Lighting switch installed behind a door.

[rdshanks]

I cannot find in the NEC the code section ( other than common sense) that says you cannot put a switch behind a door. I wrote a correction to move the switch out past the door. I realize there is no code that says there is no requirement for a swicth but there is one now.

 

[ptonsparky]

I cannot find in the NEC the code section ( other than common sense) that says you cannot put a switch behind a door. I wrote a correction to move the switch out past the door. I realize there is no code that says there is no requirement for a swicth but there is one now.

How about I install a wireless switch in your preferred location? Ok?

 

[roger]

I cannot find in the NEC the code section ( other than common sense) that says you cannot put a switch behind a door. I wrote a correction to move the switch out past the door. I realize there is no code that says there is no requirement for a swicth but there is one now.

So you think you are allowed to make your own rules?

 

[ptonsparky]

It wouldn’t be the first time the door schedule and electrical don’t mesh.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I cannot find in the NEC the code section ( other than common sense) that says you cannot put a switch behind a door. I wrote a correction to move the switch out past the door. I realize there is no code that says there is no requirement for a swicth but there is one now.

That is a design issue and not a code issue. There is nothing that permits you as the inspector to require this.

 

[readydave8]

All a matter of perspective.

Customer never tells carpenter that he put door in front of light switch, bu.tells electrician that he put light switch behind door (that wasn't there when electrician roughed it in)

 

[roger]

Hopefully the OP will come back and tell us what authourizes him to make up his own rules.

 

[tom baker]

The switch can be anywhere in the room.
And while a lighting outlet is required, a luminaire is not required.

 

[HarryJames201]

Deat NEC doesn't specifically ban putting a switch behind a door but it's definitely not ideal for ease of use and safety.Having the switch behind a door can be a hassle so moving it outside the door is a smart choice for better accessibility and practical use, even if the code doesn’t explicitly require it.

 

[Fred B]

I cannot find in the NEC the code section ( other than common sense) that says you cannot put a switch behind a door. I wrote a correction to move the switch out past the door. I realize there is no code that says there is no requirement for a swicth but there is one now.

Look into building code not NEC.

 

[rc/retired]

Deat NEC doesn't specifically ban putting a switch behind a door but it's definitely not ideal for ease of use and safety.Having the switch behind a door can be a hassle so moving it outside the door is a smart choice for better accessibility and practical use, even if the code doesn’t explicitly require it.

The OP is an inspector and needs to inspect per adopted code and not by opinions.

Ron

 

[rc/retired]

Look into building code not NEC.

Unless something changed since the 2018 IRC, the building code has nothing to say about switch locations.

Ron

 

[rc/retired]

The switch can be anywhere in the room.

The 2020 code requires the switch to be located near an entrance to the room. Whatever that means.

Ron

 

[BarryO]

I wrote a correction to move the switch out past the door. I realize there is no code that says there is no requirement for a swicth but there is one now.

Interesting; how does that work in your jurisdiction? Here in Oregon, the legally binding code is the Oregon Electrical Specialty Code, as adopted by the state Building Codes Division. There's no provision for individual inspectors to make ad hoc local amendments.

 

[winnie]

When someone writes something grammatically confusing, IMHO one should attempt to read as charitably as possible.

The OP said they were looking for a code section, then they said 'I realize there is no code that says there is no requirement for a swicth but there is one now.'

I _interpret_ this as the OP saying that code changed and they can't find the relevant section, not them saying that they are making up a requirement per their whim.

The code citation is 210.70(A)(1), and I think post #13 pretty much covers it. What does 'near an entrance mean'? On the wrong side of the door is 'near' for a magical ruler that can penetrate the door, but a longer distance away if you measure the path someone has to follow to operate the switch...and there is no set distance for what constitutes 'near'.

-Jonathan

 

[rdshanks]

So you think you are allowed to make your own rules?

No just common sense and what could be considered "workmanlike " manner. Also no good for ADA or Accessibility.

 

[LarryFine]

No just common sense and what could be considered "workmanlike " manner. Also no good for ADA or Accessibility.

We often see inspectors base some decisions on how they would have done it instead of on code.

 

[infinity]

No just common sense and what could be considered "workmanlike " manner. Also no good for ADA or Accessibility.

If you can cite a code section that it violates I'm with you. If you cannot then common sense, convenience, or anything else doesn't matter.

 

[roger]

No just common sense and what could be considered "workmanlike " manner. Also no good for ADA or Accessibility.

"Workmanlike" is in the eye of the beholder and the style manual says the word is likely unenforceable.

NC actually says inspectors that make up their own rules are guilty of "willful misconduct, gross negligence, or gross incompetence" Ca may have something similar.

Chapter 143 - Article 9C

(c) For purposes of this Article, "willful misconduct, gross negligence, or gross incompetence" in addition to the meaning of those terms under other provisions of the General Statutes or at common law, includes any of the following:

(1) Enforcing a Code requirement in areas or circumstances not specified in the requirement.

(2) Refusing to accept an alternative design or construction method that has been appealed under G.S. 143-140.1 and found by the Office of the State Fire Marshal to comply with the Code under the conditions or circumstances set forth in the Office of the State Fire Marshal's decision for that appeal.

(3) Refusing to allow an alternative construction method currently included in the Building Code under the conditions or circumstances set forth in the Code for that alternative method.

(4) Enforcing a requirement that is more stringent than or otherwise exceeds the Code requirement.

(5) Refusing to implement or adhere to an interpretation of the Building Code issued by the Building Code Council or the Office of the State Fire Marshal.

(6) Habitually failing to provide requested inspections in a timely manner.

(7) Enforcing a Code official's preference in the method or manner of installation of heating ventilation and air-conditioning units, appliances, or equipment if it is not required by the State Building Code and is in contradiction of a manufacturer's installation instructions or specifications. (1977, c. 531, s. 1; 1987, c. 827, ss. 224, 225; 1989, c. 681, s. 15; 1993, c. 232, s. 4.1; 1999-78, s. 2; 1999-372, s. 5; 2001-421, s. 2.4; 2015-145, s. 3(a); 2018-29, s. 9; 2022-62, s. 30; 2023-142, s. 2(b); 2023-151, s. 11.78.)

With all that said, have you ever submitted a PI for your idea?

 

[tom baker]

The 2020 code requires the switch to be located near an entrance to the room. Whatever that means.

Ron

Exactly what is “near?”