NJ Law - Prohibits Antique Stove Installs

SWPaDon · Post by **SWPaDon** » Sun. Dec. 13, 2015 6:35 pm

joeq wrote:
VigIIPeaBurner wrote: During our last property assessment the assessing firm's inspectors saw my free standing 50k BTU Vigilant - permitted,inspected and noted improvement I might add. The two inspectors said this is a second heating system and I'll be taxed accordingly. I was dumbfounded and pointed out they were stating something incredible - that a 50k BTU stove could adequately heat a 3,100 sq ft structure, not to mention protect 800 ft of basement where the domestic water systems were located from freezing. I'm heading to the tax assessor to check their accuracy with cpi's little tidbit in hand.
Is this true? Your county, or the state of NJ taxes the residence on their heating systems? Man, how cruel is that? We get taxed on our lot size, foundation size, and if the basement is finished or not. Oh yeah, we also have the highest "death" tax, compared to other states. I've heard of some of the mid western states taxing on "rain".
What's next, a tax on tax?

Maryland isn't out west: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/ite ... -taxpayers

EDIT: Looks like it was repealed this year: http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/2015/05/12/rain-t ... /27170401/

cpi · Post by **cpi** » Sun. Dec. 13, 2015 8:26 pm

davidmcbeth3 wrote:Chapter 14 - Heating and Cooling Equipment
SECTION M1410 VENTED ROOM HEATERS
M1410.1 General. Vented room heaters shall be tested in accordance with ASTM E 1509, UL 896 for oil-fired or UL 1482 for solid fuel-fired and installed in accordance with their listing, the manufacturer's installation instructions and the requirements of this code.

************************

Looking at this, it does not look to be mandatory. It just says "tested"...not that it has to pass any test.

And the wording "shall" is not always mandatory anyways...

And it says "room heaters" ... what's that? And is a whole house stove a "room heater"?

Your first point is a valid attack on the language of the code. Line M410.1 is badly written.
However, the code is inclusive of all relative statutes. "M1302.1 Listed and labeled. Appliances regulated by this code shall be listed and labeled for the application in which they are installed and used," will not be denied.

None the less, "tested" is exactly what the issue is. The overall intent of the three bits of controlling code is that target appliances are to betested, not to pass or fail, but to determine operating characteristics and then be installed in a way that prescribed clearances are maintained according to what the accepted 'standards' for safe parameters are; arbitrary or not.

You second point should be withdrawn. Shall means Must. This unnecessarily obfuscates the issue at hand.

Your point three - seriously, see SECTION R202 DEFINITIONS
ROOM HEATER. A freestanding heating appliance installed in the space being heated and not connected to ducts.
Chris

VigIIPeaBurner · Post by **VigIIPeaBurner** » Sun. Dec. 13, 2015 9:51 pm

cpi, it is indeed true, unfortunately! I can still see the two guys standing there, one looking at me while he said it and the other staring at the Vigilant. I am going to check out what is on my spec sheet.

davidmcbeth3 · Post by **davidmcbeth3** » Sun. Dec. 13, 2015 10:45 pm

cpi wrote:
Your first point is a valid attack on the language of the code. Line M410.1 is badly written.
However, the code is inclusive of all relative statutes. "M1302.1 Listed and labeled. Appliances regulated by this code shall be listed and labeled for the application in which they are installed and used", will not be denied.

None the less, "tested" is exactly what the issue is. The overall intent of the three bits of controlling code is that target appliances are to betested, not to pass or fail, but to determine operating characteristics and then be installed in a way that prescribed clearances are maintained according to what the accepted 'standards' for safe parameters are.; arbitrary or not.

You second point should be withdrawn. Shall means Must. This unnecessarily obfuscates the issue at hand.

Your point three - seriously, see SECTION R202 DEFINITIONS
ROOM HEATER. A freestanding heating appliance installed in the space being heated and not connected to ducts.
Chris

Thx for definition..I did not know.

As for the word "shall"..it is not automatically a mandatory thing...a more detailed analysis would be required to come to this conclusion. It usually means mandatory, but not always.

Interesting point in why testing may be required.

wsherrick · Post by **wsherrick** » Mon. Dec. 14, 2015 2:28 am

My stoves are properly labeled. One says Glenwood and the other says Crawford right over the doors. Can't miss them.

freetown fred · Post by **freetown fred** » Mon. Dec. 14, 2015 3:48 am

Dude, outstanding to see you squeak in here!!

wsherrick wrote:My stoves are properly labeled. One says Glenwood and the other says Crawford right over the doors. Can't miss them.

Pancho · Post by **Pancho** » Mon. Dec. 14, 2015 6:11 am

There are 'laws' and then there are 'laws'....and it's a scientific fact that 'laws' are for little people.

Run a properly installed unit and the burden of proof is one them. Eff them.....and when they come for it, hurry up and chew a pop tart into the shape of a gun and make pew-pew noises.

cpi · Post by **cpi** » Mon. Dec. 14, 2015 6:15 am

wsherrick wrote:My stoves are properly labeled.

Indeed William; just the thought of plastering a fine heating machine with the hideous labels that stoves come with these days hurts ones feelings.
Chris

Sunny Boy · Post by **Sunny Boy** » Mon. Dec. 14, 2015 9:29 am

davidmcbeth3 wrote:
cpi wrote:
Your first point is a valid attack on the language of the code. Line M410.1 is badly written.
However, the code is inclusive of all relative statutes. "M1302.1 Listed and labeled. Appliances regulated by this code shall be listed and labeled for the application in which they are installed and used", will not be denied.

None the less, "tested" is exactly what the issue is. The overall intent of the three bits of controlling code is that target appliances are to betested, not to pass or fail, but to determine operating characteristics and then be installed in a way that prescribed clearances are maintained according to what the accepted 'standards' for safe parameters are.; arbitrary or not.

You second point should be withdrawn. Shall means Must. This unnecessarily obfuscates the issue at hand.

Your point three - seriously, see SECTION R202 DEFINITIONS
ROOM HEATER. A freestanding heating appliance installed in the space being heated and not connected to ducts.
Chris
Thx for definition..I did not know.

As for the word "shall"..it is not automatically a mandatory thing...a more detailed analysis would be required to come to this conclusion. It usually means mandatory, but not always.

Interesting point in why testing may be required.

Full Definition of SHALL

verbal auxiliary

1archaic

a : will have to : must

b : will be able to : can

2

a —used to express a command or exhortation <you shall go>

b —used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory <it shall be unlawful to carry firearms>

3

a —used to express what is inevitable or seems likely to happen in the future <we shall have to be ready> <we shall see>

b —used to express simple futurity <when shall we expect you>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shall

They "shall" go by that definition.

Paul

Canaan coal man · Post by **Canaan coal man** » Mon. Dec. 14, 2015 12:31 pm

Id say run the nfpa 211 guidelines document with pics, and have a warm winter.

ddahlgren · Post by **ddahlgren** » Mon. Dec. 14, 2015 2:15 pm

Canaan coal man wrote:Id say run the nfpa 211 guidelines document with pics, and have a warm winter.

My thought has always been if you follow NFPA and obey their rules it shows you are concerned and followed the advice of a nationally recognized agency. It makes it difficult from some politician to crawl away from.

blrman07 · Post by **blrman07** » Mon. Dec. 14, 2015 9:32 pm

Doesn't it all depend on what is the definition of "is?"

Sunny Boy · Post by **Sunny Boy** » Mon. Dec. 14, 2015 9:54 pm

blrman07 wrote:Doesn't it all depend on what is the definition of "is?"

When you only have one terrorist ?

Paul

blrman07 · Post by **blrman07** » Tue. Dec. 15, 2015 6:52 am

And to think....all this time I thought it took a village.

cpi · Post by **cpi** » Tue. Dec. 15, 2015 7:26 am

For a minute, it look as though we were drifting away from the central issue. 'Is" means exactly what I want it to mean, not less & not more.

Chris