Letter of the code?

[harold endean]

Here is a situation. There is a remodel job being done and it includes a powder room. The old powder room has no receptacle. The homeowner removes some sheet rock but not all. He adds a 2 gang box which will have a switch for the exisitng light and a new GFI receptacle. The new GFI is on the existing 14 ga wire. I would fail the job because sec 210-11 (c)(3) (1999 NEC) says it has to be on a 20 amp. circuit. Now the homeowner says that he can't get to the main service panel. The house is on a slab and the rest of the house is finished. If he needs to put the GFCI on a 20 amp. then he won't install it. What should he do? Install it on the 15 A circuit or not install it at all?

 

[iwire]

Re: Letter of the code?

I would hope that I would be allowed to use the existing circuit as the remodel does not include areas that I would have to chew up to get the new feed run to the area under remodel.

This is just opinion and I have no code basis for this.

If I change a service I will have touched all the circuits but have never been made to up grade 15 amp circuits to 20 amp to meet the updated code.

Harold, Check your email

Bob

 

[curt swartz]

Re: Letter of the code?

So far I have found the building departments to be pretty lenient and reasonable here in Northern CA. Most of the time they do not require a new circuit be run for a remodel only new construction. 90% of the time we do run a new circuit for the receptacles since we usually are running new circuits to the area for other things anyway. If this was a full bath I would probably require that a dedicated circuit be run or that it be connected to and existing 20 amp general lighting circuit but since this is only a half bath I would probably let the 15 amp circuit go.

 

[roger]

Re: Letter of the code?

If I were the inspector, I would use 90.4 and give special permission, with a disclaimer in my final such as, due to existing conditions the installation is not compliant with current codes.

In this situation, it could lead to people trying to get around permitting or doing certain work after finals. (what goes on behind closed doors)

Roger

 

[electricmanscott]

Re: Letter of the code?

To me if you open the wall you should bring the wiring in tha wall up to code. Suppose you are rmodeling your kitchen. Your panel is on the other side of the house and you would have to make holes to run new circuits for your appliances etc. Would you feed everything off existing circuits?

 

[hurk27]

Re: Letter of the code?

The way I see it is an extension to an existing circuit and not an addition to it and would be covered as existing. if he had ran a new circuit to this bath room then I could say it is a new circuit but he didn't and can not be made to tare out walls to refeed this gfci.

Just the addition of the gfci will be a improvement over someone running a cheep extension cord to another non-gfci protected receptacle that could cause a fire or electrocution.(if he so chouses not to install it). the fact it is not on a 20 amp circuit would not present immediate danger to life or properties

[ March 16, 2003, 02:26 PM: Message edited by: hurk27 ]

 

[electricmanscott]

Re: Letter of the code?

This is a new installation of a gfci receptacle where none existed. By the NEC it must be a 20 amp circuit. By feeding this from an existing circuit you are clearly creating a violation. What is the point of the NEC if we create loopholes that allow us to go around the rules.

 

[luke warmwater]

Re: Letter of the code?

I've got to agree with scott on this. If we remodel a bathroom, the bathroom must be brought up to Code. The rest of the house wouldn't. If it was adding a receptacle and no remodel, then I might agree with the circut extention argument. Just like a service change, the service must be brought up to Code(including grounding and bonding of service) but the rest of the house wiring wouldn't.
How many electricians out there would say that it is OK to re-use a #6 copper wire to the water line when doing a service upgrade to 200amp because the water line and/or meter is on the other side of a finised room and can't be accessed easily and that this is better than no bond wire at all??

 

[T-Wragg]

Re: Letter of the code?

Because the electrical in the room has been changed, the new gfi receptacle should be on a new 20 amp circuit. Unfortunately this is a classic example of why two different electricians bidding a remodel will come up with very different prices. In this situation I would discuss it with the inspector who has the final say.

 

[gregory]

Re: Letter of the code?

Harold,
A 20 ampere circuit would be required for the new receptacle. Per NEC 2002 210.11 C 3 any bathroom receptacle must be on a 20 ampere circuit. there is an exception that would allow you to put it on the same 20 amp circuit feeding another bathroom, providing that there are no lights on same circuit. maybe you could do that.
Greg

 

[mvannevel]

Re: Letter of the code?

Harold. By powder room, do you mean bathroom as it is defined in the code? A basin with either a toilet, tub, or shower? If so, then yes it does need to be on a 20 ampere circuit. The difficulty involved in bringing a new circuit to this area shouldn't be a factor. Any good electrician would be able to fish a new circuit into the powder room. If we have a separate set of rules for homeowners because something may be too difficult for them to accomplish, we defeat the purpose of the code. Now, on the other hand, if by powder room you mean an area with only a basin, then the existing 15 ampere circuit could be used. This wouldn't meet the definition of bathroom. A technical loophole would allow the 15 ampere circuit. I'm always puzzled about why we (yes, I did it too while I was contracting) spend the time and effort to find a way to get around code requirements when they are a set of MINIMUM standards. Just my opinions...

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: Letter of the code?

What hazard would be created by permitting the use of a properly installed 15 amp circuit in this application? Yes, it is a code violation, but where is the hazard?
Don

 

[electricmanscott]

Re: Letter of the code?

Don, the issue is not wether a hazard is created the issue is code compliance. This is not code compliant. A new installation would have to meet current codes. I am not going to disregard NEC rules because I might think I am not creating a hazard.

 

[roger]

Re: Letter of the code?

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

[ March 17, 2003, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: roger ]

 

[rwp]

Re: Letter of the code?

The NEC does not require a GFI receptacle nor a 20A circuit for a 'powder room'.

[ March 17, 2003, 09:10 PM: Message edited by: rwp ]

 

[rwp]

Re: Letter of the code?

Correction:
The NEC does NOT require a GFI receptacle nor a 20A circuit for a 'power room'.

 

[rwp]

Re: Letter of the code?

Correction:
The NEC does NOT require a GFI receptacle nor a 20A circuit for a 'powDer room'.

 

[harold endean]

Re: Letter of the code?

The powder room is a room with a toilet and a sink. That is all. However there is a kicker here. In NJ there is a law we call the Rehab Code. It states that the homeowner DOES NOT have to follow 210-52 of the NEC. So therfore I can not enforce the NEC rule. Some other states have been looking to adopt this rehab code. I also think that given a choice, letting him put the GFCI receptacle on a 15 amp circuit is better than no receptacle at all.

 

[hurk27]

Re: Letter of the code?

Harold

Indiana has a similar code but it is more like a grandfather law and although the state follows it some local AJH's choose to ignore it. and try to impose on homeowners that if they change any electrical in a house they have to bring up the entire house. away to look at it is,
If there was any government agency that would have us change something it would be the EPA on car's or the NTSC on cars heck they cant even make us put turn signals on older cars or motor cycles. so how does a AHJ can make a home owner update an entire house? now I'm not knocking AJH's in general just ones that go out of bounds. Indiana does have the Immediate danger law that can be used to make someone bring a house up to habitable condition. but there is a far cry in-between.

One that we got from the town of merrivilille, In. a while back was a note from the town that said that any rental unit that a tennet had moved out, the owners had to bring the properties up to code before anyone could move in. to me that was going to far. and it didnt last long either.

 

[mvannevel]

Re: Letter of the code?

You're right, that happens frequently in Indiana. The cities of South Bend, and Mishawaka as well as St. Joseph County all require that a home be brought up to current code standards when you upgrade the service. It's been that way for over thirty years. In fact, for the last twenty-some years, the City of Mishawaka has required that all homes being sold in the city be a minimum of 100 ampere service and meet the current code. But, before you blame the electrical inspector, sometimes these requirements are written into the ordinances with little or no input from him. In Mishawaka, I had to enforce that ordinance even though it was contrary to what the State required. That having been said, in the case in question here where it's a remodel, I still think that the code requirement needs to be met. I guess as electricians, we need to find a balance between what local (even state) jurisdictions do with rehab codes and local ordinances and the NEC. I don't think we want to create too many situations where we force homeowners to do more work than necessary (how much say should "Big Brother" have inside our homes?) but, we also don't want to have a lot of loopholes and exemptions from the code. Once we start to say that the NEC doesn't have to be followed in this situation, or that situation, we open the door for all sorts of non-Code compliant installations. Just my opinion.