New Workmanship Standard FPN added to 2005 NEC

Does your text have the ADA guidelines for switches, repesticals, and etc?

Most of the work I have done in the last 10 years has to be ADA compliant.

I wired a house for a guy and all of the recpts were at 24" above finished floor and switches were at 36". He did not want to raise his arm for the switches and he hated bending over to far for outlets. Looked weird until they moved in and then most of the recpts were covered with furniture.

| After 28 years of working for and around NECA contractors I have finally | found out the recommended height for switches, receptacles, and a lot more. | This 26 page standard that some claim to have been around for years is | available from the NECA online store. $15 for NECA or IBEW members and $30 | for nonmembers. The FPN has been added to section 110.12 and is titled | ANSI/NECA 1-2000. It is interesting to note that the maximum distance | between supports for conduit and tubing in this standard are about half | those in the NEC. | Although FPN's are not enforceable, I would expect inspectors to use this | standard as a guide as to what is "neat and workmanlike" as required in | Section 110.12.

But will those part that are specified, but differently, in the NEC also be enforceable in that regardless without the local lawmaking body approving that? Maybe they should.

One issue I still have is the locations of receptacles and switches. Way too often the receptacles in a new house are located right where furniture would ideally be located. Of course that is hard to guess where anyone might put a bed or chest of drawers. But the principle behind there being sufficient and conveniently close receptacles is to avoid extension cords which increase the hazard. But I'd argue that a receptacle blocked by a bookcase is effectively not there, and the hazard now returns. Just a few months ago I looked around at several houses I was visiting to take note of just where furniture was typically placed. In most cases, it was in the middle of a wall and rarely near the corners. But that's where receptacles also mostly are located, too.

In 1969 my parents were building a new house. I got to pick and choose a lot of things. While my mother basically designed the floor plan, I did specify some thing in my bedroom. Where there would have been 3 receptacles installed normally (3 usable walls, closet and entrance on the 4th side), I got 7 installed. Further, as I was getting into ham radio, I also got them to be grounded (not required at the time and the only other outlet that was grounded was for the washing machine in the laundry). I planned out how I would place my furniture in my room, and placed the receptacles accordingly. I never needed an extension cord for anything.

Of course, contractors are doing what the do to minimize the total number of receptacles they put in. I'm sure they'd put in fewer if they could. The code does good to make them put in enough circuits in the kitchen, for example.

What I'd like to see is some kind of additional code to make even more receptacles required if that's what it takes to make them accessible even when common placement of furniture is considered. How to actually do that will need a lot of study. But it's a direction that perhaps NECA could do better than the NFPA on?

Well, if I "ruled the world" I would require outlets below each window. That's one place where you DON'T usually see furniture that would block access to the outlet. In our family room, MOST of the outlets are blocked by bookcases which I have placed between the windows.

snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news4.newsguy.com:

This is the reason I pick and choose who I wire a house for. Since it is side work, I have that luxury. If the house owner/contractor doesn't allow me to spec the receptical layout, I walk. It doesn't cost that much extra to put in an adequate amount of recepticals. Handy boxes are cheap, you are already running wire by there...so maybe 1-2 ft extra per recept, the only significant cost is the additional labor for wiring them, and the cost of the actual recepts. Since most of my jobs are bid, not hourly, the labor is a mute point, I would prefer to do it right, and have the homeowner happy with the finished job, even if I don't make as much money.

With all of today's electronics, home theaters, etc, In the room they will use for that (Den, Family room, etc) I try to run an extra feed to help supply the demand. Often, if the area where the electronics is dictated by the floor plan, I would install 2 (sometimes 3 depending on owner preferences) quad boxes fed from 2 dedicated circuits, this gives the homeowner 16 or 24 places to plug things, does away with 'power strips' and takes the load off of the rest of the room.

There are other things you can do to make things a bit safer for the homeowner also, that don't cost you extra. For example, I run all in-wall cross wiring at 2' from the floor, recepts are 18" to the bottom of the box. If possible, all vertical runs within a wall are done at a corner, or door frame. I leave a notice on the panel box door about the wire height/location. This lets the homeowner know where the wires are located in the wall, should they need to do work in the future, or just drive a nail. This takes no real extra time.

My biggest pet peeve: The panel box will NOT be a rat's nest. PERIOD. IMHO, if you don't have the time to properly route, mark and be neat and professional with your work, you shouldn't be doing it.

Many times, cheap is not good.