ECN Forum
Posted By: harold endean Letter of the code? - 03/15/03 07:31 PM
Here is a situation. What do you think? There is a partial renovation going on and it touches the powder room. The sheet rock has just a little coming off so the homeowner adds a 2 gang box which will hold the switch to the existing light and a new GFCI receptacle. The GFI though is on the existing 14 ga circuit. So I tell him that all bath recept. should be on 20 amp feeds. The homeowner says that the house is on a slab, and the rest of the house is finished. He can't get to the panel with out major damage to the house. He said if that was the case, then he wouldn't install the receptacle. He would just leave it out. What would you do?
Posted By: HotLine1 Re: Letter of the code? - 03/15/03 10:14 PM
Harold:
Try reading the "REHAB" section of our lovely UCC.
If the house is 366 days old.......
(One year & one day) he can do it!

Before you get upset.....
IMHO, I DO NOT agree with this part of 5:23.

The intent of the "Rehab" was to generate re-habing old structures in "the cities" to reduce the total dollar investment that would be required to bring this type of structure in compliance with the current NEC requirements.

We can discuss this further one on one if you care. I'll e-mail my phone numbers to you.

PS: "Cover for you" ????????????

John
Posted By: sparky Re: Letter of the code? - 03/16/03 12:55 AM
someone has legislated around the 'letter' of the NEC

what else is there really to discuss John?
Posted By: Redsy Re: Letter of the code? - 03/16/03 02:06 AM
Harold,

One of the local municipalities that require Use & Occupancy Certificates for resale require a batroom receptacle be installed when one doesn't exist. They permit you to tap off the existing fixture. They reason that it is better than someone using an extension cord to a bedroom or hall receptacle. Food for thought?
Posted By: sparky66wv Re: Letter of the code? - 03/16/03 09:11 PM
As far as older houses:

The thought of 1875 watt hairdryers plugged into a 15A cheap receptacle with who knows what other resistive-load device plugged into the second slot warming up... On old #14 wire with a 30 Amp fuse....

Makes me go "hmmmmmmmm"...
Posted By: pauluk Re: Letter of the code? - 03/16/03 11:09 PM
Quote
On old #14 wire with a 30 Amp fuse....
You get in-wall heating at no extra cost! Gee, some people are never satisfied! [Linked Image]
Posted By: Electricmanscott Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 01:37 AM
Harold, I am in complete agreement with you here. There was no receptacle in the bathroom before the renovation. If you are installing one then you would absolutely have to install it to code which would require a 20 amp circuit and a gfci protected receptacle. I can't even begin to see the issue here.
Posted By: caselec Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 03:01 AM
So you require them to install a new circuit which might end up costing hundreds or even thousands in repairs to the house to get the circuit across the house. The homeowners will probably just say forget it we don't want the receptacle and wait until after the final inspection and add the receptacle themselves. They will then tell their friends and neighbors what the inspector wanted them to do which will discourage people from getting permits and inspections. This is a powder bath (1/2 bath) so a hair dryer will probably never be used since there is no shower or bath tub. The inspector needs to be reasonable and work with the homeowner not just go be the letter of the code. There are thousands of homes with 15 amp circuits feeding the bathroom receptacles I don't think one more will be the end of the world.

Curt
Posted By: harold endean Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 03:18 PM
Actuall John is correct. In this state there is a "new" REHAB code which states that the homeowner DOES NOT have to install a receptacle. I also agree with John, that some of the inspectors don't agree with the rehab code. So in this instance I can pass the job BUT I will have to cite NJ Rehab code. since it is NOT code compliate to the NEC. Whether or not I like it is not up to me. The law is what I have to go by. This isn't the first time it has happened either. I walked into a house renovation (bathroom again) and the "new" GFI was on an existing circuit. I asked the homeowner why, and she said, "My brother is an inspector in South Jersey and he said that it is allowed under the Rehab Code. So again, I explained the pros and cons of having an outlet on existing circuits, passed the job and left. There are several states out there looking into our Rehab code. They thing it is great. IMHO I am not so sure about it.
Posted By: ElectricAL Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 03:36 PM
Harold,

I appreciate your even handed approach! And I greatly appreciate your taking the moment to explain to the homeowner the pros and cons for doing more than the bare legal minimum!!! Keeps the pressure in the right direction.
Posted By: Electricmanscott Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 07:23 PM
What a joke. Why even bother with the NEC. Give me a break.
Posted By: Joe Tedesco Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 08:44 PM
Harold:

You should always use your good judgement when it comes to non NEC related items found in the NJ codes!

[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 03-26-2003).]
Posted By: HotLine1 Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 09:09 PM
Joe:
Calm down, please, you're goin' to blow a fuse.
I do not like the "Rehab Code", and I think that it is applied in an unfair manner sometimes.
But, as Harold said...it's part of "the law" which we have to enforce.
I usually use the "suggest" routine when this situation arises. "If you are installing an outlet, you should install it to the current NEC standards, a GFI, with a 20 amp circuit".
Most of the time, this direction gets good results. A few times it does not.
John
Posted By: iwire Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 09:24 PM
Maybe I misunderstood the question, but I thought the issue was whether to let the GFI be added to a 15-amp circuit or force a new 20-amp circuit.

If it's just the difference in 5 amps, is there a safety issue?
Posted By: Electricmanscott Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 09:43 PM
Obviously the NEC thinks there is a safety issue or there would be no requirement for a 20 amp circuit.
Posted By: resqcapt19 Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 09:49 PM
Joe,
I know that the 15 amp circuit is a code violation, but how is a properly protected 15 amp circuit less safe than the code required 20 amp circuit? I'm not saying that the code should be disregarded here, I'm just wondering what actual safety hazard that is created by the use of a 15 amp circuit. What hazard do you see that could arise from a properly installed 15 amp receptacle circuit, but would not exist on a properly installed 20 amp receptacle circuit, that would lead to the injuries you described in your post?
Don
Posted By: iwire Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 09:54 PM
Scott, Can you take a shot at why a 20 amp GFI outlet is safer than a 15 amp GFI outlet?

I think the inspector could determine whether the existing circuit is safe to add to, Does it have a full sized ground is the wire good or bad.

If the 15 amp outlet is unsafe there is a lot of bathrooms that are unsafe.



[This message has been edited by iwire (edited 03-17-2003).]
Posted By: sparky Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 10:00 PM
Quote
If it's just the difference in 5 amps, is there a safety issue?

look at it the other way, i just wired a house with 5 bathrooms and could have done it with one dedicated circuit right?*

people will have you come off the vanity light for a GFI before they let you tear thru the house with a new run right?

if you make sure the circuit is fused properly, it beats the zip cords i've found pinched in doorways which will be the alternative.

You see i gotta make the call here, that is until Joe decides to bring his burn kid portfolio to the grand old state of Vermont!

*the ROP's, yes i know....



[This message has been edited by sparky (edited 03-17-2003).]
Posted By: Joe Tedesco Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 10:41 PM
Don:

I support Harold's position.



[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 03-26-2003).]
Posted By: iwire Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 11:03 PM
By Joe T.

Quote
The rule in the code should not be questioned, and it should not be the cause for continued questioning of those here who have an opinion.

I must be one of "those here"

I will question anything I want to, no one has to agree with me, and is certainly free to say so.

Harold's post asked for opinions. he knows what the code says.


[This message has been edited by iwire (edited 03-17-2003).]
Posted By: resqcapt19 Re: Letter of the code? - 03/17/03 11:37 PM
Joe,
Quote
The rule in the code should not be questioned, and it should not be the cause for continued questioning of those here who have an opinion like you do.
If the code is always correct and there is never a need for questioning, then why do we revise it every 3 years?????
I just thought that maybe there was a real safety issue involved here that I could not think of. I just asked a simple question, in response to your post.
Don
Posted By: sparky Re: Letter of the code? - 03/18/03 12:21 AM
I see Joe,
so all i need do is forward your addy to all the contestants in question , and they will either be enlightened to the ways of the NEC, or recieve burnt baby pictures?

Gee thanks Joe!!!!

Obviously, i need more time in the contractual arena to learn such skillful diplomacy!

yrs
~Steve
Posted By: Roger Re: Letter of the code? - 03/18/03 12:58 AM
Ok, I guess if this is such a safety issue, this one particular part of the NEC should be retroactive.

Let's go inspect every dwelling with back up, and force anyone with an older home that may have a 15 amp circuit, even with GFCI protection, to upgrade.

Just my oppinion.

We know that if Harold forces these people to install a multi thousand dollar circuit, they'll think twice about doing things legal next time.

How many times have we discussed common sense?

Not meaning to offend anyone.

Roger

[This message has been edited by Roger (edited 03-17-2003).]
Posted By: sparky66wv Re: Letter of the code? - 03/18/03 01:27 AM
Joe, do you have a picture of an accident involving an improperly fed bath receptacle?

If you do, then I say, Harold's hands are tied, he has to pass it, but give them the picture... But only if it relates exactly to this situation...

In a way, I really have to agree with Joe, but it is only because I have never dealt much with inspectors and don't have a good idea on where the grey area is... Enforce the code to the letter, that way the imperfections in the code will become apparent and will be more likely to be ammended.

Make sense?

Example: If we were pulled over immediately for doing 66 in a 65, we would all go 64... And someone would lobby to change the speed limit to 75 in a hurry!

</bad example>

Anyway, I like the idea of punishing people for forgetting the 6 P's:

Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance

Make an example out of 'em!

</envious of the power>

[This message has been edited by sparky66wv (edited 03-17-2003).]
Posted By: harold endean Re: Letter of the code? - 03/18/03 01:43 AM
OOPS! Sorry guys, I didn't mean to get this board so heated. I myself would like to see the bathroom circuit on a 20 amp dedicated GFCI device. However as I stated, there is this rehab code that I have to follow also. I was also hoping to try and bring some common sense to my inspecting. Joe, knows that I think the world of him and I know that Joe also would never allow anything that was dangerous. He has spent too many years trying to correct and enforce safe wiring methods. My other statement was that other states are looking into the rehab code. The good news is that just like the NEC, I am allowed to try and make code changes. I will write new changes and submit them to the state. I will see if anything develops from these.
Posted By: Electricmanscott Re: Letter of the code? - 03/18/03 02:07 AM
I guess to me the 5 amps is not the real issue. As I have said before this is a new installation and as such I feel it should have to comply with the code that is enforcable at the time. Tapping into an existing circuit that feeds other outlets in the house, be it 15 amps or 20, does not satisfy the requirement. What else is on that circuit? What is the condition of the wiring? What are the connections in the circuit like? What type of panel feeds this? Why set this up for problems? To save the homeowner the expense of a "Multi thousand dollar circuit". Remember "No good deed goes unpunished"!
Posted By: sparky Re: Letter of the code? - 03/18/03 11:34 AM
That's right guys..
NECocrats standing on the letter of the code just can't apply common sense without rationale to back it up, which is apparently why legislation has intervened to subscribe to common practice.

Scare tactics are also of questionable efficy and geared for the weak minded.
Suppose that i had nasty pixs of all the unseatbelted drivers i've dealt with posted here, would your opinon do a 180 on this alone?
Posted By: Redsy Re: Letter of the code? - 03/18/03 12:20 PM
Ahhh,

Just longing for the old days when we here at ECN could voice our opinions and we all refrained from sarcasm & bitterness.
Now EVERYBODY BE NICE! please? [Linked Image]
Posted By: Electricmanscott Re: Letter of the code? - 03/18/03 12:24 PM
Sparky, you are taking this way to personally. We all have our opinions. Sometimes we agree sometimes we don't. I am not a code Nazi I am just arguing the point of following the code or not. It is odd that you use "common sense" and "unseatbeletd drivers" in the same paragraph. These two simply do not go together.
Posted By: ElectricAL Re: Letter of the code? - 03/18/03 05:13 PM
Scott,

It's about what the definition of what the "Code" is. Harold is describing a situation where the "Code" is the NEC (current version in force there) modified by additional ordinance or statute when applied to new electrical work in existing dwellings.

Will you allow that the NEC can be modified like this?
Posted By: SvenNYC Re: Letter of the code? - 03/18/03 06:12 PM
Now here is a monkey wrench in this entire discussion:

What must an electrician do in an apartment building when renewing a branch of wiring in one apartment.

The branch in question is part of a 15 amp circuit feeding bedroom and bathroom (1950s vintage building) lightbulbs and wall sockets.

This includes the bathroom which is fed from the same circuit that feeds the adjoining bedroom.

The bathroom's original ungrounded receptacle integral to the lampholder mounted on the wall (I'm sure you've all seen these).

Theoretically a GFCI could be branched off this existing 15-amp, but as is obvious, that is against code.

What I'm not clear on still is, is there some sort of grandfather clause here that would permit an installer to technically move that receptacle to the wall (instead of next to the lampholder) but keep it on the same circuit as the bulb or does an electrician have to come in and pull a separate 20-amp feed from the buildings main fuse box?

The code states that a bathroom receptacle must be a dedicated 20-amp GFCI socket, right?

What I would like to know is this only for new construction and substantial renovation or does this also cover replacement of exisiting wiring through existing wiring paths?

Confused [Linked Image]
Posted By: ElectricAL Re: Letter of the code? - 03/18/03 09:27 PM
Sven,

The answer is in the mind of the electrical AHJ for the place where the apartment is. S/He will know of the "remodeling code" modifications to the National Electrical Code that apply to the specific occupancy in question. I know this is a delicate issue with you, but, you really need to form a relationship with your AHJ. [Linked Image]

I work in Minnesota. We have a uniform statewide interpretation of the NEC given from the Minnesota State Board of Electricity for all new construction. For existing buildings, the "rehab code" is described in many different places. . .the State Building Code, county and city. Sometimes, even a lending institution will make requirements, when it is their money that is being used by the party they are providing the loan to.

I have to be familiar with all of these regulations in order to give my customer the most value for his dollar. If I insist on only using the unmodified NEC, I penalize my customer.

Harold,

I like the idea of a single statewide rehab code. Anything that will reduce the number of bodies of regulation that I have to be familiar with is, potentially, an improvement.
Posted By: harold endean Re: Letter of the code? - 03/19/03 01:10 AM
ElectricAL,

The Rehab code is one of the reasons I brought this whole subject up. I know that we would all love to see every house wired perfectly. We all also know that it could happen only in a fairy tale. Sometimes there has to be a happy medium and I wonder if this Rehab code might be it. I know that there are bugs in the code, and hopefully over time, they too might get worked out. I also feel that the more we over regulate people, the more that they will back away from doing things the correct way. The general public will get discouraged from getting permits and getting inspections. Also no matter how fool proof we try to make electrical wiring, some dumb sope will find a way to kill himself.
Posted By: sparky Re: Letter of the code? - 03/19/03 11:23 AM
the voice of reason as usual Harold.

i only wish there were more like yourself out there. you see as a rural electrician many of us are the ambassadors of the code, we have to sell it without much backup.

simply put, those that would stand on the letter of the code unbending without having it questioned do us a disservice in that role.

having individual states legislate around the NECorates is testimony to this, they are counterproductive to the very concept (safety) that they stand on.

this is what really gets my goat about the whole matter, live in the real world for cripes sakes!
Posted By: HotLine1 Re: Letter of the code? - 03/19/03 03:41 PM
ElectricAl, Sparky, et al:
Briefly, the "Rehab" code in NJ was/is intended to provide some financial relief for builders/developers within the "inner cities"
The reasoning that was provided to me was/is:
If they can rehabilitate existing structures and return the property to a useful state, and back on the tax roles, they can deviate from the current codes in effect, providing there is no compromise of safety.

Yes, I do not agree with the whole thing, but I am not the legislature, or the DCA.

It can and sometimes is abused...and it should be revised and be more specific, as to it's intent.

There are several AHJ's who are preparing submittals for revision/clarification. The bright side is that the State DCA maintains an office staff that can and do make clarifications, when the AHJ requires interpertation.

I'm jumping off the soap box.
John
Posted By: Electricmanscott Re: Letter of the code? - 03/19/03 10:08 PM
Electrical, I agree that Harold's code seems to allow this. My points are based on the NEC. I am well aware there are many areas that use the NEC or modified versions. My state is one that uses modified version. I still beleive that on a new installation you must install to the current code.
Posted By: nesparky Re: Letter of the code? - 03/20/03 06:46 AM
I think that some are missing the point of code adoption. The NEC and any other code that AHJ's use have to be adopted legally to be enforced. Many adopters either at a state and/or local level modify the code when they adopt it.
No one can write a code that will cover all situations encountered in real world buildings. The age and workmanship of the builder and those who modified it over the years, and the care it recieved are all things that vary greatly.
We all have to make calls that are the best for our customer if we want to stay in business. If we don't our customers will NOT call us. Joe fly by nite will do what the customer wants and WITHOUT any permits or inspections.
So the question becomes who is going to do the work? A licensed caring electrician or joe fly by nite?
Posted By: ElectricAL Re: Letter of the code? - 03/20/03 02:11 PM
Electricmanscott,

I think I understand your point. Let me paraphrase: If the work results in an electrical outlet that is new, that wasn't there before in "this old house", then it is a "new installation".

Personally, only having to use the unmodified NEC would simplify and reduce the amount of studying I have to do, and that would be good for me. . .but, IMO, the resulting bill I give to my customer will be, on occasion, high, and the collateral costs to finish after my installation (wall surface repair and refinishing) will be high.

This begs the question.

HotLine1 said it well
Quote
. . .the "Rehab" code in NJ was/is intended to provide some financial relief for builders/developers within the "inner cities"
The reasoning that was provided to me was/is:
If they can rehabilitate existing structures and return the property to a useful state, and back on the tax roles, they can deviate from the current codes in effect, providing there is no compromise of safety.
To "builders/developers" over in Minneapolis/St. Paul we add home owners. Individual homeowners of older homes, especially those built before about 1950, can maintain a property by meeting the Electrical Minimum Maintenance Code, (our local Rehab Code), which will maintain or increase property value in the tax base, and increase safety for the occupants of the dwelling. The target is the economically depressed areas of the Metro area.

I've been working with various Rehab Codes in my Metro area since I started business over 25 years ago, and find, overall, a great deal of common sense lies at the heart of this, and that, overall, the existing older housing stock doesn't stagnate, rather, continues to improve and remain viable.

[This message has been edited by ElectricAL (edited 03-20-2003).]
Posted By: Mvannevel Re: Letter of the code? - 03/21/03 12:55 PM
Lots of good points from both sides of this issue. Electricians AND Inspectors need to walk a fine line between the letter of the code and the spirit of the code. Not an easy job for either of us. And, unfortunately, it's an argument that's been around forever and will likely stay with us. I guess as long as we keep debating the issue, we keep from going to far in one direction or the other. I think that's the real issue here. If we swing too far to one side, there's no flexibility and the resulting costs and headaches will cause homeowners and contractors to try to skirt the code. But, if we create an atmosphere where we are so flexible that we make exceptions every time something would be expensive or inconvenient, we've defeated the purpose of having a code and inspections in the first place. More dialogue between electricians and inspectors and a better working relationship between them will help. And, a little (maybe a lot) less input from the politicians would really help. Let those of us in the trade make these kinds of decisions. Just my opinion...
Posted By: harold endean Re: Letter of the code? - 03/24/03 01:37 AM
Mvannevel,

I agree with you. As an inspector, I try to walk a fine line. I don't know any good electrical contractor that doesn't want a safe installation. I don't know any inspector who would allow any unsafe electrical installation. We all want safety. Execpt for the "jack-of-all-trades" who just wants his money and runs. Even the DIY who doesn't know anything and thinks that he is saving tons of money by doing himself, still wants it done correctly. I just don't want to see the NEC become TOO restrictive that it makes people shy away from geting inspections. I feel it is better if I do get to inspect them because even if it is wrong I can help them get it right. I know that like Joe T. ( who was my teacher, mentor, and a great friend.) who always wants safety first. (As I do.) My thoughts still come back to, no matter how hard we try to make electricty safe, some dumb a** is going to get his butt fried because he tried to get around the NEC. Can we stop him? NO, can we try to protect him? We can TRY. We can try to get people to protect themselves with codes but as Joe can show you in pictures, there are many people out there with out the common sense to help or kill themselves.
Posted By: nesparky Re: Letter of the code? - 03/26/03 06:59 AM
Harold
You are correct whe you say that there are a lot of people who do not have or do not use common sense. There are those who sole focus is on thier pocket book. To them safety means nothing if it costs more.
If those type of indivduals are doing there own work and get themselves hurt or killed, I just call it evolution in action.
Unfortunatly those clowns usally get some one else hurt. It is a pity that we will never be able to stop them. Slow them down maybe - stop them NO
All we can do is make an honest reasoned call on each individual job we do.
© ECN Electrical Forums