230.92 versus 230.72(C)

[steveray]

Is it me or do these two sections conflict? 72 says that occupants need access and 92 says "not readily accessible to the occupant"...... am I missing some little nuance? Not an electirician originally, so why don't I understand this?

Thanx!

 

[raider1]

230.72© deals with multiple-occupancy buildings, and the exception to 230.72© permits the service disconnect(s) to accessible only to authorized management personnel.

230.92 permits the service disconnect to be located in a locked room provided that the occupant has access to the feeder or branch circuit breakers.

Chris

 

[Builder Bob]

If the over curretn protection device is available to the public, then it must be readily accessible. If the over current protection device(s) are only for authorized personnel, then access can be limited to the authorized personnel --- examples - strip mall with individual panel in each tenant space (72), Covered mall or industiral plant with electrical distribution room(s) - (92).

 

[steveray]

Thanx Guys!

Situation I have is existing tenant "A" has the service for the whole multi tenant (retail)building in their stockroom....tenant "B" is fed from there with their own panel with a lower ocp device readily accessible in their space. No 24/7 maintenence, if the main ever trips tenant "B" will not be able to reset their power...(if tenant A is not open....I have an interp from NFPA from 2003 that says the ability to reset the power is the intent of the 230.72©.....if so how does 230.92 play into it?.....

Confused....

 

[Builder Bob]

This is unfortunately, a judgement call where the code is subjective in it's application and however you interpret it, will be right or wrong depending with whom you talk to.

Does property management have a local office or a local person responsible for maintiance? (spellign errors - no caffine yet!)