Existing Electrical Room now surpassing 1000 KVA

[Grouch1980]

For those in the NYC area... we're looking at adding a new Service Switch to an existing electrical room, in NYC. The addition of this switch will push us over 1000 KVA. The electrical room doesn't meet all the requirements put forth by the EPR board. There's only 1 means of egress, and there isn't 5 feet of clearance in front of any Service Switches.

How does one tackle this? If we add the new Service Switch, just make sure there's 5 feet of clearance in front of that switch only? Does everything else in the room stay the same?

 

[Tainted]

I am about to send plans soon to DOB (maybe within a month) with a similar situation... I will let you know how it goes. Just bubble all the new work only and then explain it to them, maybe it'll pass

 

[Tainted]

You can also ask the AHJ this question by submitting a ED76 form:

https://www.nyc.gov/site/buildings/codes/ecric.page

https://www.nyc.gov/assets/buildings/pdf/ed76.pdf

If you ever submit it, let me know what they say. They usually email a response fairly quickly, and then they make it public at the end of the year

 

[charlie b]

I am sure that I'm not the only one who does not know about any KVA limit in electrical rooms. I infer it is a local requirement. I can't offer any help as I don't understand the issue. Can you summarize the requirement?

 

[Tainted]

I am sure that I'm not the only one who does not know about any KVA limit in electrical rooms. I infer it is a local requirement. I can't offer any help as I don't understand the issue. Can you summarize the requirement?

Yes this is a local NYC requirement.

In NYC an electrician cannot design a service rated 1000kVA or more and that NYC requires engineer to design it and oversee it with stamped plans sent to DOB for plan examination and review. This applies up to 2nd level overccurrent devices, wires, equipment, etc..

For example if I have a 208V 3-phase service and I have a 2000 amp service switch, 400 amp service switch and 800 amp service switch, that equals to 3200 amps which equals to 1152kVA. (They take it as worst case scenario by NYC electrical code)

This means an engineer (cannot be an electrician) with his/her stamp must make plans and send it to plan examiner with these requirements:

https://www.nyc.gov/assets/buildings/rules/1_RCNY_4000-01.pdf

 

[Grouch1980]

Sorry for the late responses!

I am about to send plans soon to DOB (maybe within a month) with a similar situation... I will let you know how it goes. Just bubble all the new work only and then explain it to them, maybe it'll pass

Now that I think about it, I did work on a previous EPR submission that had only 1 means of egress. And my submission was approved. I think you're right... maybe this one I'm working on now will pass as well. We're just getting started, so it will be some time before I submit it to the EPR board. But I'll keep you all posted.

 

[Grouch1980]

I am sure that I'm not the only one who does not know about any KVA limit in electrical rooms. I infer it is a local requirement. I can't offer any help as I don't understand the issue. Can you summarize the requirement?

Hi Charlie... it's as Tainted described in Post #5. It's a requirement that is stated in the 2011 NYC Electrical Code... which is the amendments to the 2008 NEC (unfortunately yes, NYC is still years behind).

If you add a Service Switch to an existing electrical room, and the total KVA of the service switches now exceeds 1000 KVA, you are obligated to file your drawings with the DOB's EPR review team (formerly the Advisory Board). Or, if you're working on new construction, and your electrical service will exceed 1000 KVA, you are again obligated to file as well.

The link that Tainted posted lists everything that the electrical drawings must show, which will be reviewed by the EPR team (under 'Filing Requirements').

 

[Tainted]

Sorry for the late responses!

Now that I think about it, I did work on a previous EPR submission that had only 1 means of egress. And my submission was approved. I think you're right... maybe this one I'm working on now will pass as well. We're just getting started, so it will be some time before I submit it to the EPR board. But I'll keep you all posted.

I'd like to add that the city counsel and committees are in talks and are revising the NYC electrical code and they have the draft which can be viewed here:

https://legistar.council.nyc.gov/Le...1ED-4469F3985796&Options=ID|Text|Attachments|

Haven't really heard anybody talk about it but they're working on it.

230.64 draft appears to talk different about egress and that you can have 1 means of egress if clearance is doubled in 1000kVA service. They also are finally changing the wording of "service switchboards" to "service switches".

 

[petersonra]

Sounds like your best option is to figure out some way to avoid encroaching on the limit if you can .

 

[lielec11]

I'd like to add that the city counsel and committees are in talks and are revising the NYC electrical code and they have the draft which can be viewed here:

https://legistar.council.nyc.gov/Le...1ED-4469F3985796&Options=ID|Text|Attachments|

Haven't really heard anybody talk about it but they're working on it.

230.64 draft appears to talk different about egress and that you can have 1 means of egress if clearance is doubled in 1000kVA service. They also are finally changing the wording of "service switchboards" to "service switches".

Actually I was on the phone with one of the EPR reviewers the other day going over a submission. She told me they are very close to approving and implementing the 2020 + Amendments (might be 2017 but not sure).

@Grouch1980 as someone else stated I would generate your floorplan/riser diagram drawings and cloud only the new scope. You can either write a note directly on there, or explain all of the existing conditions you're stuck with when you send the email.

I deal with the EPR group almost daily and it has been a struggle. I don't believe the guidelines are very straightforward with what they expect to see on the submission drawings. For instance sometimes they don't care if you show ground wire sizes or conduit sizes, other times the want to see them. Sometimes they don't want to see switchboard bus sizes, sometimes they do. Just the other day they asked me to add a note regarding voltage drop, which was a new one to me. I asked where this requirement came from (because I've submitted hundreds of jobs and never had this request) but she just talked around the point, basically suggesting it has to do with the NEW code when it is adopted. who knows...

 

[Tainted]

Actually I was on the phone with one of the EPR reviewers the other day going over a submission. She told me they are very close to approving and implementing the 2020 + Amendments (might be 2017 but not sure).

@Grouch1980 as someone else stated I would generate your floorplan/riser diagram drawings and cloud only the new scope. You can either write a note directly on there, or explain all of the existing conditions you're stuck with when you send the email.

I deal with the EPR group almost daily and it has been a struggle. I don't believe the guidelines are very straightforward with what they expect to see on the submission drawings. For instance sometimes they don't care if you show ground wire sizes or conduit sizes, other times the want to see them. Sometimes they don't want to see switchboard bus sizes, sometimes they do. Just the other day they asked me to add a note regarding voltage drop, which was a new one to me. I asked where this requirement came from (because I've submitted hundreds of jobs and never had this request) but she just talked around the point, basically suggesting it has to do with the NEW code when it is adopted. who knows...

Yea, I think what these requirement lack is the explanation of what is required when modifying existing conditions. It is not clear. So I think they look at plans at a case by case basis when it comes to existing. I think they realize working with existing conditions is extremely difficult and they may let things slide. It obviously depends on who reviews it and how competent they are. Not to bash on them, but one of the reviewers asked me some elementary questions about my design and I had to spoon feed them.

 

[lielec11]

Yea, I think what these requirement lack is the explanation of what is required when modifying existing conditions. It is not clear. So I think they look at plans at a case by case basis when it comes to existing. I think they realize working with existing conditions is extremely difficult and they may let things slide. It obviously depends on who reviews it and how competent they are. Not to bash on them, but one of the reviewers asked me some elementary questions about my design and I had to spoon feed them.

I know they are very short staffed and some of the reviewers are not even what I would call "electrical", they are just other DOB staff the city moves around as needed. Not sure why we just don't submit electrical plans like mechanical and plumbing trades do (and like electrical does in almost every other jurisdiction).

 

[Grouch1980]

I'd like to add that the city counsel and committees are in talks and are revising the NYC electrical code and they have the draft which can be viewed here:

https://legistar.council.nyc.gov/Le...1ED-4469F3985796&Options=ID|Text|Attachments|

Nice link! I see what you're saying where they changed 'switchboards' to 'service disconnecting means'. I think that makes it much clearer.

I deal with the EPR group almost daily and it has been a struggle. I don't believe the guidelines are very straightforward with what they expect to see on the submission drawings. For instance sometimes they don't care if you show ground wire sizes or conduit sizes, other times the want to see them. Sometimes they don't want to see switchboard bus sizes, sometimes they do. Just the other day they asked me to add a note regarding voltage drop, which was a new one to me. I asked where this requirement came from (because I've submitted hundreds of jobs and never had this request) but she just talked around the point, basically suggesting it has to do with the NEW code when it is adopted. who knows...

Voltage drop is not even listed in the requirements!

@Grouch1980 as someone else stated I would generate your floorplan/riser diagram drawings and cloud only the new scope. You can either write a note directly on there, or explain all of the existing conditions you're stuck with when you send the email.

Yep, got it.

 

[Grouch1980]

Thanks everyone for the help.