12awg to 14awg on 15A circuit

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bedroom addition was wired all receptacles with 12awg Romex, picking up lighting ran on 14awg Romex. Inspector disallowed this combination due to the fact that some happy homeowner may come in and change the 15A breaker to a 20A seeing the 12awg wire in the panel. He stated this was also a code violation, but I cannot find this code.
Obviously NM-B is rated at 60°C, but being all on a 15A breaker should be fine. Why is it my responsibility what happy homeowner does without hiring a qualified person to investigate all circuits before deciding to upgrade a breaker. I've never upgraded a breaker guessing that the wires are continuous in one size. Not to mention most receptacles are likely 15A rated anyway.
 
You have one of those inspectors that make up their own rules. Ask him what will happen if the homeowner decides to put a 30 amp breaker on that #12? What would keep them from doing it? Ask for the code reference that prohibits it? He cannot give you one, because it doesn’t exist.
 
Bedroom addition was wired all receptacles with 12awg Romex, picking up lighting ran on 14awg Romex. Inspector disallowed this combination due to the fact that some happy homeowner may come in and change the 15A breaker to a 20A seeing the 12awg wire in the panel. He stated this was also a code violation, but I cannot find this code.
Obviously NM-B is rated at 60°C, but being all on a 15A breaker should be fine. Why is it my responsibility what happy homeowner does without hiring a qualified person to investigate all circuits before deciding to upgrade a breaker. I've never upgraded a breaker guessing that the wires are continuous in one size. Not to mention most receptacles are likely 15A rated anyway.


Not a violation. Its fine. Ask him for a code section.
 
He also said 9 outlets is his limit per circuit. I told him there's no code on this. He said well actually there is with some kind of resistance issue or something that's part of the code. While I don't run wires daily, I've taken NEC code classes, wiring methods, building automation systems, electronics in college, been working with electro-mechanical controls for 28 years and still have no idea what he's talking about.
 
He also said 9 outlets is his limit per circuit. I told him there's no code on this. He said well actually there is with some kind of resistance issue or something that's part of the code. While I don't run wires daily, I've taken NEC code classes, wiring methods, building automation systems, electronics in college, been working with electro-mechanical controls for 28 years and still have no idea what he's talking about.
I’d tell him I wire houses to NEC spec. Not made up personal opinions with all due respect. Unless you can quote it from the book and show me.
 
If they have an amendment it may be enforceable. Here in Tulsa they have on and it makes no sense. The additional cost for dewelling is nuts.
However that's the rule.
By the it's ok to ask them where to look it up.
Copy of Tulsa, note for 20 circuit in other than a dwelling. Nuts.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20220317-190508.png
    Screenshot_20220317-190508.png
    453.4 KB · Views: 85
Last edited:
He also said 9 outlets is his limit per circuit. I told him there's no code on this. He said well actually there is with some kind of resistance issue or something that's part of the code. While I don't run wires daily, I've taken NEC code classes, wiring methods, building automation systems, electronics in college, been working with electro-mechanical controls for 28 years and still have no idea what he's talking about.
The inspector is.....okay I'll be nice, mistaken. Saying you cannot have #12 conductors on a 15 amp OCPD leads me to believe that obviously this person doesn't know anything about voltage drop compensation.
 
The inspector is.....okay I'll be nice, mistaken. Saying you cannot have #12 conductors on a 15 amp OCPD leads me to believe that obviously this person doesn't know anything about voltage drop compensation.
Correct, but what I see as a potential issue in tapping that smaller conductor from the larger one then oversizeing overcurrent protection by untrained persons. Seen too many issues that involve just this situation caused by "handiman" or GC that is unknowlegible of the code and or electrical in general. You know the type "here's a wire let's use this", and all of a sudden you have a receptacle outlet for the living room TV that is powered by from the upstairs master bath circuit.

Personally I would put a warning label to not exceed 15A OCPD on the particular feed, for reference by these type of people.

Right now got one slightly different but caused by the handiman type. All new NM in basement, all new NM in receptacle boxes, but no grounding. Some handiman "upgraded" and just used the old BX left inplace and spliced the NM in a Jboxes (I hope) that are buried non accessible in walls and ceilings as I haven't found the actual transition, just the live BX in the middle of the circuit.
 
Correct, but what I see as a potential issue in tapping that smaller conductor from the larger one then oversizeing overcurrent protection by untrained persons. Seen too many issues that involve just this situation caused by "handiman" or GC that is unknowlegible of the code and or electrical in general. You know the type "here's a wire let's use this", and all of a sudden you have a receptacle outlet for the living room TV that is powered by from the upstairs master bath circuit.

Personally I would put a warning label to not exceed 15A OCPD on the particular feed, for reference by these type of people.

Right now got one slightly different but caused by the handiman type. All new NM in basement, all new NM in receptacle boxes, but no grounding. Some handiman "upgraded" and just used the old BX left inplace and spliced the NM in a Jboxes (I hope) that are buried non accessible in walls and ceilings as I haven't found the actual transition, just the live BX in the middle of the circuit.
Good point about having someone come behind you and seeing #12awg in the panel and upgrading the breaker to 20ampere.

Hit the nail on the head… just leave a note beside the breaker.
 
What if's, in the future, someone might, etc... are not code issues, the inspector is an idiot. If there is amendment it should be as Tulsa posted, it should be formal and in writing.


Roger
 
What if's, in the future, someone might, etc... are not code issues, the inspector is an idiot. If there is amendment it should be as Tulsa posted, it should be formal and in writing.


Roger
True but, here is one to consider. Currently involved in an installation that are putting in a peice of equipment that the mfg is specifying an "dedicated" 15A circuit protection required and will "allow" a #14 wire, but rough wired using a #12. Normally this equipment has been on a 20A circuit, but when this on was delivered found the limitation on the equipment "instructions" (15A is "now" a code requirement).
How do you propose to deal with the multiple "what ifs"?
Best I can think of is warning labeling. Or just never put your name on the installations? That way when some handihack changes it, the next guy who come in after doesn't look at it and say the violation is your bad workmanship. (Reputation)
 
True but, here is one to consider. Currently involved in an installation that are putting in a peice of equipment that the mfg is specifying an "dedicated" 15A circuit protection required and will "allow" a #14 wire, but rough wired using a #12. Normally this equipment has been on a 20A circuit, but when this on was delivered found the limitation on the equipment "instructions" (15A is "now" a code requirement).
How do you propose to deal with the multiple "what ifs"?
Best I can think of is warning labeling. Or just never put your name on the installations? That way when some handihack changes it, the next guy who come in after doesn't look at it and say the violation is your bad workmanship. (Reputation)
See the definition of Qualified Person.

With that said let's look at your piece of equipment and add a fused disconnect. The disconnect is a 30 amp with a 30 amp feeder fused at 15, what would keep at novice from installing 30 amp fuses? If things are correct at the initial time of inspection that's all an inspector or original installer needs to worry about.

Putting labels on is ones choice but I would not bother.

Roger
 
See the definition of Qualified Person.
Almost unheard of around here, very little regulation on who "can" do electrical work. Most work on residential is being done by handihacks or GC with no training. I know of some of these that will get the rough in inspection then make alterations and not getting a new inspection just close up wall and call for final.
 
While I want every one of my jobs to be on point, I don't feel it's right to force me to spend several hundred dollars making corrections that aren't improving safety.
I purposely installed the conductor size the way I felt would handle voltage drop through the plug-in receptacle circuits. The conductor size was reduced for lighting, knowing lighting is a fixed load for the most part. In any case the wiring is safe and will provide excellent continuity. Now, I'm being force to add a reduced circuit size from the panel to supply 3 light fixtures, or tear out and upgrade the existing wiring to match other wiring.
I agree with a note on the cable at the main panel connection.

With that said, I live in a Dillon Rule state with a uniform statewide building code. I suppose individual jurisdictions can adopt an ordinance, but I want the ordinance and or specific code I violated. Whom do I contact from the state in order to request information on how to proceed. I feel abuse of power has gone on for far too long in regards to tradesmen and building inspectors. I don't feel a contractor should "fear" an inspector. If they're right, then so be it, we should fix it per legislation, but an individual enforcing a code that doesn't exist is an abuse of power. I have a problem with this...
 
Look, as professionals we perform our work per code and as we deem necessary. If somebody comes in after us, it's not our problem nor should it be.

-Hal
I agree. If this were really an issue one would think that the NEC works require some sort of labeling for the dumb guy who may come in down the road.
 
What if's, in the future, someone might, etc... are not code issues, the inspector is an idiot. If there is amendment it should be as Tulsa posted, it should be formal and in writing.


Roger
I agree. Inspector is incorrect. That said, if 14awg wire were used to connect fixed lighting on a 20A circuit, I don't really think it poses a practical safety risk. It's against code and I wouldn't do it, but if someone throws a 20A breaker on the circuit in question in the future, the house won't suddenly burn down. That lighting leg, especially if powering a fixed light fixture on the ceiling is likely to see a fraction of an amp, what with LED bulbs in use these days.


SceneryDriver
 
Look, as professionals we perform our work per code and as we deem necessary. If somebody comes in after us, it's not our problem nor should it be.

-Hal
Which in itself makes a few of the rules in the code somewhat of a "how to" for those that don't know any better.

Re-identifying a white wire landed on a breaker when permitted to use the white as an ungrounded conductor? Come on, if you don't realize that is not a grounded conductor you don't have any business messing with it. Marking the other end, maybe is more understandable. Yet I one time had a 120 volt water heater, used typical two pole pull out style disconnect just because they are cheap. Inspector got out his marker and started coloring the white. I said - Ummm this is a 120 volt WH and that is a grounded conductor in this instance. He stopped marking but never really said anything afterword.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top