ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#94375 - 07/29/05 07:18 PM Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema
Alan Nadon Offline
Member
Registered: 03/10/05
Posts: 399
Loc: Elkhart, IN. USA
Section 210.70 requires lighting outlets wall switched for habitable rooms, etc. There is an exception for switched receptacles.
The definition of a lighting outlet is an outlet INTENDED for the installation of a lampholder etc.
On final inspection the contractor put blank covers on the lighting outlets and claimed that the owner would select fixtures (luminaires) at some future date.
Should the inspector accept or reject ?
We are curious in Indiana, because it is a real situation.
Should the word intended be removed from the definition (Article 100) of lighting outlet,therefore requiring a lampholder, luminaire, pendant etc. ?
Alan-- Inspector.
_________________________
Alan--
If it was easy, anyone could do it.
Top
2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
#94376 - 07/29/05 07:29 PM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema
Larry Fine Offline
Member
Registered: 02/18/05
Posts: 693
Loc: Richmond, VA
I would require at least a keyless; elsewise, the requirements are not met. Without a luminaire, there is no light.
_________________________
Larry Fine
Fine Electric Co.
fineelectricco.com
Top
#94377 - 07/29/05 08:07 PM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema
Ryan_J Offline
Moderator
Registered: 08/19/03
Posts: 1374
Loc: West Jordan, Utah, USA
Accept it. We as AHJ's can't save the world.

I mean honestly, what do you gain from having them put in a cheesy keyless?
_________________________
Ryan Jackson,
Salt Lake City
Top
#94378 - 07/29/05 08:18 PM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema
DougW Offline
Member
Registered: 06/08/03
Posts: 1143
Loc: North Chicago, IL
Quote:
Originally posted by Ryan_J

Accept it. We as AHJ's can't save the world.

I mean honestly, what do you gain from having them put in a cheesy keyless?


Or a $5.99 Orange Box single bulb & fluted glass fixture from China.
Top
#94379 - 07/29/05 09:06 PM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema
Jps1006 Offline
Member
Registered: 01/22/04
Posts: 615
Loc: Northern IL
The advantage of keyless over a blank is a functioning light. Why the NEC has the requirement, I don't know specifically if it is for protetion from fire from what some clever people might do to get light, or if it to minumize the hazards of fumbling through a dark room. But for whatever the reason for the code, there is exposure to the hazard until the lights get picked out, ordered, delivered, and installed, which could be a long time. Mix some small kids in and who knows. Are ther bigger things in life to worry about, sure, but I don't think it is unreasonable to require a keyless. As an installer, I wouldn't leave a house for final with just blanks.
Top
#94380 - 07/30/05 12:18 AM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema
Joe Tedesco Offline
Member
Registered: 10/07/00
Posts: 2749
Loc: Boston, Massachusetts USA
Alan:

Leaving that outlet with a blank cover is an accident waiting to happen!

I have called for the installation of at least a lampholder before signing off a final during my career.

Quote:
Should the inspector accept or reject ?


REJECT!
_________________________
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
Top
#94381 - 07/30/05 03:15 AM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema
iwire Offline
Moderator
Registered: 01/05/03
Posts: 4391
Loc: North Attleboro, MA USA
Quote:
Section 210.70 requires lighting outlets wall switched for habitable rooms, etc. There is an exception for switched receptacles.

The definition of a lighting outlet is an outlet INTENDED for the installation of a lampholder etc.


You answered your own question.

The NEC requires a lighting outlet, that is all.

If the room uses a switched outlet would you require them to install a floor lamp before you signed off?

It is the same concept.

To me the NEC is crystal clear here, a lighting outlet is not a luminaire.

For those that say reject, please provide the code reference you would cite?

Bob
_________________________
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts
Top
#94382 - 07/30/05 03:31 AM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema
Joe Tedesco Offline
Member
Registered: 10/07/00
Posts: 2749
Loc: Boston, Massachusetts USA
110.3(A)(8) and the approved plans and specifications!

Switched lighting are required, especially in bathrooms and kitchens!

Common sense, too!
_________________________
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
Top
#94383 - 07/30/05 03:49 AM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema
iwire Offline
Moderator
Registered: 01/05/03
Posts: 4391
Loc: North Attleboro, MA USA
Quote:
110.3(A)(8)


110.3(A)(8) does not allow an inspector to require items not required by the text of the NEC.

Quote:
the approved plans and specifications!


We have built many condos that simply show lighting outlets without Luminaires. The Luminaires will be chosen by whoever buys the condo which may be long after the occupancy permit is released for the building.

Quote:
Switched lighting are required, especially in bathrooms and kitchens!


No, lighting is not required by the NEC, lighting outlets are required in these locations by the NEC

Quote:
Common sense, too!


Well that may be true, but it is no way enforceable by an electrical inspector who works within the rules.

I would still like to hear why it is unsafe to leave a blanked up lighting outlet in a living room but it is perfectly safe to leave a switched outlet without a lamp in the same room.

It makes no sense whatsoever.

Bob
_________________________
Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts
Top
#94384 - 07/30/05 04:02 AM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema
Electricmanscott Offline
Member
Registered: 01/12/02
Posts: 1457
Loc: Holden, MA USA
I am with Bob on this. Perfectly clear to me as well. Joe you as a code guru who has been know to argue the literal wording of the code should certainly be able to see this. You yourself call the blanked up box an outlet. NEC requirement is met. Pass the job according to the code not personal opinion.

[This message has been edited by Electricmanscott (edited 07-30-2005).]
Top
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Member Spotlight
Member Since: 07/05/02
Posts: 8211
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box


Who's Online
0 registered (), 75 Guests and 10 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
 
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
 
Top Posters (30 Days)
Admin 49
HotLine1 43
gfretwell 18
Ruben Rocha 12
Trumpy 9
 
Newest Members
Freecrowder, clee512, Jdscott2005, FAIZAN, Regitest2

ECN Electrical Forums - sponsored by Electrical Contractor Network - Electrical and Code Related Discussion for Electrical Contractors, Electricians, Inspectors, Instructors, Engineers and other related Professionals