cselectric
Senior Member
- Location
- Wisconsin
I came across something I've never seen before today. It seems like it should be a code violation, but I can't find anything to support that.
This is a small retail property divided into two tenant spaces (it appears to have originally been one.) On the back of the building is a tap box, nippled to a gutter. From the gutter, the service conductors enter two 200A meter sockets, then terminate into 2 seperate 200A disconnects. There is a nipple out of the back of both disconnects, throughm the wall and into a 400A MLO (fused at 200) in the first tenant space. From the top of that panel, a 2" EMT runs to a second panel in the other tenant space. Effectively, the feeders for one tenant space are routed through the panel of the other tenant space.
The 400A panel is large enough to be used as a raceway without violating code.
The wall between the spaces is a two hour fire rated partition, which does not meet the UBC definition of a fire wall, therefore these are not seperate buildings per art.100, so 230.3 doesn't apply.
Both panels are fed by disconnects at the meter location, so 230.72 isn't violated, nor is 230.70(A)(1)
Aside from violating common sense, is there any other violation here?
This is a small retail property divided into two tenant spaces (it appears to have originally been one.) On the back of the building is a tap box, nippled to a gutter. From the gutter, the service conductors enter two 200A meter sockets, then terminate into 2 seperate 200A disconnects. There is a nipple out of the back of both disconnects, throughm the wall and into a 400A MLO (fused at 200) in the first tenant space. From the top of that panel, a 2" EMT runs to a second panel in the other tenant space. Effectively, the feeders for one tenant space are routed through the panel of the other tenant space.
The 400A panel is large enough to be used as a raceway without violating code.
The wall between the spaces is a two hour fire rated partition, which does not meet the UBC definition of a fire wall, therefore these are not seperate buildings per art.100, so 230.3 doesn't apply.
Both panels are fed by disconnects at the meter location, so 230.72 isn't violated, nor is 230.70(A)(1)
Aside from violating common sense, is there any other violation here?
