single receptacle for DW

[HappElectrician]

Anytime an AHJ inspector tells me something, I just say 'yes sir', esp. when it is something relatively trivial like this thread.

Lol. True.


Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[Leespark57]

Boy you got one moron of a inspector , he did not even plug a tester in. What a useless ......inspector

How do you know if the OP is working in Mass?

I don't, that's why I asked where he was located.

 

[Ponchik]

Wired a shop a couple of years ago in resident's back yard building. AHJ said must have TR receptacles unless over counter or above 50 inches - a future resident may convert to a day care room or something like that with children as a reason I guess.

You can not go with "What-Ifs" As long as it complies to the NEC and/or the local amendment then you are fine.

Anytime an AHJ inspector tells me something, I just say 'yes sir', esp. when it is something relatively trivial like this thread.

I always ask for code reference if he/she can not come up with one then it is not getting changed to their way.

Look at it this way, you get pulled over by a cop and get a ticket that does not have a violated code section and it is only $100. There is no vehicle code section to cite you on but the cop "Thinks" that you did something wrong. Will you pay that ticked or fight it?

 

[roger]

You can not go with "What-Ifs" As long as it complies to the NEC and/or the local amendment then you are fine.



I always ask for code reference if he/she can not come up with one then it is not getting changed to their way.

Look at it this way, you get pulled over by a cop and get a ticket that does not have a violated code section and it is only $100. There is no vehicle code section to cite you on but the cop "Thinks" that you did something wrong. Will you pay that ticked or fight it?

:thumbsup:

Roger

 

[junkhound]

There is no vehicle code section to cite you

Has been over 30 years since I've been pulled over, but think at least in this state any traffic ticket has to state the RCW (revised code of WA) section you are cited under.

So, a suggestion for an input to the 'code': e.g. -- anytime a AHJ cites you or does not sign off, the reason for no sign off has to cite the applicable code section.

 

[stevenje]

The NEC does not require the use of simplex receptacles.

Ask inspector for Code section.

I would be curious to know how many states require the inspector to cite the code reference for violations. I know in Oregon, inspectors are required to do so.

Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 918-098-1900

Cite-it Write-it Requirement

In addition to any other requirements set forth in statute and rule, all building officials, inspectors and plans examiners certified under Division 098, OAR 918-225-0540, 918-281-0020, 918-695-0400, and ORS 460.055 must include an exact reference to the applicable specialty code section, Oregon administrative rule, or statute, when issuing corrective notices at construction sites or to buildings or related appurtenances during a plan review while administering or enforcing a building inspection program. The building official, inspector, or plans examiner must include a plain statement of facts upon which the citation for correction action is based.

Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.720 & 455.740
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.720 & 455.740
Hist.: BCD 16-2005(Temp), f. & cert. ef. 7-7-05 thru 12-31-05; BCD 24-2005, f. 9-30-05, cert. ef. 10-1-05; BCD 1-2016(Temp), f. & cert. ef. 1-26-16 thru 7-23-16; BCD 6-2016, f. & cert. ef. 4-1-16

 

[Coppersmith]

I would be curious to know how many states require the inspector to cite the code reference for violations. I know in Oregon, inspectors are required to do so.

Exactly the way it should be done everywhere. :thumbsup:

Then we can spend a lot more time arguing their mis-interpretation of the code section.

 

[jumper]

I would be curious to know how many states require the inspector to cite the code reference for violations. I know in Oregon, inspectors are required to do so.

Va does not require for it directly unless requested. Most inspectors and Fire Marshalls go ahead and include it anyways.

USBC VA

113.6 Approval or notice of defective work. The building official shall either approve the work in writing or give written notice of defective work to the permit holder. Upon request of the permit holder, the notice shall reference the USBC section that serves as the basis for the defects and such defects shall be corrected and reinspected before any work proceeds that would conceal such defects

 

[kwired]

I'm still in my apprenticeship, but this occured to me early on. If I'm correct, cities/jurisdictions choose what codes they adopt. NEC isn't an authority like OSHA. (I could be wrong on this, and would appreciate corrective feed back) So, just quoting code isn't the end of the argument. I think the better angle is arguing how the function of your install satisfies the concerns of his requirements.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

They adopt the document as is or they make amendments, and need to have those amendments included in the statutes, otherwise they are making up requirements as they go. No reference to the code section or the amendment that is in violation is not the right way to do it, though it still does happen in some places.

And, so, my answer was simply that he needs to make sure what the inspector is referencing for this requirement. Because the answer may be outside of what he knows of the NEC.

I have seen inspectors more than once blindside someone with the specs and/or city code. Once, an inspector actuall told us that it was his job to make sure we complied with our contract with the customer, as if he was hired by them or something.

(Don't think I'm one who tries to avoid doing things the right way. I am indeed a professional and work with integrity. And a big part of that is knowing how to navigate the AHJ minefield )

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Though some places to inspect to the plans/specifications, IMO that should remain between the designer/installer/owner, all the city/state inspectors should be inspecting is for code compliance and not to see if a designers wishes were fulfilled.

Anytime an AHJ inspector tells me something, I just say 'yes sir', esp. when it is something relatively trivial like this thread.

Wired a shop a couple of years ago in resident's back yard building. AHJ said must have TR receptacles unless over counter or above 50 inches - a future resident may convert to a day care room or something like that with children as a reason I guess.

Just said 'yes sir' and swapped out 18 spec grade Hubbel outlets for cheap big box TRs I had on hand - switched back to the Hubbel after permit signoff, did cost me an extra hour or so, did not even wrap the wires on the TR screws as they never ever carried any current.

I don't like "what if" inspectors either. So it is a shop today, in 5 years it may be a daycare - shouldn't proper permits be filed at that time and things be brought up to what they need to be then? what if they put livestock in it in a few years or decide to put a swimming pool in that building?

 

[FionaZuppa]

i am not agreeing with "NEC" being stated in laws and statutes.

closest you will get is local ordinance by way of adoption.

laws typically state that the AHJ will either make and maintain their own code, or adopt something. i have not seen any laws saying "the code to be used is NEC 2014", as example.

but, me all eyes. show me a law or statute that says "NEC" in it.

 

[packersparky]

i am not agreeing with "NEC" being stated in laws and statutes.

closest you will get is local ordinance by way of adoption.

laws typically state that the AHJ will either make and maintain their own code, or adopt something. i have not seen any laws saying "the code to be used is NEC 2014", as example.

but, me all eyes. show me a law or statute that says "NEC" in it.

Here is one from Wisconsin.

SPS 316.014 Adoption of standards by reference.(1) PRIMARY STANDARDS. The following standard is hereby incorporated by reference into this chapter, subject to the modifications specified in this chapter: a) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), One Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169−7471, telephone 800−344−3555, www.nfpa.org: NFPA 70 National Electrical Code, (NEC) − 2011.

 

[junkhound]

And from WA

WAC 296-46B-010 General
Adopted standards.
(1) The2017edition of the National Electrical Code (NFPA 70)
NFPA Codes and Standards
Visit the website of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) (www.nfpa.org) for read-only access to the NFPA codes and standards adopted by L&I.


BTW, forget which year the courts ruled that NEC could not restrict distribution of NEC on the web since it was incorporated into laws, which are by definition public domain.

Have noticed that the required classes for keeping some state licenses current REQUIRE the electrician to have a NFPA NEC book, NOT a copy.
Back door purchase requirement ?

Our county library lets you print 75 pages a week free, so over a few weeks pretty easy to print yourself a 'free' copy of NEC from online sources if you don't have to jump thru some state regulatory training hoop. note: 'read only' means for the computer illiterate

 

[JFletcher]

210.21(B) does not apply, it reads that if there is a single receptacle, it must be rated what the circuit it. Single receptacle as in dryer, range, ptac, etc. A duplex 15A is legal on a 20A circuit. A simplex 20A is legal.

110.3(B) may get you if the equipment requires an individual branch circuit. There is no NEC requirement otherwise.

jumper is right, in VA most resi inspection failures will have a brief description of the failure written down, like "boxes set too far back in wall on baseboards" rather than the direct code section (314.20), which is not straight NEC here anyway. Inspections in this area are too lenient imho anyway, so if the inspector gigs something, it's generally easier to fix it than fight it, especially if you really get him looking...

In the time it would have taken to post online and get an answer to this, or even argue/debate with the inspector, I would have bought the $8 worth of receptacles and plates and changed them out... unless you had them wired split or switched or it was a more a pita to do the work than argue your position.

 

[FionaZuppa]

NEC books are free online, so any smart phone, hence all NEC books are in you back pocket

having "NEC" in the law verbiage just seems odd to me. so you need a legislation cycle(s) and a vote to have that changed? do they even know what they are voting on?

(1)  Primary standards. The following standard is hereby incorporated by reference into this chapter, subject to the modifications specified in this chapter: (a) National Fire Protection Association® (NFPA), One Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471, telephone 800-344-3555, www.nfpa.org: NFPA 70 National Electrical Code®, (NEC®) - 2011.
Note: Copies of the standard are on file in the offices of the Department and the Legislative Reference Bureau. A copy of the code may be purchased from the organization listed or may be reviewed on the organization's website at not cost if the person is a registered user for the site.

"at not cost", only if they could spell and/or grammar check

so all of Wisconsin must abide by NEC 2011, no locale can use NEC2014 ?? 316.04(3) allows for it, but if the other code is say less stringent in any area then 316.04(3) does not allow it. this is why i say having it hard-set in the laws is a bad idea.

 

[kwired]

NEC books are free online, so any smart phone, hence all NEC books are in you back pocket

having "NEC" in the law verbiage just seems odd to me. so you need a legislation cycle(s) and a vote to have that changed? do they even know what they are voting on?



"at not cost", only if they could spell and/or grammar check

so all of Wisconsin must abide by NEC 2011, no locale can use NEC2014 ?? 316.04(3) allows for it, but if the other code is say less stringent in any area then 316.04(3) does not allow it. this is why i say having it hard-set in the laws is a bad idea.

Nebraska puts NEC into the law books also. Every three years the legislature must have a bill go through proper legislation to get the new code entered as the edition that is in effect. In general once passed the law goes in effect 90 days later unless there are emergency clauses - which almost never happens with adopting a new NEC. This year because of timing of legislation the 2017 NEC did not go into effect until Aug 1. In 2008 there was a lot of opposition to the bill, that was the year the AFCI's got expanded even more, plus NE had amended the AFCI requirements before then to basically strike out 210.12 altogether. 2008 was going to include 210.12. It got held up and if I recall correctly we were getting close to time to think about adopting 2011 before 2008 ever got put into law books.

No the legislators don't know what they are voting on, but unless there is enough outsider interest as there was in 2008, it usually does go through the process, and any hold up is usually the process itself, there are a lot more bills that get more of the public interest then adopting the most current NEC.

Local municipalities must also use whatever edition the state has adopted. Local municipalities can make some amendments, but the state AHJ does have some control over what locals can and can't do. Some examples of what has been allowed for amendments is requiring ADA placements of certain items where NEC is silent on such requirements, a receptacle being required on a 18 inch wide wall space where NEC says 2 feet, usually things that are more restrictive instead of more relaxed then what NEC says.

 

[FionaZuppa]

as for the DW recept, install singles, done. might as well just install singles there from now on, and when mr gadget says "hmmm, you need a duplex there" you'll be ready to go.


******************************
this is off-topic, so last one.

as written the Wisconsin law is hypocritical. lets says the 2014 NEC lightens up on some restrictions that were in the 2011 code, for whatever reasons that is, the law says anything else cannot be less restrictive, so how would it even be possible for legislature folks to vote in new code that was less restrictive than the code they had?

IMO, the legislatures should govern the framework by which things are done, hence, the state law should say "a standard is to be created or adopted by the state's [building code enforcement agency]^{put correct dept here} and should be reviewed and updated every 1yr minimum"

this way you dont need state legislature goofing around on something they know little about, etc.

governance is by framework (should be), its the only way to make fluent/efficient govt. state legislature goofing around with having to vote on what NEC version is to be adopted is just a waste of taxpayer $$$.

 

[kwired]

as for the DW recept, install singles, done. might as well just install singles there from now on, and when mr gadget says "hmmm, you need a duplex there" you'll be ready to go.


******************************
this is off-topic, so last one.

as written the Wisconsin law is hypocritical. lets says the 2014 NEC lightens up on some restrictions that were in the 2011 code, for whatever reasons that is, the law says anything else cannot be less restrictive, so how would it even be possible for legislature folks to vote in new code that was less restrictive than the code they had?

IMO, the legislatures should govern the framework by which things are done, hence, the state law should say "a standard is to be created or adopted by the state's [building code enforcement agency]^{put correct dept here} and should be reviewed and updated every 1yr minimum"

this way you dont need state legislature goofing around on something they know little about, etc.

governance is by framework (should be), its the only way to make fluent/efficient govt. state legislature goofing around with having to vote on what NEC version is to be adopted is just a waste of taxpayer $$$.

Can't speak for Wisconsin, but here we have a State Electrical Board that administers everything, there possibly are rules of the board that maybe aren't exactly in the law books, but which edition of NEC is in effect definitely is in the law books. Amendments to that NEC are produced by the electrical board, and submitted as part of the bill to make them a law. Only when there is significant public opposition as happened when they tried to adopt 2008 NEC do the lawmakers end up looking further into the situation and maybe the process does go into further legislation activity. 2008 adoption was slowed by Homebuilders associations from what I recall, and again it was not only the year NEC added more areas that required AFCI's, but the board had also amended out AFCI's prior to this. The board wanted to adopt 2008 with no amendments and that caught the attention of hombuilders associations and got them involved in lobbying against the bill.

I don't know the exact process, but would guess the board contacts a state senator when a new NEC is out and gets them to introduce a bill to adopt that NEC as the law. Then it passes through normal lawmaking procedures and if little or no opposition it generally gets passed.

 

[Andy Delle]

Well, here's a personal situation I recently went through. I put a gas tankless WH in my garage. It's a UL listed product and the install manual specifically says not to plug into a GFIC or AFCIi outlet. It pulls a whopping 3 amps! There is a duplex GFCI next to it. So I assumed that if I remove that GFIC, I must replace with a single receptacle. Otherwise I leave an non-GFIC receptacle half available for general use in a garage which is not legal.

Make sense?

 

[Sierrasparky]

Well, here's a personal situation I recently went through. I put a gas tankless WH in my garage. It's a UL listed product and the install manual specifically says not to plug into a GFIC or AFCIi outlet. It pulls a whopping 3 amps! There is a duplex GFCI next to it. So I assumed that if I remove that GFIC, I must replace with a single receptacle. Otherwise I leave an non-GFIC receptacle half available for general use in a garage which is not legal.

Make sense?

If its in the Garage there is no exception or a area covered by AFCI you must AFCI.

I don't see a issue with it being on a GFCI. What brand ?

 

[Andy Delle]

If its in the Garage there is no exception or a area covered by AFCI you must AFCI.

I don't see a issue with it being on a GFCI. What brand ?

Rheem. The house is 1990 built so no AFCI grandfathered. And I agree with no GFIC. They trip too easily and a WH is certainly well grounded enough through the plumbing.