ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema

Glad that you submitted the proposals Alan. I'd like to see that wording cleaned up (not that this is the only area that needs that). But, more importantly, as you stated, we should at least get some clarification from the panel about what they INTENDED the definition and code section to say. (Gee, there's that word again...I still think we have to go by the dictionary definition of intended)

Roger:

With all due respect to you, and all the other members, please hear me out....

210.70 et al.

What I'm trying to convey is that there must be a provision for illumination within the areas as defined in 210.70. You can call it a 'lighting location', a 'lighting outlet', a 'switched recept' or whatever that particular person wants to refer to the "LIGHT" as. A "blank cover" (inviso-plate) on a location that is the ONLY means of illumination in an area "FAILS".

Further......a "room" that has four (4) wall sconce locations on a SP sw.; a "ceiling" location on a SP sw, and a 1/2 switch controlled receptacle need NOT have all the "fixtures" installed, as long as there is ONE functioning switch controlled means to provide illumination.

John

The NEC is not a design manual. Article 210 sets branch circuit minimum requirements (allowances) but does not, well hardly ever, provide specifics. 210.70 is only about allowing for direct connected luminaires.

Illumination/luminaire requirements are part of the "building code" not the electrical code.

Taken to an extreme; if I install a combination wall switch with a separately wired pilot light which is illuminated when on, haven't I provided a direct connected luminaire for the room? How does this not meet the requirements of 210.70(A)(1) for a bathroom?

I believe any proposal made to change the wording will be rejected. As JBD said, now we are talking about design requirements.

Furthermore, bedrooms, living rooms, family rooms don't actually require a lighting outlet at all when a switched receptacle is installed. So how do you reconcile your desire to have luminaires installed when the NEC doesn't even require them in many rooms of a house?

I'm happy with the way the NEC is as written. Why fix something that isn't broken?

Peter

For substantiation of the proposal I point out; proper illumination allows persons to move about safely thus preventing accidents.
The wording is from the Handbook.
Most agree that the Code allows blank covered lighting outlets to be in compliance.
Many also agree that this is inadequate.

It is not, in my opinion a design consideration but one of safety. After all that is what the Book is supposed to be all about.
I love this site and the input. It gets lonely trying to figure this stuff out without input. Thanks.

Alan --Inspector
Added; edited
Note that the Mechanical Code requires the lighting outlet to illuminate the equipment.
The Building Code requires the lighting outlets to illuminate the stairways.



[This message has been edited by Alan Nadon (edited 08-25-2005).]

"Furthermore, bedrooms, living rooms, family rooms don't actually require a lighting outlet at all when a switched receptacle is installed."

More accurately, the switched receptacle IS the lighting outlet. Remember, except for rooms with applaince circuits, receptacles are (or were) considered lighting outlets.

The only room that "required" electricity for other than lighting loads for many years was the kitchen, later the laundry (sound famalair?) Other rooms had only lighting loads.

In the "beginning", electrified homes had a single 30-amp circuit (one hot, one neutral - both fused) for a single pendant light socket in each room, switched at the socket.

Remember those adapter devices that screwed into a socket, took a bulb on the other end, and had a pair of receptacles in the sides, and often their own pull-chain switch?

Those were one of the first electrical devices widely sold, which now allowed "new-fangled" appliances to be powered. Unfortunately, most appliances were high current heating loads.

Thus the NFPA was born, and begat the NEC.

Larry, receptacle outlets are not lighting outlets. A switched receptacle is not a lighting outlet, it's a receptacle outlet. There is a distinction that must be made.

I maintain that the NEC is fine in its present form.

Peter

Okay, I'll accept that. How about if we say that they're lighting circuits?

Actually is says ...
"Exception No. 1: In other than kitchens and bathrooms, one or more receptacles controlled by a wall switch shall be permitted in lieu of lighting outlets."

... so if you have a switched receptacle you don't need a lighting outlet.

That is how they deal with the blanked off ceiling box here. There is a "half hot" somewhere in the room. We still have some inspectors who say they can count the blank cover but I dissagree.

I think someone make the point clearly. The requirements for illumination comes from building codes not the electrical code.

Electricians, sorry but just because it ain't in the NEC doesn't mean you don't have to follow any and all adopted ordinances or codes of the municipality.

You're right the inspector will not be able to show you in the NEC a requirement for a light, but if they have the NEC adopted I'll bet they also have some building code adopted that requires illumination.

So you still have to install the light to pass inspection.