Code Question
- Thread starter actionjoe
- Start date
- Status
Re: Code Question
The 2002 NEC is in effect most places now. September is when the 2005 will be available, but will not go into effect.
The short answer to your question (if this meets 334.10(2)) is yes you can barring any local codes prohibiting it.
Roger
[ August 11, 2004, 06:48 AM: Message edited by: roger ]
The 2002 NEC is in effect most places now. September is when the 2005 will be available, but will not go into effect.
The short answer to your question (if this meets 334.10(2)) is yes you can barring any local codes prohibiting it.
Roger
[ August 11, 2004, 06:48 AM: Message edited by: roger ]
Re: Code Question
The problem with 334.10 is that it can sometimes be a little hard to apply. Is wood framing used for the interior walls of the building? If so, then it is constriction type III, IV, or V. If not, then you have to find out: would the building have been allowed to be built using type III, IV, or V construction if it had been proposed that way? Only the AHJ can answere that question.
Edit: There are a few allowances in the IBC where wood framing can be used in some interior partitions even in Type I and II construction. So a little bit of wood doesn't ensure that it is type III, IV, or V.
[ August 11, 2004, 03:33 PM: Message edited by: eprice ]
The problem with 334.10 is that it can sometimes be a little hard to apply. Is wood framing used for the interior walls of the building? If so, then it is constriction type III, IV, or V. If not, then you have to find out: would the building have been allowed to be built using type III, IV, or V construction if it had been proposed that way? Only the AHJ can answere that question.
Edit: There are a few allowances in the IBC where wood framing can be used in some interior partitions even in Type I and II construction. So a little bit of wood doesn't ensure that it is type III, IV, or V.
[ August 11, 2004, 03:33 PM: Message edited by: eprice ]
A
a.wayne3@verizon.net
Guest
Re: Code Question
Town homes,mulyiple dwellings.apartment buildings here are mostly built with 2x4 walls 1 in apart and watch the 24 in rule all is good to go.internally,panel feeds are another story.
Town homes,mulyiple dwellings.apartment buildings here are mostly built with 2x4 walls 1 in apart and watch the 24 in rule all is good to go.internally,panel feeds are another story.
pierre
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
Re: Code Question
Just for info: NY State is still referencing the '99 NEC and the Residential Building code, until January of 2006, that year they are going to reference the 2002 NEC
The state plans on always being one code cycle behind the NEC, and the State's cycle starts one year later than the NEC. Go figure.
Pierre
Just for info: NY State is still referencing the '99 NEC and the Residential Building code, until January of 2006, that year they are going to reference the 2002 NEC
The state plans on always being one code cycle behind the NEC, and the State's cycle starts one year later than the NEC. Go figure.
Pierre
peter d
Senior Member
- Location
- New England
Re: Code Question
Same here Pierre. We are one code cycle behind as well.
Same here Pierre. We are one code cycle behind as well.
A
a.wayne3@verizon.net
Guest
Re: Code Question
GOTTA work the bugs out I guess I left NYC in 81 and at that time the NEC was another world.They went by the NYC code that was set up by the unions to keep guys working
GOTTA work the bugs out I guess
I left NYC in 81 and at that time the NEC was another world.They went by the NYC code that was set up by the unions to keep guys working jimwalker
Senior Member
- Location
- TAMPA FLORIDA
Re: Code Question
Here what code applies depends on when permit was pulled.I did 40 townhouses without arcfaults because it was permitted before we adopted 2002.So i would check with AHJ
Here what code applies depends on when permit was pulled.I did 40 townhouses without arcfaults because it was permitted before we adopted 2002.So i would check with AHJ
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
Re: Code Question
Roger It's that way here in Indiana. it goes by the date the plans were accepted or the date the permit was issued.
If you are doing a building that runs across a code change cycle then would you be required to go back and change everything to the new code?
[ August 12, 2004, 07:58 PM: Message edited by: hurk27 ]
Roger It's that way here in Indiana. it goes by the date the plans were accepted or the date the permit was issued.
If you are doing a building that runs across a code change cycle then would you be required to go back and change everything to the new code?
[ August 12, 2004, 07:58 PM: Message edited by: hurk27 ]
Re: Code Question
Wayne, I think everywhere goes by the date the job was permitted. Even the NFPA recognizes this as defining "Existing Buildings". Jim implies that the job was permitted after 2002 but Fl was still under the 99 NEC.
FL adopted the 2002 NEC on July 1 2003.
So, if the permit was issued after 2002 AFCI's (Receptacle Outlets only) were part of the 99 NEC at that time.
If the permit was issued in 99 or before, there would be no reason for Jims post.
Roger
[ August 12, 2004, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: roger ]
Wayne, I think everywhere goes by the date the job was permitted. Even the NFPA recognizes this as defining "Existing Buildings". Jim implies that the job was permitted after 2002 but Fl was still under the 99 NEC.
FL adopted the 2002 NEC on July 1 2003.
So, if the permit was issued after 2002 AFCI's (Receptacle Outlets only) were part of the 99 NEC at that time.
If the permit was issued in 99 or before, there would be no reason for Jims post.
Roger
[ August 12, 2004, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: roger ]
A
a.wayne3@verizon.net
Guest
Re: Code Question
Roger it has to do with the actual permit #,we did apartment``s that were built a year after the cut off point for arch fault requirements,but we had a release to be prior code even after the # it was only a few digits off.But the chief allowed it and after those were done we complied.Welcome to my world!
Roger it has to do with the actual permit #,we did apartment``s that were built a year after the cut off point for arch fault requirements,but we had a release to be prior code even after the # it was only a few digits off.But the chief allowed it and after those were done we complied.Welcome to my world!
- Status