lighting outlet

[roger]

David, by making up your own rules and ignoring what CMP-2 has said is simply disrespect for those in CMP-2.

In otherwords, you are saying you know best and they might as well not waste there time meeting and voting on issues you have already made up your mind up on even though they are the ones making article 210

Might it be that you have had this belief so long that you are having a hard time seeing your error in this belief?

Why not answer yes or no to Bob's question.

"Is it your opinion that NEC 210.70(A)(1) require a luminaire to be installed?"



Roger

 

[mpd]

maybe the NEC needs a FPN that says it is not the intent of article 210.70 to require the installation of light fixtures

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

Don,
Outlet “ A point on a wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment

If there is no current being taken to supply utilization equipment it is not an outlet.

Just because the code calls out for a specific kind of outlet intended for the derect connection of does not change the fact it must be a point at which current is taken Not may be taken or someday may be taken Or could be blanked off for certain use. The definition does not say voltage present for future use it says current is taken present tense

Tell us what you call that box with light fixture if the switch is in the OFF position.Cant be a light outlet anymore can it ?

And for those of us that have no power till CO i guess we dont have any outlets whatsoever

 

[pjg]

I'm responding to Al's question regarding the Original code violation-- the inspector cited 210.70 . as I stated previously his boss had agreed that the liuminaire was not required and by installing the Switch, box and wire that we met the intent of the code, we had indeed installed a "lighting outlet".

as stated earlier

Lighting outlet required ---yes

luminaire required ---no

FPN Good idea

I feel that the intent has been met. The round fan box is installed in the center of the room ,the switch is installed across the room from the door since the code didn't require me to put it at the entrance to the room(just kidding)it is by the door . the box is wired with a 14/3 NM cable on arc fault circuit. It was intended for a luminaire---

 

[david]

210.70
(3) Storage or Equipment Spaces. For attics, underfloor spaces, utility rooms, and basements, at least one lighting outlet containing a switch or controlled by a wall switch shall be installed where these spaces are used for storage or contain equipment requiring servicing. At least one point of control shall be at the usual point of entry to these spaces. The lighting outlet shall be provided at or near the equipment requiring servicing.

McGraw Hills National Electrical Code Handbook 25th adition
Page 180
? Part ( C ) of 210.70 requires that either a lighting outlet containing a switch ?such as the familiar pull-chain porcelain lampholder ?or the wall ?switched controlled lighting outlet must be provided in attics or underfloor spaces housing heating.?

I do not find disagreeing wit the members of any panel disrespectful, I simply do not agree, show me a lighting outlet as you are defining it containing a switch not controlled by a but one that contains a switch. It is very clear in part ( C ) that the lighting outlet refers to the fixture not simply the box.

I am not disputing that a disconnect or control for the outlet can be in series with the outlet so I am not sure what you mean by a fixture with the switch in the off position does not utilize current so it can not be an outlet.

 

[dingokangaroo]

Whats wrong with trains ? My wife growed up next to tracks and misses them.Not sure what side she was on LOL.Actually after you get use to trains they are rather enjoyable at night.
We do office buildings that change many times before the first tenant arrives.Starting to think it be cheaper to just call us in after the rooms are built.Nothing ever is where they need it.

nothing is wrong with trains jim. the HO will have a free vibrating bed and an alarm clock in one...LOL

 

[drg]

maybe the NEC needs a FPN that says it is not the intent of article 210.70 to require the installation of light fixtures

Nope , your getting warm though.

How about switching that to ,the intent of article 210.70 is to conform with the requirements of the luminarie requirements of local buliding codes or some other gibberish that explains who dictates where a light bulb has to be placed in a building.
What a bunch of nonsense .

 

[david]

David, by making up your own rules and ignoring what CMP-2 has said is simply disrespect for those in CMP-2.
Roger

How am I making up my own rules. I simply said that the definition of lighting outlet has to been in line with the root concept outlet.
Outlet, a point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment.

You strongly argued that the term lighting outlet has nothing to do with utilization equipment being connected to the wiring system , I disagree

Now you insist that a am being disrespectful to CMP-2 yet if you hold to your definition of lighting outlet 210.70 (C ) makes no sense calling out what we no to be a fixture and defining it as an outlet containing a switch as an option as means to meet the requirement for lighting outlet in part ( C ) if lighting outlet in the first sentence is referring to a fixture not the box then you would conclude that a switched controlled ( lighting outlet ) fixture is what is being referred to in the second sentence. All of which is consistent with the root term outlet.

Now lets say you agree that it has been clearly shown that the term lighting outlet does indeed include a fixture or at least a lamp holder. Is it such a huge leap to say that the definition of lighting outlet has to be consistent in 210.70 A fixture is clearly included and defined as a lighting outlet in section 210.70 A fixture is utilization equipment and when connected to a wiring system is consistent with the term outlet.

 

[George Stolz]

David, by making up your own rules and ignoring what CMP-2 has said is simply disrespect for those in CMP-2.

Come, now, Roger. Disrespecting CMP-2 has been a growing sport here for many moons. Where's Sam when you need him?

What a bunch of nonsense .

Finally, something we can agree on.

But if someone comes away the wiser, it was worthwhile.

 

[drg]

Finally, something we can agree on.

But if someone comes away the wiser, it was worthwhile.

Ya but it shoots the ignorance is bliss concept all to pieces.

 

[allenwayne]

We can all conclude that the wording in this article is well,subjective.#1 they require a lighting outlet to be installed,IE: a box on a ceiling or wall or a switched receptacle.The problem is that there is actually nothing that states that there has actually has to be a lampholder installed at the time of the inspection.So the point is.If there is a switch that controls the power to a lighting box/switched receptacle have we actually met the requirements of this article ???? Even though an actual item that produces light is not present.You can have a switched receptacle and a fan/light prewire thats ok even though no lamp is plugged in the switched receptacle.But if you have only a lighting box and no switched receptacle that won`t have a lamp plugged in at inspection time that is not ok ,since there is nothing on the lighting outlet actually hooked up.

 

[roger]

David, so you will not give us a yes or no answer?

Those who make the rules openly say they don't require it and you tell them and us that they don't know what they're talking about.

Then you say you're going to enforce something that is not there.

Sounds to me like you're making up your own rules.

BTW, McGraw Hills National Electrical Code Handbook 25th adition
Page 180 is not a code.


George,

Come, now, Roger. Disrespecting CMP-2 has been a growing sport here for many moons. Where's Sam when you need him?

well, that is true, but even with that being the case, if they by their own admission say they don't have a rule it means they don't have a rule.

Roger

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

This will never get solved untill we get one thing out of the way.Lighting outlet and lighting fixtures are two seperate items.There are a few places that nec requires both,bedrooms and living rooms are not in that group.

 

[david]

David, so you will not give us a yes or no answer?
Outlet. A point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment.

The current is taken from the system by means of a load on the system. When you remove the disconnect (close the switch ) current is taken to supply the equipment ( the fixture) So yes Rodger I have answered the question several times in this thread I have said you must have a fixture connected to the wiring system to have an outlet.
In lieu of this concept you have exception No. 1 Which will allow a lamp to be connected to the wiring system via a switched rec.

Exception No. 1: In other than kitchens and bathrooms, one or more receptacles controlled by a wall switch shall be permitted in lieu of lighting outlets.
Those who make the rules openly say they don't require it and you tell them and us that they don't know what they're talking about.

Then you say you're going to enforce something that is not there.

Sounds to me like you're making up your own rules.

BTW, McGraw Hills National Electrical Code Handbook 25th adition
Page 180 is not a code.

So you want to dismiss the code section that Mr. McPartland in the hand book pointed out by saying Mr. McPartland handbook is not code , why do you think I the reference and the page # so every one would no I was not sighting code or even the NFPA handbook.

But what is code is the section 210.70 ( C ) at least one lighting outlet containing a switch So you have a description of what everyone commonly knows as a pull-chain porcelain lampholder being called a lighting outlet in the code it?s self. Which should not be ignored. So would hanging a lampholder with a pull chain switch in these spaces be in line with the root concept outlet? No it would not No more so then installing a box without the lampholder, Combined together though the lampholder connected to the building wiring system you have the concept of an outlet.

 

[iwire]

David, your beating a dead horse for you to go on with this further does you no good.

 

[al hildenbrand]

In post # 10 pjg references my post and the citation I cut and pasted from Article 100 Definitions.

Until pjg tells us different, this thread's original post and question never said the inspector red tagged based on 210.70.

I'm responding to Al's question regarding the Original code violation-- the inspector cited 210.70 .

PJG,

Thanks for the correction of my understanding. Had the inspector nudged you to the building code AHJs requirement for illumination, as the State of Minnesota Electrical Licensing and Inspections long has, I would say he is helping you. . .but 210.70 is a mis-direction.

It was intended for a luminaire---

"Was" intended, or "is" intended. . .

The intended use of a switch-controlled ceiling box, just like the turn signal blinking on a car that is going straight, is ambiguous. As with the car, it serves no purpose to think about the character of the driver, to determine the "intent", rather, one must expand one's field of view to the behaviour of the vehicle and the road and other vehicles to best respond as the seconds pass. . . .one must look to concrete clues.

To provide a better service, and "experience", for my customer, I will choose, to the extent that I can, to do my work in relationship to the bigger picture.

Al, how can you maintain your position given this statement from the CMP

I have, in this thread, consistently, although not clearly, said that "code rules dictate where lighting is required." I have attempted to say, as the CMP wrote (graciously posted by Roger), "the requirements specific to illumination are in the building code."

 

[electricguy61]

For those of you who may be Bible readers: 1 Timothy 6:4 "being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words"

I read all of these posts, hoping to further improve my understanding of electrical problems and issues. These constant debates can truly become worrisome.

No insult intended to anyone.

 

[david]

This post is meant in humor!!!!

The buildings electrical has a final the electrical contractor installed blank covers on all the lighting outlets, The building inspector wants actual lighting fixtures. This work is defined as an alteration to an electrical system in the adopted building codes in this state. Is this work covered under the building permit? In states that electrical work is required an electrical licensing is this electrical work or is this covered under the building code. Does the inspector need to be certified as a building inspector or a electrical inspector to inspect the lighting fixtures.

Oh what a can of worms. At times the turf war between the ICC building codes and the NFPA is not very particle in the real world

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

This post is meant in humor!!!!

The buildings electrical has a final the electrical contractor installed blank covers on all the lighting outlets, The building inspector wants actual lighting fixtures. This work is defined as an alteration to an electrical system in the adopted building codes in this state. Is this work covered under the building permit? In states that electrical work is required an electrical licensing is this electrical work or is this covered under the building code. Does the inspector need to be certified as a building inspector or a electrical inspector to inspect the lighting fixtures.

Oh what a can of worms. At times the turf war between the ICC building codes and the NFPA is not very particle in the real world

NEC does not mention inspections ,rough ins,finals or permits or deal with who is or is not qualified.

 

[rpeay1]

lighting outlet

code says each room shall have a switch outlet for light... if you only have fan then it isn't a light outlet as Trevor says ..It doesn't meet code