2024 Code Revision and Interpretation Committee Code Interpretation 

EC 110.14(C) – (4/03/2024)

R-2 building has new window (PTAC) AC units installed in each apartment which replace old unit. PTAC name plates call for MOP of 30 amps 208V.

Existing wiring from panel to PTAC receptacle in #12 THHN copper (rated 90 degrees @ 30amps). Spliced wire in panel and at receptacles junction box #10THHN copper (rated 60 degrees @ 30amps)

Breaker is rated for 75 degrees.
Wire nuts are rated for 90 degrees.
Receptacle is rated for 60 degrees.

Our plan is to splice at the receptacle and at the panel from #12 to #10 wire so that the entire assembly from breaker to receptacle is rated for 30amps. See attached sketch for more details.

Question 1: Does this meet Code as all ratings have been met?

Question 2: If not, what part of assembly is not Code compliant?

The proposed installation will not be Code compliant if the panelboard’s listing restricts the use of conductors with 90°C ampacity inside the panelboard. Additionally, EC 240.4(D) prohibits 30A overcurrent protection for 12 AWG conductors unless it can be demonstrated that the installation complies with EC 240.4(E) and (G). EC 240.4(G) references EC 440 for air conditioning equipment, and in this case, EC 440.62 would apply.

Section 110.9 and 110.10 – (8/7/2024)

Is Up-Down peak current let-through method for current limiting fuses and breakers acceptable to be used in NYC? This is a standard method for meeting the SCCR requirements of many devices. See attached drawing for more details.

The current limitation provided by listed overcurrent protection devices is an acceptable method for ensuring compliance with equipment short-circuit current ratings.

EC 210.26(F)(1)(a) – (2/07/2024)

A switchboard is to be installed with a 24-inch crown box above the switchboard. The switchboard is 90-inch tall without the crown box. There is no bus in the crown box and only wires are to enter it. Does the required 6 feet of Dedicated Electrical Space above the switchboard measures from the top of the crown box? Or does it start at the bottom of the crown box? My interpretation is that it starts at the bottom of the crown box because a crown box is no different than a pullbox. Do you agree with our interpretation? 

Yes, we agree with your interpretation. Since the crown box only contains wires, the 6 feet required Dedicated Electrical Space should be measured from the top of the switchboard.

EC 250.102 – (2/7/2024)

Violation from DOB: 5 sets of 600mcm migb daisy chained with 1/0 awg 250.102(C)

Supply Side

Code Requirements

250.102(C) sentences 3 and 4 states Where the service-entrance conductors are paralleled in two or more raceways or cables, the equipment bonding jumper, where routed within the raceways or cables, shall be run in parallel. The size of the bonding jumper for each raceway or cable shall be based on the size of the service-entrance conductors in each raceway or cable”.

• Table 250.66 states 600MCM cable requires 1/0 copper grounding conductors.

Installation

In Conclusion - We ran 250MCM copper grounding conductors within each raceway, meaning we are above and beyond the Code requirement. The bonding jumper from the conduit to the ground bar is not the equipment bonding jumper.

Load Side

Code Requirements

250.102(D) states load side equipment bonding jumper shall be sized in accordance with table 250.122.

• Table 250.122 states a 2000A OCPD requires 250MCM copper grounding conductors.

Installation

We ran 250MCM copper grounding conductors in each raceway, meaning we met the Code requirement. The bonding jumper from the conduit to the ground bar is not the equipment bonding jumper.

Our request is as follows: Can the 250 MCM copper grounding conductors, which were not required, serve as the Equipment bonding jumper?  Our efforts are to try and avoid a Con Edison shutdown. 

See attached sketches for more details.

Since the bonding jumper is being combined at the supply and load sides, the size of the bonding jumper should be sized per Table 250.66 and Table 250.122, whichever is bigger.

EC 250.36(F) – (4/3/2024)

I have attached a plan view of an equipment arrangement that I believe is in compliance with Section 230.64 in that the dead-front, 4,000A, at 208V, 3 phase, service disconnect has no live parts across from it and therefore only requires 5 feet of clearance on front. Also, the enclosure does not constitute a transformer vault as it is provided for aesthetics, it is a stand-along structure, all electrical equipment inside the enclosure is rated NEMA 3R for outdoor use.

• Question 1: Does the equipment layout provided comply with Section 230.64?
• Question 2: Am I correct in stating that the equipment enclosure does not constitute a vault? .
  

1. Five feet of working space in front of the subject service disconnect is sufficient. However, since the switchboard is rated above 1,200A and over 6 feet wide, the installation must comply with EC 110.26(C)(2), which requires an additional entrance or working space. Additionally, the transformer must be properly ventilated and provided with clearances as per the manufacturer’s recommendation. We assume the enclosure will be located outdoors, otherwise the room needs to be 2-hour rated per EC 230.64(B).
2. The subject structure is not considered a transformer vault.

EC 220.54 – (4/03/2024)

When doing load calculations, how should we handle the newer 15A/120V heat pump type electric dryers? Table 220.54 demand does not apply but is there any other demand factor we can take for multifamily buildings? (for example, can we have (2) laundry circuits per apartment and take the demand permitted by Section 220.52(B)?

I linked some examples below:

• 15A, 120V dryer: https://www.mieleusa.com/e/t1-heat-pump-dryer-txd160wp-lotus-white-11619650-p
• 15A, 120V washer/dryer combo unit - single connection point: https://www.homedepot.com/p/GE-Profile-4-8-cu-ft-UltraFast-Combo-Washer-Dryer-with-Ventless-Heat-Pump-Technology-in-Carbon-Graphite-PFQ97HSPVDS/324668085.

Yes, two laundry circuits per apartment are allowed, with the demand calculated as permitted by EC 220.52(B). However, if these dryers are later replaced with “traditional” electric dryers, the associated feeders and overcurrent protection devices must be updated to comply with EC Table 220.54.

Section 210.52(C) – (6/05/2024) 

This question pertains to new construction of a dwelling unit in a high-rise (70 story) residential (R-2) building in Manhattan. Specifically referring to the Code requirement for receptacles required on an island countertop space. Does the receptacle location on the (see attached) rendering and sketch comply with 210.52(C) Exception to (5), which states: Receptacles mounted below a countertop in accordance with this exception shall not be located where the countertop extends more than (6 in.) beyond its support base. Note: The receptacle has access from the side and front. From the side, the countertop extends less than 6 in. From the front, the countertop extends 2 ft.

The receptacle is only allowed to be installed on the side with overhang extending no more than 6 inches. This answer will replace the ruling for section 210.52(C) on 4/6/2016.

Section 210.52(B)(2) – (6/05/2024)

Section 210.52(B)2 states that small appliance circuits shall have no other outlet; with two exceptions; clocks in dwelling units, and for supplemental equipment and lighting on gas-fire ranges, ovens, or counter-mounted cooking units.

Recent requirement for installation of gas-alarms within 3 to 10 feet of gas appliance is applicable to new buildings as well as the existing residential buildings. Manufacturers offer gas alarms that are 120 V AC plug-in type with battery back-up. The power supply for the plug-on unit would be no more than 0.25 A at 120 V.

Is it permitted to utilize the receptacle provided for a microwave appliance and utilize it for both, a plug-in gas-alarm and the microwave appliance since it would represent a minor load addition to the circuit?

The sensor for the gas alarm would be located within 12 inches of the ceiling.

Yes. However, some microwaves require an individual branch circuit, which allows only one piece of utilization equipment. Refer to the microwave’s installation manual to verify this requirement.

Section 250.4(A)(5) – (6/05/2024)

When installing a 3-pole 3-wire transfer switch that contains no neutral for fire pump, are all the other transfer switches required to be upgraded to be 4-pole transfer switches with switched neutral?

No, however, the ground-fault current path must be sized in accordance with 250.4(A)(5). Additionally, transfer switches containing neutral conductors and connected to the same emergency system must all be of the same type (either 3-pole or 4-pole). It is not permissible to mix 3-pole transfer switches with neutral and 4-pole transfer switches with neutral on the same emergency system.

Section 215.2(A)(1) – (8/07/2024)

We have a few questions regarding The New York City 2011 Electrical Code (Local Law 39 of 2011) Section 215.2(A)(1):

1. Is it a Code violation if voltage drop at the last overcurrent device exceeds 3 percent?
2. Is it a Code violation if total maximum voltage drop of feeder and branch circuit conductor to the last outlet exceeds 5 percent?
3. If riser includes transformer, does 3% voltage drop include voltage drop on transformer?
4. Are we allowed to use transformer tap to adjust the voltage at the overcurrent device? For example, using transformer tap to increase the voltage from 195V to 205V in 208V 3 Phase System.
5. In 215.2 "Exception No.3. For residential occupancies and portions of the electrical system of mixed use buildings serving exclusively residential occupancies, the maximum voltage drop from the service point to the last overcurrent device shall not exceed 4 percent and the total maximum voltage drop to the last outlet shall not exceed 5 percent."

(1) Does 4% maximum voltage drop apply to meter bank that feeds apartment panel?
(2) Does 4% maximum voltage drop also apply to house load panel in the residential building??

1. Yes, it is a Code violation, except when it is allowed by Exception No.3 of Section 215.2(A)(1) for residential occupancies.
2. Yes, it is a Code violation.
3. No, the 3% voltage drop doesn’t include the voltage drop on the transformer.
4. No, a transformer is not allowed to compensate voltage drop.
5. (1) Yes.
   (2) Yes, if all the loads are from the residential occupancy.
   

Please note that where compliance with the NYC Energy Conservation Code is mandated, the voltage drop requirements of that Code shall apply..

Section 230.46– (8/07/2024)

We have a single set of 500MCM conductors going from a Trans-S meter enclosure via an 8x8 trough to a single 400-amp service switch. We are supposed to make a tap for Fire Alarm equipment (30A, single phase) via a 30-amp, red fused switch (an approved fire alarm switch). The client is asking us to use an insulation piercing connector to tap the 500MCM conductor to feed our new Fire Alarm disconnect with a set of #8 wires. I always thought insulation piercing connectors were not permitted to be used in NYC at all. I have attached a diagram for what is being proposed

Are insulation piercing connectors approved by NYC for this purpose?

An insulation piercing connector is allowed if it is listed for the purpose intended.

Section 210.19(A)(4) – (10/02/2024)

I have a 4000A switchboard that has a main switch fused at 4000A. The bus is fully rated throughout the switchgear. 

I have a 4000A/3600AT fused generator panel that connects directly to the bus of the 4000A switchboard via lugs and 600MCM THHN conductors rated at 3780A. The 4000A main and generator panel have a Kirk key interlock so power can never be sourced from both.  Generator panel is back feeding switchboard bus.

Is the point of connection for 3780A rated conductors (EM generator panel) to 4000A switchboard (normal power) considered a tap?  Connection point on bus to the generator panel is over 25ft.  

Do the conductors feeding the generator panel need to be rated at 3600A for the generator fuse, or 4000A for the main fuse? Conductors connected to the 4000A rated bus will be energized during normal operations. See attached sketch for more details.

Since the generator is one of the two sources supplying the 4,000A switchboard, the emergency feeder is not considered a tap and does not need to comply with 240.21. Also, the generator feeders may be sized according to the generator’s OCPD (3,600A).).

Section 230.70(A)(1) – (10/02/2024)

Is it allowed to install the main service switch for an 8-family house on the outside of the building, when the service to the building is from overhead?

No, the main service switch shall be located within a building or structure per EC 230.70(A)(1).

Section 210.52 – (10/02/2024)

We have 14ft long millwork cabinets (with door floor to ceiling) on the walls of a residential building, see attached plan. The millwork cabinets are custom built to fit permanently at each location (bedrooms, corridors and closets). The cabinets will be used for residential storage. Which Code section clarifies if we need a receptacle and where - on the millwork wall?

A receptacle outlet is required in dwelling unit wall space per EC 210.52(A)(2). Fixed millwork cabinets are not addressed.

EC 355.10(J)  – (2/07/2024)

This is a follow-up to our question from October 11, 2023, with ECRIC response from December 6, 2023:

The Draka Lifeline Power Cable system will be installed per its FHIT.25C listing (which includes RHW-2 Fire Resistive cables in phenolic conduit) to achieve a 2 hr fire rating of a 208V standby power feeder. The phenolic conduit for the Draka Lifeline Power Cable system will be installed in a shaft, that happens to be fire rated, used to vertically route MEP services including separate conduit and wiring for other power feeders, duct work and piping. The only wiring to be installed in the phenolic conduit will be the Draka Lifeline cable.

• Question 1
  Can the Draka Lifeline Power Cable system be installed in phenolic conduit per its UL FHIT.25C listing (this is a listed electrical circuit integrity system) to achieve a 2 hr fire rating for the 208V standby power feeder in question? This 208v standby feeder will be routed in a shaft as described above that contains other MEP services such as separate conduit and wiring for other power feeders, duct work and piping. While the shaft itself happens to have a 2 hr fire rating, the shaft is not intended to fire rate the Draka Lifeline Power Cable. It is our understanding MI cable and other similar listed fire rated cable systems can be installed in a shaft, or other locations without the need for physical separation from other MEP building systems and other power feeders. We would expect that installation of the Drake Lifeline Power Cable system is also permitted in such a shaft.
• Question 2
  If the response is no to Question 1, can you give us background as to why it cannot be installed in a shaft with other systems.
  
• Question 3
  If the response is yes to Question 1, is the 1hr. fire rated thermal barrier noted section 355.10(j) required for this installation as described above when the phenolic conduit is installed in the shaft?
  

1. Yes, it is permitted.
2. See above.
3. The 1-hour rated thermal barrier is not required.

EC 300.15(F) – (4/03/2024)

Is a change-over required to be "readily accessible" to be able to see it? or is it sufficient that we can remove the fixture in case we need and we have access to the connector/change-over?

Example: we have light fixtures or exit signs installed on a concrete ceiling and the wire is coming out of a drywall soffit and being changed over to EMT pipe, do we need to expose the change-over or it can be in the wall.

300.15(F) requires fittings that are being used in "lieu" of a box or conduit body, is a change-over in this category and if yes, the requirement is "accessible" which is by definition required to have access without damaging the building in that case we can remove the light fixture and pull it out to see it.

No, a change-over is not required to be “readily accessible” or “accessible.” 

EC 314.29– (4/03/2024)

If access panels are provided to the Bocci receptacles per the attached sketch, such that access is provided to the splices and grounding connections within the backbox of the receptacles (similar to a standard receptacles), is it permissible to use metallic boxes and metallic conduit to serve the Bocci receptacle.

No, only non-metallic wiring methods and non-metallic device boxes are allowed for Bocci receptacles. Additionally, the proposed access panel will not allow access to the interior of the backbox from the rear, preventing inspectors from verifying wiring connections within the backbox during electrical inspection.

Section 314.29– (6/05/2024)

The Bocci 22 System receptacle is a UL listed product for both the US and Canada for installation in plaster, gypsum, millwork, tile, marble and similar wall surfaces up to 1 1/4 inches thick.  The City has previously rendered a 2019 interpretation on 314.20 and another in 2023 on 314.29(A).  The 2023 interpretation is noted as replacing the 2019 interpretation in full with the limitation for wiring method and device box.  Since the issuance of the 2023 interpretation further investigation has resulted in a determination that resolves the concerns that had been raised for limiting the application to non-metallic boxes and non-metallic wiring methods. 

Please see Attachments A and B for details on how the concerns for applications with metal wiring methods and metal boxes have been addressed.

The Bocci 22 System has been addressed on a national level with further processing of TIA 1690 by Code Making Panel 8 in the 2026 NEC process as shown in Attachment C.  The revised text of 314.29(A) removes the limitation for this application only using non-metallic wiring methods and non-metallic boxes.  Finally, please see Attachment D for updated manufacturer’s installation instructions removing the restrictions based on the action of NEC Code Panel 8 modifying TIA 1690 in processing the 2026 NEC.

QUESTION: With the evidence presented for safe installation, the ability to inspect, and present NEC changes underway, is the UL Listed Bocci 22 System acceptable for installation without wiring method and device box restrictions in accordance the manufacturer’s instructions and New York City Electrical Code?

Yes, the UL listed Bocci 22 system is acceptable for installation in NYC with the updated installation instructions, which allows installation using metallic wiring methods and metallic device boxes. However, such installation shall meet the following conditions:

1. When provided, the wire type Equipment Ground Conductor (EGC) shall be visible during electrical inspection with tool, such as flashlight.
2. For AC cable, the anti-short bushing shall be visible during electrical inspection with tool, such as inspection mirror.

This answer will replace the ECRIC’s rulings to section 314.20 on 6/4/2019 and section 314.29 on 6/7/2023. And moving forward, this kind of equipment will be reviewed by OTCR.

Section 330.12(5) – (6/05/2024)

I am looking for clarification in using PVC-coated MC cable in various scenarios. I went through every year of ECRIC interpretations and didn’t find the exact question/interpretation.

The closest to my question is from 11/9/2006 where you allow the exposed use in garages if the garage is open, and no residential buildings are above which is very logical for me.

Part 1: Is installation of PVC MC in NON-residential/commercial/office buildings/warehouses allowed in areas:

1. Loosely under concrete paver floor on roofs, balconies and/or terraces?
2. Exposed on roofs, supported as per Code?
3. In planters at terraces, roofs, balconies or similar?
4. Passing under canopies, balconies or high ceilings that are open to atmosphere and not enclosed by walls or windows?
5. In any areas open to atmosphere and not enclosed by walls or windows?
6. If any of questions above are not allowable, does being within 3000ft of saltwater make them allowable?

Part 2: Is installation of PVC MC in residential buildings over 3-stories allowed in areas:

1. If any of my questions 1-5 for non-residential buildings above are allowed, which of those questions/scenarios are also allowed in residential buildings?
2. ECRIC ruling of section 330.12 from 2/22/2018 allows 18in of PVC MC inside wall cavity to feed a device. Does it assume that the outer PVC coating stays on the cable all the way to the device? If the outer PVC coating is removed rendering the PVC MC a regular MC cable, does the 18in limitation still apply?
3. For any of the non-residential questions 1-5 that are not allowable in residential buildings, does being within 3000ft of saltwater make them allowable??

Part 1:

1. Yes, it is ok for locations that are open to atmosphere.
2. Yes.
3. Yes, only if such locations are open to atmosphere.
4. Yes.
5. Yes.
6. For installations within 3,000ft of saltwater, the MC cable must be listed for such application.

Part 2:

1. See answers above, they are applicable to residential buildings over 3-stores as well.
2. Outer PVC coating may remain on the cable up to 18 inches from the device. If the outer PVC coating is removed, the 18-inch limitation does not apply. However, removing the outer PVC coating may affect the cable’s performance characteristics, such as its suitability for wet location. Please consult the manufacturer to verify the cable’s performance for such installations.
3. For installations within 3,000ft of saltwater, the MC cable must be listed for such application.

Section 352.10(J) and 378.10 – (10/02/2024)

For a 25kw solar PV installation on the roof of an 8-story, high-rise museum building in NYC, solar installer is proposing to route low voltage DC cabling on the roof in non-metallic wireways and rigid PVC conduits. All of the non-metallic wireways and rigid PV conduits will be installed outdoors.

We have the following questions regarding the use of exposed Rigid Polyvinyl Chloride Conduit (Type PVC – Article 352) and Non-metallic wireways (Article 378) for routing of DC cabling associated with solar PV installation on the roof of the building:

1. For this application, can exposed rigid PVC conduit be used for routing DC cabling associated with solar PV installation on the roof?
2. If yes to Question 1, Is a thermal barrier of material that has at least 1-hour rated assembly required (as mentioned in Article 352.10(J)) if rigid PVC conduit is permitted to be installed exposed on the roof?
3. As per NYC Electrical Code Article 378.10 “Uses Permitted by Special Permission Only,” for this application, can non-metallic wireways be used for routing of DC cabling associated with solar PV installation on the roof and can special permission be granted for use of non-metallic wireways for this installation on the roof?
4. If the PV system is UL listed as a system with non-metallic raceway, can it be installed on the roof as described above without Special Permission as noted in Article 378.10?
   

1. Yes, PVC conduits are allowed on the roof, when running exposed to the atmosphere. PVC conduits need to be listed and marked as suitable for this purpose.
2. No, thermal barriers are not required for PVC conduits that are running exposed on the roof.
3. Special permission is required. A determination will be provided after being reviewed by the Department.
4. No, special permission is still required to be submitted for review.

Section 422.31 – (6/5/2024)

A ductless “multi split” heat pump for a single, ground floor apartment in a multiple dwelling uses 1 outdoor condenser, and 3 indoor wall-hung miniature fan coils. Per the manufacturer’s instruction manual, the “wall units” (fan coils) are controlled and powered from the condenser using 5-wire jacketed Type MC cable carrying both power and control. The outdoor condenser unit is on a readily accessible, lockable disconnect within sight, per the manufacturer’s documentation for this NRTL-listed system.  The variable-speed motors in the wall units are less than 300VA. Your 5/5/2010 interpretation of section 422.31 allows the fan coil disconnect for a similar system with just 1 fan coil, which uses its own circuit, to be at the breaker panel and does not seem to suggest that 424.19 or 430.102 applies  But the present system powers 3 fan coils through the condenser - not separate circuits. Obviously a disconnect at the condenser is required under 430.102 and 430.112. The basic question is whether this disconnect is sufficient for the fan coils as well.

According to section 440.8, “an air-conditioning or refrigerating system shall be considered to be a single machine under the provisions of 430.87, Exception, and 430.112, Exception. The motors shall be permitted to be located remotely from each other.” Attached is an Oregon Code Interpretation (2009, confirmed through 2023) which also considers 424.19, holds that 422.31 applies, and concludes that the disconnect for the condenser is an appropriate disconnect for the whole system.  This reasoning seems consistent 440.8 and also with your 5/5/2010 interpretation.

Partial disconnection of such a system would seem to pose significant hazards to service personnel.  One fan coil (or the condenser!) might remain powered while a technician mistakenly believes the entire system is off because another fan coil has been disconnected via local means.  The industry norm where the entire system is powered-down by a lockable disconnect at the condenser, and cannot be partially depowered, as per 440.8 and the Oregon interpretation, seems safer.

• Question 1: for disconnect purposes, are the miniature fan coils (“indoor units”, “wall units”) of this “multi-split” air-conditioning system “appliances” less than 300VA per 422.31, or are they multiple “motors” on a single controller per 430.102, 430.112, and 440.8?
• Question 2: In either case, if installed per the manufacturer’s system diagram with a single locking disconnect at the condenser, does this system comply with Code, or is a disconnecting switch at each indoor unit also required?

Fan coil units are considered appliances. Since the subject fan coil units are controlled and powered by the condenser, they are working together as part of the “unit”. A single lockable disconnect located within sight from a condenser, per manufacturer’s installation manual, is allowed.

Section 406.11– (8/07/2024)

If a medicine cabinet is UL listed to include a receptacle inside the cabinet, it is still considered to be Code violation per 406.11, which requires receptacle to be tamper-resistant. See attached cabinet cut sheet.

The product in question is evaluated to UL 962. If a 15- or 20-ampere, 125- or 250-volt nonlocking receptacle is installed in these cabinets, UL 962 requires that they be tamper-resistant, as also required by Section 406.11 of the New York City Electrical Code. However, if the receptacle is located more than 5 1∕ 2 ft above the floor, tamper-resistance is not required.

Section 445.13– (12/04/2024)

We are installing an emergency generator to power non legally required loads.  The nameplate of the generator states that its amperage rating is 550 amps.  There is a 500 amp circuit breaker on the generator.

We need to connect a 30 amp Fire Alarm Circuit which will feed a 30 amp disconnect in the same room as the generator.  The feeder for the Fire Alarm Disconnect will be connected to the Generator Bus.

After reading relevant Code sections it seems that we will need to use a conductor rated at 115% of the nameplate rating of the generator.  This will be quite a challenge since we cannot fit conductors rated at 633 amps under the lugs of a 30 amp disconnect.

We searched for exemptions but came up with nothing.  760.41 in the 2008 NEC tells us that non power limited power source requirements shall comply with Chapters 1-4 but the NYC 2011 amendment replaced this section in its entirety.  The odd thing is that the NYC amendment removed the requirement from the text that required the install shall comply with chapter 1-4. 

Even so, according to Section 90.3, Chapter 7 either Modifies or Supplements Chapters 1-4.  But in this case, Section 760.41 does not specifically modify anything in Chapter 1-4.  We think (because of 90.3) that we need to comply with Article 445, Section 445.13.  This creates a bit of a hardship as we run into this predicament quite often and aren’t quite sure how to comply.

Is it the Committee's contention that we need to comply with 445.13 or are we missing something? If we do need to comply, any suggestions for a solution to this problem? See attached picture of the installation.

Section 445.13 refers to the sum of all conductors connected to the generator terminals, not the individual conductors serving individual overcurrent devices. The individual emergency circuits shall be sized and installed in accordance with 700.10(B).

EC 695.5(B) & 760.41(A)(1) – (2/07/2024)

The contractor provided a common meter (CL20 or CL200) for a 200Amp fire pump and 20Amp fire alarm system.

NYC Electrical Code section 695.5(B) specifies dedicated metering for the fire pump, and section 760.41(A)(1) specifies that utility metering of the fire alarm system shall maintain power continuity to the fire alarm system at all times.

Therefore, the question arises: Can we connect the fire pump and fire alarm through a single CL-type meter, or do we need to provide dedicated meters for both systems?

The fire pump and fire alarm system can share the same utility meter if approved by the utility company, provided the meter is listed for multiple load connections. Additionally, the meter must be either a current transformer-driven or bypass type to ensure that its removal does not interrupt service to the fire pump or fire alarm system.

EC 695.5(B) & 760.41(A)(1) – (2/07/2024)

The contractor provided a common meter (CL20 or CL200) for a 200Amp fire pump and 20Amp fire alarm system.

NYC Electrical Code section 695.5(B) specifies dedicated metering for the fire pump, and section 760.41(A)(1) specifies that utility metering of the fire alarm system shall maintain power continuity to the fire alarm system at all times.

Therefore, the question arises: Can we connect the fire pump and fire alarm through a single CL-type meter, or do we need to provide dedicated meters for both systems?

The fire pump and fire alarm system can share the same utility meter if approved by the utility company, provided the meter is listed for multiple load connections. Additionally, the meter must be either a current transformer-driven or bypass type to ensure that its removal does not interrupt service to the fire pump or fire alarm system.

EC 695.5(B) & 760.41(A)(1) – (2/07/2024)

The contractor provided a common meter (CL20 or CL200) for a 200Amp fire pump and 20Amp fire alarm system.

NYC Electrical Code section 695.5(B) specifies dedicated metering for the fire pump, and section 760.41(A)(1) specifies that utility metering of the fire alarm system shall maintain power continuity to the fire alarm system at all times.

Therefore, the question arises: Can we connect the fire pump and fire alarm through a single CL-type meter, or do we need to provide dedicated meters for both systems?

The fire pump and fire alarm system can share the same utility meter if approved by the utility company, provided the meter is listed for multiple load connections. Additionally, the meter must be either a current transformer-driven or bypass type to ensure that its removal does not interrupt service to the fire pump or fire alarm system.

EC 625.23– (4/03/2024)

Tesla has installed three Supercharger cabinets powering twelve fast charging posts at 3035 Cropsey Ave. Additionally, EVgo has installed four fast chargers off of a shared switchgear. Article 625.23 of the New York City 2011 Electrical Code based on the 2008 National Electrical Code states that electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) rated more than 60 amp or more than 150 volts to ground, the disconnecting means shall be provided and installed in a readily accessible location. The disconnecting means shall be capable of being locked in the open position. The provision for locking or adding a lock to the disconnecting means shall be installed on or at the switch or circuit breaker used as the disconnecting means and shall remain in the place with or without the lock installed. Portable means for adding a lock to the switch or circuit breaker shall not be permitted. We are seeking clarification whether the branch breakers within the switchgear would qualify as a compliant disconnecting means. A disconnect at the switchboard is visible from the location of the chargers and located within 100 feet, as required by the Code. See attached plans for more details.

The switchgear on the Supercharger site contains a main breaker and branch breakers to provide site-wide and cabinet specific overcurrent protection. Tripping the main breaker shuts off power to the entire site. The switchgear contains one branch breaker for every Supercharger Cabinet, enabling a single Cabinet to be deenergized without affecting the operation of the rest of the site. The breakers will trip instantaneously if input current exceeds a threshold, and also trip if the current exceeds a lower threshold for longer than a preset delay, opening the circuit to stop the flow of power. GFCI or RCD devices will trip either the main or branch breakers, depending on regional configurations, in the case of ground faults. This is detailed in the Tesla Supercharger Emergency Response Guide?

Branch breakers within the switchgear are qualified to serve as the disconnecting means to meet the requirements of EC 625.23. However, the breakers must be capable of being locked in the open position, and the locking provisions must remain in place regardless of whether a lock is installed.

EC 695.4(B)(1)(1) – (6/05/2024)

An 800A disconnect switch was installed instead of a 400A disconnect switch for a fire pump with 62.1A of FLA. Can fuse reducers be used in the installed 800A switch to fit 300A fuses, to comply with 695.4(B)(1)(1), which requires the OCP to be less than 600%? It has been done in another project. The installed 800A switch will have a new tag label 400A disconnect.

Yes, listed fuse reducers may be used within the limitations of their listing and when permitted for permanent installation in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications.

EC 695.3(C) – (6/05/2024)

27-3025 of The New York City amendments to the 2008 NEC Section 695.3 reads:

“Subsection 695.3 (C) – Add new subsection 695.3 (C) to read as follows:
(C) Multiple Independent Sources. Two or more feeder sources routed separately to the building and independently operated may be permitted for compliance with this section, as approved by the commissioner, where the reliability of the sources can be demonstrated.”

Does the requirement for “Multiple Independent Sources” apply to a fire pump installation with multiple incoming services to the building? The building has three incoming services at 27KV, routed separately to the building, and tied to a collector bus, where the collector bus is feeding two main service switches (MSS-A and MSS-B). In a scenario during service interruptions on one or two services, MSS-A and MSS-B will still be energized. We are proposing to tap a head of MSS-A to feed the fire pump and tap a head of MSS-B to satisfy alternate power source requirement. Please see the attached single line diagram for your reference.

Yes, the proposed installation will meet the requirements of 695.3(C).

EC 695.6(B)(1) – (8/07/2024)

Is it acceptable to utilize manufacturer approved connectors on Prysmian Lifeline type MC cable within a fire pump room in lieu of the specific connector type noted in the fire resistive cable listing (FHIT 50, attached - Appendix A)? Article 695.6.(B)(1) of the 2011 NYC Electrical Code includes an exception (attached - Appendix B) that indicates the 2-hour fire separation or resistive rating is not required for the supply conductors within the fire pump room, which is a 2-hour fire rated room. Refer to attached diagram (Appendix C) for additional information.

The manufacturer-approved connectors are acceptable for supply conductors located within a 2-hour fire-rated Fire Pump Room, Electrical Service Room, or Generator Room.

EC 690.14– (8/07/2024)

I currently reside in a HOA and I considering having solar panels installed on my property (one- and two-family dwellings). My HOA requires that the electrical boxes, such as disconnect switch, rapid shutdown, etc., see attached photos, be installed in either my garage or attic.  I am inquiring if this would be considered a Code violation.

The location of the solar disconnect switch must comply with 2011 NYC Electrical Code Section 690.14(C), which requires disconnect switches to be installed at a readily accessible location either on the outside or inside of a building or structure. Installation within a garage is allowed. However, in an attic is not acceptable, unless the attic is readily accessible. Also, where rapid shutdown function is provided, the location of the rapid shutdown initiation equipment must be coordinated with FDNY.

EC 690.31(A) – (12/04/2024)

For a 25kW solar PV installation on the roof of an 8-story, high-rise museum building in NYC, we would like to confirm whether running the PV wiring on the roof is acceptable without any raceway.

We have the following question regarding wiring methods for PV system (Article 690.31):

1. NEC Article 690.31(A) states:
   “Where photovoltaic source and output circuits operating at maximum system voltages greater than 30 volts are installed in readily accessible locations, circuit conductors shall be installed in a raceway.”
   

In our application, the installation is not readily accessible as it being installed on a sloped roof with 40Deg incline. Additionally, the flat PV panels and the associated wiring will be installed under a removable glass screen on top. Access to the wiring and PV panels will be accessible by removing the glass screen on top. Please confirm if wiring associated with the PV system can be routed exposed without a raceway since they are being installed in non-readily accessible location.

Yes, PV wirings that are indicated in section 690.31(A) can be routed exposed without a raceway in non-readily accessible locations.

Section 725.136– (8/07/2024)

Is the current NYC Electrical Code allowing for the installation of an Excel control cable 18/2 in the same conduit with class 1 wiring, per the attached cut sheet. My understanding is that it is not without a 0.025” separation, and the same will be true for the 2020 NEC when it officially gets adapted. Please confirm as there are many electrical contractors in the NYC jurisdiction currently installing this cable as well as similar cable in the same conduit system without any separation in the conduit.

Yes, this product is allowed in the same conduit as a Class 1 circuit, which is defined in 725.2, provided it complies with the manufacturer’s specifications.

Section 760. 41 & 760.136– (8/07/2024)

CONCERN #1 - Regarding fire alarm SLC (Signaling Line Circuit) cable in underground conduit in Same/Dedicated Handholes. Background description:

1. Around the site, we have underground ductbanks that contain low voltage and medium voltage cables in conduit.
2. The low voltage cables consist of 480VAC, 120VAC, Fire Alarm SLC cable.
3. We have manholes dedicated for the medium voltage cable and handholes dedicated for the low voltage cables

Question: Would it be a violation of the NYC Building Code to install Fire Alarm SLC Cable and 480VAC/120VAC low voltage cables in the same handhole or does the Code require the fire alarm cables to be in dedicated handholes?

CONCERN #2 - Regarding Emergency Power Source for the Fire Alarm System in the new Operations & Maintenance Building

Background Description

1. The Operations & Maintenance Building will be fed from an Outdoor Unit Substation that is located in an Outdoor Walk-in E-House. The Substation will be comprised of a 15kV Switchgear, a Transformer and a 480V Low Voltage Switchgear
2. The Fire Alarm Control Panel that serves the Operations & Maintenance Building will be fed from dual sources (normal utility and generator power) via Automatic Transfer Switch (ATS) dedicated to the fire alarm system.
3. The normal utility source feeder, per the NYC 2011 Electric Code, Section 760.41(A), will be a feeder tap connected ahead of the 480V Main breaker in the Substation
   (Section 760.41 NYC 2011 Electric Code, Section 760.41 (A) indicates the Primary Power Supply for the Fire Alarm system should be connected ahead of the building service disconnecting means so if the building service disconnecting means needs to be opened it would not de-energize the power to the Fire Alarm system)
4. The tap conductors for the normal source will terminate at a fused disconnect that will be located inside the Operations & Maintenance Building.
5. The generator is located in a Building adjacent to the Operations & Maintenance Building on the same site approximately 1,000 feet distance.
6. A 480V Main-Tie-Main Switchgear that is located inside the Operations & Maintenance Building will receive normal utility source from the Outdoor Substation and generator power from the Generator in the adjacent building.

See attached sketches for more details.

Question:

1. Please confirm that Section 760.41(A) should also apply to the generator source feeder (or the secondary power supply to the fire alarm system) also follow Section 760.41(A) requiring a feeder tap connection?
2. Can the feeder tap occur ahead of the Main breaker at the 480V Main-Tie-Main Switchgear (downstream of the Generator) or does the feeder tap need to connect ahead of the actual breaker that is mounted on the Generator to feed the emergency side of the ATS?.

CONCERN #1

Fire Alarm SLC cables are not permitted in the same handhole as 480VAC and 120VAC circuits unless one of the conditions in 760.136 subsections (B) through (G) is met.

CONCERN #2

• Question 1: Generator source shall comply with 760.41(B). The power supply shall be connected such that all other disconnecting means serving other building emergency loads can be opened without de-energizing the fire alarm power supply.
• Question 2: All building fire alarm systems connected to an emergency generator shall be provided with a dedicated transfer switch and be connected ahead of the emergency generator overcurrent protective devices as follows:

1. 1. 208Y/120 volts systems - by a dedicated fused disconnecting means.
   2. 480Y/277 volts systems - by a dedicated fused disconnecting means on the secondary of the associated transformer.
      

Section 760.41(B) – (10/02/2024)

Regarding Concern #2 of Question #3 from the 8/7/2024 ECRIC meeting, as mentioned below in Background description #5, the Operations & Maintenance Building receives secondary power from the adjacent building.

One point that was brought to my attention and that I wanted to bring to light here is the following:

• The adjacent building is fed via redundant Utility Sources fed from diverse substations upstream. See attached single line for your review.
• If one of the utility sources is lost, the redundant one can feed all of the loads in the adjacent building.
• It would be very unlikely for the building to lose both utility sources – in this case, the generator will start and carry the load.
• If the O&M Building, which will contain the fire alarm control panel in question loses utility power, it will receive secondary power – in this case, utility power – from the adjacent building.

Follow-up Question - With the above information brought to your attention, would it still required to connect the Fire Alarm Control panel power supply ahead of the generator breaker at the adjacent building even though the secondary power source to the Operation and Maintenance Building will predominantly be utility power and not generator power? See attached one-line diagram.

Emergency feeders for the fire alarm system shall be tapped ahead of the generator’s main breaker per 760.41(B).

Section 760.41(B) – (12/04/2024)

Siemens Power Mod (modular metering equipment) contain provisions for meters and circuit breakers. Is this product required to comply with 110.26(F)(1)(a) – Dedicated Electrical Space? Note that this product is designed per UL 67 standards. Please see attached product cut sheets.

Yes, this product in question is required to comply with 110.26(F)(1)(a), since it is listed to UL 67 and considered as panelboard.

Section 700.3(F) of 2024 Electrical Code– (12/04/2024)

We are currently designing two new projects, one a 10-story community college and the second a three-story fire station for the FDNY.  Both Facilities have a fire alarm system and a fire pump being installed and both being designed to incorporate a permanently installed life safety generator. By the time this project is bid/filed and installed we will be under the 2024 NYC Electrical Code which is based on the 2020 NEC. In reading 700.3(F) of the Code (2020 NEC revision) it requires a permanently installed portable generator connection when an emergency generator is present to be used during maintenance of the emergency generator. The permanent generator also serves Critical Operations which would have required the portable generator connection in accordance with article 708.22(A) as well. In designing both the permanent generator connection and the permanent portable generator connection we are concerned with the power to the fire alarm and the fire pump within the building to ensure that an emergency power source is always available in both emergency and while the emergency generator is undergoing maintenance/testing while still complying with all sections of the Code [700.3(F)(4); 760.41(A)(1); 760.41(B); 695.3(A)(1)(4); 695.4(B)(2)(4). 

We are proposing the following indicated on SKE-1 and SKE-2. SKE-1, which indicates the OCP on the Generator and Permanent Portable Generator Connection are key interlocked to a common distribution board, is preferred as it will cause the least impact and has less points of failure, but the taps are not ahead of the main (Please note we believe that this arrangement would be acceptable in a paralleled generator arrangement). SKE-2 is similar but the taps for the fire alarm and fire pump are ahead of the main and then interlocked to a common bus (one for the fire pump and one for the fire pump). We are respectfully asking if either of these solutions presented, would be an acceptable interpretation of the requirement, with the preference being SKE-1.

Such taps are required to be ahead of the mains. Only SKE-2 is acceptable for non-paralleled generator installation.

Section 800.133(D) & 830.133(D) – (12/04/2024)

Our client has a single-family home with a 100 amp service disconnect panel combination in a small closet in the basement. Optimum and Verizon also installed a RG-6 coax cable with a splitter for cable TV, a land line telephone line and a router in the closet. We (the contractor) received an objection for having those communication equipment’s and cable in the closet that contains the electrical panel.  The inspector cited 800.133 D and 830.133 D of the NYC Electrical Code.

800.133 D
(D) Electric Closets. Communications equipment and cabling shall not be installed in Electric Closets.

Am 830.133 D
(D) Electric Closets. Broadband communications equipment and cabling shall not be installed in Electric Closets.

When we look at the Electrical Code definition of Electrical Closet, it seems to indicate that an electrical closet is something different than what is in the single-family home that we wired.

Electric Closet. A room designed for or dedicated to the purpose of containing electrical distribution equipment such as vertical risers, bus ducts, transformers or panelboards.

So, the question is, is it permissible to have RG-6 coax cable with a splitter, a land line telephone line and a router with Cat-6 cable in this closet?  If so, what at what point does an electrical closet become such that communications equipment cannot be installed inside of it?

No, the intent of section 830.133 is to prohibit communication equipment and cabling from being installed in electric closets as defined in NYC Electrical Code. If the closet is not classified as an “electric closet”, such installation is allowed. It is atypical to have a dedicated electric closet in a 1- or 2-family dwelling unit.