Submitter:
Eric Stromberg, Stromberg Engineering, Inc.
Recommendation:
Delete Section 210.21B(2) and associated table.
Substantiation:
As written, this section is unenforceable, because it applies to all cord-and-plug devices; not just those fastened in place at the time of installation. According to this section, every time I use my circular saw, I violate the Code . If this section is for the purpose of after-the-fact application, as would be the case for a fire investigation, it seems that 210.23 could be cited instead.
Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement: The panel continues to maintain that the cord and plug connected load must not exceed the maximum load specified in Table 210.21(B)(2).
Number Eligible to Vote: 12
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 12
____________________________________________________________
2-175 Log #1089 NEC-P02 Final Action: Reject
(210.21(B)(2) and Table 210.2(B)(2))
Submitter:
Daniel Leaf, Seneca, SC
Recommendation:
Delete.
Substantiation:
This section has nothing to do with safety and is virtually unenforceable when the load is portable or transient, or connected after inspection. In Proposal 1-64 of the 1994 ROP, the panel rejected the proposal to define an individual circuit as one supplying a single receptacle inferring that a circuit supplying a duplex receptacle with only one equipment plugged in is an individual circuit. If this is the intent, the receptacle can supply any load for which it is rated. Receptacles are evaluated for their full ratings. There are listed appliances with rated current over 12 amperes with factory equipped 15 ampere plugs with no instructions to utilize an individual circuit, such as hair dryers, central vacuums, pressure water sprayers, etc. implying the testing agency found no hazard with a multiple receptacle circuit.
Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement: See the panel action and statement on Proposal 2-174.
Number Eligible to Vote: 12
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 12
____________________________________________________________
2-176 Log #1394 NEC-P02 Final Action: Reject
(210.21(B)(2), Table 210.21(B)(2))
Submitter:
George Stolz, II, Pierce, CO
Recommendation:
Delete the text and chart.
Substantiation:
Item (1) and (3) in 210.21(B) address receptacle ratings, whereas Item (2) addresses connected loads, which are more appropriately and already addressed in 210.23(A)(1). 210.21(B)(2) is redundant. The following sections reference this section and would need to be amended to either reference 210.21 in general, or 210.23: 210.21, the FPN to 406.2(B), 406.3(A), 520.9, 530.21(A). Index “Heavy Duty
Lampholders”, and “Maximum Connected Load to Receptacles”. No coordinating proposal will be submitted to request these amendments.
Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement: See the panel action and statement on Proposal 2-174.
Number Eligible to Vote: 12
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 12
