The NEC. Does it stop at the outlet or not?

[charlie b]

I am starting work on a new project that had me digging, just this morning, into the ?2005 Seattle Electrical Code Supplement.? Publication of this book was the manner in which this particular ?local jurisdiction? formal adopted, with revisions, the 2005 NEC. I find it interesting to note that they threw out 90.2 in its entirety! In its place, the City wrote its own statement of applicability. It begins,

The Electrical Code shall apply to all electrical wiring and equipment, including communication systems, installed OR USED (my emphasis) within the City.

It seems to me that Seattle specifically wanted to claim jurisdiction over points that lie beyond the premises wiring system, and that they felt the need to add the ?or used? as the means of staking that claim.

 

[dnem]

It seems to me that Seattle specifically wanted to claim jurisdiction over points that lie beyond the premises wiring system, and that they felt the need to add the ?or used? as the means of staking that claim.

You're assuming the reason for the wording. . I don't think they reached past premise wiring with their statement of applicability because they already had that reach in 90.2(A).

What they did pick up in application was jurisdiction over 90.2(B) installations. . I wonder if Washington State would back them up when they try to permit and inspect work that falls under 90.2(B) ?

 

[charlie b]

I don't think they reached past premise wiring with their statement of applicability because they already had that reach in 90.2(A).

That has not been settled within this thread; it is still a matter of debate, and I do not agree with your take on the question.

I wonder if Washington State would back them up when they try to permit and inspect work that falls under 90.2(B) ?

Not relevant. As far as Seattle is concerned, neither 90.2(A) nor 90.2(B) exists. Washington State rules (specifically the Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 296-46B) does not apply to the City of Seattle. Local rules trump state rules. You get a permit from the City, and the City Inspectors (not the WA State Department of Labor and Industries) are the approval authority for the installation.

 

[dnem]

Washington State rules (specifically the Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 296-46B) does not apply to the City of Seattle. Local rules trump state rules.

The state is the sovereign authority. . If Seattle rules trump state rules, it's only because Washington State allows that by virtue of how they have written their laws.

 

[charlie b]

The state is the sovereign authority. . If Seattle rules trump state rules, it's only because Washington State allows that by virtue of how they have written their laws.

I think that is how it works here.

 

[dnem]

I wonder if Washington State would back them up when they try to permit and inspect work that falls under 90.2(B) ?

Not relevant. As far as Seattle is concerned, neither 90.2(A) nor 90.2(B) exists. Washington State rules (specifically the Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 296-46B) does not apply to the City of Seattle. Local rules trump state rules. You get a permit from the City, and the City Inspectors (not the WA State Department of Labor and Industries) are the approval authority for the installation.

What I'm saying is:
I wonder if Washington State would back them up when they try to permit and inspect the type of work that is described in 90.2(B), ships, mines, railways, utilities, etc

 

[George Stolz]

Note Charlie is hanging his hat on the word 'installed' he is not bringing up the definition of Premise Wiring system.

I noticed, and introduced my own argument.

 

[iwire]

I noticed, and introduced my own argument.

Well thats cool, but it is a weak one. :grin:

 

[iwire]

BTW, the above post was a joke, don't anyone take it to serous. :smile:

 

[charlie b]

BTW, the above post was a joke, don't anyone take it to serous. :smile:

Which one was the joke? Post #1? :grin:

 

[George Stolz]

BTW, the above post was a joke, don't anyone take it to serous. :smile:

Well, that's cool and all, but that was a weak one.

 

[iwire]

Well, that's cool and all, but that was a weak one.

:grin:

LOL