ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
sparky 5
Recent Posts
Holiday Wishes to all!!
by HotLine1. 12/15/17 07:20 PM
Dimmable LED 2x4 lay in fixtures
by HotLine1. 12/15/17 07:15 PM
2017 NEC Changes
by HotLine1. 12/15/17 07:06 PM
Casino Wiring methods
by HotLine1. 12/09/17 10:44 AM
Ground wire Size to water Line.
by HotLine1. 12/05/17 12:11 PM
New in the Gallery:
Gallery Test
Popular Topics(Views)
243,079 Are you busy
179,523 Re: Forum
170,436 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (gfretwell), 5 guests, and 11 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
#94375 - 07/29/05 09:18 PM Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema  
Alan Nadon  Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 399
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.

2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#94376 - 07/29/05 09:29 PM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema  
Larry Fine  Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 693
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

#94377 - 07/29/05 10:07 PM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema  
Ryan_J  Offline
Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,374
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

#94378 - 07/29/05 10:18 PM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema  
DougW  Offline
Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,143
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.


#94379 - 07/29/05 11:06 PM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema  
Jps1006  Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 615
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.


#94380 - 07/30/05 02:18 AM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema  
Joe Tedesco  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
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

#94381 - 07/30/05 05:15 AM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema  
iwire  Offline
Moderator
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
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

#94382 - 07/30/05 05:31 AM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema  
Joe Tedesco  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
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

#94383 - 07/30/05 05:49 AM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema  
iwire  Offline
Moderator
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
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, [Linked Image] 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. [Linked Image]

Bob


Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts

#94384 - 07/30/05 06:02 AM Re: Proving Intent- Inspectors dilema  
Electricmanscott  Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,457
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).]


Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Member Spotlight
AllClear
AllClear
Belmond Iowa US
Posts: 44
Joined: August 2005
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 Master Electrician Exam Preparation Combos
2017 NEC Electrician
Exam Prep Combos:
Master / Journeyman

 

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.016s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.8276 MB (Peak: 1.0038 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-12-17 02:29:25 UTC