Dedicated Electrical Space

[Vmadden]

i just ran into a home inspector that is requiring my customer to enclose a plumbing pipe in drywall because as he said it (is above the panel and within 3 feet). this plumbing pipe is not directly above the panel but it is above the panel and about 6 inches in front. the only code i am aware of for dedicated space calls for the foot print of the panel up to structural ceiling. i believe this pipe is outside of the foot print (lenth and width). when i asked him where in the code book talks about this he referred me to article 110.226 paragraph A (I could not find it) and article 110.26 (F) (1) (A).

Any thoughts?

 

[infinity]

Dedicate equipment space is only for the foot print. Working space is 30" wide by 6'6" high.

 

[GoldDigger]

Dedicate equipment space is only for the foot print. Working space is 30" wide by 6'6" high.

And just to clarify the way the diagram is drawn, the requirements would be exactly the same if the suspended ceiling were not there. It is shown to demonstrate that only the structural ceiling counts.
Incidentally, on that basis, enclosing your pipe in anything less than a structural covering would not make the pipe location acceptable if it were directly over the footprint of the panel.
So that is two strikes for your inspector. hmy:

 

[Vmadden]

Maybe the inspector feels by enclosing the pipe it will add protection. However, I don't believe the code requires that if it is not located in the dedicated space. I respectively questioned him on this matter and he is yet to give me an answer. On another note, this is a house built in the 60s and when does a home inspection require you to bring a house up to current code? Unfortunately the last couple of times I respectively question an electrical inspector they both got very angry as if how dare I question them!

 

[jxofaltrds]

i just ran into a home inspector that is requiring my customer to enclose a plumbing pipe in drywall because as he said it (is above the panel and within 3 feet). this plumbing pipe is not directly above the panel but it is above the panel and about 6 inches in front. the only code i am aware of for dedicated space calls for the foot print of the panel up to structural ceiling. i believe this pipe is outside of the foot print (lenth and width). when i asked him where in the code book talks about this he referred me to article 110.226 paragraph A (I could not find it) and article 110.26 (F) (1) (A).

Any thoughts?

Thoughts?

Does your state have anything like this?

(B) The "practice of electrical inspection" includes any ascertainment of compliance with the Ohio building code, or the electrical code of a political subdivision of this state by a person, who, for compensation, inspects the construction and installation of electrical conductors, fittings, devices, and fixtures for light, heat or power services equipment, or the installation, alteration, replacement, maintenance, or repair of any electrical wiring and equipment that is subject to any of the aforementioned codes.

3783.06 Certificate required.

No person shall engage in the practice of electrical inspection in this state unless he is the holder of a certificate of competency as an electrical safety inspector issued under Chapter 3783. of the Revised Code. Any person practicing or offering to practice electrical inspection shall show proof of his certification upon request as provided by rules of the board of building standards.

Effective Date: 03-22-1973

Here is a HI I followed this week. As to date I have never reported anyone. Should I?



Never mentioned the NM in the picture.

I really do not care what anyone does. My problem is most of these guys make buyers feel all warm and fuzzy inside and miss hazards in the home. But wait they do call out those pesky "double taps".

Does it sound like he is citing code? Just curious!

 

[GoldDigger]

Maybe the inspector feels by enclosing the pipe it will add protection. However, I don't believe the code requires that if it is not located in the dedicated space. I respectively questioned him on this matter and he is yet to give me an answer. On another note, this is a house built in the 60s and when does a home inspection require you to bring a house up to current code? Unfortunately the last couple of times I respectively question an electrical inspector they both got very angry as if how dare I question them!

I missed the part in your first post about this being a home inspector.
All that a home inspector can do is present his report to the buyer who can try to use it as leverage during the real estate purchase negotiation. Unless his findings are of a blatant safety issue or indicate that the original construction was not compliant with the codes in effect at the time, that leverage is (or should be) limited. And the seller can bring in his own inspector to politely disagree with the first inspector's report.
Unlike the Code inspector for an AHJ, the home inspector is not legally required to justify anything he says based on code citations. He just has to be competitive in his market and meet any applicable professional licensing standards.

 

[GoldDigger]

Thoughts?

Does your state have anything like this?

(B) The "practice of electrical inspection" includes any ascertainment of compliance with the Ohio building code, or the electrical code of a political subdivision of this state by a person, who, for compensation, inspects the construction and installation of electrical conductors, fittings, devices, and fixtures for light, heat or power services equipment, or the installation, alteration, replacement, maintenance, or repair of any electrical wiring and equipment that is subject to any of the aforementioned codes.

3783.06 Certificate required.

No person shall engage in the practice of electrical inspection in this state unless he is the holder of a certificate of competency as an electrical safety inspector issued under Chapter 3783. of the Revised Code. Any person practicing or offering to practice electrical inspection shall show proof of his certification upon request as provided by rules of the board of building standards.

Effective Date: 03-22-1973

Here is a HI I followed this week. As to date I have never reported anyone. Should I?



Never mentioned the NM in the picture.

I really do not care what anyone does. My problem is most of these guys make buyers feel all warm and fuzzy inside and miss hazards in the home. But wait they do call out those pesky "double taps".

Does it sound like he is citing code? Just curious!

My take would be that the HI has covered his self pretty well by recommending evaluation by a licensed electrician. He is not required by his licensing to do a good job. How close he is to "practicing electrical inspection" is going to be a local call and I have no idea how strict Ohio is on this in practice.

 

[jxofaltrds]

My take would be that the HI has covered his self pretty well by recommending evaluation by a licensed electrician. He is not required by his licensing to do a good job. How close he is to "practicing electrical inspection" is going to be a local call and I have no idea how strict Ohio is on this in practice.

First Ohio does not license HI's. Second Ohio could care less if someone violates this law.

It is like what has been stated before. The code doesn't matter to buyers. If the HI said run a Ufer to another state they would ask for it.

 

[m sleem]

i just ran into a home inspector that is requiring my customer to enclose a plumbing pipe in drywall because as he said it (is above the panel and within 3 feet). this plumbing pipe is not directly above the panel but it is above the panel and about 6 inches in front. the only code i am aware of for dedicated space calls for the foot print of the panel up to structural ceiling. i believe this pipe is outside of the foot print (lenth and width). when i asked him where in the code book talks about this he referred me to article 110.226 paragraph A (I could not find it) and article 110.26 (F) (1) (A).

Any thoughts?

I belive you are in line with code, but if there is a false ceiling which will be somthing we may worry about!!

 

[infinity]

i just ran into a home inspector that is requiring my customer to enclose a plumbing pipe in drywall because as he said it (is above the panel and within 3 feet). this plumbing pipe is not directly above the panel but it is above the panel and about 6 inches in front. the only code i am aware of for dedicated space calls for the foot print of the panel up to structural ceiling. i believe this pipe is outside of the foot print (lenth and width). when i asked him where in the code book talks about this he referred me to article 110.226 paragraph A (I could not find it) and article 110.26 (F) (1) (A).

Any thoughts?

He's obviously mistaken. And since when do HI's cite code?

 

[ActionDave]

...Never mentioned the NM in the picture.

I really do not care what anyone does. My problem is most of these guys make buyers feel all warm and fuzzy inside and miss hazards in the home. ....

Where is the hazard concerning the NM in the picture?

 

[jxofaltrds]

Where is the hazard concerning the NM in the picture?

Just shows that the work was not permitted/inspected or it would have failed.

 

[kwired]

Just shows that the work was not permitted/inspected or it would have failed.

Limited to what is shown in the picture alone, I still don't know why it should fail. There are some assumptions of things not shown that can make it fail.

 

[kwired]

i just ran into a home inspector that is requiring my customer to enclose a plumbing pipe in drywall because as he said it (is above the panel and within 3 feet). this plumbing pipe is not directly above the panel but it is above the panel and about 6 inches in front. the only code i am aware of for dedicated space calls for the foot print of the panel up to structural ceiling. i believe this pipe is outside of the foot print (lenth and width). when i asked him where in the code book talks about this he referred me to article 110.226 paragraph A (I could not find it) and article 110.26 (F) (1) (A).

Any thoughts?

Enclosing the pipe does not change it's relationship to the location of the panel:happysad:

If it is within the footprint of the panel it is in violation of 110.26 whether it is enclosed or not. If it is not in the footprint, and not in required working space then all that is left is possibly whether it can leak onto the panel, which outside of condensing situations directly above the panel is pushing things a bit.

 

[jxofaltrds]

Limited to what is shown in the picture alone, I still don't know why it should fail. There are some assumptions of things not shown that can make it fail.

334.15 Exposed Work. In exposed work, except as provided
in 300.11(A), cable shall be installed as specified in
334.15(A) through (C).

(C) In Unfinished Basements and Crawl Spaces. Where
cable is run at angles with joists in unfinished basements
and crawl spaces, it shall be permissible to secure cables
not smaller than two 6 AWG or three 8 AWG conductors
directly to the lower edges of the joists. Smaller cables
shall be run either through bored holes in joists or on running
boards.

 

[charlie b]

I want to add to what Golddigger said earlier.

i just ran into a home inspector that is requiring my customer to enclose a plumbing pipe in drywall . . . .

Drywall would do nothing for you, and calling for drywall makes the Home Inspector look ignorant and foolish. A leaking pipe would cause the drywall to get quickly soaked through, after which the leaking would hit whatever is underneath the pipe. But in this case the panel is not underneath the pipe, so there never was a problem with the installation.

 

[GoldDigger]

Maybe in an ideal world the drywall enclosure would redirect the leak into the wall so that it could drip directly onto the panel?

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[jxofaltrds]

I want to add to what Golddigger said earlier. Drywall would do nothing for you, and calling for drywall makes the Home Inspector look ignorant and foolish. A leaking pipe would cause the drywall to get quickly soaked through, after which the leaking would hit whatever is underneath the pipe. But in this case the panel is not underneath the pipe, so there never was a problem with the installation.

Agreed.

I follow a lot of HIs. The problem is that they forget may times this work has been 'Approved'. They read something on the internet and believe that it must be true.

 

[jaylectricity]

Yeah, the key words are "Home Inspector" and most of them don't really know code and safety from an electrical standpoint. Their knowledge is in how sellable your house is.

Yes...I just said sellable, which isn't a word, but I assume you know what I mean.

 

[GoldDigger]

Yes...I just said sellable, which isn't a word, but I assume you know what I mean.

My spell checker suggests smellable, but I choose to go with salable.
Or just avoid the problem completely and use marketable.