Alert on NEC section 406.15

STEVETERRY

STEVETERRY

Well-Known Member
In the 2014 NEC, new section 406.15 was added:

406.15 Dimmer-Controlled Receptacles. A receptacle supplying lighting loads shall not be connected to a dimmer unless the plug/receptacle combination is a nonstandard configuration type that is specifically listed and identified for each such unique combination.

This section is intended to address misapplication of dimmers to receptacles in residential applications. The example cited by the submitter was a dimmer feeding under-cabinet LED rope lights not designed to be dimmed.

Leaving aside for the moment the validity (or not) of this new section, it has the potential to cause havoc in article 520 theatres and article 530 studios, where as a matter of course, dimmers feed all types of receptacles including E1.24 pin connectors and NEMA parallel blade and twist-lock connectors. Outlets may even change from dimmed to switched to constant power based on the configuration of the control system for a given production.

As such, your entertainment industry NEC team (Ken Vannice, Steve Terry, Mitch Hefter, Eddie Kramer, Mike Skinner) has created proposals for two Tentative Interim Amendments to section 520.45 and 530.21(A). If accepted, these TIA's will exempt theatres and studios from new section 406.15. TIA's are considered by the NFPA "of an emergency nature". That's good, because we view the potential negative effects of section 406.15 as an emergency.

You can find these TIA's (numbers 1151 and 1152) here:

http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/Files/Codes and standards/nfpa news/NFPANews0514.pdf

These TIA's are open to public comment until June 20, 2014. Please feel free to submit a comment in support.

If they pass, these TIA's will become part of the NEC until the next cycle, where they will go through the normal proposal process.

If you run into issues with consultants, engineers, inspectors, contractors, or others regarding section 406.15 in article 520 or 530 venues, I suggest you refer them to proposed TIA's 1151 and 1152 on the NFPA website.

ST
 
Outside of theater it makes a lot of sense. Most wall dimmers are rated at 600 watts, and that is often a generous number considering the triac used. Plug a vacuum cleaner or hair dryer in and they usually make an unpleasant smokey exit. There is also the cases where a charger, computer, or tv is plugged into a non-sign-wave outlet resulting in damage.
Theater would be a big problem! Without the special exemption, there are a number of them out there done with NEMA 5-15 / 5-20. Still, I would suspect the lion's share are stage pin. Not sure how to read on Twist-lock... It is non-standard for domestic use, but has a "standard" in that it is NEMA listed.
 
This was an Illuminati plot to expand the sale of Stagepin connectors into the residential market, right? Better watch your back, ST.
 
techieman33 said:
Probably powercon instead. Then in another 3 years they'll decide they don't like you can can't connect powercon to a hot circuit so they'll start requiring use of powercon true one and confuse the hell out of everyone.
Click to expand...


Ahhhh, those crafty Lichtensteiners, should have known.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
 
techieman33 said:
Probably powercon instead. Then in another 3 years they'll decide they don't like you can can't connect powercon to a hot circuit so they'll start requiring use of powercon true one and confuse the hell out of everyone.
Click to expand...
Too bad its still only permitted in equipment and not on a plug box or otherwise permanently connected to mains.
 
Public comment submitted:

I could not agree more with Ken Vance's assertion: "It is clear that section 406.15 did not receive adequate review from those familiar with standard operating practices in Article 520 [and 530] venues."

In our industry, which is covered by article 520 and 530, exemptions are permitted regarding wire types (520.44 C), over current protection (520.52) and conductor ampacity (520.68 B). These existing exemptions address the specific use case of article 520 and 530 venues, and are acceptable because they apply to non-residential work place environments where they are applied by trained personnel. This is also the case with the exemptions proposed in TIAs 1151 and 1152.

In article 520 and 530 venues, there are different types of dimmers for different types of loads, and both the dimmers and the loads are adjusted and replaced as a matter of routine in the daily operation of these systems. These trained personnel in article 520 and 530 venues are aware of these factors, and are constantly monitoring and addressing them in their regular duties. In this environment, where these systems are under constant management from trained personnel, 406.15 should not apply. I fully support TIA 1151 and 1152 and see it as imperative to the entertainment industry that they be approved and ratified.

Should these TIAs not be ratified, the section 406.15 will have substantial and material negative impacts on article 520 and 530 venues, without providing any safety benefits to such venues.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
Casey Diers
Systems Design and Integration
DesignLab Chicago
Member of PLASA Electrical Power Working Group
P: (773) 265-1100
D: (773) 242-2175

F: (773) 265-0800
Click to expand...
 
Staying out of the stage/studio fight for this for now, but thanks for letting us know what is in discussion.
More at home... I moved into a new condo about five or six years ago and in the living room part of the dining room/living room combination it has all split duplex receptacles controlled on a three way between the dining room entrance to the room from outside and kitchen other entrance.

I would suspect that this is normal design and code compliant for come in the door type of turn on the switch lighting that isn’t dimmed down all the way on a switch at the other side of the room when the room doesn’t have overhead lighting. All the outlets in the room split switched... "frees up design for the room..." Kind of removes half available live power outlets in the room without adding cube taps or power strips also though - which are not preferred overall but now become necessary for many outlets. No overhead lighting as per the main reason for the switched split outlets - and also often normal. The switched outlets are necessary for lighting the room out of safety in lighting the room and normal when not overhead lit, but also making them dimmed outlets is normal I would think in later end user use after installation. Who wants full light output from switched outlets in visibility to watch TV late at night with - this given all outlets in the room are split duplex and one often plugs in a vaccume into them? Plug in a lap top to an outlet, that removes options of a lamp even on its own dimmer short of other accessories.

I dimmed all of the main bank of three three way switches (stairs/dining room overhead light/living room outlets) for ambiance for my own use and as per a professional - under supervision of load. This includes accounting for lower wattage rating in cooling fins clipped off per need to fit into a three gang.

Yes.. Someone dims the main central panel down all the way, you won’t be able to get sufficient light for your way from other entrances short of knowing where other lights are, and I would need to change back were I to move out. That and I understand the dimmers are down rated for wattage while in use for a three gang application. And such dimmed lamps do not always work with fluorescent and LED lighting gear for working properly - boy do I know that.
Some observations on my part though...

First, the dimmers in use on a three way circuit or in general single are the main part of the problem NEC is trying to deal with in these new rules - for two reasons.

(No also, dimmers don’t normally don’t start on fire when overloaded.. They just become screwy on/off switches in the dimmer curve going away, but they could possibly perhaps if intent by the end user in serious overload a rope light would be hard to do.)

On a say 400-600 Watt dimmer, there is no circuit breaker protection and better yet thermal CB or electronic fuse protection for should cooling fins be cut down in load on them in heat becoming a problem from anyone’s application. 5 Amps at best for a 600w dimmer on a normal household 15A breaker. This when all other parts of the circuit are rated at 15 Amps.

In other words... why is the NEC about to change their rules about household dimmed circuit outlets simply because instead of direct wired fixtures, it’s going to outlets because of the dimmers in having a problem? Direct where the person wiring them up is in theory following manufacturer specifications - listed fixture for X amount of Watts for a fixture, and dimmer for Y amount of Watts (including cooling fins clipped off).

I can tell you of some "very licenced" Polish immigrant Electricians wiring up a three floor building I once provided the design and electrical diagram to who could neither read a blue print, nor do much else but short circuits with a wire to turn off/find a breaker for what they were wiring 220/120 for single circuit entire floor of an old school... serious problems in there were no 220v circuits. Amazing how many breakers on the panel were open after they got done... This in me spending hours upon hours balancing three phase load for design. (Above is correct in their assumptions of 220/120 and no neutrals - long story in really bad but licenced.)

That’s bad, but overall the homeowner short of me adding dimmers to my situation at home is probably going to also add a dimmer at some point to a house Edison load circuit so as similar to what I did, get ambiance. This than new NEC rules solves nothing in solving a perspective problem (not specified as to which plug to use) in solving it. The place constructing the building didn’t install a dimmer to my split duplex outlets and so they will continue doing so. Simply don’t install a dimmer and you don’t have to worry about the problem - end user problem that certainly won’t have any knowledge of the NEC in correcting it. This with unknown outlets in solving the problem.
Assuming my situation above with a living room full of split duplex outlets, half on a three way, and half live power... not a lot of options available for making one into "dimmed." Would love it as a concept, and assuming I have installed a few thousand plugs over the years... think I can go to Home Depot, and buy a lighting fixture, than install the "proper" dimmed plug on it’s zip cord with following the ribbed neutral concept. This so I have a table lamp in my house that’s up to code.
Dimmer the problem in the above... dimmer easy enough to fix.

Part 2:
So why is it that a 3-way dimmer or 4-way dimmer when switched on from a normal switch cannot sense a need to go to full voltage? Possibly easy problems with the concept but not hard to overcome in solving the other part of the problem perspective.
Yea.. I curse not being able to turn on my "ambiance light" lamp at the other end of the sofa so as to read to my child - this given a computer plugged into the live outlet... but that will be changed soon in me adding an in-line dimmer to the lamp and if nice power for the computer. Again adding accessories to split outlets.

New NEC concepts not helping really... no such thing as a split duplex with dimmed outlet type and I would thing as frequent in code compliant, the end user is still going to both use cube taps or power strips to get more outlets, and in plugging in stuff they now have to become an electrician to properly install a plug on a lighting fixture if dimmed and special outlet.
And going back to the days of why the ribbed side is neutral... home owners don’t know this and they will than start screwing in lamps to these specially plugged lamps which are wired wrong with some new plug. Short themselves and we get back to the days of un-polorized plugs in problems due to a new proposed rule.
I say too much. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
Why did this even come up? Dimmers that appear in residential construction seem to only be listed to feed permanently installed fixtures, not outlets, so this should be a question of enforcing an existing product's listing.
 
Speaking from personal experience with the development of the building codes and other than NEC NFPA codes and standards, its easy to understand. Smallish committees generally above average experience and you see a problem in the field and think hey - we can fix that. For the most part, committee discussion of the nature you suggest (and I didn't know that the wall box dimmer listing was for permanently connected loads and suspect I'm not alone) does come up and it gets squashed. Its really easy. A proposal I submitted long ago resulted in a code change that required the vents on stage roofs to be listed, as in UL or equal, and its still the code after 25+ years. It also says that you should be able to open these from the stage floor in an emergency, and be able to open and close them for testing. Unfortunately there is no vent - still - that is listed to allow that remote opening and closing operation. Attaching something to a listed product that it wasn't tested with violates the terms of the listing and basically de-lists it. If you saw the many provisions and the many hours - days - of discussions for fire doors and windows and what can and can't be attached. Until recently, you could not replace the glazing in a glazed fire door without violating the listing - or at least not unless it was the same glazing product from the same manufacturer - and it it was no longer available - replace the door to be up to code. But of course many doors are not up to code because a latch wore out and was replaced with a non-tested one, and so on.

And, since we are discussing rope locks on another forum, how did a group of knowledgeable people write a rigging standard that described what a rope lock was to do, dissenters acknowledged, but didn't require a rope lock at all? It's humans (mostly) writing these things and they are not etched in stone from Moses a long tine ago.

So, you make a good point, headcrab, if what you say is true, and a change was not necessary, but education sure is.
 
STEVETERRY said:
In the 2014 NEC, new section 406.15 was added:

406.15 Dimmer-Controlled Receptacles. A receptacle supplying lighting loads shall not be connected to a dimmer unless the plug/receptacle combination is a nonstandard configuration type that is specifically listed and identified for each such unique combination.

This section is intended to address misapplication of dimmers to receptacles in residential applications. The example cited by the submitter was a dimmer feeding under-cabinet LED rope lights not designed to be dimmed.

Leaving aside for the moment the validity (or not) of this new section, it has the potential to cause havoc in article 520 theatres and article 530 studios, where as a matter of course, dimmers feed all types of receptacles including E1.24 pin connectors and NEMA parallel blade and twist-lock connectors. Outlets may even change from dimmed to switched to constant power based on the configuration of the control system for a given production.

As such, your entertainment industry NEC team (Ken Vannice, Steve Terry, Mitch Hefter, Eddie Kramer, Mike Skinner) has created proposals for two Tentative Interim Amendments to section 520.45 and 530.21(A). If accepted, these TIA's will exempt theatres and studios from new section 406.15. TIA's are considered by the NFPA "of an emergency nature". That's good, because we view the potential negative effects of section 406.15 as an emergency.

You can find these TIA's (numbers 1151 and 1152) here:

http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/Files/Codes and standards/nfpa news/NFPANews0514.pdf

These TIA's are open to public comment until June 20, 2014. Please feel free to submit a comment in support.

If they pass, these TIA's will become part of the NEC until the next cycle, where they will go through the normal proposal process.

If you run into issues with consultants, engineers, inspectors, contractors, or others regarding section 406.15 in article 520 or 530 venues, I suggest you refer them to proposed TIA's 1151 and 1152 on the NFPA website.

ST
Click to expand...


These TIA's, now numbered 14-4 and 14-5 have been issued. See: http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/document-information-pages?mode=code&code=70&tab=editions

A bullet dodged!

ST
 
Wow! the above is going to be very corporate and labor expensive as I read it given a L6-15 world I live in. Assuming grandfather clouse won't help in this monumental problem... any hints to a opening in the storm cloud I just sent to my bosses' the info on that is looming? Talking probably a lot of hundreds of thousands of dollars or more overall given http://www.nfpa.org/Assets/files/AboutTheCodes/70/TIA_70-14-5.pdf though a concept I saw years and years ago as per a problem coming.
 
I think that when this edition is adopted by a local jurisdiction, the LED lights typically used in under cabinet and in cabinet will more often be hard wired rather than just having their wall wart plugged in. I suspect biggest impact are electricians who do residential kitchens and kitchen designers. I doubt many if and jurisdictions will make this retroactive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

STEVETERRY
Important NEC Tentative Interim Amendments--Public Comment
Replies
12
Views
2K
Jay Ashworth
Jay Ashworth
STEVETERRY
Summary of NEC 2017 Entertainment Industry changes
Replies
10
Views
6K
STEVETERRY
STEVETERRY
STEVETERRY
NEC Changes for 2014--Public Review
Replies
1
Views
2K
jstandfast
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back