jar546
CBO
In South Florida, it's common to find FPL transformer vaults located inside older condominium buildings, including both mid-rise and high-rise structures. These vaults are typically only accessible by FPL from the outside—there are no interior doors or access points from within the building. The buildings are almost always Type I or Type II construction, with concrete or solid poured masonry walls separating the vault from the rest of the structure. You’ll usually find the building’s main service disconnects and switchgear on the opposite side of one of these vault walls.
Many of these buildings were constructed in the late 1950s through the 1980s, a time when building code enforcement in many parts of South Florida was inconsistent at best. That brings us to the problems we face today.
In quite a few cases, the required electrical workspace doesn’t come close to meeting today’s standards—or even the minimum requirements that have been in place for decades. NEC 110.26, which establishes the minimum clear working space around electrical equipment for safe operation and maintenance, would be wishful thinking. In one example, a building that was initially a hotel was converted into condominiums, and a chiller system was later installed. The chilled water piping runs right through the electrical service room, clearly violating not just NEC 110.26 but other sections as well. This has been the case for over 30 years, a legacy of South Florida’s “wild west” era of enforcement.
Now, many of these buildings have electrical switchgear that is well beyond its useful life. In some cases, the equipment has deteriorated to the point where certain breaker buckets no longer function at all. Replacement is not just needed—it’s overdue. But how is that handled? At what point does a situation like this demand a no-nonsense approach that mandates compliance?
In many instances, full compliance is physically impossible. The electrical rooms—already undersized—are often located directly adjacent to the FPL vaults, and in some cases, mechanical piping and ductwork have been added over the years that would now need to be completely removed, at an extreme cost, to bring the room up to code.
So, where does the NEC intersect with the IEBC in addressing these existing conditions? That’s the real-world question. These are not theoretical scenarios—they're daily challenges. Many of these buildings are themselves beyond their intended life expectancy, yet the only viable path is to keep repairing and maintaining them.
This is a discussion worth having. These legacy conditions force us to confront tough choices between practicality, life safety, code compliance, and the economic reality of aging infrastructure.
Many of these buildings were constructed in the late 1950s through the 1980s, a time when building code enforcement in many parts of South Florida was inconsistent at best. That brings us to the problems we face today.
In quite a few cases, the required electrical workspace doesn’t come close to meeting today’s standards—or even the minimum requirements that have been in place for decades. NEC 110.26, which establishes the minimum clear working space around electrical equipment for safe operation and maintenance, would be wishful thinking. In one example, a building that was initially a hotel was converted into condominiums, and a chiller system was later installed. The chilled water piping runs right through the electrical service room, clearly violating not just NEC 110.26 but other sections as well. This has been the case for over 30 years, a legacy of South Florida’s “wild west” era of enforcement.
Now, many of these buildings have electrical switchgear that is well beyond its useful life. In some cases, the equipment has deteriorated to the point where certain breaker buckets no longer function at all. Replacement is not just needed—it’s overdue. But how is that handled? At what point does a situation like this demand a no-nonsense approach that mandates compliance?
In many instances, full compliance is physically impossible. The electrical rooms—already undersized—are often located directly adjacent to the FPL vaults, and in some cases, mechanical piping and ductwork have been added over the years that would now need to be completely removed, at an extreme cost, to bring the room up to code.
So, where does the NEC intersect with the IEBC in addressing these existing conditions? That’s the real-world question. These are not theoretical scenarios—they're daily challenges. Many of these buildings are themselves beyond their intended life expectancy, yet the only viable path is to keep repairing and maintaining them.
This is a discussion worth having. These legacy conditions force us to confront tough choices between practicality, life safety, code compliance, and the economic reality of aging infrastructure.
