing to assume. To be plain, it can be either designer driven or AHJ driven, but either way, once it becomes the source for Code required emergency lighting, it becomes a Legally required emergency system. Yes?

 

[dkidd]

Thank you both, I guess I had a better grasp of the interpretation than I was willing to assume. To be plain, it can be either designer driven or AHJ driven, but either way, once it becomes the source for Code required emergency lighting, it becomes a Legally required emergency system. Yes?

Yes, unless it is a health facility under 517.

 

[iwire]

once it becomes the source for Code required emergency lighting, it becomes a Legally required emergency system. Yes?

Yes.

At least the portion that is supplied from the emergency system transfer switch.

I work at many locations with a single generator that has 2, 3, 4, maybe more automatic transfer switches. One of those will be the emergency ATS the others will be for optional loads.

Its funny as the emergency transfer switch is a often about 1/4 the capacity of the optional switches as the emergency transfer switch has very little it is allowed to supply.

You cannot even add lighting to it that is not required egress lighting.

So because of that some of the stores I work in will have some sales floor lights on the emergency ATS with the rest of them on the optional ATS.