Nec 700.15

[jar546]

During a recent plan review one of the items written up and sent back to the RDP was that the circuits for the emergency lighting had to be compliant with 700.12. On the plans, they had shown a separate circuit for the EL system which did not activate with loss of power to the lighting circuit of the areas served.

Their response was that 700.15 conflicted with 700.12 and the EL circuit had to be on its own circuit. For starters, they did not know either code until they were written up and the initial design was made with ignorance to the facts. The other part is that I believe that they are confused as to the intent of 700.15 which in our interpretation is written to stop additional loads being from being supplied by lighting circuits with EL's.

Thoughts?

 

[Gregg Harris]

During a recent plan review one of the items written up and sent back to the RDP was that the circuits for the emergency lighting had to be compliant with 700.12. On the plans, they had shown a separate circuit for the EL system which did not activate with loss of power to the lighting circuit of the areas served.Their response was that 700.15 conflicted with 700.12 and the EL circuit had to be on its own circuit. For starters, they did not know either code until they were written up and the initial design was made with ignorance to the facts. The other part is that I believe that they are confused as to the intent of 700.15 which in our interpretation is written to stop additional loads being from being supplied by lighting circuits with EL's.

Thoughts?

700.15 Loads on Emergency Branch Circuits. No appliances and no lamps, other than those specified as required for emergency use, shall be supplied by emergency lighting circuits.

I do not see any way that 700.12 could conflict with 700.15

700.12 describes sources of power and 700.15 states no other load can be added to the emergency branch circuits

 

[Builder Bob]

Be very careful with that, I believe that there are exceptions for that article in the NEC. The handbook may provide a better explanation than this dumb ole fire guy...

 

[chris kennedy]

Be very careful with that, I believe that there are exceptions for that article in the NEC. The handbook may provide a better explanation than this dumb ole fire guy...

The exception is for a large area supplied by 3 or more lighting cirs. The following is the 2011 HB commentary following 700.12 along with the exception in question.

Unit equipment must be permanently fixed in place, usuallyby mounting screws that are accessible only from within the

unit. One or more lamps may be mounted on or remote from

the unit. The unit should be located where it can be readily

checked or tested for proper performance. See Exhibit 700.9.

Unit equipment is intended to provide illumination for

the area where it is installed. For instance, if a unit is located

in a corridor, it must be connected to the branch circuit supplying

the normal corridor lights (on the line side of any

switching arrangements). If normal power fails, the unit automatically

energizes the unit lamps, restoring illumination

to the corridor. A separate circuit is not permitted for unit

equipment [except as noted in Exception No. 1 to 700.12(F)]

because, if applied to the preceding example, failure of the

normal corridor circuit would not affect the unit equipment,

and the corridor would remain dark. The branch circuit feeding

the unit must be identified at the panelboard.

Exception No. 1: In a separate and uninterrupted area suppliedby a minimum of three normal lighting circuits, a separate

branch circuit for unit equipment shall be permitted if

it originates from the same panelboard as that of the normal

lighting circuits and is provided with a lock-on feature.