Kitchen GFI Clarification (E3703.2)

[GoldDigger]

Thanks for all the replies, this is awesome. In my mind, the island most definitely counts as kitchen counter top space. I work mainly with a designer and rarely install a kitchen without an island. I always have one 20amp GFI serving the counter tops along the walls and the second serving the island. All of my appliances I give dedicated circuits with single receptacles. This is the first time I've been failed for "not enough circuits" so I was really eager to hear what other professionals thought before I go back to my inspector and make my case. Thanks again everyone.

I agree with your interpretation of the Code, but I also like the idea of having more than one 20A circuit in the same general part of the countertop to allow for, say, an electric cooker of some sort and a coffeemaker or toaster to be used at the same time.

 

[david]

Your quoted material doesn't say it is the same, it says it is based on 2008 NEC.

That said, unless it is pretty much copied word for word, there may be some differences even if they seem minor.

you can use the IRC 2009 0r the NEC 2008 for one and two family and town houses in this state.

 

[GoldDigger]

you can use the IRC 2009 0r the NEC 2008 for one and two family and town houses in this state.

Do you have to pick one and follow it completely, or can you mix and match?

 

[qcroanoke]

I agree with your interpretation of the Code, but I also like the idea of having more than one 20A circuit in the same general part of the countertop to allow for, say, an electric cooker of some sort and a coffeemaker or toaster to be used at the same time.

I agree. I would have split the circuits up between the two. But your install is compliant with the NEC.

 

[david]

Do you have to pick one and follow it completely, or can you mix and match?

?Effective Use of the International Residential Code
E3401.2 refer to other codes either as an alternative to the provisions of the IRC or where
the IRC lacks coverage for a particular type of structure, design, system, appliance or method of construction.?

The omission from these chapters of any material or method of construction provided for in the referenced standard NFPA 70 shall not be construed as prohibiting the use of such material or method of construction. Electrical systems, equipment or components not specifically covered in these chapters shall comply with the applicable provisions of the NFPA 70.

They are supposed to be the same in content just stated a little differently

 

[kwired]

Do you have to pick one and follow it completely, or can you mix and match?

I have same question.

?Effective Use of the International Residential Code
E3401.2 refer to other codes either as an alternative to the provisions of the IRC or where
the IRC lacks coverage for a particular type of structure, design, system, appliance or method of construction.?

The omission from these chapters of any material or method of construction provided for in the referenced standard NFPA 70 shall not be construed as prohibiting the use of such material or method of construction. Electrical systems, equipment or components not specifically covered in these chapters shall comply with the applicable provisions of the NFPA 70.

They are supposed to be the same in content just stated a little differently

We never have debates on this forum where just one little word makes a big difference in how something is interpreted. IMO having two possible standards to follow just would complicate matters even more.

 

[mwm1752]

Inspector is quoting ICC, Not the NEC.

Your state does not reconize the NEC? Ususally if both NEC & IRC are adopted either should apply -- I see the IRC is not as discriptive as the NEC so where would he get his definition from? even the IRC definition of kitchen starts with "An area"

 

[mwm1752]

Do you have to pick one and follow it completely, or can you mix and match?

Usually the most restrictive would apply if one of the two lacks full disclosure on a subject.

 

[AndrewG185]

I ran into my inspector last night at my local iaei meeting (where Mike Holt was guest speaking) and ended up discussing it with him and several other inspectors for about an hour. We finally concluded that I had in fact not violated any code but he convinced me to add another circuit anyway. He explained his logic which I agreed with and in the end I think it's going to save me a headache and an upset customer down the road. Case closed. Thanks everyone for your input.

 

[jumper]

I have same question.

We never have debates on this forum where just one little word makes a big difference in how something is interpreted. IMO having two possible standards to follow just would complicate matters even more.

It is not so much as having two possible standards that apply to one install, it is having two different standards that apply to two different installs.

Let me restate what I said earlier.

The IRC, which many areas adopt, has its own electrical section and applies to one and two family dwellings. This code incorporates sections that require smoke detectors and CO monitors. There are also a few minor differences from the NEC, but I cannot remember them right now.

The IBC is adopted for other structures and references the NEC as the applicable code for electrical. The NEC is adopted by reference instead of directly.

This set up is pretty common to many areas.

 

[iwire]

It is not so much as having two possible standards that apply to one install, it is having two different standards that apply to two different installs.

Let me restate what I said earlier.

The IRC, which many areas adopt, has its own electrical section and applies to one and two family dwellings. This code incorporates sections that require smoke detectors and CO monitors. There are also a few minor differences from the NEC, but I cannot remember them right now.

The IBC is adopted for other structures and references the NEC as the applicable code for electrical. The NEC is adopted by reference instead of directly.

This set up is pretty common to many areas.

Never heard of it. Seriously.

 

[kwired]

Never heard of it. Seriously.

Many people have enough trouble with only one standard, IMO you weren't missing out on much

 

[david]

Not trying to be critical but section R314 deals with requiring smoke and CO2 detectors that is not part of the electrical provisions of the international residential code.

This is no different than areas of the country that have a building code that deals with other issue and use the NEC is adopted as the electrical code.

Part VIII starting with chapter 34 is supposed to parallel the NEC in content to the area?s that are specific to one and two family dwellings and townhouses.

The IRC does not address every wiring methods addressed in the NEC. You are allowed to wire a dwelling or portions of a dwelling using wiring methods found in the NEC in contrast to those specifically addressed in the IRC. When a state adopts the IRC as their residential code you are adopting the NEC as the referenced standard .

The IRC has a cross reference to every section of the electrical to the NEC where this content was taken from.

They codes are supposed to be identical in content. The international code counsel does not have the copy right to the content of electrical provisions in NEC that the IRC electrical provisions are derived from.

You could wire a dwelling in PA directly from the NEC.

 

[jumper]

Never heard of it. Seriously.

Va is set up this way.

Where the heck is Chris/Raider1? Utah is similar and he could probably explain it better than I.

 

[qcroanoke]

Va is set up this way.

Where the heck is Chris/Raider1? Utah is similar and he could probably explain it better than I.

Really? I guess I never violated it cause I had no idea.

 

[jumper]

Really? I guess I never violated it cause I had no idea.

http://www.dhcd.virginia.gov/index....ons/uniform-statewide-building-code-usbc.html

Your statewide amendments to electrical start around page 72, smoke detectors and CO monitors are somewhere else, I forget exactly the place.

Note that your AHJ is not the DPOR, but the DHCD.

2009 VIRGINIA CONSTRUCTION CODE (Part I of the Virginia
Uniform Statewide Building Code) ? Effective March 1, 2011
-
1
-
CHAPTER 1
ADMINISTRATION
SECTION 101
GENERAL
101.1 Short title.
The Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code, Part I, Construction, may be cited as the Virginia
Construction Code. The term ?USBC? shall mean the Virginia
Construction Code unless the context in which the term is
used clearly indicates it to be an abbreviation for the entire
Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code or for a different
part of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code.
Note:
This code is also known as the 2009 edition of the US
BC due to the use of the 2009 editions of the model codes.
101.2 Incorporation by reference.
Chapters 2?35 of the 2009 International Building Code, published by the International
Code Council, Inc., are adopted and incorporated by referen
ce to be an enforceable part of the USBC. The term ?IBC?
means the 2009 International Building Code, published by the International Code Council, Inc. Any codes and standards
referenced in the IBC are also considered to be part of the incorporation by reference, excep
t that such codes and standards
are used only to the prescribed extent of each such referen
ce. In addition, any provisions
of the appendices of the IBC
specifically identified to be part of the USBC are also cons
idered to be part of the
incorporation by reference.
Note 1:
The IBC references the whole family of International Codes including the following major codes:
2009 International Plumbing Code
2009 International Mechanical Code
2008 NFPA 70
2009 International Fuel Gas Code
2009 International Energy Conservation Code
2009 International Residential Code
Note 2:
The International Residential Code is applicable to the construction of detached one- and two-family dwellings
and townhouses as set out in Section 310

 

[rogerp]

The ICC published the International Electrical Code from 2000 to 2006.
Part VIII of the IRC essentially replaces NFPA 70A last edition 2005.
From the IRC (2009), This Electrical Part (Chapters 34 through 43) is produced and copyrighted by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and is based on the 2008 National Electrical Code? (NEC?) (NFPA 70-2008), copyright 2007 National Fire Protection Association, all rights reserved. Use of the Electrical Part is pursuant to license with the NFPA.
The title National Electrical Code? and the acronym NEC? are registered trademarks of the National Fire Protection Association,Quincy, Massachusetts. See Appendix Q, International Residential Code Electrical Provisions/National Electrical Code Cross Reference.

The 2009 IRC includes this disclaimer:
IMPORTANT NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER CONCERNING THE NEC AND THIS ELECTRICAL PART.
This Electrical Part is a compilation of provisions extracted from the 2008 edition of the NEC. The NEC, like all NFPA codes and standards, is developed through a consensus standards development process approved by the American National Standards Institute.
This process brings together volunteers representing varied viewpoints and interests to achieve consensus on fire and other safety issues. While the NFPA administers the process and establishes rules to promote fairness in the development of consensus, it does not independently test, evaluate or verify the accuracy of any information or the soundness of any judgments contained in its codes and standards.
The NFPA disclaims liability for any personal injury, property or other damages of any nature whatsoever, whether special, indirect, consequential or compensatory, directly or indirectly resulting from the publication, use of, or reliance on the NEC or this Electrical Part. The NFPA also makes no guaranty or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of any information published in these documents.
In issuing and making the NEC and this Electrical Part available, the NFPA is not undertaking to render professional or other services for or on behalf of any person or entity. Nor is the NFPA undertaking to perform any duty owed by any person or entity to someone else. Anyone using these documents should rely on his or her own independent judgment or, as appropriate, seek the advice of a competent professional in determining the exercise of reasonable care in any given circumstances.
The NFPA has no power, nor does it undertake, to police or enforce compliance with the contents of the NEC and this Electrical Part. Nor does the NFPA list, certify, test, or inspect products, designs, or installations for compliance with these documents. Any certification or other statement of compliance with the requirements of these documents shall not be attributable to the NFPA and is solely the responsibility of the certifier or maker of the statement. For additional notices and disclaimers concerning NFPA codes and standards see www.nfpa.org/disclaimers.

The IBC referenced the International Electrical Code through the 2006 edition. The 2009 IBC references only the NFPA 70, as does the 2009 IRC.