Disagreement W/ Inspector - Ethics

[lielec11]

Because the GC doesn't want to pay for 2 ATS. The inspector didn't say you can't have two he just said you don't need two.

GCs usually don't want to pay for a lot of things that isn't something new . Regardless, I would push for code compliance. What if this inspector leaves and someone else comes to your building a year from now when it's installed and they have a problem with it? Guess who the client will be pointing the finger at?

 

[gadfly56]

I agree with Andy's comment above. I don't see the issue with going above and beyond what the inspector is looking for. In this case "above and beyond" is simply code compliant but who is he/she to tell you that you can't over design something? Inspector is definitely wrong here but like I said, if you want want two ATS why can't you use two ATS if everything is code compliant?

In this particular instance it isn't you can have, it's you must have.

 

[ggunn]

Have a lawyer draw up a document that places all the blame and financial responsibility for anything untoward that happens on the premises related to the lack of the second ATS squarely on the shoulders of the inspector. Have him and his boss sign it, and then build the system to his specifications. Walk away whistling.

 

[topgone]

Have a lawyer draw up a document that places all the blame and financial responsibility for anything untoward that happens on the premises related to the lack of the second ATS squarely on the shoulders of the inspector. Have him and his boss sign it, and then build the system to his specifications. Walk away whistling.

Nice one but. . you have to pay the lawyer some.

 

[Andy Delle]

Nice one but. . you have to pay the lawyer some.

Hah! It would probably be cheaper to just eat the second ATS!

 

[Strathead]

Maybe I didn't convey it properly but that was kind of my point. With the inspector eliminating the second transfer switch everything connected would have to comply with the requirements for emergency circuits.

I got it. If everything fed from an article 700 legally required Emergency system must be an emergency circuit per that code section. Then everything hooked up to the panel is a legally required emergency circuit, period. If it is not the it can't be in the panel.

 

[Strathead]

That would be impossible, because they are not, in fact, emergency loads. Putting the ice cream freezer on an emergency ATS does not magically transform it into an emergency load. It has to be an emergency load, by definition, before you draw the one-line.

What comes first the chicken or the egg? Don't get hung up. If it is hooked in to the emergency panel then it is an emergency circuit. Whether it is a legally required emergency circuit and therefor correctly installed is a different issue. That is perfectly clear to me.

 

[Strathead]

No problem. My wordsmanship is somewhat lacking today.

We have had our go arounds, but on this one, I fully understood exactly what you meant. to me it was as plain as the nose on my face.

 

[Strathead]

I agree with the first part but I don't agree with the second part that it needs it's own 2hr rated room.

This may be true for certain occupancy types such as healthcare or nursing homes but for Type R-2 specifically (which I'm dealing with), that is nowhere required in the Mass Building Code.

If I am wrong, please provide where this is required.

Thank You

Review NFPA 110. For the record, I am not just smart, I was recently educated. It isn't a 2 hour wall, per se, it is a separation requirement from normal power transfer equipment.

 

[Strathead]

The inspector is saying you don't need the 2nd ATS for Emergency Lights.

Clearly that's a code violation and I decided I am willing to lose the client and just do the design per code.

There is a second solution. I apologize if this was stated clearly and dismissed. It has been eluded to, I just didn't see it plainly stated. That solution is that you put all required egress lighting on battery backup in your design. I personally don't see how doing an illegal design is even an option unless you make sure you get your money up front, before they get shot down by the AHJ. Which will also likely lose you your client.

 

[gadfly56]

What comes first the chicken or the egg? Don't get hung up. If it is hooked in to the emergency panel then it is an emergency circuit. Whether it is a legally required emergency circuit and therefor correctly installed is a different issue. That is perfectly clear to me.

No, that is simply not true.

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 illumi-
nation, 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.

Unless the circuit meets the purpose above it's not an emergency circuit. If you put it on the emergency ATS it's simply an error.

 

[Strathead]

No, that is simply not true.



Unless the circuit meets the purpose above it's not an emergency circuit. If you put it on the emergency ATS it's simply an error.

Wow, I'd bet you would argue with a rock. If you put it on the emergency ATS it's simply an illegal emergency circuit. Is an equally valid statement.

 

[rlqdot]

I have a situation where I did the electrical design for an apt. bldg. with a generator.

The owner is putting in a generator large enough to power the entire building so the main house panel is going to be on the generator.

My design has a separate transfer switch / panel for the emergency/egress lights since they are considered life safety and the main house panel on the generator has other loads which can't be considered emergency.


The inspector said you don't need the second transfer switch and I am sure this is wrong. Obv. I know it will work but do I submit the design without the 2nd transfer switch (even though I know this is wrong) or lose a client/give back his money?


Thank You

I know I am very late to this game and many of you may not even see my response - the first clarification needed is to understand if this building will have utility power. You MUST establish "normal" power and "emergency" power sources. If there is utility power, that would be the "normal" source. Next question is what will the inhabitants of the building do when "normal" power fails - if they evacuate the building using genset-powered lights, then the genset is an "emergency" power source ... if, on the other hand, they continue to carry on life as normal, then the genset is simply a second "normal" power source. If they continue to occupy the building on genset power and there is no other emergency power source for egress lighting, how will they exit the building when the genset runs out of fuel, fails due to overtemperature or low oil pressure or for any other reason? If there is no utility power, then the genset is the "normal" power source and cannot also act as the "emergency" source. In this situation, if the genset fails, ALL lighting is lost.

If the intention is to continue occupancy on genset power, then the genset is a standby (second "normal" source) and there is no requirement for separate wiring systems, second ATS or any of the other stuff that goes along with EMERGENCY GENERATORS. There is, however, a requirement for battery-backup egress lighting so that the occupants can safely exit the building when / if the genset stops operating and utility power is still unavailable.

Although it is not written anywhere that I can find, it seems that emergency lighting (unit battery pack equipment) defines the intention that a building will be vacated within 90 minutes after "normal" power failure. If there is utility power and 100% genset backup but occupancy is intended to continue for more than 90 minutes after the genset starts, I put in battery E-lights. Maybe this is overkill, but I don't want the lawsuits when someone can't find their way out of a dark building.

 

[romex jockey]

Have a lawyer draw up a document that places all the blame and financial responsibility for anything untoward that happens on the premises related to the lack of the second ATS squarely on the shoulders of the inspector. Have him and his boss sign it, and then build the system to his specifications. Walk away whistling.

Some states have 'plan review' , resolving in their 'stamp', thus the passage places the onus of compliance upon them>>>>(my bold)

700.5 Transfer Equipment.
(A) General. Transfer equipment, including automatic trans‐
fer switches, shall be automatic, identified for emergency use,
and approved by the authority having jurisdiction.

Further, some states have a method of formal complaint , in other words one could let them make the design call, and then document a complaint against it

not exactly the way to make peace with one's AHJ, but certainly a shield against litigation and liability


~RJ~