Dedicated Circuit: Is Junction Box Required?

Page 3 of 4  

In typed:

The above says nothing. I'll give you a hint for citations: Start by looking at ANSI and perhaps a trip to your local town hall.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

You do realize that ANSI is also a private not-for-profit corporation that has no other standing (i.e. other than being a not-for-profit 501 (c)3) with the federal government?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What law exactly? Cite it. There are so many misstatements in your replies that I must assume you are extrapolating a very narrow experience set to the whole continent. The National Electric Code is a privately published document. It only becomes enforceable when it has been adopted in whole or part by a state or a political subdivision of a state. Do you even know what a minimum / maximum state is? Just as almost half of US states do not have OSHA enforcement for government employees and smaller firms many state have no state wide electrical code. Only incorporated municipalities or charter counties can adopt local codes in most states. Statutory counties cannot, in most states, do anything not required of them by state statute. Many states and local jurisdictions have declined to adopt the Arc Fault Circuit Interrupter requirements of the last two code cycles and that is only one example of local exception to your so called absolute minimum. I have installed electrical installations from Argentina to Alaska and California to Maine. I have worked in many areas were there is no electrical code in place. Some of the companies I have worked for went through a great deal of research in trying to find a code enforcement authority for an installation only to conclude that the owners acceptance representative was the only authority having jurisdiction. There are in fact vast stretches of the United States of America that have no publicly enforced electric code of any kind. -- Tom Horne
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In typed:

Well said.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/2/2010 3:25 PM, Evan wrote:

LOL! the county just to the south of me has no such "codes" "enforcement" or inspectors. You can build a complete house from scratch, and no such permits except for a septic system are required. So to say " You do have such an office," is not always correct.
--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
typed:

We don't even have a septic system requirement. But I think farms of less than 50 or maybe it's 100 acres might have some kind of inspection requirement. As for his question, I have the 2005 code book but it will take me awhile to find it. So, I'll just try to answer this from memory. As for the wire nut question. I would not even consider the pigtail method if you are going direct to, and only to, a wall plug outlet. Just wire the black to the bronze with a wire nut (correct size), white to the silver with a wire nut (correct size), and the unwrapped copper to the green/ground. Now, if you are using a metal box, you definately should pigtail and ground to the box also and use a wire nut to connect the two wires (correct size). As for the junction box, I'm not sure what you're asking. If it is a straight run, why would you need a junction box? I might be confused by your terminology and maybe you are just talking about the eor (end of run) connections to the outlet. If that's the case, yes, you need the "junction" box.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"The Post Quartermaster"
typed:

Let me clarify something here. The wire nuts are used if you are going to use pigtails. Otherwise just connect direct to the outlet plug, black to bronze, white to silver and plain to green.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In typed:

You are under a serious misconception. The NEC et al, is a set of nationwide MINIMAL requirements based on the criteria of many different organizations all pulled together into NEC (NFPA, etc.). MINIMUM is the operative word there. Many zoning areas management choose to strengthen some parts of it as they see fit for the demographics of any geographical area they serve. They use the NEC as the basiis for their requirements and adjust it as they require for their own specifc needs. The NEC requirements can only be strengthened, never loosened, by local jurisdiction. Because you don't see a generic entry in your phone book for local code enforcement" does not in any way mean that there isn't an office that dictates what codes must be followed for any particular area. Even ifi all they have to say is to follow NEC, it is still their responsibility to do so. One may have to work thru the phone book from rural, village, town, county or state, but there IS a governing office for building requirements, of which NEC is one of them. In some very rural outlying areas there may not be any enforcement, but unless the office is vacant, there is a ttle responsible for the zoning.
Most of the time, electrical questions on code requirements are much more clearly and easily settled with simple phone calls to the zoning offices or town/county/state responsiblity to get the information directly from those who enforce it. Very few code requirement questions can ever be faithfully answered on a newsgroup; though you can get some good suggestions maybe. But you can NOT get the actual local requirements here since you have no idea who you're talking to and no idea whether they even are who they say they are.
HTH,
Twayne`
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
typed:

Sorry Twayne, it actually just sounds like a bunch of gibberish

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RBM wrote:

That is good advice coming from Twayne, because Twayne's code advice is usually wrong.

It is reassuring to know that Twayne is more familiar with the code enforcement in RBM's area than Roy is.

The NEC is put together only by the NFPA. It is generally (but not always) consistent with other organizations regulations and standards.

Complete bull crap.
The NEC has *no* authority except as part or all of it is adopted or modified by an "authority having jurisdiction". The authority can do what they want, including "loosening" the NEC. Or no electrical code may be in effect. If state or lower entities do not adopt a code there is no code for residential. I believe there is some rather basic electrical in OSHA.

Why does there have to be? Cite the requirement. Feds? UN? T-party? The pope?

Zoning is not the same as building codes.

The code that is enforced locally is about always based on the NEC. Most code requirement questions can be faithfully answered on this newsgroup. There are many people on this newsgroup that are quite familiar with the NEC. Obviously Twayne is not one of them.

As usual. Power factor correction capacitors. Using a dryer neutral for a ground. Class 1, 2, 3 transformers.
--
bud--

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Twayne wrote: ...

The first part of that is sorta' true; the last sentence is complete and utter hogwash. It appears you are the one under a serious misconception. NEC has no standing other than whatever whichever jurisdiction in charge choose to give it. It is NOT law nor have any status such as that. As so, local jurisdictions could choose to ignore it entirely and do it all on there own or w/ some other basis than NEC. That they don't is simply reflective that there's no reason to reinvent the wheel in general not that there's any inviolate mandate or law the requires it.

And, again, while undoubtedly you're in and have always been in locations for which that is true doesn't mean it is universal.
As noted, locally there is no code provision at all in the County outside the 3-mile limit for other than sewer/water.
The county _requests_ that folks do get permits for residential building but they have no authority in place to require it.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So, theoretically, a business could build a hotel establishment along a highway somewhere and if it is outside the "3-mile limit" no one bats an eyelash about it other than where the sewage goes ?
LOL... Sounds _real_ safe...
Or are there exceptions to these exemptions for certain occupancy types... Given that such places are often only protected by a volunteer fire department your house will be mostly burnt down by the time the fire is brought under control...
This is why inspection by government inspectors is something people should want... The government has no financial interest in when the work gets signed off, you pay the permitting fees up front and property taxes if applicable no matter what is on your land...
To leave one private business who has a financial interest in maintaining a business relationship with an electrician who installed wiring for a customer of their own and therefore a financial interest in passing inspection to get paid for the job and hoping that the first and foremost priority in all cases is life safety is something you gotta have your head buried really far into the sand to buy into...
~~ Evan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/2/2010 19:16, Evan wrote:

Unless the local government has been bought off by unions or other special interests who require permitees to spend more than is necessary on building projects, only to benefit certain trades. Think of all those fire traps of houses outside of Chicago with wiring that is not in metallic conduit.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In typed:

Wow, you guys may be pros, but you're missing a lot! The requirements of the NEC cannot be ignored or loosened without case by case investigation and approval, meaning good reason. Any loosening of the code that's possible is included IN the NEC itself or its references. The only way to avoid NEC adherance is to superced the entire context with another, stronger document with adjustments in areas necessary. Somce California cites are a great example of this. Rather than asssting in general, you choose to nit-pick and extoll the exceptions to the rules, without regard to location or authority, and that tells me that you are dangerous people to take advice from.
Just for grins, I took this e-mail to our local inspector's office where I know the inspectors. We went to lunch together (we each paid our own way) and this was the general concensus: -- You sound like the type where intent of the requirements isn't your strong point. -- You are the type to cut corners, most likely. -- Your atttudes are far from what's needed in having the client's benefit in mind. -- And your understanding of the NEC and how/when/where it's applied appears to be seriously lacking IF you are in a role where they matter to the work you do. -- I did not know the NEC could be replaced, which they showed me in black and white. -- I came off as condescending and may have inspired your trollity. Yeah, I learned a new word!
As for the rest of your trollish BS and silliness, it's been deleted; not needed for this response.
HTH,
Twayne`
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

No, it is *you* who is missing a lot. Try reading.

You're wrong (but I doubt you'll read my post any more than you read others). The NEC has no special god-given authority. The NFPA is a *private* non-profit company that publishes a standard that is useful for government entities to reference in their laws. It is up to the governmental entity with jurisdiction to include the NEC, subsets of the NEC, or other rules into *its* laws. The laws do *not* have to include the entire NEC or any other rules.

Absolutely wrong. The cities can write whatever electrical codes they wish. Usually they reference the NEC because it's easier and they don't have the expertise of the NFPA. They are usually stricter that the NEC, but there is no reason they can't be more lax. Often they reference older versions of the NEC.

No, you're being told that you're *WRONG*, but you're too pig headed to read.

I'm sure you told them everything that was said here. Yeah, right.

When you're wrong, you're *really* wrong.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Personally, I'd take the advice from guys like RBM, Bud, and Doug based on their excellent knowledge of the NEC. And I have on many occasions. And contrary to your silly claim for the need to always call the local code office or zoning office, I've seen lots of people get good sound advice here. To claim that one needs to call the local code office to know the answer to basic NEC questions is nonsense. And along the lines of what RBM stated, in some areas of NJ; which isnt exactly some hillbilly terrritory, some municipalities use private electrical inspection companies. And those guys are NOT sitting around answering homeowner questions on how to do electrical work correctly.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Wrong. The Code describes itself as "contain[ing] provisions that are considered necessary for electrical safety." Nowhere does it describe itself as a set of minimum standards. Further, the Code specifically authorizes local jurisdictions to waive provisions of the Code.

Wrong. The Code is the product of *one* organization, the NFPA.

Wrong; as noted above, local jurisdictions are explicitly permitted under the Code to waive portions of it if they choose. Further, the Code itself has no legal force unless adopted as law by a particular jurisdiction -- and nothing at all prevents a jurisdiction from adopting only part of the Code as law, should they choose to do so.

It would help a lot more if it were true. Perhaps you should stick to giving advice on topics you actually know something about, if there are any. This isn't one of them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In wrote:

Of course not!, AFAIK, and it should not anyway since NEC is NOT the body responsible for deciding what is a set of minimal requirements and what is not. It is, however the MINIMAL requirements for the US fire and personal safety protection requirements. It may specify say 8 conductors in a certain box: no more than 8 in a box can be used and still pass the electrical code. It is not possible for another body to step in and say BS, I'll allow 10, or 12, or 21! It can spec a minimal distance between objects, but as before that distance can NOT be made less but it CAN be more! You need to get a grip and actually think about what you're on about before spewing misinformation to the world, in particular the type that indicates a final word on a location's requirements can be gotten from this newsgroup and be as good or better than going to the local controlling authority.
What you are trying to say, and failing to do, and only bringing up confusion for most who are not familiar wth these areas, is that the NEC comes from a SMALL part of the NFPA - 70 I think? Not sure but if YOU don't know, it wouldn't surprise me in the least. The NEC is a set of "regulations" for protection of personnel and property safety in electrical installations. Except for heavily more stringent regulations, NOT weaker. Fiber-optics is one such area, but nit-picking of that kind only serves to dillute the credibility of your own input. The NFPA "adopted" NEC and approved by ANSI. I almost defy you to cite ANY local which has less stringent rules than the NEC unless the artcles concern something that is Not Applicable to the region. You will find that even such a case, should it exist, is NOT the end of the line and WILL have been approved, usually by ANSI. I don't mention the other 3 because I don't want to do your homework for you.

Urban Renewals has this short, concise definition: The accepted standard for installation of wiring and associated devices. It is written by a panel of experts and printed by the National Fire Prevention Association. Top of Page [Top]
Oh, then how come the NEC calls FOR the NFPA in many sections if IT IS the NFPA sourced it? It's not uncommon at all to see things like: " NEC REQUIREMENT ? Either of the following listing requirements** A. Underwriters Laboratories B. FM Global
* Refer to NFPA 220 for definition of non-combustible Type I and II building construction. ** Fine Print Note, Section 450.23, (B)(1) states: "Installations adjacent to combustible material, fire escapes, or door and window openings may require additional safeguards such as those listed in Section 450.27. It says to go to the NFPA for DEFINITIONS, not for rules. The NEC contains the rules. "
The NEC is NOT the NFPA! Two different offices, two different functions in the overall scheme of things. Also: NEC REQUIREMENT ? Either of the following listing requirements** A. Underwriters Laboratories B. FM Global " Why are those NEC requirements and not NFPA if you actually know what you're talking about. And then: " NEC OPTIONS* ? Both liquid confinement, and either of the following listing requirements A. Underwriters Laboratories B. FM Global or ? Both liquid confinement and auto extinguishment or ? Vault per NEC 450, Part III * No additional safeguards are required if one or more of Exceptions 1-6 of Section 450.26, Oil-Insulated Transformers Installed Indoors apply. "
"

The above is so far off base as to make me wonder whether you anything but a passing familiarity with NEC, NFPA/NEC, ANSI, UL and the other associated bodies. You CAN build anything you want to, but trying to sell or installing it, besides negating insurances, is definitely a legal requirement of any jurisdictional body. A good example of not having NEC labelling can be found in California: Without the LosAngeles "Orange" sticker for instance, you aren't going to sell anything legally. And guess what that entails? Yup; NEC or UL or one of several other MOU's they carry/allow. But not a single one of them is going to be less stringent than the NEC Is. NYS is another one, Chicago was going to something like the "sticker" thing, but I don't know if they have done so.
So let's get real and talk about the subjects the OP's ASK about, not hair splitting and silliness such as has gone on thru these last couple days. If I've bruised your precious ego, that's your problem not mine.
HTH,
Twayne`

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Twayne wrote:

The NEC is not a "body". The NFPA creates the NEC.

Cite. Feds? UN? T-party? The pope?
Hallucinations do not count.

The NEC explicitly gives the AHJ authority to modify NEC requirements in particular cases.

The NEC is one of many standards that come from the NFPA. None of them are applicable unless adopted in whole or part by an "authority". (ANSI is not that authority.)

A number of jurisdictions had less stringent, or no, rules on AFCIs.
According to you that can't happen.

Beyond stupid. Jurisdictions don't need ANSI permission to adopt what they want (or nothing).

Does not exist in the NEC. Acceptance is by the AHJ.

Geez - I guess the NFPA could include all of its standards in one document. That would be real useful.

You are apparently educated beyond your intelligence.
What ever happened to you promise to HeyBub: "next time I'll be a lot more careful."
-- bud--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It is a set of recommendations. That is all.

False. You completely misunderstand what the Code is.
Any jurisdiction may, if it wishes, adopt the Code in toto or in part, as law, and modify it in any way it chooses. The Code has no legal force.

Indeed this is good advice; you should consider following it.

I never said that.

False. The NEC is not a set of regulations at all. It is a set of recommended practices to ensure electrical safety. It has no regulatory force whatever. That force comes from laws or ordinances that adopt the Code as the electrical standard for a particular jurisdiction -- and any jurisdiction is free to adopt, or not adopt, the Code or any part of it as law as it sees fit.

That's easy enough. There are numerous locales that have *no* electrical code whatever. That certainly qualifies as "less stringent rules than the NEC".

Completely irrelevant. Read what the NEC says about itself.

You claimed that the NEC consists of "criteria of many different organizations ... (NFPA etc)." That's not true. The NEC is the product of the NFPA alone.

Nobody ever said it was.

Ummm...no. The NFPA is the author of the NEC.

Time to put up, or shut up. Specify what exactly is "off base" in that statement.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.