Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

physis · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

I got number 400.

Edit: I'm too tired to do a celebration right now. maybe tommorow.

[ April 10, 2005, 02:33 AM: Message edited by: physis ]

jwelectric · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

georgestolz posted April 09, 2005 01:41 PM
The key to my side of the argument is that, although the two codes are linked, they are not codependent. Once 210.70 is satisfied, then 210.52(B) must be satisfied.

So long as there is a switched receptacle in the room, 210.70 is satisfied, there's no violation. That section is satisfied, so no more thought needs to be devoted to it.

George I agree with you totally with this post you made above. The sad part is that you are not reading the articles that you are posting. You seen to be hung on the fact that one replaces the other. This is not true at all.

It is totally out of the scope of the NEC to say that one article or section will replace another. When installing small appliance circuits we are bound to 210.52 (B) and nothings else. When we are installing lighting outlets we are bound by 210.70 and nothing else.

One of the biggest problems that I run into when teaching a license prep or inspectors is they don?t know how to read the code book. I see that you have the same problem.

here is a link that may help you understand the code a little better. It will also help ypu with the proposals you are attempting to post

[ April 10, 2005, 09:54 AM: Message edited by: jwelectric ]

iwire · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Originally posted by jwelectric:
It is totally out of the scope of the NEC to say that one article or section will replace another.

Really?

Ya Gotta to be careful making broad statements about the NEC.

90.3 Code Arrangement.
This Code is divided into the introduction and nine chapters, as shown in Figure 90.3. Chapters 1, 2, 3, and 4 apply generally; Chapters 5, 6, and 7 apply to special occupancies, special equipment, or other special conditions. These latter chapters supplement or modify the general rules. Chapters 1 through 4 apply except as amended by Chapters 5, 6, and 7 for the particular conditions.

Chapter 8 covers communications systems and is not subject to the requirements of Chapters 1 through 7 except where the requirements are specifically referenced in Chapter 8.
Chapter 9 consists of tables.

George Stolz · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Originally posted by jwelectric:
The sad part is that you are not reading the articles that you are posting. You seen to be hung on the fact that one replaces the other. This is not true at all.

One does not replace the other--where have I said that? But when applying these codes, I address one at a time, in sequence. It goes like this:

I need a lighting outlet in a habitable dining room.
A switched receptacle is permitted by 210.70, with no distinction as to what circuits they should be on, per 210.70. Kitchens and bathrooms cannot use this exception.
So I can install a switched receptacle in the dining room. There is nothing more that 210.70 has to offer for my situation.
I turn to 210.52, .52(A) & (B), which address where I am to put receptacles in my dining room.
(B)(1) states that all my receptacles for wall/counter/floor use are to be on the SA circuit(s).
I install my receptacles per code.
For curiousity's sake only, I look at the exceptions and sections that I haven't used:
(B)(1)#1: Oh, I was permitted to use #14 instead of #12, that convenient. I could do that next time.
(B)(1)#2: Well, I can run a dedicated circuit for my fridge. That makes sense.
(B)(2): Oh, I can't stray from the eating areas and can't add serve other than floor/wall/counter receptacles in my eating areas. Good to know, I haven't done that, thank goodness. All my SA receptacles in the dining area are serving wall space.
(B)(2)#1: A clock outlet can be served by my SA's. I guess that most clock recep's are in spaces other than floors/counters/walls.
(B)(2)#2: Igniters/clocks on gas ranges are permitted on the SA's, too. I guess that those outlets are in other spaces like the clock outlet was.

One of the biggest problems that I run into when teaching a license prep or inspectors is they don?t know how to read the code book. I see that you have the same problem.

So at the end of this line of reasoning, where did I have a violation, JW? Where did I demonstrate I "couldn't read code"? I may have simplified it, and added inflection, but didn't I interpret it correctly? Where did I go off track?

jwelectric · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Bob
The point I was after is that George is trying to use 210.52 to fulfill 210.70.
He can?t see that 210.52 is for the 20 amp small appliance and 210.70 is the general purpose circuit and that they are two separate circuits.

I posted a link to the manual of Style and if he reads it maybe it will be a little clearer. Maybe I should point out that in 210.70 that the exception to switch the receptacle is in two places there, in (A) (1) and in (B). this should show him that the exception to switch the receptacle refers to that part only.

Then again it may be impossible to show him anything, I just hate to see others led astray. I have finally got my class to settle down and understand what the code states about 210.52 (B) small appliances

Got to go will be late for church

jwelectric · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

No George 210.52 comes before 210.70

George Stolz · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Originally posted by jwelectric:
If we use this permissive exception to switch a receptacle as outlined in the exception in 210.52 by the exception itself it is required to be on a general purpose circuit.

That's a big if. If is not "when."

which clearly states that this is to be on a general purpose circuit

...if we don't use the SA as required by (B)(1).

Why do you think that the words ?general purpose circuit? was added to 210.52 and not to 210.70?

You're paving the road and not smelling the asphalt! Because 210.70 doesn't care! 210.52 doesn't care either way--if you install a general purpose BC to handle that job, there's an exception to let you. Otherwise, that recep is required to be on the SA circuit!

JW, every time you make a statement like that, even just now, I referred back to that exception to verify the text. Are you doing me the same courtesy?

George Stolz · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Originally posted by jwelectric:
No George 210.52 comes before 210.70

My mistake, I should start in 100 when I want to do my lighting layout for a house. :roll:

Please tell me that was a joke.

George Stolz · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Originally posted by jwelectric:
Bob
The point I was after is that George is trying to use 210.52 to fulfill 210.70.
He can?t see that 210.52 is for the 20 amp small appliance and 210.70 is the general purpose circuit and that they are two separate circuits.

So then, using that logic, the SA circuits specified in 210.11(C)(1) could not be used to serve the function specified in 210.52(B) if there wasn't a direct reference between them? One box can't serve two purposes? Where is that written?

Then again it may be impossible to show him anything, I just hate to see others led astray. I have finally got my class to settle down and understand what the code states about 210.52 (B) small appliances

Thanks for the vote of support. How did you convince your class? Perhaps that argument will work against me.

3.1.4 Exceptions. If used, exceptions shall convey alternatives or differences to a basic code rule. It shall be the responsibility of the Code-Making Panel to determine whether the principle can be expressed most effectively as a separate positive code rule or as an exception to a rule.

Apparently, by the NEC Style Manual, the CMP agrees with me that requiring an SA is a "basic code rule" and that permitting a GPBC receptacle is an alternative method.

Edit to add: Are you implying that a receptacle installed per 210.70 doesn't need to adhere to 210.52(B)? Does it need to adhere to 314, 334, anything else? This recep answers only to 210.70? Preposterous.

[ April 10, 2005, 11:20 AM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]

iwire · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Originally posted by georgestolz:
One box can't serve two purposes?

George here is where I just can't understand your view.

The outlet can not be called both the required outlet for small appliances and the required outlet for lighting. A single outlet is one thing or the other.

Where is that written?

Where is it written something can not be down at the same time it is up?

Where is it written something can not be on at the same time its off?

It's not written, IMO it is obvious common sense.

A switched outlet of some type is required by the NEC for lighting, it does not matter what the homeowner uses it for.

JW I don't see how talking down you nose at George helps any. :roll:

jwelectric · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

George and Bob I do not intend to be belittling with my comments and if I have Please forgive me.

What I have tried so hard to point out to George is that if I am installing a circuit as outlined in 210.52 (B) (1) for the small appliances and decide at this time to switch a receptacle in lieu of the light then I use the exception that is located there which requires that it be on a general purpose circuit.

If I am installing my lighting circuit as outlined in 210.70 and I decide to switch the receptacle then I use the exception that is located there.

What I am not allowed to do is install the small appliance branch circuit as out lined in 210.52 (B) (1) and decide to switch a receptacle and use the exception located in 210.70 (A) (1) to switch the small appliance receptacle.
I am not allowed to do is ?simplified it,?
I do have to use it as it is intended to be used.
Again I apologize if I have said anything wrong. Let me add that I would love to debate with George on other matters of the code just because of what I learn.

jimwalker · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

We have battled this for weeks now.I wish a moderator would call Mike Holt in on this one.Or perhaps he is reading all this and not ruled on this himself.Personally i see no real danger in the lights being plugged in on this SA receptacles.If it was in the kitchen then yes there is a hazard.To put a 15 amp general purpose outlet in dining room is an equal hazard,but yes permitted.
Do we all agree if that dining room had a wall switched outlet in ceiling on general purpose circuit and we pluged in a buffet with light into a SA receptacle that no code was violated ?

iwire · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

I agree with you JW, you can not use an exception from one section and apply to another.

Lets look at the two exceptions under discussion.

210.52(B)(1)Exception No. 1: In addition to the required receptacles specified by 210.52, switched receptacles supplied from a general-purpose branch circuit as defined in 210.70(A)(1), Exception No. 1, shall be permitted.

IMO the only purpose of this exception is to allow (not require) a switched receptacle from a GP circuit to be installed in the kitchen, pantry, breakfast room, dining room, or similar area in addition to the SA circuits.

Without this exception we could not add additional switched receptacle outlets to these rooms from GP circuits.

210.70(A)(1)Exception No. 1: In other than kitchens and bathrooms, one or more receptacles controlled by a wall switch shall be permitted in lieu of lighting outlets.

Really IMO has little to do with receptacles it has only to do with outlets for lighting.

Without this exception we would have to install lighting outlets in all rooms.

That said I don't see that we need any exception to switch a SA circuit.

We would only need an exception to switch a SA outlet if there was a section that says we can not switch a SA outlet.

Do you have a section that prevents switching an SA circuits?

Remember it is a permissive code.

iwire · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Originally posted by jimwalker:
Do we all agree if that dining room had a wall switched outlet in ceiling on general purpose circuit and we pluged in a buffet with light into a SA receptacle that no code was violated ?

Yes I agree with that as because the ceiling outlet satisfies the requirement for a lighting outlet.

I would also say in your example switching that outlet the buffet is plugged into would be fine.

Take away the ceiling light and it all changes.

JMO, Bob

jimwalker · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Only thing is that the customer might prefer the buffet light and not use the ceiling light.That would be there choice.What i have trouble with is seeing how this setup is any safer or dangerious than lieving out the ceiling light outlet.Only differance i see is that we are code compliant.I thought we did not make codes that solved nothing.

iwire · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Originally posted by jimwalker:
Only thing is that the customer might prefer the buffet light and not use the ceiling light.That would be there choice.What i have trouble with is seeing how this setup is any safer or dangerious than lieving out the ceiling light outlet.Only differance i see is that we are code compliant.I thought we did not make codes that solved nothing.

Again I agree to some extent.

IMO It's not that they try to write a code that solves nothing.

I think we just do not understand how hard it is to write code sections.

What we work with today has been changed and tweaked for a 100 years. Not by a group of people that want to make our life difficult.

I would bet that the majority of people chosen to help make the code really care about the mission they are charged with.

Sure some are placed into the CMPs by companies that have an agenda. Even still I doubt that agenda is to make the code hard to follow or unsafe.

I believe the CMP members are actually volunteers.

Have you tried to read general laws?

The NEC is a cake walk compared to reading general laws.

jimwalker · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

This is scary if we start agreeing on anything

Yes i have tried reading some Florida statutes and they are difficult without a lawyer,but they are on internet for free.

In this case i don't think anyone is trying to sell anything.

If indeed the staff is working free then who is getting all this money ?It does not cost that much to just put it on a web page

George Stolz · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Originally posted by iwire:
A switched outlet of some type is required by the NEC for lighting, it does not matter what the homeowner uses it for.

See, that's just it. If the code doesn't care what the customer uses it for, then how do you come to the conclusion you do?

Since a SA circuit by it's definition can supply cord-and-plug connected lighting (since it clearly prohibits permanently connected lighting), then a duplex installed to serve wall space per 210.52(A) should be able to have one half switched to comply with 210.70. Sure, there's two receptacles, but either still have to comply with 210.52(B)(1). They have to be on an SA, that's required.

Bob, you know what they say about common sense: what's so common about it?

jwelectric · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

George, help me to understand what you are trying to say.
If I switch a small appliance receptacle this is not a code violation we both agree.

Where is the lighting outlet required by 210.70?

George Stolz · Apr 10, 2005

Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Originally posted by jwelectric:
What I have tried so hard to point out to George is that if I am installing a circuit as outlined in 210.52 (B) (1) for the small appliances and decide at this time to switch a receptacle in lieu of the light then I use the exception that is located there which requires that it be on a general purpose circuit.

Why do you keep saying that 210.52(B)(1)'s exception requires it to be on a GPBC? The difference between "permitted" and "required" is monumentally important to what we're discussing here.

Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?

Senior Member

Senior Member

Moderator

Moderator

Senior Member

Senior Member

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Senior Member

Senior Member

Moderator

Moderator

Senior Member

Moderator

Senior Member

Moderator

Senior Member

Moderator