In an effort to help the electrical industry make a smooth transition into the new Electrical Code and ensure the continuity in the performance of electrical work, the Department of Buildings will be posting code interpretations on its website. Listed below are new code-related questions and corresponding interpretations by the Code Committee. The users of this list should have available the 2008 edition of the NEC and the associated NYC Amendments to the 2008 NEC , as well as (Local Law 39/11) that went into effect on March 1, 2012.
All interpretations are based on the 1999 NEC and associated NY City amendments.
Whenever there are a few sections referenced, the first one is the "lead section", and the rest are secondary sections. All the secondary sections are referenced with the purpose of offering additional clarifications.
Click a topic, or press the enter key on a topic, to reveal its answer.
Chapter 1: General (Section 110.1 to 110.79)
We are planning a renovation of a kitchen in an existing residential building. The scope of the renovation is to replace the gas stove in kind. There is an existing electrical panel located behind the existing hood.
I am searching for a code reference or information on:
Chapter 2: Wiring and Protection (Code Section 200.1 to 285.28)
It has occurred to me over the 42 years in the electrical contracting industry that many electrical contractors installing new electric services in the city of New York to date are not in compliance with NEC Section 220.87. Additionally, they don’t receive any violation, objection, directives in not producing such test or information thereto. With the big move on EV (electric vehicle) charging electrical installations, adding considerable additional loads to an existing building service, this should be better and more rigidly enforced as a matter of code compliance as we are required to comply with all other parts of the code, and of course functionality. Please reply with your comments.
This committee provide interpretation to NYC Electrical Code, and not of opinion and personal experiences.
Based on the attached sketch, is the Fire Alarm service switch permitted to be connected to the Fire Pump Service Entrance Conductor in accordance with NYC EC section 230.46(2)? (Plan attached)
The proposed installation is not an approved equipment and method for Fire Pump and Fire Alarm service entrance conductors. Please refer for the 2011 ECRIC’s Industry Standards Sketches of Fire Alarm.
We are relocating electrical service and service switchboard from cellar to 2nd floor (above DFE).
The existing standby emergency installation consists of (2) 2000 KVA, 4160 volt, 3 phase, 3 wire generators paralleled onto a common switchboard and feeding a 1500 KVA step down transformer with a 120/208 volt, 3 phase, 4 wire wye secondary. During a commercial power outage, the generators and standby emergency loads are isolated from the building commercial power distribution by disconnecting the 3 phase conductors while maintaining continuity to the unswitched neutral conductors. The neutral is grounded and bonded at the commercial service entrance. The WYE side of the transformer serves various emergency loads at the building voltage via automatic transfer switches with solid unswitched neutrals. The building neutral conductor is connected to the Xo center point of the transformer but is not bonded or grounded, allowing both single and 3 phase loads to be fed by the generators with neutral continuity at all times. The existing transformer secondary is grounded in compliance with section 250.20(B) of the NYCEC and the emergency system neutral conductors are unswitched and solidly grounded throughout. It is our position that since the neutral conductors have a direct connection to the commercial service ground bond, the transformer cannot meet the definition of a separately derived service as defined in Article 100 of the NYCEC. (See Attached Reference)
We are working on a project in an existing building that is more than 50 years old. The main service switchgear is grounded using a connection to the water service pipe (street side of the meter) as the sole grounding electrode. The NEC now requires a redundant grounding electrode. As the building is all concrete, there is no building steel, and due to a very high-water table installation of a driven ground rod below the basement slab is impractical. We are installing a second water service to support a new sprinkler system throughout the building.
In a building where the water main is far from the main service disconnect, is it permissible to utilize the building steel as a grounding electrode conductor by installing jumpers from the building steel to the service switches and water main? I am asking this question since the NEC does allow it in the last couple of code editions please see attached code reference. 250.66 (C)(2) The metal structural frame of a building shall be permitted to be used as a conductor to interconnect electrodes that are part of the grounding electrode system, or as a grounding electrode conductor.
No. Building Metal Structure is not permitted to serve as a conductor for the grounding electrode system conductor, see 250.62. Additionally, 250.50 requires the bonding of all electrode system present, regardless of their location.
Chapter 3: Wiring Methods and Materials (Code Section 300.1 to 398-104)
Background:
When feeding rooftop equipment, many have the practice of running a type AC or MC cable to the area below the equipment and transitioning from the cable to RGS conduit, which pokes through the roof. A section of the cable’s armor is stripped off with the conductors long enough to sleeve through the conduit and into a termination trough or disconnect switch on the roof. The changeover is accomplished with a threaded RGS coupling installed on the RGS conduit’s threaded end, and an approved type AC or MC connector that is installed into the other side of the RGS coupling.
Question:
Based on the NEC Handbook’s explanation of the Article 100 definition of “Fitting” and based on your honors’ own interpretation and experience, does the changeover method described require accessibility?
(If you reply is “no”, please clarify, if time permits, what types of fittings do require accessibility.)
Yes, where conductors are not spliced or terminated, and the fitting is listed for concealed installation. See 300.15(F).
314.29 requires boxes and wiring within to be rendered accessible without removing any part of the building.
A specific site condition has multiple 1ft x 4ft lighting fixtures installed into framed openings of a hard ceiling from below using factory integral toggle wings. Fixture is wired using liquid tight flex tailed to a box above the ceiling. The project specification requires all wiring to be in raceway. No flexible cabling such as MC can be used.
Can a box and wiring above the ceiling be rendered accessible by lowering the above described fixture out of the way so the boxes with branch wiring (20A circuits) can be reached without extending the head above the ceiling?
(Note we are aware of a code revision in NEC 2020, 410.118 that may preclude this practice in the future)
Yes. Installation is permitted under the current NYC Electrical Code.
Apex would like to inquire regarding any spacing requirements for installations of LFMC which will contain power/data cables for 24vdc powered sensors in support of a groundwater remediation project in Queens. The conduits will also be run overhead within a garage/warehouse alongside black iron pipe used for compressed air conveyance and also either stainless steel or brass piping for conveyance of petroleum impacted groundwater.
LFMC are not permitted in lengths exceeding 6 ft., see NYC Electrical Code 350.12(3). LFMC shall bot be supported from other systems and shall be spaced to allow service and/ replacement of other systems.
I am working on an indoor pool job and have the following question.
Can PVC be ran exposed as per 352.10(B) for pool storage areas and open areas under pool decks? Nothing has been modified in section 680 to remove PVC.
Using EMT, IMC, or RMC will eventually corrode in these environments
No, see 352.10(I) and (J), unless the building is residential under three floors. Amendment in chapters 1 thru 4 applies to Chapters 5,6 and 7. You may request a variance for the use of PVC in corrosive location. A submission of completed CCD1 form is required, and the link below provide all information to apply for CCD1, https://www1.nyc.gov/site/buildings/industry/determinations.page
Chapter 4: Equipment for General Use (Code Section 400.1 to 490.74)
Chapter 5: Special Occupancies (Code Section 500.1 to 590.7)
Would you please clarify the following questions:
Chapter 6: Special Equipment (Code Section 600.1 to 695.14)
Can the feed for a new elevator auxiliary circuit panel be run in the hoist way? If no, can special permission be granted?
The proposed installation is not permitted by NYC Electrical Code 620.37(A).
Only required circuits serving the shaftway are permitted to enter the shaft. Section 620.22 specifies the required circuit and doesn’t require disconnecting means and such circuits are not subject for 620.51(C) requirements.
Engineer designed the following:
Solar modules on a flat roof at a McDonalds Restaurant.
Micro-inverters are mounted behind modules and are not visible nor readily accessible.
Modules must be removed, with tools, to gain access to the micro-inverters.
No AC disconnect will be installed on the roof. I believe this does not comply with 690.15(A)(2) (this is the big issue)
An AC disconnect switch will be located within site of the main distribution in the basement for the solar interconnection.
These micro-inverters have no built in disconnect switches for AC. Just pull out plugs that are not readily accessible. Micro-inverters mounted behind modules.
These micro-inverters have no built in disconnects switches for DC. Just pull out plugs that cannot be opened under load per manufactures instruction and are not readily accessible.
I informed them that per 690.15(A)(2), 2014 code, an AC disconnecting means shall be mounted on the roof within sight of or in each the inverters. (inverters do not have factory installed disconnects either).
NYC Electrical Code section 690.14(D) governs your described installation and Item (2) requires AC disconnecting means within sight of or in the inverter.
Chapter 7: Special Conditions (Code Section 700.1 to 770.182)
ADMINISTRATIVE: General Requirements
Based on the above sections of the NYC Building Code and Electrical Code,
This question is a Building Bode questions, for official response, the question shall be submitted to the department to Construction Codes Questions. Answer provided for information only.
Filing question for elevators:
Copies of the NYC 2011 Electrical Code (only the amendments to the NEC 2008 Electrical Code) and the New York City Electrical Code (the amendments and the NEC 2008 Electrical Code) can be purchased at the CityStore.