New Electrical Code Rules for Existing Buildings

Archive Public Archive
1

Originally Posted By: jtedesco
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.


2005 NEC:


New provision for use of GFCI protection where equipment grounding means is not available in switch enclosure

404.9 Provisions for General-Use Snap Switches.

(B) Grounding. Snap switches, including dimmer and
similar control switches, shall be effectively grounded and
shall provide a means to ground metal faceplates, whether
or not a metal faceplate is installed. Snap switches shall be
considered effectively grounded if either of the following
conditions is met:

(1) The switch is mounted with metal screws to a metal
box or to a nonmetallic box with integral means for
grounding devices.

(2) An equipment grounding conductor or equipment
bonding jumper is connected to an equipment grounding
termination of the snap switch.

Exception to (B): Where no grounding means exists within
the snap-switch enclosure or where the wiring method does
not include or provide an equipment ground, a snap switch
without a grounding connection shall be permitted for replacement
purposes only. A snap switch wired under the
provisions of this exception and located within reach of
earth, grade, conducting floors, or other conducting surfaces
shall be provided with a faceplate of nonconducting,
noncombustible material or shall be protected by a groundfault
circuit interrupter.

New provision for the use of GFCI protection for luminaires where equipment grounding conductor is not available at outlet.

410.18 Exposed Luminaire (Fixture) Parts.

(A) Exposed Conductive Parts. Exposed metal parts shall
be grounded or insulated from ground and other conducting
surfaces or be inaccessible to unqualified personnel. Lamp
tie wires, mounting screws, clips, and decorative bands on
glass spaced at least 38 mm (11⁄2 in.) from lamp terminals
shall not be required to be grounded.

(B) Made of Insulating Material. Luminaires (fixtures)
directly wired or attached to outlets supplied by a wiring
method that does not provide a ready means for grounding
shall be made of insulating material and shall have no exposed
conductive parts.

Exception No. 1: Replacement luminaires (fixtures) shall be
permitted to connect an equipment grounding conductor from
the outlet in compliance with 250.130(C). The luminaire (fixture)
shall then be grounded in accordance with 410.18(A).

NEW Exception No. 2: Where no equipment grounding conductor
exists at the outlet, replacement luminaires (fixtures)
that are GFCI protected shall not be required to be connected
to an equipment grounding conductor.

--
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

www.nachi.org/tedescobook.htm

2

Originally Posted By: dbowers
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.


which ones he/she can inspect in a VISUAL inspection without taking anything apart.

3

Originally Posted By: rwashington
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.


Ditto.

–
Richard W Washington


www.rwhomeinspections.com

4

Originally Posted By: jtedesco
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.


icon_biggrin.gif Sure!


After the Home Inspector determines that the electrical system has no equipment grounding conductor (knob and tube, or two wire nonmetallic cables) he or she should pay close attention to the types of plates, and fixtures that are installed.

The reason that this was considered important was to avoid a possible electrical hazard if any exposed metal was carrying current because of contact with a live wire. The HI may want to test the metal plates and fixtures to verify that there is no hazard present.

I felt that this was good to know, and wanted to spark some discussion, since there were issues related to switches in bedrooms, etc., and that the AFCI was to protect the outlets and not the switch.

By the way the revised AFCI rule is clearer now and wants protection for the entire branch circuit.

--
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

www.nachi.org/tedescobook.htm

5

Originally Posted By: Greg Fretwell
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.


I know article 80 may create the impression that the AHJ can come into an existing home and force compliance to the code but most state laws will limit that authority to permitted projects. In fact, in most states, the AHJ can’t enter your property without a warrant or the permission that is granted when you apply for a permit.


The worst example of handyman wiring a HI could find is still not enough to trigger a mandatory code inspection


We had a municipal court judge give us a 4 hour class on the legalities at a BOAF seminar and a lot of building officials had their eyes opened a bit. The 4th, 5th and 6th amendment applies to building officials as much as it does to the cops. Perhaps even more since any exigent circumstances are not as compelling. You may live in a state that does allow a code enforcement “raid” but I doubt it would actually stand up in court if the homeowner could afford a decent lawyer. I am guessing most can’t and that is why you even hear the stories.

6

Originally Posted By: Ryan Jackson
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.


Greg: How many states/areas really adopt article 80?

–
Ryan Jackson, Salt Lake City

7

Originally Posted By: Greg Fretwell
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.


Ryan Jackson wrote:
Greg: How many states/areas really adopt article 80?


I suspect there are more than actually read it. Florida has adopted the NEC in it's entirety.