Existing Installations and hazard to life

[smallfish]

A general contractor has removed slightly water-damaged plaster board from interior walls in patient care areas in a medical office exposing Type NM 2-wire cable with ground supplying receptacle outlets in the walls. Records indicate the building was built in 1951 but there are no records indicating when the existing wiring was installed. If the contractor were to replace the drywall with new drywall and no additions, alterations or repairs were made on the electrical circuits (including the receptacles) in the walls, could this existing, non-redundant wiring-means be code compliant?

2011 NEC Annex H 80.9 (B) suggests that it would be code-compliant providing that this existing electrical wiring does not "present an imminent danger to occupants."

Michigan Electrical Code Rules (where this situation is happening) requires that this existing wiring does not present a "hazard to life, health, or property".

As Electrical Inspector, I'm having trouble determining if the existing wiring is indeed a hazard thus requiring compliance with the current code. Any suggestions?

Thanks

 

[S'mise]

In my opinion, The electrical is not being touched, so unless you see something wrong, it should be grandfathered the way it stands.

 

[eHunter]

A general contractor has removed slightly water-damaged plaster board from interior walls in patient care areas in a medical office exposing Type NM 2-wire cable with ground supplying receptacle outlets in the walls. Records indicate the building was built in 1951 but there are no records indicating when the existing wiring was installed. If the contractor were to replace the drywall with new drywall and no additions, alterations or repairs were made on the electrical circuits (including the receptacles) in the walls, could this existing, non-redundant wiring-means be code compliant?

2011 NEC Annex H 80.9 (B) suggests that it would be code-compliant providing that this existing electrical wiring does not "present an imminent danger to occupants."

Michigan Electrical Code Rules (where this situation is happening) requires that this existing wiring does not present a "hazard to life, health, or property".

As Electrical Inspector, I'm having trouble determining if the existing wiring is indeed a hazard thus requiring compliance with the current code. Any suggestions?

Thanks

Did the conductors and wiring devices get wet also?

 

[smallfish]

No there is no evidence that conductors nor receptacles got wet. I was told that just the first few inches of the plasterboard got wet.

 

[iwire]

Article 80 means absolutely nothing unless specifically adopted by your area.

If the wiring looks OK I think it would be wrong to require it be up graded to new standards.

 

[zbang]

I'm not trying to argue whether the existing wiring was compliant when installed or whether on the face it's acceptable now, but as I read it this it's really two questions-

No matter how old, does the exiting wiring "present an imminent danger to occupants" ? (How can you tell?)
Only if the answer to that is No can you ask "was it compliant when installed"?
If the answers are No and Yes, then it's OK to leave everything alone. It does sound like this one is No and Yes, but the next one might not be.