30 amp water heater (re-identifying white wire) just venting

Status
Not open for further replies.
templdl said:
I'm have been intrigued by OP and the string of posts. If I were the OP I would apologize to the inspector as it being an oversight, that you are completely aware of the color white represents and it is a rudimentary practice to re-identify it.
Click to expand...
That's not going to happen
I'm sure it would be agreed that the color white is commonly recognized as a grounded conductor and as it has been applied per the OP it certainly isn't grounded
Click to expand...
True, but for 15 and 20 amp circuits. This is a 30 amp circuit and # 10 wire.
and poses to be a serious code violation and safety hazard. Getting zapped by a conductor that one understands to be grounded may not be a good thing.
Click to expand...
A serious code violation ?? Are you for real ? First of all, anyone removing a panel cover or a disconnect cover while it is energized better know what they are doing. If you're working live on the water heater end and don't realize it's a 240v unit you're in a lot more trouble than you think. And, if you're working in a breaker panel and see a # 10 white wire terminated on a 2-P, 30 amp breaker do you take it off the breaker and move it over to the ground bar just because it's a white wire ?

Look, I've already admitted I was wrong by not re-identifying the white wire but you have to think about the logic in this situation. Who am I marking the white wire for ? The homeowner ? If it's another EC isn't he going to realize that the # 10 white wire on the 2-p, 30 amp breaker is an ungrounded conductor ?
 
goldstar said:
Why slap a red sticker on the panel and infer to the homeowner that I committed a serious code violation ? Just being a DB - IMHO.
Click to expand...

Here in Mass they relaxed the rules a bit regarding re-marking and sometimes I get lazy and do not re-mark ones I should.

That said if I got shot down for it I would own it, I would not moan about the inspector being a 'DB' for failing it. :roll:

I have no patience at all for people who try to blame the consequences of their own actions on others doing what they are supposed to do. Get over it, remember it and stop calling the inspector names for doing his job.
 
goldstar said:
That's not going to happen True, but for 15 and 20 amp circuits. This is a 30 amp circuit and # 10 wire.A serious code violation ?? Are you for real ? First of all, anyone removing a panel cover or a disconnect cover while it is energized better know what they are doing. If you're working live on the water heater end and don't realize it's a 240v unit you're in a lot more trouble than you think. And, if you're working in a breaker panel and see a # 10 white wire terminated on a 2-P, 30 amp breaker do you take it off the breaker and move it over to the ground bar just because it's a white wire ?

Look, I've already admitted I was wrong by not re-identifying the white wire but you have to think about the logic in this situation. Who am I marking the white wire for ? The homeowner ? If it's another EC isn't he going to realize that the # 10 white wire on the 2-p, 30 amp breaker is an ungrounded conductor ?
Click to expand...

Ok, I get it, when logic applies, code does not:slaphead:
 
iwire said:
Here in Mass they relaxed the rules a bit regarding re-marking and sometimes I get lazy and do not re-mark ones I should.

That said if I got shot down for it I would own it, I would not moan about the inspector being a 'DB' for failing it. :roll:

I have no patience at all for people who try to blame the consequences of their own actions on others doing what they are supposed to do. Get over it, remember it and stop calling the inspector names for doing his job.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised that you (of all people) are admitting that you intentionally violate a Code section by not re-identifying a wire, especially here in the Forum. But that being said, you're right, I did learn a lesson and I shouldn't be calling the inspector names for tagging me on this. I'm just irritated at the way it was done.

I don't know what it's like up in MA but down here in NJ many of the townships are broke (or close to it) and don't have full time inspectors. I met one EI that inspected for 9 different towns. I can think of numerous instances where I have been cited for violations by temps or part time inspectors who were hired to fill a void and weren't up to date on the NEC. I've been cited for mounting breaker panels upside down, having two wires on breakers that are designed for two wires, just to name a few instances. I take the time (5 minutes) out of my day to contact the EI and plead my case or get an explaination. All my contact info (including cell phone #) was on the permit app. Inspectors know by your license # how long you've been in business and whether or not you're a novice. IMHO, a simple 5 minute phone call would have been more dignified than a red sticker.
 
mjf said:
Ok, I get it, when logic applies, code does not:slaphead:
Click to expand...
It was never my intention to get a majority of Forum subscribers to agree with me. As I stated from the outset, I was just venting. My gripe wasn't specifically about the Code section I violated but the logic behind it and the way I was cited for the violation. I've been in the trade for over 40 years and a participant of this Forum almost since the day it started. My only wish is that I can become as knowledgeable on every section of the NEC as the vast majority of experts here who never make mistakes.;)
 
As an Inspector, I appreciate your rant and agree that a phone call could have resolved the issue in short order. I have addressed the same situation numerous times on the job site and luckily most the time the electrician is still there. I tell him there is a violation and then he has to find it. It is kind of like the old game "you are getting warmer". I have actually taken a sharpie and marked wires before, although I should not because of liability, and called the electricain and explained what I had done. Because my area of inspection is small enough, I know most the guys and realize it was a simple over sight and do not make a big deal about it. Most important, I call them, give them the code section, explain my corrective action and they make sure they don't forget again. Seems to work for me.
 
goldstar said:
It was never my intention to get a majority of Forum subscribers to agree with me. As I stated from the outset, I was just venting. My gripe wasn't specifically about the Code section I violated but the logic behind it and the way I was cited for the violation. I've been in the trade for over 40 years and a participant of this Forum almost since the day it started. My only wish is that I can become as knowledgeable on every section of the NEC as the vast majority of experts here who never make mistakes.;)
Click to expand...
I understand where you are coming from. I understand the violation you experienced, we used to have an inspector that would find that one every time, and we got used to it and started doing it right - that was like 20-25 years ago. That said I still don't always mark the white wire especially if I know it isn't going to be inspected - both on 240 volt circuits like you had and for switch loops (but the need for a neutral at most switches now changes how often that may happen). I think mostly because I feel the same as you about how dumb the rule is. Seems to me the rule is there more for the non professionals than for the professionals. Like you said, how many people that know what they are doing see a white wire landed on a breaker and question whether or not it is a grounded conductor? How many people that know what they are doing have a lighting outlet box with all black wires tied together with one white wire give it any second thoughts as to whether or not this wire is likely the start of a switch loop?

How many times have you seen UF cable that when someone was stripping the sheath got into conductor insulation and had to fix it up with tape? When I was young apprentice and did not have the knack of stripping UF cable yet I did this a lot. I guess it was wrong not to use white tape to repair the white conductor if it was damaged
 
goldstar said:
My only wish is that I can become as knowledgeable on every section of the NEC as the vast majority of experts here who never make mistakes.;)
Click to expand...

I can't speak for others but I make mistakes, more than I care to talk about. But the difference is I do not blame the inconvenience and cost of my mistake on the one that caught it.

Same as I have never gotten mad at a cop for handing me a speeding ticket. Each time I was given a ticket I was in fact speeding.
 
goldstar said:
I'm surprised that you (of all people) are admitting that you intentionally violate a Code section by not re-identifying a wire, especially here in the Forum.
Click to expand...

Just trying to be honest with you and I also agree with you that any qualified person should know a white on a breaker in a home is hot.


IMHO, a simple 5 minute phone call would have been more dignified than a red sticker.
Click to expand...

How would the inspector know that you would in fact take care of it?

I am all but certain inspectors are lied to and misled often.

Anyway I have all but guaranteed a fail on my next inspection with all this talk so I better shut up. :eek:hmy:
 
iwire said:
I can't speak for others but I make mistakes, more than I care to talk about. But the difference is I do not blame the inconvenience and cost of my mistake on the one that caught it.

Same as I have never gotten mad at a cop for handing me a speeding ticket. Each time I was given a ticket I was in fact speeding.
Click to expand...
FWIW I can tell a couple speeding ticket stories where the person was not speeding, I am not in the story either. It is a big deal for someone that drives for a living, and the person these stories come from did just that at the time. That said OP was probably wrong in his incident.
 
iwire said:
That is fabulous. :p

And at the same time meaningless considering I was comparing a legitimate speeding ticket to legitimate NEC violation.
Click to expand...

Hey, legitimate may be different to one person than to another. Besides, it is fun to ruffle your feathers once in awhile.

There are inspectors with a mission (right or wrong) and there are cops with a mission (right or wrong). Not every citation from either is always legitimate either.

But OP also has not presented this judge (the open forum) enough evidence to overturn the citation either.
 
kwired said:
That said I still don't always mark the white wire especially if I know it isn't going to be inspected - both on 240 volt circuits like you had and for switch loops (but the need for a neutral at most switches now changes how often that may happen). I think mostly because I feel the same as you about how dumb the rule is.
Click to expand...

I to think the rule is dumb but I try to do every job as if it were going to be inspected. Once you start cutting corners just where do you stop? Each of us would have a different opinion.

I figure if a job wouldn't pass an inspection then it's not code compliant it's just my idea of good enough and I may not be right ( at least there are plenty of people that would disagree with my idea of good enough).
 
I don't know why everyone thinks inspectors like to write correction notices. It's a whole lot easier to sign the job card than to write a notice and have to come back and reinspect something.

Some guys like to be there for their inspections and some guys don't. Go on a rough and find a missing KO seal, guy who's there fixes it and gets job card signed, guy who's not, gets a notice and comes back and fixes it. Not really my problem if he's an hour away.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all your replies. I made the correction this morning, typed a letter to the inspector and included photos. One of the sad things about this situation is that I usually re-mark white wires when I do a service upgrade. But, I do that for my own edification so I know that the circuit is 240V. I can't remember if I do it for wires larger than # 12 because I already know they are 240V. All these years I never realized it was a Code requirement. So, lesson learned. :cool:

BTW, the analogy to a speeding ticket is an appropriate one. Everyone likes to believe they are law abiding citizens just like all EC's like to believe they continuously do Code compliant work. When you are cited for a speeding violation you get lectured by the police officer, slapped with a fine, points on your license and, as if that isn't bad enough, your insurance company now considers you a speeder (even if you were only going 5-10 mph over the limit) and punishes you with increased premiums that don't go away for 3 years. In addition, you now feel like a criminal. If you decide to fight the summons the PO comes into court with radar tuning fork certificates and an entire barrage of support for his case against you. If it boils down to your word against his - the court has to take his side.

In the case of an EI and an EC (not necessarily my scenario) we all like to believe that we do exceptional, Code compliant work and do not like it when we are cited for violations. I'm sure we all take numerous CEU classes and participate in discussion groups such as this one to increase our knowledge. Looking back at my scenario, I can now appreciate the EI's point of view as he does not know whether the license holder or one of his employees was on the job doing the work. In my case it was me on the job and I just got my back up at the way it was handled. Enough said. My tail is between my legs (I won't include a photo of that). :p
 
goldstar said:
I I'm just venting because I hate failing a job for chicken $&!* stuff, especially one where I have to travel an hour to get to.
Click to expand...

Reidentification of an white wire in a cable assembly for a 240 v circuit was a code requirement when I started in the trade back in 78. There is a good reason for the reidentification requirment.
 
tom baker said:
Reidentification of an white wire in a cable assembly for a 240 v circuit was a code requirement when I started in the trade back in 78. There is a good reason for the reidentification requirment.
Click to expand...

We are still waiting to hear this good reason:D

I hope it doesn't have any references to untrained people working on it:(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top