WACS SUPERSEDE NEC, BUT WHAT ABOUT WA CITIES CODE?

[Tradesmanx]

In the State of Washington, it is commonly understood that the WACS (which have origin in RCW's) supersede the NEC. However, many cities now have adopted a supplementary set of rules called the "Washington Cities Code." When you go to pull a permit on MyBuildingPermit.com, all those cities have adopted the WA Cities Code that imposes burdens that go beyond those set out in the NEC. The Department Head at the City of Bellevue told me he writes the "Laws" for MyBuildingPermit.com, whatever that means. Maybe he means that he is the guy that codes the formatting for the site? Or, maybe he means he is a primary drafter of the Washington Cities Code? Who knows? In any case, this raises a question. Do we treat the WA Cities Code as superseded by the WAC's like the NEC? Or, do we treat it like a municipal law, which would supersede the WACs? It is true that cities can adopt by laws that are "Equal or Better" than the NEC. They can impose a higher bar of work, but it has to be adopted by the City as an "Ordinance, Rule, or Regulation."

RCW 19.28.010(3) states, "...In a city or town having an equal, higher, or better standard the installations, materials, devices, appliances, and equipment shall be in accordance with the ordinance, rule, or regulation of the city or town."

So, virtually all jurisdictions have adopted the NEC, which isn't an ordinance or a regulation. But, you would think it would be a "rule." Yet, we know the WACs supersede it. Why? And with this being the case, wouldn't the Washington Cities Code be superseded as well? If Cities have adopted the Washington Cities Code, how is that different than the NEC, which is also adopted by cities?

 

[petersonra]

As written the national electrical code is pretty much meaningless until some state or locality enacts a law or ordinance that says you have to follow it. So saying that some law supersedes is not accurate.

 

[electrofelon]

I don't totally understand the question. It is true, as you stated, that a municipality can adopt a code more strict than the WAC ( but not less). For example the Seattle electrical code is more strict than the WAC. I guess you could say then that the SEC "supercedes" the WAC, but I feel that's not quite the right word if it's more strict.

 

[petersonra]

I don't totally understand the question. It is true, as you stated, that a municipality can adopt a code more strict than the WAC ( but not less). For example the Seattle electrical code is more strict than the WAC. I guess you could say then that the SEC "supercedes" the WAC, but I feel that's not quite the right word if it's more strict.

A better word might be that it amends it.

 

[Tradesmanx]

Thanks for taking a stab at this. The question is: Do the WACs take precedence over Washington Cities Codes? If so, why?

 

[Tradesmanx]

As written the national electrical code is pretty much meaningless until some state or locality enacts a law or ordinance that says you have to follow it. So saying that some law supersedes is not accurate.

In the State of Washington, everyone knows that State Law (WACS & RCWs) over-rule the NEC when there is a conflict between the two even where municipalities have adopted the NEC.

 

[electrofelon]

Thanks for taking a stab at this. The question is: Do the WACs take precedence over Washington Cities Codes? If so, why?

You have to follow both. The cities electrical code is going to be more strict, so I don't see how the WAC could "take precedence" over the cities code. The cities code is going to employ further requirements over and above the WAC.

 

[Tradesmanx]

You have to follow both. The cities electrical code is going to be more strict, so I don't see how the WAC could "take precedence" over the cities code. The cities code is going to employ further requirements over and above the WAC.

Now we are getting down to it. So, the City of Bellevue city council met and adopted specific ordinances related to electrical that go beyond the NEC. This would be an example of a situation described in RCW 19.28.010(3) where a "City or Town" has an "equal, higher, or better standard." It is an "ordinance...or regulation," so it takes precedence over state law because that it what the RCW says.

But, the Washington Cities Code is a different deal. It is a code adopted by multiple cities as a single document. The city councils of those cities didn't meet and individually adopt these rules. I'm not sure it meets the public disclosure requirements imposed on lawmakers. Maybe. But, no-one sent me any notices of meetings or participation requirements for stakeholders. It just looks like various department heads of certain cities got together and imposed stricter requirements than the NEC per their own arbitrary interests which likely relate to revenue generation. But, maybe not. Maybe it's totally legit and they meet some kind of public input requirements and I just missed the memo. If I understood why the NEC is superseded by state law (RCW & WACS), then I might understand whether Washington Cities Code is more like the NEC (superseded by state law), or more like a municipal ordinance (not superseded by state law).

 

[jim dungar]

This discussion requires everyone to apply the same means to the terms being used.

 

[electrofelon]

Now we are getting down to it. So, the City of Bellevue city council met and adopted specific ordinances related to electrical that go beyond the NEC. This would be an example of a situation described in RCW 19.28.010(3) where a "City or Town" has an "equal, higher, or better standard." It is an "ordinance...or regulation," so it takes precedence over state law because that it what the RCW says.

But, the Washington Cities Code is a different deal. It is a code adopted by multiple cities as a single document. The city councils of those cities didn't meet and individually adopt these rules. I'm not sure it meets the public disclosure requirements imposed on lawmakers. Maybe. But, no-one sent me any notices of meetings or participation requirements for stakeholders. It just looks like various department heads of certain cities got together and imposed stricter requirements than the NEC per their own arbitrary interests which likely relate to revenue generation. But, maybe not. Maybe it's totally legit and they meet some kind of public input requirements and I just missed the memo. If I understood why the NEC is superseded by state law (RCW & WACS), then I might understand whether Washington Cities Code is more like the NEC (superseded by state law), or more like a municipal ordinance (not superseded by state law).

I am not sure I buy your argument that the cities electrical code is somehow different than another other local code document (such as the Seattle electrical code). I am aware of the "cities electrical code" and that there are multiple cities that adopt that document, but I don't see what that has to do with anything. Why do you think that is different than say the city of Seattle adopting the Seattle electrical code?

 

[petersonra]

But, the Washington Cities Code is a different deal. It is a code adopted by multiple cities as a single document. The city councils of those cities didn't meet and individually adopt these rules. I'm not sure it meets the public disclosure requirements imposed on lawmakers. Maybe. But, no-one sent me any notices of meetings or participation requirements for stakeholders. It just looks like various department heads of certain cities got together and imposed stricter requirements than the NEC per their own arbitrary interests which likely relate to revenue generation. But, maybe not. Maybe it's totally legit and they meet some kind of public input requirements and I just missed the memo. If I understood why the NEC is superseded by state law (RCW & WACS), then I might understand whether Washington Cities Code is more like the NEC (superseded by state law), or more like a municipal ordinance (not superseded by state law).

I suspect the Washington Cities Code is somewhat analogous to the NEC, in that a third party drafts the standard and multiple entities adopt it.

 

[electrofelon]

I suspect the Washington Cities Code is somewhat analogous to the NEC, in that a third party drafts the standard and multiple entities adopt it.

Right. I don't know who or what organization wrote the cities electrical code, but I don't see that it matters that the city using it didn't write it.

 

[petersonra]

Right. I don't know who or what organization wrote the cities electrical code, but I don't see that it matters that the city using it didn't write it.

I agree. No more than it matters who wrote the NEC.

 

[xptpcrewx]

In the State of Washington, it is commonly understood that the WACS (which have origin in RCW's) supersede the NEC. However, many cities now have adopted a supplementary set of rules called the "Washington Cities Code." When you go to pull a permit on MyBuildingPermit.com, all those cities have adopted the WA Cities Code that imposes burdens that go beyond those set out in the NEC. The Department Head at the City of Bellevue told me he writes the "Laws" for MyBuildingPermit.com, whatever that means. Maybe he means that he is the guy that codes the formatting for the site? Or, maybe he means he is a primary drafter of the Washington Cities Code? Who knows? In any case, this raises a question. Do we treat the WA Cities Code as superseded by the WAC's like the NEC? Or, do we treat it like a municipal law, which would supersede the WACs? It is true that cities can adopt by laws that are "Equal or Better" than the NEC. They can impose a higher bar of work, but it has to be adopted by the City as an "Ordinance, Rule, or Regulation."

RCW 19.28.010(3) states, "...In a city or town having an equal, higher, or better standard the installations, materials, devices, appliances, and equipment shall be in accordance with the ordinance, rule, or regulation of the city or town."

So, virtually all jurisdictions have adopted the NEC, which isn't an ordinance or a regulation. But, you would think it would be a "rule." Yet, we know the WACs supersede it. Why? And with this being the case, wouldn't the Washington Cities Code be superseded as well? If Cities have adopted the Washington Cities Code, how is that different than the NEC, which is also adopted by cities?

If I understand the question correctly, it doesn't sound like superseding is the correct description. Its more like having to comply with all applicable rules. We all know laws aren't written or coordinated between jurisdictions as good as we would like or need them to be...

At the end of the day, it will come down to using the more strict requirement and exercising your due diligence. There is an implied warranty of quality and safety for electrical contractors. If that isn't accomplished (at minimum), then there will always be potential liability - even if you followed all the rules. Why? Because building codes don't tell you how to design or install something, they are merely constraints you must abide by.

 

[Tradesmanx]

How do you feel when you get written up for a thing that's not a thing? What then?

 

[xptpcrewx]

How do you feel when you get written up for a thing that's not a thing? What then?

I guess it depends on what that thing is, how far am I willing to fight it, what liability I have in the matter, and if I will make things more difficult for myself by appealing it. This is sadly the state of dealing with other human beings. Special permission can be requested but the burden of proof will be on you. It might help if you can get a professional opinion from a qualified person stating that an equal or better standard is being met.

 

[electrofelon]

How do you feel when you get written up for a thing that's not a thing? What then?

Ask for a a code reference. What does this have to do with the OP?