I have a question and I don't remember if it was brought up. (Forgive me for getting old) I was at my supply house this weekend and someone was talking about required receptacles and "Usable" wall space. Now I am at work, and my handbook is home. I think there is something in there about that.

Now the question. You walk into a room and there is a 7' bookcase right on the right hand wall. Would you need a floor receptacle to meet the 6' space rule? What about a window seat? Or a home media center with a wall to ceiling video screen?

Harold:
IMHO, without getting out the books, wall space is wall space and must conform to the NEC spacing requirements. I don't remember seeing the word 'usable'.

Occasionally, an EC will raise a debate about the wall space behind a door (>24") as to what 'use' a receptacle would be in that space. I see nothing in NEC that exempts that space.

As to the window seats, the required (or design) recept is installed. Bookcases either have the recept at the required spacing (although eventually behind books), or I remember one with a floor recept.

I'll consult the '08 Handbook time permitting.

There's always room to exercise judgement.

In a situation similar to your bookcase, I've seen rooms with floor-to-ceiling niches that were plainly intended for later insertion of a cabinet. As I see it, there's room to say 'skip the receptacle.'

Or, my personal favorite: the area behind the door. It's one thing to use this area for measurement ... but I've seen a number of situations where the combination of doorways was such that placing a receptacle in that 30" section does nothing but create hazards.

IMO, the problem is not with code and design requirements, but the blind application of 'minimum' code requirements. Simply measuring 12-ft. between receptacles often results in poorly placed receptacles.

While I understand the desires behind this ancient code basic, I think it comes back to the simple fact that you can't legislate good judgement.

Reno:
Yes, good judgement and common sense should be within the layout persons ability. Some have it, and unfortunatley....some don't.

Alas, good judgement, and common sense are not within the NEC, which the AHJs have to enforce.

Perhaps some day the spacing requirements will be reviewed, and adjusted.

Personally I like having the one behind the door.
It gives me somewhere to plug in the vacuum without having to reach behind the dresser and unplug something else.

With built in book cases it may be best to put the receptacle in the toe kick but that requires coordination between the cabinet builder and the electrician. On Harold's big entertainment center, where is that floor to ceiling TV plugged in?

I would want a quad in an entertainment center and you still may end up with a quasi legal plug strip. It is probably beyond the scope of what they pay for but the user would want a lot of stuff behind his entertainment center if he could get it (in wall chases for cables etc). You certainly want plenty of places to plug things in.

210.52 defines wall space as

A built in, floor to wherever bookcase creates a break in the wall space at the floor line, it doesn't continue it. Keep in mind that we are talking about minimum required receptacles, not the extra stuff for an entertainment center or video wall that a homeowner or builder might ask for IN ADDITION to the minimum. If the builder wants a receptacle in the bookcase, fine. But it's not required in the case described by the OP.

Thanks, Greg, for including the code section.

Now we know to advise customers to make a cabinet of the space under that window seat, so we won't need to put a receptacle there

One of the McMansions has a library, custom floor to ceiling bookcases and one door and one window. Cases are cherry, extreemly detailed. Room has duplexes cut into the mullions that are 5" wide. Duplex every 4'; 12" AFF.

The receptacles under the window seats are in the toe kicks. The home theater had a duplex for the ceiling mounted projector, and 3 pcs of six foot, 6" OC plugmold at the equipment rack location. Theater room had code recept spacing.

This GC has a steady EC & Plumbing sub, and all the rest of the tradesmen are his direct employees, which creates cooperation!!!

John,

I was reading in the NEC handbook and the word "Usable" was written in there under the writer's comments.

We all know the code, but why would we need a receptacle in the toe kick if there are other wall outlets in the room? Vacuuming? or night light? You can't put a table or chair in front of the bookcase can you?

How about a large screen for the media center? An outlet right in the middle of the screen might ruin the picture.

harold:
The receptacles were installed to maintain the 6-12-24 spacing. I agree that they may be useless, and even may have been blanked off after final.

Unfortunatley, you and I have to enforce somethings we did not write, nor perhaps personally agree with.

John,

I don't have a problem enforcing code that I don't always believe in, I didn't always agree with TR recpt. and AFCI's but if the code say's you need them, so be it.

I also tried to get some code changes in past code cycles, the only problem is that by the time I figure out what I don't like with the new code ( Since it doesn't get adopted right away.) The newer code changes are closed out.

Harold:
I have a personal issue with the required receptacle on perinsulas & islands. But, I have no option, unless a variation is requested.

What is the problem with the receptacle on islands and peninsulas?

Receptacles in islands and peninsulas are where you plug in the crock pots at a party. (you usually need a couple of circuts for those) Would you rather have a couple 12 or 10AWG extension cords running across the floor?

Greg:
Basically, the 'arguments' about the kids (and adults) possibly getting tangled in the cords. Peninsulas with 'fake' cabinet doors having the 'mandatory' duplex cut into the 'fake' doors as that's the only 'option' for the duplex.

I think PA summed it up. The danger of extension cords is as bad there as it is anywhere and that is what 210.52 is all about. If you have "kid" problems, don't leave things plugged in. That is no reason not to have the ability to plug things in. Like a lot of things in the code, these rules just create a market for innovative solutions.

http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/yhst-17771562391491_2140_7903344


If they wanted the code to be easy to obey, they wouldn't have made it over 1000 pages long full of arcane language that they change every 3 years

Greg,

I understand about "Not leaving things plugged in". However you have too many hungry lawyers out there just looking to blame everyone else for people's mistakes. How many of my electrical friends were sued because somebody got hurt with a coffee pot that fell over. It seems like nobody wants to take responsibility for their own actions anymore. That is why we "need" TR receptacles, so that people don't stick pins into the receptacle.

John,

I you have a full wall of built-in bookshelves that go from floor to ceiling. I really don't see a reason to make someone put a receptacle inside the book case between shelves. There should be at least 1 open receptacle in the room for vacuuming but what would you use a receptacle inside the book case for?

Again, I have to enforce rules, but sometimes I think some rules should be changed.

Puck lights? a set of RF speakers? the charger for your Kindle?
It is not our job to decide what the receptacle will be used for, only to assure the ones defined in 210 are there.
If you are that convinced it is not necessary you can always 90-4 it but you do that at your own peril if the next owner (or his home inspector) wants to know why there isn't a required receptacle there.

As a design issue, it is almost always better to exceed 210.52, you should, at least, meet it. We have lots of stuff with plugs on it.

We've managed to get back to the topic of another thread: is "code minimum" really an opion?

I mean ... all his fuss over a bookcase ... while there's absoluely no rule agains putting a/the receptacle on either side of the thing! I need no be placed precisely at the 12-ft. mark!

Harold:

I have to agree with Gregs comments above.

Reno:

No, the 12 foot precisely is not how I understand the inquiry. The 'point' is to maintain the NEC required MINIMUM required receptacles within a room. In the real world, I know that after I sign-off on a final for one of the residences that had spacing issues, the 'required' devices were blanked off.

John and Greg,

I agree with everything said here and I realize that we do have a lot of things with plugs and that you don't need a receptacle exactly at the 12 foot mark. I am just playing devil's advocate, and sometimes questioning why we need such strict codes. I know I can use 90-4 and I get homeowners saying to me, "It's my house and if I don't want it, then why do I have to have it?" Then they will say,if someone else buys a house after I said an outlet wasn't required, then let them install if they want it."

I am sure we have all heard statements like that.

About only a millon times.

Harold:
A few variations have been granted for receptacle ommissions in islands and peninsulas for what the homeowners 'cited' as safety issues. Each was considered, and reviewed for justification. The 'under 6" overhang' was the cause of the request. Two had 5" overhang.

The next time I'm at my buddy's house, I'll setup a good reason that there should be a receptacle,take a pic, and post It!! I'll be sure to bring LOTS of extension cords!!!
12awg, of course!

What I should do is print out these pages, so that the next time I inspect something and the homeowner asks me these same questions, I can hand out these answers.

As PA said, "Only about a million times!"

I should do the same.

Greg,

This will be my last post about this topic, but another EC got into it with me over the weekend at the supply house. "If you had a built in window seat, it is furniture, not usable wall space. So therefore a built in book case is also not usable wall space". He also said that if you have a wall in an exercise room and the HO puts mirrors on the wall, then the receptacle will be behind the mirror and not accessible. I didn't have my responses from this forum printed out yet, so I couldn't give them to him. I tried to explain that "Usable" wall space is not in the code. He then said that we should use more common sense when we write the NEC. I asked him if he ever wrote in a proposal to the NEC, and of course the answer was no.

Harold, I feel your pain ... I've posted on the topic of code inadequacies many times.

I almost seems that architects deliberately design things to confound code authorities. For example, the introduction of the AFCI spawned all manner of debate over just what was a bedroom, whether it included the closet, did it matter if the closet was a walk-in or even a dressing room, etc. There was also the 'hotel' variation, where the 'kitchen' was little more than a microwave next to the bed.

We return to another thread I once started, questioning whether building 'to code' was ever an option. IMO, there are just too many possibilities for there to be a 'cookbook' approach, so you're much better off focusing on good design rather than 'code minimum.'

Besides ... the "12 ft. rule" is always explained with regards to placing a reading lamp. I submit it's kind of hard to place a reading lamp 'behind' a window seat .... unless you're using a streetlight

Reno,

I have been doing electrical work since 1975, started out as a BA/FA installer then went right into electrical resi/com work. I am a firm believer in safety, don't get me wrong. It just seems like code making panel are just interested in changing the code every 3 years to a) Sell more code books. B) Serve the interest of manufactures, who sit on code making panels in order to sell more equipment. C) Try to save people from themselves, because lawyers love to sue everyone at the drop of a hat.
It is getting frustrating to be an EC, trying to meet the code, trying to make money and still keeping the jobs safe.

I am now an AHJ and see the problems that the new EC's are facing. I feel very sorry for them, it is darn near impossible to make a living anymore.

Harold:
Resi is tough, I agree. Some ECs do really good, others survive, and some fail.

Unfortunatley, you and I have to assure compliance with "Code", and our personal opinions can get us in deep stuff.

IMO, when an inspector says "all I do is enforce the rules, and to do otherwise would be wrong," they're lying.

I say that because - code issues aside - that's NOT all they do. They're part of the system, and have multiple opportunities to affect things. They're in a better position to influence decisions, to submit proposals, and be up-to-date than anyone out on a jobsite.

This is especially true when the time comes to adopt the 'latest and greatest' codes. Before you even think of taking it to the city council for consideration, you need to ask: "what will this change do to Granny whan all she wants is another place to plug in her teapot?" If the end result is that the only help she can get is an untrained day laborer, have we made things any safer?

Back to the OP ... theres always room for discretion. One cannot simply look at the book and say 'this is the rule.' Rather, one has to apply the rule to each individual situation. In this case, we have to ask "is the wall interrupted?." We can't say 'yes, it is today, but that might change tomorrow' and apply the rule.

Reno:
Look back on my previous comments; there are 'ways' to solve issues. Those that do not affect life safety, or ADA requirements.

My last comment was to Harold...and perhaps I was not eloquent in my choice of words. As to there being discression on an AHJs approval, I and Harold also have to abide by State regulations.

Without a rant, yes there are NEC requirements that I personally don't agree with, as I am quite sure that others, including you concur. Our UCC has procedures for certain variations from NEC, and other code requirements, as long as it is not life safety or ADA. Harold seems to be of the same opinion that I expressed, although I cannot speak for him.

Also, we (NJ) do not have any 'city' codes, we have the 2008 NEC, with a few exceptions, that is supposed to be statewide. The 'codes' are adopted by the State DCA, and opinions are accepted for consideration prior to adoption. Harold, for one has submitted opinions, and like most, I believe they were not accepted by DCA.

Hopefully, the title or 'lying' is not on my ID tag.

John,

Yes, as you said, I too have to follow the NJ UCC or else the state could yank my AHJ lic. Even if I don't agree with the code. As Reno said, I try to use common sense when I do my inspections and I will offer solutions to a problem. For example recept. on a island. There are the "Pop up" type of receptacle and/or you could use a plugmold strip up close to the counter top. I just wish that architects would use some common sense when they design a room. They should try to design the room to be able to comply with the NEC. I also have used the Variation to the code on occasion.

Harold is right, complying with the code is the responsibility of the designer. I think you should have to have some basic NEC (and other code) competence before you get your architect's license. I fear they spend more time on the "arty" part and less on the code part. In a perfect world this would be caught in code review but they really don't delve into that kind of detail when you get to cabinetry. What is on "the plan" is far from a real plan for what they build. Again, I throw this back to the builder or job super to be sure they figure out a way to meet code in the early design phase from the cabinet guy.
You can't really even blame this one on code churn. I think the last major change was in 93 or 96 and it was for counter tops.

Greg:
Yes, the end cause is within the design, or lack thereof. Resi plan review on my end for kitchen reno & new SFD construction, looks compliant on the plan/sketch submitted. But, the end product changes by the time 'rough' is inspected. Then it's 'as-built'. The end result, whatever has to be done...comply with the current '08 NEC. Most of the kitch reno contractors are OK, notice 'most'.

Greg, John,

I didn't mean to rant and rave about the NEC, I have other things that drive me crazy too. Like my truck. Again the designers want to design things because they thing we are stupid. Now the trucks/cars all have electric eyes to make sure that the lights come on during the day. I guess they think I am too stupid to turn on my headlights. It drives me crazy in the morning when the light of day is just bright enough to turn off the lights , but when you come to a shady street, the lights come on again, then off, then on.

Know what I mean?