Tie-in at a venue

[cdub260]

Beyond that, it is up to the space to provide qualified personel or I call my Journeyman and charge them.

Unless your rental contract with the venue specifies that they are responsible for providing qualified personnel to tie in your power, chances are, the responsibility will fall on your shoulders. Even if the venue is responsible, you will most likely be charged for that person's time, so either way, you're paying for the tie-in.

I know that in our rental agreements with the various groups coming to use our venues, the agreement specifies what we will provide in terms of staffing. Typically we provide a Facilities Manager (usually me), maybe 1 tech if requested and 1 or 2 of our security staff. The group using our venue pays for these people's time. We are not staffed as a road house; we're set up for 1 specific show. We simply do not have the personnel available to provide load in/out and running crew for groups using our venue, so that responsibility falls on them.

Other venues I have worked at over the years are set up as road houses and are perfectly capable of providing a full if requested, but still, in every case it was the group renting the venue that footed the bill for whatever crew was provided.

To narrow my point down, when renting a venue, expect that you will be responsible for all expenses related to your show.

 

[JD]

Here in lies the concept of a “Company Switch.” If a venue has one, that means they have been down this road and know what is happening. When a venue does not, it is a large red flag. Not only are you dealing with added logistics, you will also have to battle a learning curve with the venue operators, owners, or managers.

The presence of a company switch should always be one of the factors when choosing a venue.

 

[STEVETERRY]

Here in lies the concept of a “Company Switch.” If a venue has one, that means they have been down this road and know what is happening. When a venue does not, it is a large red flag. Not only are you dealing with added logistics, you will also have to battle a learning curve with the venue operators, owners, or managers.

The presence of a company switch should always be one of the factors when choosing a venue.

And all of this is why we invented the ETCP program.

ST

 

[SteveB]

And all of this is why we invented the ETCP program.

ST

Steve

I don't know if you have access to the Stagecraft mailing list, but the issue as to whether the ETCP certification was "good enough" came up in the thread that Herrick Goldman started about the legal issues he had with the New York City Fire Dept. and connections of dimmer and power distro systems.

Eddie Kramer replied on the list, confirming that the ETCP certification was not recognized by the NYFD in this case, no surprise really given how recent the ESTA program is, and how slow the NYC bureaucracy can be.

It seems that the NYFD is now (as of '09) requiring a so called "CEF" certificate to be issued by a Master Electrician licensed by the Building Dept. of the City of NY, for all temporary connections of dimming and power systems.

According to Eddie, the Electrical Division of the NYC Building Dept. is not the agency requiring this, but instead it's the NYFD - go figure.

My first thought was to cross post this info. on the LightNetwork, where a bunch of Film and TV folks lurk, thinking what a HUGE impact this has on their end of the business. I'm awaiting further news.

My second thought was that it would be in the best interests of IATSE Locals 1 and 52 to get their members ETCP certified and to have all relevant NYC agencies recognize ASAP, the ETCP program as the equivalent (in these situations) to a comparable NYC electrical license. Seems what the ETCP program was created to do.

Steve Bailey
Brooklyn College

 

[Esoteric]

Yeah, I would never accept an ETCP certification to be the same as a state electrical license.

Having seen what is required for each, they are not the same.

Then again I do a lot of permenant installs subject to building inspections.

Mike

 

[mrb]

Yeah, I would never accept an ETCP certification to be the same as a state electrical license.

Having seen what is required for each, they are not the same.

Then again I do a lot of permenant installs subject to building inspections.

Mike

I agree. Maybe for tying a set of tails into a company switch it would be ok, but not for entering panelboards or switchgear.

 

[SteveB]

Yeah, I would never accept an ETCP certification to be the same as a state electrical license.

Having seen what is required for each, they are not the same.

Then again I do a lot of permenant installs subject to building inspections.

Mike

Yeah, I seemed to have used a poor choice of words.

What I was thinking was an intent to get the NYFD and Building Dept. to recognize the ETCP certificate as acceptable for connections of temporary and portable feeder systems, using cam-lok connections and/or wires to lugs in a company switch.

Having to obtain the services of a licensed electrician for every temporary tie-in is going to shake up the entertainment industry due to cost and scheduling issues. How many licensed elec's are going to be available at 1AM for a dis-connect and at what cost ?, and is it really needed if you have a ETCP certificate ?.

SB

 

[Esoteric]

My rider ALWAYS states that paying for tie ins is the responsibility of the venue.

Mike

 

[Esoteric]

Oh! Then I agree 100%. For something like that an ETCP cert should be perfectly acceptable.

As far as tie ins you can get my guy to come out at 1AM but it will cost you $200 for the call out and $75 an hour.

Mike

 

[STEVETERRY]

Steve

I don't know if you have access to the Stagecraft mailing list, but the issue as to whether the ETCP certification was "good enough" came up in the thread that Herrick Goldman started about the legal issues he had with the New York City Fire Dept. and connections of dimmer and power distro systems.

Eddie Kramer replied on the list, confirming that the ETCP certification was not recognized by the NYFD in this case, no surprise really given how recent the ESTA program is, and how slow the NYC bureaucracy can be.

It seems that the NYFD is now (as of '09) requiring a so called "CEF" certificate to be issued by a Master Electrician licensed by the Building Dept. of the City of NY, for all temporary connections of dimming and power systems.

According to Eddie, the Electrical Division of the NYC Building Dept. is not the agency requiring this, but instead it's the NYFD - go figure.

My first thought was to cross post this info. on the LightNetwork, where a bunch of Film and TV folks lurk, thinking what a HUGE impact this has on their end of the business. I'm awaiting further news.

My second thought was that it would be in the best interests of IATSE Locals 1 and 52 to get their members ETCP certified and to have all relevant NYC agencies recognize ASAP, the ETCP program as the equivalent (in these situations) to a comparable NYC electrical license. Seems what the ETCP program was created to do.

Steve Bailey
Brooklyn College

What we need to do is get the Shuberts, Nederlanders, and Jujamcyn behind a political lobbying effort to have NYFD recognize ETCP certification for the purposes of a temporary take in. We did a similar thing on the "new" NYC code with them. NYDOB electrical dept has always required filing on a show install--and that has to be a licensed electrician. But the ETCP should be able to satisfy NYFD. I will make some calls. Do you have more specifics on the NYFD requirements, or does Eddie?

ST

 

[SteveB]

Do you have more specifics on the NYFD requirements, or does Eddie?

ST

No further info,

Here's what Eddie posted:

"The NYC Fire Dept now requires a Licensed New York City Master Electrician to certify the installation is in compliance with the NYC electric code. The Electrical Division of the NYC Department of Buildings says you don't need to do this, but the fire Dept will not let a show open with out one. We have a building licensed, which is only good at our theater. An ESTA certification is not acceptable for this."

Herrick posted a follow up after contacting a friend of Eddies who appears to have a lic. Here's Herrick follow up post:

"Apparently no one really knows what a CEF is. The Five-Four
(54) firehouse on 8th ave asks for them and calls them that, but even Eddie's college pal AL (the GUY) doesn't know what a CEF is"

Now you know what I know.

Be well

SB

 

[photoatdv]

Don't know if this helps, but the (professional) LD ties in the camloks when we rent stuff at my school. When we get to strike anyone can unplug the cams or any other power cables once he's killed power.

 

[Sony]

Don't know if this helps, but the (professional) LD ties in the camloks when we rent stuff at my school. When we get to strike anyone can unplug the cams or any other power cables once he's killed power.

Yea....thats now Illegal in NYC, you have to have a licensed Electrician do all connects and disconnects.

At MVPAC anyone is allowed to connect and disconnect from the Cam-Lok's, except the high school students or anyone under the age of 18 of course. Also they have to state the need for the Cam-Loks in their rider beforehand. Since we usually keep them not only disconnected at the disconnect next to the tails but also at the main panel in the dimmer closet. This is because we can't lock the disconnect near the tails, because the disconnect is just litterally a large circuit breaker without a lock on it...because the electrcian decided for some reason to not install the locking type of breaker. The Main Panel disconnect however is in a secured room which is off-limits to the students without supervision.

 

[mnfreelancer]

This is because we can't lock the disconnect near the tails, because the disconnect is just litterally a large circuit breaker without a lock on it...

Have you looked at aftermarket lock-out products (like for lock-out/tag-out) ? The system you use probably works just fine but there is likely a product for locking out whatever type of circuit breaker is used. Grainger has like 10 pages of breaker lock-outs. Just a random thought...

 

[Sony]

Have you looked at aftermarket lock-out products (like for lock-out/tag-out) ? The system you use probably works just fine but there is likely a product for locking out whatever type of circuit breaker is used. Grainger has like 10 pages of breaker lock-outs. Just a random thought...

I have not, and in all honesty I most likely could find one, but why pay for something that is used maybe twice a year in the summer (When the school kids aren't even around) and you already have a suitable system in place. It takes me literally about 30 seconds to walk around the corner, unlock the dimmer closet and switch the breaker. Since the dimmer room is already locked and the main breaker is turned off all the time, except for maybe once or twice a year. The only people who really use our Company Switch with any regularity is the American Ballet Theatre when they do their show once a year in the summer.

 

[mrb]

I have not, and in all honesty I most likely could find one, but why pay for something that is used maybe twice a year in the summer (When the school kids aren't even around) and you already have a suitable system in place. It takes me literally about 30 seconds to walk around the corner, unlock the dimmer closet and switch the breaker. Since the dimmer room is already locked and the main breaker is turned off all the time, except for maybe once or twice a year. The only people who really use our Company Switch with any regularity is the American Ballet Theatre when they do their show once a year in the summer.

I would lock the company switch. You are putting unecessary wear on the breaker feeding it, and I hope you are inspecting the company switch before energizing the feed to it. I would hate to be the guy closing a few hundred amp breaker into a fault because some kid thought they would be clever and leave a wrench laying across the line side lugs in an unlocked deenergized switch.....

 

[Sony]

I would lock the company switch. You are putting unecessary wear on the breaker feeding it, and I hope you are inspecting the company switch before energizing the feed to it. I would hate to be the guy closing a few hundred amp breaker into a fault because some kid thought they would be clever and leave a wrench laying across the line side lugs in an unlocked deenergized switch.....

Yea, because I'm really putting that much wear on the breaker by flipping it ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR. If I were doing it once or twice a week, then I would be much more concerned. Also, as a rule, I don't energize the Company Switch until everything that needs to be connected to it is connected, so the chances of that happening is basically zero. I understand your concern...but it's really unfounded.

 

[mrb]

Yea, because I'm really putting that much wear on the breaker by flipping it ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR. If I were doing it once or twice a week, then I would be much more concerned. Also, as a rule, I don't energize the Company Switch until everything that needs to be connected to it is connected, so the chances of that happening is basically zero. I understand your concern...but it's really unfounded.

oops, i missed the once or twice a year part