No low voltage communication lines in new home?

[mwm1752]

Does anyone find it pecular that the 2014 added in a readily accessible area -- so a 1' piece of coax fitted thru a 2x6 wall on the other side of probable service provider demarcation point would address the code section. In other words an EC could wait for the service point to be established & insert a coax after construction and still be compliant with code. The Colorado State Statutes adopts the most current NEC every cycle but does exempt various installations from inspection, one being communication,telephone, & telegragh not exempt as utilities. So basically, sections of the NEC are not adopted which would include Art 800. I would agree new installations are better when certain ammenities are installed throughout the residence but it does not make it code. see quote

 

[don_resqcapt19]

That is what I was told when it came out in the 08 code. The thing was if you called 911 with a cell phone it would not show the correct address for emergency responders. I know where I live if I call 911 with my cell phone it will connect me with the neighboring counties 911 center because I am within 1 mile of the county line. They then have to transfer me to my counties dispatch center.

The wireline address data bases are so filled with errors that the Illinois Commerce Commission requires that the addresses for 40% of the wire line numbers must be verified before putting a new 911 center into service.

While the FCC requires cell phone locations to be with in 300' 95% of the time, that often does not happen, and the initial call will almost always go the PSAP (public safety answering point) based on the tower location and tower sector. The 911 center has to do a "re-bid" to get a more precise location and, yes in many cases that requires transferring the call to another PSAP.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Given the current code wording the section is impossible to comply with if the home owner has not contracted with a communications utility.

800.156 Dwelling Unit Communications Outlet. For new construction, a minimum of one communications outlet shall be installed within the dwelling in a readily accessible area and cabled to the service provider demarcation point.

There will be no service provider demarcation point if there is no contract with a service provider.

If they really intended to make this an universal requirement, the wording needs to be changed to require the communications cable to be installed to the "likely location" of the service provider demarcation point.

 

[GoldDigger]

Given the current code wording the section is impossible to comply with if the home owner has not contracted with a communications utility.

There will be no service provider demarcation point if there is no contract with a service provider.

If they really intended to make this an universal requirement, the wording needs to be changed to require the communications cable to be installed to the "likely location" of the service provider demarcation point.

How about just assuming it will be in the same place as your bonding bridge?

 

[Sierrasparky]

May have been the reason for putting it in, but even when it was put in not all homes had telephone service supplied to them. Some never had telephone service provider within reasonable distance and may never see land line telephone service. How do you connect to what doesn't exist?

How is this any different than installing a laundry circuit. The homeowner may never install one.

 

[pete m.]

Here is the ROP for the addition of 800.156. I think it worthy to note that two ROC's suggested deleting this reqirement but both were rejected by the CMP.

IMHO, I don't see how most of the substantiation given in the ROP helps to alleviate a problem.

Pete

16-207 Log #2655 NEC-P16 Final Action: Accept in Principle in Part
(800.156)
_______________________________________________________________
Submitter: Robert W. Jensen, dbi / Rep. BICSI, A Telecommunications
Association
Recommendation: Add new text to read:
800.156 Dwelling Unit Communications Outlets. For new construction, a
minimum of two communications outlet shall be installed; one within the
master bedroom and one within the living room or kitchen, and cabled to the
service provider demarcation point.
Substantiation: Currently there is no requirement for a communications outlet
in a dwelling unit. A communications outlet in the home is needed for many
reasons, but most important is for emergency services such as a simple call for
police, fire or rescue squad.
This proposal only affects newly constructed dwelling units. In addition to
the problem it solves for communications needs in a dwelling, the proposal is
also targeted at safety of technicians and emergency responding personnel
while enhancing the 5 key NFPA strategies to reduce fatal home fires.
1. Reduces the safety risk of electrocution to technicians where extended
length drill bits (54 to 72 inches) are typically used to install cables and
penetrate unseen electrical cables in the attic, wall and ceiling space. (See
pictures at end of this proposal)
2. Reduces the tripping hazard for fire protection personnel during a fire.
3. Reduces the need for home wiring for communications after occupancy
which typically involves tracing, handling, and snaking through electrical cable
pathways and spaces such as in attics and wall cavities which creates
potentially greater hazard (e.g., electrocution).
4. Increases the use of home protection systems and automation which
typically includes fire detection and direct dial-up remote monitoring systems.
5. This proposal ties directly to one of the 5 key NFPA strategies to reduce
fatal home fires (see attached ?Fire Loss in the United States During 2002?,
Michael J Karter, Jr., Fire Analysis and Research Division, NFPA).
6. Places communications outlets in homes to address fire safety needs of
young high user communications groups, older adults, and ADA affected.
7. A fine print note is used as a reference to a standard that specifies
installation requirements such as minimum separation from power cabling and
minimum requirements for cabling in support of the FCC mandate for category
3 cable or better. In addition, this standard references several NEC Articles for
meeting minimum requirements.
Note: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters.
Panel Meeting Action: Accept in Principle in Part
Add new text to 800.156 to read as follows:
800.156 Dwelling Unit Communications Outlet. For new construction, a
minimum of one communications outlet shall be installed within the dwelling
and cabled to the service provider demarcation point.
Panel Statement: The requirement for at least one outlet within the dwelling
meets the submitter?s intent.
Number Eligible to Vote: 15
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 15

 

[don_resqcapt19]

How about just assuming it will be in the same place as your bonding bridge?

Because the code rule does not permit that. It specifically requires that the communications cable be run to the service provider's demarcation point. If there is no such point you cannot comply with the rule as it is currently written.

 

[iwire]

How is this any different than installing a laundry circuit.

Good point.

Lets eliminate that requirement as well.

 

[GoldDigger]

Because the code rule does not permit that. It specifically requires that the communications cable be run to the service provider's demarcation point. If there is no such point you cannot comply with the rule as it is currently written.

Logic chopping: if the the code said only that all communications outlets had to be wired back to the demarc, then providing no outlets would meet that requirement.
In some areas (e.g. above ground phone service) the new construction will include a riser and attachment point up to the roof, and a flush mount wall box in which telco will install their demarc box.
Same for overhead cable.
But those are probably a minority of sites.

 

[ceb58]

How about just assuming it will be in the same place as your bonding bridge?

Because the code rule does not permit that. It specifically requires that the communications cable be run to the service provider's demarcation point. If there is no such point you cannot comply with the rule as it is currently written.

Where I stub my wire out is the demark point as far as I'm concerned. I stub out about 2ft past the bonding bridge and the phone co. can set their box there. The thing is, the phone company, most of the time, is coming in last. Usually the trim out is done, power is on the house and the electrician is done.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Where I stub my wire out is the demark point as far as I'm concerned. ...

There is no demark until the phone or cable or other communications company installs one. As written, the current code wording can not be complied with for the very reason you stated...the communication company is last on the job. If the NEC wants this to be an enforceable section the wording needs to be changed to require the installation like you do it...that is stub out to the likely installation point of a future demark.

 

[kwired]

That is what I was told when it came out in the 08 code. The thing was if you called 911 with a cell phone it would not show the correct address for emergency responders. I know where I live if I call 911 with my cell phone it will connect me with the neighboring counties 911 center because I am within 1 mile of the county line. They then have to transfer me to my counties dispatch center.

But with the cell phone you at least do get in contact with someone if there is wireless signal available. Try dialing 911 on a land line phone that has no connected land line and see what kind of response you get from the nobody you end up reaching.

How is this any different than installing a laundry circuit. The homeowner may never install one.

I agree, and do think the requirement of a laundry circuit gets into design requirements more so then into safety requirements and the NEC is in contradiction with it's own 90.1 by requiring a laundry circuit.

I can understand requiring a laundry circuit if there is to be laundry equipment on the premises though.