Occupancy

[hhsting]

What does NEC 2014 Section 230.40 exception no. 1 mean when it says occupancy or group of occupancies?

 

[JGinIndy]

What does NEC 2014 Section 230.40 exception no. 1 mean when it says occupancy or group of occupancies?

A good example would be R2 Multifamily or Mixed Use or combination of both, ie. occupant

 

[hhsting]

A good example would be R2 Multifamily or Mixed Use or combination of both, ie. occupant

Isn’t that occupancy classification not occupancy?

 

[JGinIndy]

That’s how it’s classified as in how the “ Occupant / Occupants “ use of said facility.

 

[hhsting]

That’s how it’s classified as in how the “ Occupant / Occupants “ use of said facility.

Electrical room have occupancy if any then?

 

[JGinIndy]

Per IBC 302.1 which electrical rooms are not specifically mentioned classify it under the group where the electrical room is located. Let’s say it’s am M occupancy then classify it as an S1 or some AHJ say F2

 

[hhsting]

Per IBC 302.1 which electrical rooms are not specifically mentioned classify it under the group where the electrical room is located. Let’s say it’s am M occupancy then classify it as an S1 or some AHJ say F2

All:

In that event please see this post and any opinions thoughts directly in that post:

Two services one multi occupancy bldg

Attached sketch shows utility xfmr1 200A 480/277V existing which feeds the existing fdr #1 electrical room in multi occupancy bldg. The plans now show new xfmr2 800A 480/277V which feeds thru new fdr #2 Electrical Room. Told that a building can have only one service and second is not...

forums.mikeholt.com

 

[don_resqcapt19]

In general each occupancy has its own meter and each meter is permitted to supply a set of service entrance conductors.

 

[hhsting]

In general each occupancy has its own meter and each meter is permitted to supply a set of service entrance conductors.

What if one occupancy has one set of service entrance conductor run to that occupancy and the rest service entrance conductors Do Not go to their respective occupancy instead terminate in fused disconnect in trough electrical room? Would NEC 2014 section 230.40 exception number one still apply to such install?

 

[don_resqcapt19]

What if one occupancy has one set of service entrance conductor run to that occupancy and the rest service entrance conductors Do Not go to their respective occupancy instead terminate in fused disconnect in trough electrical room? Would NEC 2014 section 230.40 exception number one still apply to such install?

The service conductors end at the fused disconnect so I don't know what you are asking. Nothing in Article 230 applies to the conductors after that disconnect.

 

[hhsting]

The service conductors end at the fused disconnect so I don't know what you are asking. Nothing in Article 230 applies to the conductors after that disconnect.

What I meant in that part is the service entrance conductors come from transformer and terminate in main service fused disconnect .

 

[don_resqcapt19]

What I meant in that part is the service entrance conductors come from transformer and terminate in main service fused disconnect .

Still confused...once you are on the load side of the main service disconnect, you no longer apply the rules in Article 230. I guess I need to see a one line diagram.

 

[electrofelon]

Still confused...once you are on the load side of the main service disconnect, you no longer apply the rules in Article 230. I guess I need to see a one line diagram.

I think what he is saying is you have one set go to it's occupancy per 230.40 ex 1, but the other set(s) go to disconnects all grouped in a central location - not to their respective occupancies. I think there is wiggle run in exception #1 as it does say. ".....or group of occupancies."

 

[hhsting]

I think what he is saying is you have one set go to it's occupancy per 230.40 ex 1, but the other set(s) go to disconnects all grouped in a central location - not to their respective occupancies. I think there is wiggle run in exception #1 as it does say. ".....or group of occupancies."

Correct but other set(s) of service entrance conductor(s) run to service disconnects all grouped in electrical room which does not go to their respective occupancies.

So how can one say the other set(s) go to group of occupancies since other set(s) service entrance conductors terminate in electrical room (one occupancy) do not actually run to groups of occupancies?

 

[electrofelon]

Correct but other set(s) of service entrance conductor(s) run to service disconnects all grouped in electrical room which does not go to their respective occupancies.

So how can one say the other set(s) go to group of occupancies since other set(s) service entrance conductors terminate in electrical room (one occupancy) do not actually run to groups of occupancies?

I don't know exactly what they are intending, but they add in the "group of occupancies" so there is clearly something else allowed than just running a set to each occupancy.

Let me give you some advice:. The wording in the NEC is not always perfect and clear. If you are in a position of being the decider/interpreter, then just make a decision and move on.....or like Augie said, die early of heart disease. If it was me I would allow it, and I have been in fact done this exact install.

 

[Fred B]

Correct but other set(s) of service entrance conductor(s) run to service disconnects all grouped in electrical room which does not go to their respective occupancies.

So how can one say the other set(s) go to group of occupancies since other set(s) service entrance conductors terminate in electrical room (one occupancy) do not actually run to groups of occupancies?

What if one occupancy has one set of service entrance conductor run to that occupancy and the rest service entrance conductors Do Not go to their respective occupancy instead terminate in fused disconnect in trough electrical room? Would NEC 2014 section 230.40 exception number one still apply to such install?

What you are indicating is only 2 "occupancies" (points at which service conductor recieve a disconnect) 1 disconnect = 1 occupancy, after which it is no longer a service conductor under Article 230 just as @don_resqcapt19 indicated.

 

[hhsting]

I don't know exactly what they are intending, but they add in the "group of occupancies" so there is clearly something else allowed than just running a set to each occupancy.

Let me give you some advice:. The wording in the NEC is not always perfect and clear. If you are in a position of being the decider/interpreter, then just make a decision and move on.....or like Augie said, die early of heart disease. If it was me I would allow it, and I have been in fact done this exact install.

I am just having trouble visualizing 230.40 exception no. 1 part in which install would one set of service entrance conductor run to group of occupancies. I mean one set of service entrance conductor terminate in main service disconnect which then can be located in electrical room which would be running one set service entrance conductor to one occupancy or main service disconnect can be located outside building which is just outside not running to group of occupancies.

 

[hhsting]

What you are indicating is only 2 "occupancies" (points at which service conductor recieve a disconnect) 1 disconnect = 1 occupancy, after which it is no longer a service conductor under Article 230 just as @don_resqcapt19 indicated.

Sure wish NEC would define occupancy as you stated points at which service conductor receive a disconnect. Thus their was post somewhere what is meant by occupancy.

Do you see what you posted above in NEC anywhere?

 

[hhsting]

I don't know exactly what they are intending, but they add in the "group of occupancies" so there is clearly something else allowed than just running a set to each occupancy.

Let me give you some advice:. The wording in the NEC is not always perfect and clear. If you are in a position of being the decider/interpreter, then just make a decision and move on.....or like Augie said, die early of heart disease. If it was me I would allow it, and I have been in fact done this exact install.

electrofelon buddy I am just really confused at this point by NEC. Let’s say if what you say is correct then in attached sketch two services I have two electric utility transformers one 200A and another 800A both 480/277V three phase in commercial multioccupancy building each have one set of service entrance conductors in electrical room SWGRs which then serve group of occupancies. What’s to stop anyone from saying it’s per 230.40 exception no. 1 and thus it’s allowed?

 

[Fred B]

Sure wish NEC would define occupancy as you stated points at which service conductor receive a disconnect. Thus their was post somewhere what is meant by occupancy.

Do you see what you posted above in NEC anywhere?

Definition of occupancy not specifically give in the NEC but inference from description in related portions of code can be made. Article 230 starts off restricting 1 service to a building in 230.2; in code reference to service conductors 230.70 a means to disconnect all conductors in a building from the service conductors, in 230.71(A) it further refers back to 230.40 including (exception 1) tieing a disconnecting means to service conductors and occupancies. Thus inference 1 disconnect 1 occupancy.

electrofelon buddy I am just really confused at this point by NEC. Let’s say if what you say is correct then in attached sketch two services I have two electric utility transformers one 200A and another 800A both 480/277V three phase in commercial multioccupancy building each have one set of service entrance conductors in electrical room SWGRs which then serve group of occupancies. What’s to stop anyone from saying it’s per 230.40 exception no. 1 and thus it’s allowed?

What your drawing appears to show maybe permitted not in reference to 230.40 but to 230.2(A),(B),(C),(D) but more specifically your statement indicating it might be covered in section 230.2(D) might be applicable.