Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
- Thread starter davedottcom
- Start date
- Status
- Location
- Windsor, CO NEC: 2017
- Occupation
- Service Manager
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
I pull the circuit as "Dining Room & Fridge."
It's an SA circuit, and that's all it is.
(B)(1) is the rule. The rule states "all receptacles." If you choose to use the exception to it, you can. But the exception is permissive. It permits you to violate the rule to use a different circuit for lighting.
Edit: Mornin' Dillon! Notice I edited my last post.
[ April 11, 2005, 08:28 AM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]
I pull the circuit as "Dining Room & Fridge."
It's an SA circuit, and that's all it is.
(B)(1) is the rule. The rule states "all receptacles." If you choose to use the exception to it, you can. But the exception is permissive. It permits you to violate the rule to use a different circuit for lighting.
Edit: Mornin' Dillon! Notice I edited my last post.
[ April 11, 2005, 08:28 AM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]
kturner
Member
- Location
- East Tennessee
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
The circuit would be labeled as a small appliance circuit- that's what it is. It is not a lighting circuit because there are no lighting outlets connected to it.
In order for me to reject this installation I must be able to cite a specific code reference. That was the purpose of my little check off exercise. Try it yourself.
Remember that George does not have to prove that his installation is permitted, the inspector must prove that he is wrong. So far, I don't think we've made a convincing argument that he can't that doesn't rely on intent or on manipulating exceptions back and forth from one paragraph to another or on taking liberties with the actual code text.
That's been George's challenge from the beginning- prove him wrong and cite the code text to back it up. Give it a try Dillon .
The circuit would be labeled as a small appliance circuit- that's what it is. It is not a lighting circuit because there are no lighting outlets connected to it.
In order for me to reject this installation I must be able to cite a specific code reference. That was the purpose of my little check off exercise. Try it yourself.
Remember that George does not have to prove that his installation is permitted, the inspector must prove that he is wrong. So far, I don't think we've made a convincing argument that he can't that doesn't rely on intent or on manipulating exceptions back and forth from one paragraph to another or on taking liberties with the actual code text.
That's been George's challenge from the beginning- prove him wrong and cite the code text to back it up. Give it a try Dillon
.kturner
Member
- Location
- East Tennessee
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
Start with 210.52B1 and carry it through 210.70A1 Exc.1 taking each item one at a time. Try to do it without letting intent influence your thinking.
Start with 210.52B1 and carry it through 210.70A1 Exc.1 taking each item one at a time. Try to do it without letting intent influence your thinking.
kturner
Member
- Location
- East Tennessee
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
It remains a SA circuit. It has no lighting outlets - plugging in a lamp would not make this a GPBC. Again, take the code articles one at a time, slowly, and see if you can find a specific violation that you can cite that George cannot refute.
It remains a SA circuit. It has no lighting outlets - plugging in a lamp would not make this a GPBC. Again, take the code articles one at a time, slowly, and see if you can find a specific violation that you can cite that George cannot refute.
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
Ok, It's a S/A circuit.Sure you can plug a lamp into it.BUT can you switch it,and USE it as defined in 210.52(b)Exception(1)(general purpose branch circuit) ..To/and satisfy article 210.70.Will not circuit take differate definition,in doing so.
[ April 11, 2005, 11:47 AM: Message edited by: dillon3c ]
Ok, It's a S/A circuit.Sure you can plug a lamp into it.BUT can you switch it,and USE it as defined in 210.52(b)Exception(1)(general purpose branch circuit) ..To/and satisfy article 210.70.Will not circuit take differate definition,in doing so.
[ April 11, 2005, 11:47 AM: Message edited by: dillon3c ]
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
Keep in mind..There's only one circuit in that dining room..210.70 must be satisfied..Article 210.52(b)(1)Exception#1,If used, Calls the circuit by another name .-Can't be defined as both-..fill dual rolls..
[ April 11, 2005, 10:09 AM: Message edited by: dillon3c ]
Keep in mind..There's only one circuit in that dining room..210.70 must be satisfied..Article 210.52(b)(1)Exception#1,If used, Calls the circuit by another name .-Can't be defined as both-..fill dual rolls..
[ April 11, 2005, 10:09 AM: Message edited by: dillon3c ]
kturner
Member
- Location
- East Tennessee
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
Dillon, I know what you're saying and I would really like for someone to shoot down the notion that the installation is legal. I'm going to make you the inspector, George is the installer, and I'm just a casual observer. Your job is to cite the specific code violation and be prepared to defend your case. Take your time and try not to let the intent of the code influence your thinking. You are making the same mistake I did- you're taking 3 or 4 code sections, adding them together, and basing your conclusion on the sum. You can't do that. Take the code sections one at a time, apply it to the installation, and find a violation that George cannot refute. I've rejected this once already and got ripped a new one! Give it your best shot!
Dillon, I know what you're saying and I would really like for someone to shoot down the notion that the installation is legal. I'm going to make you the inspector, George is the installer, and I'm just a casual observer. Your job is to cite the specific code violation and be prepared to defend your case. Take your time and try not to let the intent of the code influence your thinking. You are making the same mistake I did- you're taking 3 or 4 code sections, adding them together, and basing your conclusion on the sum. You can't do that. Take the code sections one at a time, apply it to the installation, and find a violation that George cannot refute. I've rejected this once already and got ripped a new one! Give it your best shot!
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
Just got back from walking the dogs.Seen your post.Inspector...I don't know,..How I can explain it any better without taking associated article of 210,in context.There isn't one sentence,going to define..Other than the one circuit present now in the dining room, it's a S/A circuit..We have agreed,in definition of this.And this room must have lighting.. We are in agreement there..To illuminate the Dwelling Unit rooms,is covered in 210.70
If the lighting outlet,is not present..Can we use 210.52 Exception# 1,- YES -Quote: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)---
This point,that continues to stick this installation.
This one circuit is a: Small Appliance Branch Circuit (as defined)
The Exception in 210.52.(clearly says) General-Purpose Branch Circuit
Could these two terms be mixed.. NO
One of these circuits, MUST be defined from the other.
In all due respect, not the same in definition
Noted:Had to go back an edit,have had art.220 on the brain for weeks..
[ April 11, 2005, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: dillon3c ]
Just got back from walking the dogs.Seen your post.Inspector...I don't know,..How I can explain it any better without taking associated article of 210,in context.There isn't one sentence,going to define..Other than the one circuit present now in the dining room, it's a S/A circuit..We have agreed,in definition of this.And this room must have lighting.. We are in agreement there..To illuminate the Dwelling Unit rooms,is covered in 210.70
If the lighting outlet,is not present..Can we use 210.52 Exception# 1,- YES -Quote: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)---
This point,that continues to stick this installation.
This one circuit is a: Small Appliance Branch Circuit (as defined)
The Exception in 210.52.(clearly says) General-Purpose Branch Circuit
Could these two terms be mixed.. NO
One of these circuits, MUST be defined from the other.
In all due respect, not the same in definition
Noted:Had to go back an edit,have had art.220 on the brain for weeks..
[ April 11, 2005, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: dillon3c ]
kturner
Member
- Location
- East Tennessee
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
The exception to 210.52B1 does not apply to this installation. We're sticking to the general rule and installing only SA receptacles. George has chosen not to use the exception. All of the dining room rects are on a SA circuit so we have not violated 210.52B1.
The exception to 210.52B1 does not apply to this installation. We're sticking to the general rule and installing only SA receptacles. George has chosen not to use the exception. All of the dining room rects are on a SA circuit so we have not violated 210.52B1.
kturner
Member
- Location
- East Tennessee
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
We're switching 1/2 of one of our SA outlets. Do you have a code reference that forbids this? I gotta go work now.
We're switching 1/2 of one of our SA outlets. Do you have a code reference that forbids this? I gotta go work now.
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
No sir,
I sure don't.
But where is your requirement for 210.70 for this Dwelling Room....Your right...Ok,you CAN switch that outlet.Nothing says you can't...But..I still see the need of compliance.
Again Inspector,finish the education..
Article 210.70..Associate your statement with this article /and language of the NEC,as to the required lumination in that dining room.(this being the whole debate of this thread)
You said you've been caught/called on it.You convince me Inspector.Lets see that card up your sleeve. I'll wait for the crow from you...And snack on it,if served..
[ April 11, 2005, 02:12 PM: Message edited by: dillon3c ]
No sir,
I sure don't.
But where is your requirement for 210.70 for this Dwelling Room....Your right...Ok,you CAN switch that outlet.Nothing says you can't...But..I still see the need of compliance.
Again Inspector,finish the education..
Article 210.70..Associate your statement with this article /and language of the NEC,as to the required lumination in that dining room.(this being the whole debate of this thread)
You said you've been caught/called on it.You convince me Inspector.Lets see that card up your sleeve. I'll wait for the crow from you...And snack on it,if served..
[ April 11, 2005, 02:12 PM: Message edited by: dillon3c ]
kturner
Member
- Location
- East Tennessee
Re: Switched Din. Rm. Outlet?
I'm going to use the exception to 210.70A1. In other than kitchens and bathrooms, one or more receptacles controlled by a wall swithch shall be permitted in lieu of lighting outlets. I've got a switched rect, therefore I don't need another lighting outlet. This exception does not specifically prohibit switching a SA rect, even though we are all pretty much in agreement that the code people probably intended otherwise.
I'm not sure which side of the issue you're on, but the challenge is to cite a code section that specifically prohibits switching a SA receptacle in a dining room. Can you do that? I couldn't.
I'm going to use the exception to 210.70A1. In other than kitchens and bathrooms, one or more receptacles controlled by a wall swithch shall be permitted in lieu of lighting outlets. I've got a switched rect, therefore I don't need another lighting outlet. This exception does not specifically prohibit switching a SA rect, even though we are all pretty much in agreement that the code people probably intended otherwise.
I'm not sure which side of the issue you're on, but the challenge is to cite a code section that specifically prohibits switching a SA receptacle in a dining room. Can you do that? I couldn't.
- Status