Separate NEC Residential Code?

[roc]

I have heard rumors that NFPA may eventually split up the NEC into residential and electrical codes.

Is the "stand-alone" residential electrical code section/part written by NFPA/ICC in the International Residential Code (IRC) the first step towards having a separate residential code? Is anyone aware any discussions within NFPA concerning this?

 

[earlydean]

Re: Separate NEC Residential Code?

That electrical code portion of the IRC was preceeded by the CABO electrical section. Both have been authored by NFPA, and licensed to the ICC. In fact, the current edition was authored by Joe Sheenan of NFPA. I recall in 1987, or so, there was a separate residential electrical code. It was 70A or something. Anybody else recall?

 

[charlie]

Re: Separate NEC Residential Code?

The problem with the IRC is that the electrical section does not match the NEC. Here in Indiana, I am responsible for making all the changes necessary to make the IRC (Indiana changed its name to the Indiana Residential Code) match the IEC (Indiana Electrical Code) which is the NEC with the Indiana amendments.

When you get into making changes in one document, all of a sudden it is easy to make lots of changes in both documents and I only have one vote.

 

[ryan_618]

Re: Separate NEC Residential Code?

Charlie: I'm guilty of enforcing the NEC and not the IRC, although our state uses the IRC. I have heard many people say that there are discrepencies between the two, but I have yet to find any. Do you have any examples off the top of your head?

 

[roc]

Re: Separate NEC Residential Code?

Earl ... I also vaguely remembered 70A which was previously discontinued. When I went to check when it was discontinued guess what ... it was re-issued earlier this year as the 2002 NFPA-70A "National Electrical Code Requirements for One-and Two-Family Dwellings"! How do ya like them apples ?

But, is anyone familiar with the 2002 NFPA-70A and how it compares to the IRC electrical sections? I would think it would be very similar, but I don't know for sure.

 

[ryan_618]

Re: Separate NEC Residential Code?

Roc: The 2000 edition of the IRC is based on the 99 NEC. The 2003 edition of the IRC is based on the 2002 NEC. I have not seen any differences.

 

[roc]

Re: Separate NEC Residential Code?

I am wondering how the 2003 IRC electrical sections (based on 2002 NEC) compare to the new 2002 NFPA-70A residential code.

The IRC electrical sections are about 70 pages long, but the NFPA-70A is about 300 pages long. Did they just write bigger so they could charge you more ...

 

[pierre]

Re: Separate NEC Residential Code?

Is there a difference between the IRC and the ICC?

The ICC is what NY State is following, and the electrical chapters are also about 70 someodd pages.
There are some differences, such as it references the '99 NFPA 70 (NEC).
Services in dwellin units including 200 amps, require lighting.
All equipment, material, etc... is required to be listed HMMM!
The requirement for protection of service entrance conductors is more severe.
The list goes on..........but not me

Pierre

 

[roc]

Re: Separate NEC Residential Code?

The IRC (International Residential Code) is one of the many ICC model codes, and you are correct that one of the ICC codes NY adopted is the IRC with some changes ... called the Residential Code of New York State (RCNYS).

I was looking more at a comparison of the 2003 IRC (based on 2002 NEC) with the 2002 NFPA-70A since they should have a more direct correlation.

Was 70A re-introduced so that the IRC and other residential codes will eventually just reference that, instead of getting a "freebie" with the IRC code (similar to the ICC International Building Code, or IBC, which just references the NEC) ... or are there really differences between the IRC electrical sections and 70A?

 

[eprice]

Re: Separate NEC Residential Code?

Ryan,

One difference I have noticed is a slight difference in wording between IRC E3503.1 and NEC 310.15(B)(6), which may or may not be a real difference, depending on what significance you place on the (s) in feeder(s) and panelboard(s) in the NEC.

But in Utah, in the state amendments to the IRC it states "Should there be any conflicts between the NEC and the IRC, the NEC shall prevail". To me that means what's in the IRC is either the same as what I'll find in the NEC, or it's wrong, so I very seldom even crack open the electrical section of the IRC.

 

[earlydean]

Re: Separate NEC Residential Code?

I listed 9 differences between the 2003 IRC electrical chapters and the 2002 NEC.

1) E3303.3 of the IRC requires all materials to be listed and labled. The NEC does not require labeling and listing of everything, nor could this be done.

2) E3502.4 requires all systems to be 3-wire 120/240 volts, single phase with a grounded neutral. What about "network", two phases of a 208Y/120 system?

3) E3502.2 allows only the optional compution to be used in computing the size of a service. Why can't the standard method be used?

4) Note c to Table E3503.1 specifies support distances on GECs, where the NEC requires only "securely fastened" (250.64(B)).

5) Table E3503.1 does not allow the use of cable armor for the protection of the GEC. NEC 250.64(B) allows this.

6) The IRC does not detail the bending radius for the following types of wiring methods, where the NEC does: AC, MC, USE, UF, IMC, RMC, FMC, RNC, LFC, EMT, ENT. (E3702.5)

7) E3702.4 requires all cables smaller than 2 #6 or 3 #8 (NM, MC, SE, and UF) to be run on running boards or in bored holes when installed in unfinished basements. The NEC only requires this for NM, SE, and UF cables.

8)The IRC does not allow Concealed knob and tube wiring, while the nEC does. (E3701.2- 394.10)

9) E4104.3 of the IRC has elevated the FPN following 680.26(A) to the status of code.