|
1 members (Scott35),
175
guests, and
11
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
Member
|
John,
Now that we have adopted the '08 NEC, I asked people what they heard about doing additions to the house. A EC said that the DCA stated, if you extend a circuit from the old house into the new addition, you own that circuit and it will have to meet the '08 code.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,445 Likes: 3
Cat Servant Member
|
Such a view would, it seems to me, go against the '60% rule' rule regarding remodels. That is, the idea that the value of the remodel (or part thereof) has to be at least 60% the cost of a complete re-do for the new codes to apply.
I even think this rule is spelled out in the UBC.
Perhaps it's one of creation's never-ending battles, like the one of 'good vs. evil,' but I see a contstant attempt by various governmental minions to extend their reach - despite our having a starting point (the Constitution) that makes clear that government is to be quite limited in scope.
While it's bad enough when someone feels government no longer needs limitations when THEY'RE the ones in charge, what's truly horrifying are those who consider themselves on some holy mission.
If I haven't said this before, I'll say it now: "Model" codes have expanded way beyond the 'basic minimum required for safety,' and ought not be automatically adopted, in full, at the publishers' discretion.
Don't simply 'hop on the bandwagon.' NECA recently asserted that Ohio was the only state that had not adopted the NEC. This is not correct. Nevada has not, as a state, adopted ANY version of the NEC; such matters are determined locally. More to the point, NECA and the NFPA were most certainly NOT pointing out in early 2008 that 'no one had adopted it - and therefore you should avoid the 2008.'
Another argument is that 'we have to justify why we are not accepting the national industry-wide standard.' Balderdash! None of those national groups are the AHJ- you are! It is they who need to justify themselves to you - not the other way around.
Now, if someone can explain just how safety is advanced by requiring the ceiling-mounted receptacle for the garage door opener to be tamper resistant, I'm all ears.
Last edited by renosteinke; 06/26/09 11:31 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,382 Likes: 7
Member
|
Harold:
From SB (verbal) re: AFCI:
Additions & new construction; AFCI
Utilize an existing circuit, extend an existing circuit, use an existing "spare", it will be AFCI & 'sparky' owns the whole thing. Basically, this type of situation is left up to our (AHJ's) discression on "extend" & "existing".
The EC's I spoke to seem to have a grip on it, but time will tell.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,382 Likes: 7
Member
|
Reno:
NJ has it's own version of the IBC (2006 NJ Version). But, we have the NJ Uniform Construction Code, within that is the Rehabilitation Subcode. The 'rehab' code is what is used to determine the 'extent' of job-scope. I do not know all the specifics offhand, I would have to consult the book. There is latitude within the rehab code except for life-safety items.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
Member
|
John,
What are we going to have to do now when we inspect. Trip the AFCI and see which outlets go off? Is there a tester out there right now that can actually check an AFCI breaker? Also how do we know if the EC "extended" a old circuit? (Unless it is out in the new addition.)
Last edited by harold endean; 06/26/09 09:59 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,931 Likes: 34
Member
|
They have to call AFCI testers "indicators" because there is so much smoke and mirrors in AFCI technology they can't guarantee a "tester" will actually test one.
Yes I would agree, an inspection of an addition would require that you trip the AFCI and see which outlets go off.
I assume any receptacle in the new addition would have to be AFCI if you are 2008. I bet the best practice these days is to run a sub panel for any sizable addition since device type AFCIs have to be near the panel. You can't extend a circuit and drop a device type at the extension point.
You could put the whole circuit you are extending on an AFCI, either by breaker if it is available or with a device type next to the existing panel.
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,382 Likes: 7
Member
|
Greg:
Have you seen a device type AFCI??
If so, a little info please.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,382 Likes: 7
Member
|
Harold:
Last info I have is the test button is the only method.
There are/were a few devices on the market, pricey, and may or may not be compatable with all brands.
SQD & SEimens reccomend the test button only.
DCA said any circuit that is 'extended'...the EC owns the whole circuit. This is where the 'truth-in-installation' (trust) comes to play. Anything within the existing structure could fall into rehab. Guess a case by case situation to start.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,931 Likes: 34
Member
|
I have never seen a device type AFCI but the code thinks they are there. Sort of like the AFCI that detects series arcs.
... don't get me started
Greg Fretwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
Member
|
John, As far as most EC will go, they never touched the old circuit. Everything they did is new.  We will just have to wait and see now. Also the ground grid around above ground pools whether they are on dirt, pavers, cement, etc. this rule will be tough to explain to homeowners.
|
|
|
|
Posts: 524
Joined: December 2003
|
|
|
|
