Habitable Rooms - Lighting Outlet

[George Stolz]

If an inspector called me and said, "These folks called me by mistake, here's their number..." I wouldn't be offended. I think there's enough of a message under the surface without the inspector even trying to say so, that the matter will be taken care of, IMO.

 

[mpd]

george

thats exactly what I am talking about, I do not like being put in that position by a contractor, my phone calls to the contractor are hey we have a homeowner you did work for that is not happy and is calling anybody who will listen, do yourself a favor and go take care of this, if the contractor is offended by my phone call, I am also not happy that I have to deal with the problems they created

 

[romeo]

Habitable Rooms -Lighting Outlets

Habitable Rooms -Lighting Outlets

210.70 A (1)
Can a paddle fan be used in a room with two switch legs connected to fan with intention of future light kit? No light currently on fan. Does this
meet the requirement of lighting outlet under 210.70 A (1) and 100
Definitions?

Thanks,
Mark

How can it be called a lighting outlet if it has no light installed?I would not pass it.

This reminds me of a recent inspection,the basement stairs had 3way switches one at the top and one at the bottom of the stairs,and the second exit door was on the other side of the basement.IMO this and the above installation serve no worthwhile purpose.

 

[pete m.]

How can it be called a lighting outlet if it has no light installed?I would not pass it.

I know it seems strange that the NEC does not require "illumination" where you think it should but the fact is that it doesn't. Illumination is a building code issue.

The NEC does, however, require illumination in some places, see 110.26(d) for example.

IMO, I think the fact that the NEC does create this difference in requirement makes it even more evident that the intent is to provide the necessary "outlet" for the connection of a luminaire not necessarily the luminaire itself.

Pete

 

[iwire]

How can it be called a lighting outlet if it has no light installed?I would not pass it.

Romeo, you have to pass it or you are requiring more than the NEC requires.

Did you not see this....

OK, I'm bringing the ROP where CMP 2 said they don't require fixtures (at least in these locations) to the table just to see how many will say that the CMP doesn't mean what they are saying.

2-251 Log #575 NEC-P02 Final Action: Reject
(210.70)
__________________________________________________ __________
Submitter: Alan H. Nadon, City of Elkhart, IN
Recommendation: Revise as follows:
210.70 Lighting Outlets Required. Lighting outlets, that provide illumination,
shall be installed where specified in 210.70(A), (B), (C).
Substantiation: As currently worded, only 210.70(A)(2)(b) requires a lighting
outlet to actually illuminate anything. The definition of a lighting outlet, in
Article 100 does not require anything more than a junction box with switched
conductors intended to be connected to a lampholder, light fixture, or pendent
light. A proposal has also been submitted to change or amend the definition of
lighting outlet. Proper illumination ensures safe movement for persons thus
preventing many accidents.
Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement: The objective of the NEC is to provide the requirement for the lighting outlet. The requirements specific to illumination are in the building code.
Number Eligible to Vote: 12
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 12

Roger

This was written by the people who write the NEC, if anyone knows what the NEC requires it should be them.

 

[sandsnow]

OK, I'm bringing the ROP where CMP 2

Thanks for the ROP. For me, it's end of story.

 

[sandsnow]

roger

I agree it would all depend on the adopted building code, and I also agree with you it is not an electrical inspectors call

Where does it state in either the Building Code or Electrical Code which inspector is supposed to look at what?

 

[mpd]

larry

the state I inspect in has an administrative code for the inspectors responsibility for plan review and inspection

 

[sandsnow]

larry

the state I inspect in has an administrative code for the inspectors responsibility for plan review and inspection

Well that's a first for me. Are the inspectors segregated by which codebook the violation is in? i.e. - NEC - Electical inspector only

 

[romeo]

Habitable Rooms-Lighting Outlet

Habitable Rooms-Lighting Outlet

Romeo, you have to pass it or you are requiring more than the NEC requires.

Did you not see this....



This was written by the people who write the NEC, if anyone knows what the NEC requires it should be them.

Sorry I did not see that,so having read that I agree that I must accept the installation.

But you can be sure I will check with the building inspector hoping to find a violation in the building code.

 

[sandsnow]

.....hoping to find a violation in the building code.

I strive to never "hope" to find violations. I played that game years ago and in the end it was unsatisfying.

The job is what it is.
If it complies. Sign it.
If it has a violation. Write a correction.

 

[pete m.]

Agreed!

Pete

 

[mayjong]

very interesting....
in California we (inspectors) ARE the electrical,plumbing, mechanical and building inspectors. so there is no differentiation between any of the "phases" of construction.
therefore - the correction would be written and, as i stated before, i (inspector) would not care who fixed it, just that it got fixed.(because building,plumbing, mechanical , and energy codes require theses items be tested)....

 

[roger]

Mayjong, Larry is in California.


Roger

 

[winnie]

The cost of a cheap plastic keyless is probably $0.75 more than a cheap cover.

If anyone makes a plastic keyless with 'backstab' termination, then the labor saved versus screwing on a couple of wirenuts would probably make the keyless cheaper than the blank plate

Of course, this wouldn't fly in California, since someone might screw in an incandescent lamp.....

-Jon

 

[M. D.]

My two cents; If the there is only a lighting outlet installed and no luminaire or other utilization equipment is installed and a blank used , I would say it does meet the requirement. if the H.O. then installs a fan only he cannot violate the code so no violation. If I am hired to install a fan only I have IMO violated the NEC I can no longer contend the intent of the outlet is for lighting. If I were hired to remove a luminaire and install a fan only and the outlet was the only one that met the requirement I have caused a violation, IMO.

 

[mayjong]

Mayjong, Larry is in California.


Roger

o-k....? which Larry?? and why???

 

[barbeer]

Here a blank will be an approved inspection. Inspectors should not be involved in quarrels between HO's and Contractors. Our job is to assure code compliant installations. In most cases today, residential requires power to verify NEC required Arc Fault protection, I do not make sure it works- I make sure it doesn't work(when it shouldn't) :grin: I answer questions all day long from anyone who would contact me, even though that takes time away from this forum:wink:

 

[roger]

o-k....? which Larry?? and why???

Larry LeVoir, AKA Sandsnow.

The reason is, I was wondering if your California was different than his.

very interesting....
in California we (inspectors) ARE the electrical,plumbing, mechanical and building inspectors. so there is no differentiation between any of the "phases" of construction.

Roger

 

[mayjong]

yes, i read his posts... don't see how they differ from mine, as a matter of fact, he's asking some of the same questions...
any other Cali inspectors out there care to chime in?
(btw) what are you implying?!?!?