Massachusetts Electrical Code vs National Electrical Code

[mshields]

The MA electrical code has a preface with 9 rules that are be added ahead of the NEC. Rule #3 indicates, and I'll paraphrase that when you are doing a renovation and you tap into the existing electrical system to add infrastructure for the renovation, you do not need to bring the existing equipment up to code.

As this does not amend anything specific in the NEC, it is difficult to know if it undoes a requirement or whether the NEC is silent on the matter. Which is the case and if the latter, what does the NEC have to say on the matter?

 

[iwire]

I don't understand the question. The NEC says nothing about the MA amendments.

It is murky, but as an example I am currently replacing some site pole bases and the existing conduits are only 6" below the asphalt.

Rule 3 allows me to replace the base yet reuse the existing non-compliant conduits.

 

[gadfly56]

On the resi side, if AFCI breakers are required for a home addition, the rule would allow any non-AFCI breakers on the panel to remain in place.

 

[romex jockey]

Reads 'Anything Existing is grandfathered' to me......~RJ~

 

[Dennis Alwon]

So if you extend an existing circuit in a residence it seems you still have to add an afci-- NO?

 

[kwired]

The MA electrical code has a preface with 9 rules that are be added ahead of the NEC. Rule #3 indicates, and I'll paraphrase that when you are doing a renovation and you tap into the existing electrical system to add infrastructure for the renovation, you do not need to bring the existing equipment up to code.

As this does not amend anything specific in the NEC, it is difficult to know if it undoes a requirement or whether the NEC is silent on the matter. Which is the case and if the latter, what does the NEC have to say on the matter?

Are you asking if it is allowing you to tap temporary construction power into something presently not up to code without bringing the existing portion up to code?

 

[roger]

what does the NEC have to say on the matter?

The NEC has no jurisdiction over any local codes or local amendments to the NEC.

Remember, the NEC is not a mandatory set of rules.



Roger

 

[steve66]

As this does not amend anything specific in the NEC, it is difficult to know if it undoes a requirement or whether the NEC is silent on the matter.

Except for a few rare instances, I would say the NEC is completely silent on when things need brought up to a current code. I don't think you won't find any "grandfather" clauses in the NEC, and if you do, I think they will be very limited in scope. In general, the NEC just doesn't differentiate between new and existing installations, unless there is a general statement in the front end.

Just curious, does the Mass clause only apply to installations that were per code when they were installed, or does it apply to any existing installation? For example, can a 400 amp subpanel that is fed with 3/0 wire remain because its existing, or would that have to be replaced since the code never allowed that?

 

[charlie b]

I don't think you won't find any "grandfather" clauses in the NEC, and if you do, I think they will be very limited in scope.

I think I will find a grandfather clause. Indeed, I found it in 80.9(B) and (C), in the (not to be enforced unless adopted by a local jurisdiction) Informative Annex H. It used to be in the front of the book, but they moved it to the back several cycles ago. And I would not exactly call it "limited in scope." I think it is fairly clear that existing non-conformances can remain, so long as they don't present an imminent danger to personnel, and that alterations do not require upgrading existing work.

 

[mshields]

clarifying the question

clarifying the question

sorry if the question wasn't clear guys but Steve66 hit it on the head in terms of what my intentions were. I know that the MEC is the law of the land in the commonwealth. But I do a lot of work in RI where the ammendments are minimal and the adoption of the 2014 NEC is nearly verbatim. So for that work and other area's where the NEC is not amended, I wanted to know what the rule was. The fact that Mass is compelled to add note 3 and that it is in fact an addition and not a modification would indicate that the NEC is silent on the point. I wanted to know if that was the case.

Thanks for all of your excellent input.

Mike

 

[mshields]

80.9(C)

80.9(C)

that's particularly telling. the MA rule #3 is a partial copy of 80.9(C). I gather that we do not adopt this Annex but that we chose some of it's rules in the form of the rules listed at the beginning of our amendments. I wonder if that's accurate that the other rules come from this section as well. Shall have to investigate further.

Thanks,

Mike

 

[steve66]

I think I will find a grandfather clause. Indeed, I found it in 80.9(B) and (C), in the (not to be enforced unless adopted by a local jurisdiction) Informative Annex H. It used to be in the front of the book, but they moved it to the back several cycles ago. And I would not exactly call it "limited in scope." I think it is fairly clear that existing non-conformances can remain, so long as they don't present an imminent danger to personnel, and that alterations do not require upgrading existing work.

That's what I meant by "unless there is a general statement in the front end" even though they moved it to the back of the book. And as you mentioned, it doesn't normally apply unless the local specifically adopts article 80.

 

[gadfly56]

That's what I meant by "unless there is a general statement in the front end" even though they moved it to the back of the book. And as you mentioned, it doesn't normally apply unless the local specifically adopts article 80.

If they adopt the NEC without amendments, don't they automatically pick up article 80?

 

[roger]

If they adopt the NEC without amendments, don't they automatically pick up article 80?

No, it has to be specifically adopted. Read the first (italicized) paragraph of Annex H

Roger