2 buildings fed from 1 service/meter

[david]

So the consensus here is the inspector who judged this installation to be non compliant with the NEC as written, did not exercise common sense. If he had he would have agreed that this commonly done, and as our experience ( at least our current experience ) allows us to judge that no hazard would have developed had he approved the installation.

Well I for one am tired of trying to judge if the code as written matters. Its hard enough to keep up with all the changes keep every thing straight to the best of ones ability permits linger for five years and installations have to be approved not to what year the construction started but rather what year the design was stamped or a design contract signed. In any given day your looking at projects that span the 2003, 2005, 2008 additions of the NEC.

 

[kwired]

The NEC was never met to be a building code.

However the building codes do define dwellings ,single family dwellings, and accessory structures. I would think the individuals had believed these structures where defined when they wrote this section of the code.

The NEC does have a definition of a dwelling. It may or may not match other codes definitions of a dwelling, but NEC definitions are for determining how a word applies when used within text of the NEC. NEC does define what it deems to be a single family dwelling also.

So the consensus here is the inspector who judged this installation to be non compliant with the NEC as written, did not exercise common sense. If he had he would have agreed that this commonly done, and as our experience ( at least our current experience ) allows us to judge that no hazard would have developed had he approved the installation.

Well I for one am tired of trying to judge if the code as written matters. Its hard enough to keep up with all the changes keep every thing straight to the best of ones ability permits linger for five years and installations have to be approved not to what year the construction started but rather what year the design was stamped or a design contract signed. In any given day your looking at projects that span the 2003, 2005, 2008 additions of the NEC.

Here the applicable NEC is determined by which edition is in effect the date the permit was issued. Seems like the logical way to do it to me. Just because something was designed 5 years ago doesn't seem to be good enough reason to apply whatever code was in effect 5 years ago if construction is starting today. JMO.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I am not saying ignore the code I am saying that I don't agree totally with your interpretation. You do what you feel is best and you have a valid argument. To me it makes me say this article may need some work. I agree you as an inspector need something tangible.

 

[ggunn]

I am also in the "what difference would it make club". But you all know how well that sometimes goes when it is still a conflict with what the code says.

There's the rub. Figuring out what the code says about a specific case is often a nontrivial exercise.

If nothing else, the case in point is an illustration of why it is a good idea where possible to get plans preapproved by the AHJ before construction begins.

 

[david]

So, if the OP were to spray paint "ACCESSORY STRUCTURE" in big letters on the side of the second building, everything would be hunky, right?

David,

The NEC does not differntiate between principal uses and an accessory uses, that is a zoning issue. I think for the purpose of the NEC the accessory structure is the structure located remote from the drop. Don't let your code enforcement experience cloud your judgement. The NEC does not deal with zoning isuues.

The NEC does have a definition of a dwelling. It may or may not match other codes definitions of a dwelling, but NEC definitions are for determining how a word applies when used within text of the NEC. NEC does define what it deems to be a single family dwelling also.

I agree the NEC does define Dwellings but there seems to be a thought that the second dwelling could be defined as accessory use to the first, since the NEC does not define what an accessory building is. I think we (and CMP) should turn to the building code that as jurisdiction before defining the second structure (dwelling)