ivsenroute
Senior Member
- Location
- Florida
If you were an inspector would you fail this?
Pass or Fail Real Life
- Thread starter ivsenroute
- Start date
- Status
ivsenroute
Senior Member
- Location
- Florida
Oops, almost forgot I MUST provide a code reference so no one has to look it up themselves.
334.30 NFPA 70
334.30 NFPA 70
You also should post the reference so we can understand your side. We Like to have a discussion, we all have opinions and your picuture without a reference doesn't show want you are getting at. If your post included a dog in it, and your title was, what's wrong with this picture? I might assume the dog isn't supposed to be there.
And that NM needs staples, too
Last edited:
ivsenroute
Senior Member
- Location
- Florida
Would failing the installation be nit-picking in real life?
That would depend. I'm not an inspector, but if the job was neat and proper everywhere else, I'd ask for it to be properly secured and leave it. But, I have a problem with authority
ty
Senior Member
- Location
- 3rd Rock from the Sun
not in my opinion.
ty
Senior Member
- Location
- 3rd Rock from the Sun
Buck Parrish
Senior Member
- Location
- NC & IN
Fail...Be consistant.
electricmanscott
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, MA
I have no problem with leaving this violation as is. It is actually very common 'round these parts. It is pretty rare that I see those cables secured.
peter d
Senior Member
- Location
- New England
electricmanscott
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, MA
Seriously the attitude is getting old. :roll:
Pierre C Belarge
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
1. Most likely this installation is not unsafe.
With that said there are a few of thoughts that I want to point out.
1. Even though this install may not lead to a disaster in regards to the well being of the occupants, there are other considerations.
2. The next electrician will possibly ask, "how did that pass inspection?"
3. The building department personnel are better trained in regards to electrical (I should know, I am training them around these parts). The BO may say, " if he can't get this simple inspection correct, what about more complex installations?"
4. The property owner has paid for work to be completed in a proper man ner. He/she may develop doubts and go after both the EI and the BO. I have seen this happen in "real life", as has been asked by the OP.
5. As I have mentioned before, where does the inspector draw the line? I have learned it is not up to the inspector to draw a line, just to follow codes and then no one gets upset or feels they are being picked on at their particular job. Code is code is code.
Inspectors generally do not write the codes, they enforce them.
6. This is such an easy part of the NEC to follow, I do not understand why the installer puts himself in the position to force the inspector to write a violation about something that should never surface to begin with.
7. By enforcing the code more consistently, everyone will suffer the same fate.
With that said there are a few of thoughts that I want to point out.
1. Even though this install may not lead to a disaster in regards to the well being of the occupants, there are other considerations.
2. The next electrician will possibly ask, "how did that pass inspection?"
3. The building department personnel are better trained in regards to electrical (I should know, I am training them around these parts
). The BO may say, " if he can't get this simple inspection correct, what about more complex installations?"4. The property owner has paid for work to be completed in a proper man ner. He/she may develop doubts and go after both the EI and the BO. I have seen this happen in "real life", as has been asked by the OP.
5. As I have mentioned before, where does the inspector draw the line? I have learned it is not up to the inspector to draw a line, just to follow codes and then no one gets upset or feels they are being picked on at their particular job. Code is code is code.
Inspectors generally do not write the codes, they enforce them.
6. This is such an easy part of the NEC to follow, I do not understand why the installer puts himself in the position to force the inspector to write a violation about something that should never surface to begin with.
7. By enforcing the code more consistently, everyone will suffer the same fate.
TOOL_5150
Senior Member
- Location
- bay area, ca
I would fail it - there is NO reason to not put a 2x4 back there and staple those HR's like the code book tells us to.
In real life, I know they are not going anywhere, but its in the code book - we got to follow the rules.
~Matt
In real life, I know they are not going anywhere, but its in the code book - we got to follow the rules.
~Matt
Pierre,
I don''t disagree with you, but would like to enter another thought. I've
inspected for a number of years, some of that time in a municipality with strict enforcement and strict licensing requirements. I've also inspected in rural areas where licensing was lenient and "homeowner" wiring is allowed. I think to some degree the inspector has to adapt to the environment and perhaps wear the "training hat" also.
If I used the same enforcement techniques in the "unlicensed" areas as I did in the City I would have a 90% rejection rate and limited employment.
I have had to prioritize on your #1 point "is it safe". Beyond that I have found it necessary to point out Code violations that are consistent for the area and caution that those are not going to be acceptable. Over time, the quality improves.
I'm not advocating my approach or saying it's "better" it's just different by necessity...I have had to adopt an approach somewhat like a "warning ticket".
I don''t disagree with you, but would like to enter another thought. I've
inspected for a number of years, some of that time in a municipality with strict enforcement and strict licensing requirements. I've also inspected in rural areas where licensing was lenient and "homeowner" wiring is allowed. I think to some degree the inspector has to adapt to the environment and perhaps wear the "training hat" also.
If I used the same enforcement techniques in the "unlicensed" areas as I did in the City I would have a 90% rejection rate and limited employment.
I have had to prioritize on your #1 point "is it safe". Beyond that I have found it necessary to point out Code violations that are consistent for the area and caution that those are not going to be acceptable. Over time, the quality improves.
I'm not advocating my approach or saying it's "better" it's just different by necessity...I have had to adopt an approach somewhat like a "warning ticket".
Not rated for use
Not rated for use
The anchors are powder actuated tool nails shot into the block. PAT nails are not rated for hollow wall, probably not rated for block even in the solid (shattering). The OSB board is rated for 30 days of moisture, not 30 years. The OSB looks flat on the wall, no airspace or moisture resistant backer required for damp location.
The install will fail by itself when the board falls off the wall.
Not rated for use
The anchors are powder actuated tool nails shot into the block. PAT nails are not rated for hollow wall, probably not rated for block even in the solid (shattering). The OSB board is rated for 30 days of moisture, not 30 years. The OSB looks flat on the wall, no airspace or moisture resistant backer required for damp location.
The install will fail by itself when the board falls off the wall.
- Status