Should I push the inspector.

[AC\DC]

He called me on two jobs.
One was UF on side of home feeding disconnect to mini split.
Ran wire under lip of old lap siding. He says subject to physical damage i then say well if it is then I guess I can’t run liquid right or schedule 40 pvc.
He says that’s alright he just does not want UF.
I say they all say not installed if subject to physical damage so how can you pick and chose.


Same thing but this time exposed nmb running tight along beam running vertical.
Says it subject I’ll give him that and protect it.
The one that gets me on this is.
It’s an old garage. With existing circuits.
I ran new convenience outlets on each side of garage that are supplement to existing circuits on each bay of garage.
They are 15 amp circuits.
He telling me they have to be 20
I tell him he has existing 20 on each bay.
He says you can’t have 15amps in a garage I tell him I can.
He says if it was your house would you want that.
I say it’s about price and it’s just a convenience receptical for trickle charger if he needs more power you the existing.
He then says I can take to electrical board.
I tell him I don’t want conflict.
I try and throw a couple ideas out. He says if it’s pushed farther he bet he can find that the existing circuits were never permitted and then I’ll have to deal with that.

He tells me in his 10 years he never seen a 15 amp. And I tell him so what it’s code and that’s that.
I then tell him you can run a single 20 amp and feed all receptacle in Garage and that install Is worse the. 2 additional 15 dedicated circuits.
Am I wrong.
It’s going to cost me about 500 bucks to fix it.
Should I fight if I am right.

 

[AC\DC]

The reason I ran the uf was because in his jurisdiction I have seen it ran same way I did and I guess they did it without a permit.
What got me is he trying to tell me what he would do.
I told him I am competing on jobs and as long as it’s code you should not give me your opinion on if it’s right or not
And he chuckled that even if it’s compliant no one would ever run a 15 amp in a garage.
That’s set me off

The owner just wanted a plug for his chargers.

 

[augie47]

I would definitely take it to the next step.
Often "physical damage" is arbitrary but he's totally wrong about the receptacle and needs to recognize you know the Code.

 

[LarryFine]

Should I fight if I am right.

Absolutely, yes. Kowtowing to inspectors sets a bad precedent. Be polite and respectful, but firm.

I have formally challenged fails four times over the years, when I was sure, and "won" every time.

 

[AC\DC]

He called after my reference and said as it’s worded I am right.
He going to talk to his supervisor about it though he said it may be good to go through apeal to make sure….
I guess I am fine with that outcome.

As long as the existing circuits are 20 amp and gfci he will not allow it.
I could get into that the existing I did not touch so I don’t need to bring up to code but I guess I won a little so I can lose a little l.

The allowing one subject to physical damage vs another , still has me baffled.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

He called after my reference and said as it’s worded I am right.
He going to talk to his supervisor about it though he said it may be good to go through apeal to make sure….
I guess I am fine with that outcome.

As long as the existing circuits are 20 amp and gfci he will not allow it.
I could get into that the existing I did not touch so I don’t need to bring up to code but I guess I won a little so I can lose a little l.

The allowing one subject to physical damage vs another , still has me baffled.

That should be the case...the amount of force required to damage the various wiring methods that say you cannot install where subject to physical damage is different. It takes more force to damage UF than NM and more to damage LFMC than UF. It is a subjective rule and a judgement call on the part of the inspector. I don't think it is possible to write a "subject to physical damage" rule that would not be a subjective rule.
Maybe one I use in jest sometimes "if you can see it or touch it, it is subject to physical damage"

 

[AC\DC]

Well it blows when some one gets away with it but you don’t. If you inspector does not like you then they can make your life hell with this one

 

[AC\DC]

Flimsy thwn wire in lfnc can get screwed up just as bad and as easy as UF
I figured I would get called on the uf since people don’t like seeing that stuff o well

 

[AC\DC]

No ser on side of house out in this area if uf can’t be used lol

 

[letgomywago]

In WA in shops and detached garages you have to use mc or sleeve nm even uf in conduit to 10ft so i do usually protect uf outside but under a lip of siding I think is grey at most since the damage that'd break it would be the same as pvc coated mc and that is often approved for minisplits here. Ask him if it was pvc coated mc if it would fly ask why and hand him a pair of sharp cutters and ask if there's any difference.

 

[electrofelon]

I don't see how on Earth NM stapled along a beam is subject to physical damage. The NEC allows NM to be run exposed

 

[acin]

He called me on two jobs.
One was UF on side of home feeding disconnect to mini split.
Ran wire under lip of old lap siding. He says subject to physical damage i then say well if it is then I guess I can’t run liquid right or schedule 40 pvc.
He says that’s alright he just does not want UF.
I say they all say not installed if subject to physical damage so how can you pick and chose.


Same thing but this time exposed nmb running tight along beam running vertical.
Says it subject I’ll give him that and protect it.
The one that gets me on this is.
It’s an old garage. With existing circuits.
I ran new convenience outlets on each side of garage that are supplement to existing circuits on each bay of garage.
They are 15 amp circuits.
He telling me they have to be 20
I tell him he has existing 20 on each bay.
He says you can’t have 15amps in a garage I tell him I can.
He says if it was your house would you want that.
I say it’s about price and it’s just a convenience receptical for trickle charger if he needs more power you the existing.
He then says I can take to electrical board.
I tell him I don’t want conflict.
I try and throw a couple ideas out. He says if it’s pushed farther he bet he can find that the existing circuits were never permitted and then I’ll have to deal with that.

He tells me in his 10 years he never seen a 15 amp. And I tell him so what it’s code and that’s that.
I then tell him you can run a single 20 amp and feed all receptacle in Garage and that install Is worse the. 2 additional 15 dedicated circuits.
Am I wrong.
It’s going to cost me about 500 bucks to fix it.
Should I fight if I am right.

I think PVC needs to be sced. 80 to meet protection req.

 

[AC\DC]

Its all interpretation, they need to somehow address these vague statements, have an enforcing body make up their own definition and we don’t know how they will go cost us money and is not a proper rule if it’s not black and white

 

[R&T Jimmy]

Sounds like 10 pound badge syndrome to me, and I am an inspector! Just plain bull**** making up rules to have something to write up.

 

[AC\DC]

here is the subject to damage uf. Seems safe to me

 

[electrofelon]

Yeah I don't see what the issue is. IMO people go nuts with this subject to physical damage stuff.

 

[hillbilly1]

View attachment 2565001 View attachment 2565002 here is the subject to damage uf. Seems safe to me

I can see the inspectors point where it runs up the wall into the disconnect. If you had sleeved in some sealtite where it came up the wall, the inspector may have let the rest slide.

 

[AC\DC]

No sealtight in truck so I attempted the uf method lol

 

[electrofelon]

I can see the inspectors point where it runs up the wall into the disconnect.

Why? What is going to happen to it? Is something like this scene from John wick 3 going to happen there?? Is there gang activity there?

 

[acin]

We sometimes cover the wire with wood trim