Attic Wiring

Status
Not open for further replies.
cadpoint

cadpoint

Senior Member
Location
Durham, NC
George Stolz said:
I'm not following - There's 48" between what and what? :confused:
Click to expand...

S: (n) rafter, balk, baulk (one of several parallel sloping beams that support a roof)

S: (n) truss (a framework of beams (rafters, posts, struts) forming a rigid structure that supports a roof or bridge or other structure)


IE where the wire is laying, measuring straight up is 48", is the way I read it.
 
cowboyjwc

cowboyjwc

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Simi Valley, CA
I think it has something to do with, if you can use the attic for storage, but since we only see truss roofs here, we don't run into that to much, and I didn't feel like looking it up.

I had one electrician tell me that they don't staple in the attics because it cuts back on trouble calls. I said it only says that you have to secure the cable, not beat it into submission.:D
 
cowboyjwc

cowboyjwc

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Simi Valley, CA
Dennis Alwon said:
Okay that changes things but all these threads you have started not any of them had me freaking out worrying. I have seen 100 times worse all over the place.
Click to expand...

While I agree with you in pricipal Dennis, each of these things by it's self is not a big deal, but when you are inspecting, these things start addining up. While I'm the one signing the card and so it's really up to me to decide what's a big deal and what isn't, is it really up to the EC? Do you get one "it's not a big deal? Two? At what point does "it's not a big deal" become a big deal?

If it's in the book it's a violation, no matter how trivial. As an inspector it irritates me more when I see a bunch of simple things missed than when I find one big one. Wrong size wire to the A/C could have been a design issue, not stapling NM is just lazy.
 
cowboyjwc

cowboyjwc

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Simi Valley, CA
augie47

augie47

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee
Occupation
State Electrical Inspector (Retired)
It is a section of the Code where, after much frustration, I resigned myself to accept "common practice".
I have taken a "cop out" based on the earlier post, using Mdshunk's reasoning that most of the attics I encounter are designed such as the "floor" is composed of ceiling joists and not built with floor joists, and Cavie's point that a lot of them are now "engineered trusses".
I think any "attic space" that is accessible by stairs (pull down or otherwise) is going to used to some extent for storage regardless of the structural design and 320.23 should apply. That stance finds me on a lonely island apparently as I find unprotected Romex (in 320.23 areas) in most every attic I encounter. TN AHJ's have ruled that only the 6ft area around pull down stairs is subject to 320.23.
 
Jim W in Tampa

Jim W in Tampa

Senior Member
Location
Tampa Florida
The only way you will see things change is by tagging. That is costly for them to go back. They need to be paying for reinspects.The licensing issue perhaps is something you could get put in place but really changes little in some places like FL. We have far too many hackers here too but because we do not require licensing of the workers it does little good. Here we require a master to pull the permit but he need not ever see the job and can hire anyone to do the actual work.
Currious as to what area you inspect in.
 
augie47

augie47

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee
Occupation
State Electrical Inspector (Retired)
Pierre C Belarge said:
Code is code is code.

What gives any inspector the right to decide what to, and what not to enforce?


If there are permanent stairs to this attic, it is quite plain in 320.23
Click to expand...

Pierre, what about the "opinion" that the framing members that are present in most of today's houses are either "ceiling joists" or "trusses" and not "floor joists" as the wording in 320.23 states.
 
ivsenroute

ivsenroute

Senior Member
Location
Florida
The wording for 320.23(A) needs to be revised.

Should we look at intent and common sense or split hairs over the wording because it does not say truss or ceiling joist.
 
Pierre C Belarge

Pierre C Belarge

Senior Member
Location
Westchester County, New York
augie47 said:
Pierre, what about the "opinion" that the framing members that are present in most of today's houses are either "ceiling joists" or "trusses" and not "floor joists" as the wording in 320.23 states.
Click to expand...


The wording that is presently used does not account for the type of construction. Maybe the wording does need to be changed.

Something like this.

Building Code.
Section whatever number is appropriate:
If the framing members of the attic are designed not to carry loads, permanent stairs or pulldown type stairs shall not be installed. If an access to the attic space is necessary, an access 18 inches by 18 inches shall be permitted to be installed.

There, I just fixed that issue, NEXT...:cool::D
 
ivsenroute

ivsenroute

Senior Member
Location
Florida
This is storage space above a commercial kitchen:

IMG_7203.JPG
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top