Code question

J

Jim bradford

New User
Location
15437 white linen dr Lakewood ranch 34211
Occupation
Ac and electric contractor
I’m also an air-conditioning contractor as well as an electrical contractor. We installed a package unit with an MOP of 70 and MCA of 54.6 . The home had number six wire run from the panel to the unit so we put a 60 amp breaker in the panel. The inspector failed me said it has to have a 70. I thought as long as my breaker was between MOP and MCA and the wire was sized correctly for the MCA I was good.
 
Ask the inspector what MOP stands for and ask what code section says you can't install less than the maximum.

You are correct. Wire is sized to MCA and protection at or less than MOCP

440.4(B), First sentence.
 
M in MCA = MINIMUM,
M in MOP = MAXIMUM.
Inspector is incorrect / ignorant of the above facts and/or their meanings.

That said, I like to go with Maximums, because if it nuisance trips on startup, you will have to eat the return call to replace that breaker.
 
As an electrical inspector, I would pass your job. You met the MCA with I'm assuming is #6 romex @ 55 amps in Table 310.16 (60 deg). If the unit nameplate did not specify a minimum OCP greater than 60 amp, I see no reason to fail the job.
 
bmcgovern5 said:
As an electrical inspector, I would pass your job. You met the MCA with I'm assuming is #6 romex @ 55 amps in Table 310.16 (60 deg). If the unit nameplate did not specify a minimum OCP greater than 60 amp, I see no reason to fail the job.
Click to expand...
Correct, there is no reason to fail the installation because it is code compliant.
 
An inspector being wrong doesn't mean they are wrong. The AHJ has final authority. There's code, and then there's the AHJ.
Make you argument, and if that fails you can make appeal to the AHJ directly.
When the inspector returns, will it be same person? Many times it won't be. Have you proof ready to go.
 
FionaZuppa said:
An inspector being wrong doesn't mean they are wrong. The AHJ has final authority. There's code, and then there's the AHJ.
Make you argument, and if that fails you can make appeal to the AHJ directly.
When the inspector returns, will it be same person? Many times it won't be. Have you proof ready to go.
Click to expand...
It many locales there is an adopted code that is law. No one can make up their own rules.
 
infinity said:
It many locales there is an adopted code that is law. No one can make up their own rules.
Click to expand...
True, but such adopted law does not have to be NEC ink word for word, or even NEC at all. ;)
So maybe go check what the AHJ has on the books, then argue from there.

Being compliant with NEC doesn't always mean being compliant with the AHJ, as long as the AHJ is not violating the NEC. AHJ asking for more than what NEC prescribes is lawful, but you can surely challenge it if the ask poses a burden. If NEC says use cable staple every 18" but AHJ says they want every 12", unless you can prove using a few more staples is a cost burden, the AHJ will prevail.
 
Local inspectors cannot tell me that I have to have an unspliced grounding electrode conductor to my 2 rods, just for example. He may want it but it is not a code requirement and thus he is incorrect, unless there is a local amendment.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
If by AHJ, you mean the unit of government that has the legal authority to adopt codes, you are correct. If by AHJ, you mean anything else, you are incorrect.
Click to expand...
The NEC view of it.

100(I)
Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). An organization, office, or individual responsible for enforcing the requirements of a code or standard, or for approving equipment, materials, an installation, or a procedure.


FPN: The phrase “authority having jurisdiction,” or its acronym AHJ, is used in NFPA documents in a broad manner, since jurisdictions and approval agencies vary, as do their responsibilities. Where public safety is primary, the authority having jurisdiction may be a federal, state, local, or other regional department or individual such as a fire chief; fire marshal; chief of a fire prevention bureau, labor department, or health department; building official; electrical inspector; or others having statutory authority. For insurance purposes, an insurance inspection department, rating bureau, or other insurance company representative may be the authority having jurisdiction. In many circumstances, the property owner or his or her designated agent assumes the role of the authority having jurisdiction; at government installations, the commanding officer or departmental official may be the authority having jurisdiction.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Local inspectors cannot tell me that I have to have an unspliced grounding electrode conductor to my 2 rods, just for example. He may want it but it is not a code requirement and thus he is incorrect, unless there is a local amendment.
Click to expand...
Well, if the AHJ says that's how things need to be done (for their stated reasons), then you follow what the AHJ says. Or, you can fight the AHJ.

AHJ's have authority to go beyond what the NEC says. They usually document it, but not always.

When the AHJ (inspector, etc) cites a specific NEC (or additional code) item, that's when you can challenge the bad calls more easily.

Per NEC the 60 was right, per AHJ we need an answer from the AHJ. It's that simple.

Would using the 70 violate any of the NEC code items for OCPD and wire sizing? Just curious to see if the inspector failed in some other way with the 70 suggestion.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
If by AHJ, you mean the unit of government that has the legal authority to adopt codes, you are correct. If by AHJ, you mean anything else, you are incorrect.
Click to expand...

FionaZuppa said:
The NEC view of it.

100(I)
Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). An organization, office, or individual responsible for enforcing the requirements of a code or standard, or for approving equipment, materials, an installation, or a procedure.
Click to expand...
This. I have been criticized in here for using the term "AHJ" per the NEC definition, meaning a POCO, a city licensing and permitting department, building code enforcement, or anyone else who can direct me in what I can do or not do on a project.
 
ggunn said:
This. I have been criticized in here for using the term "AHJ" per the NEC definition, meaning a POCO, a city licensing and permitting department, building code enforcement, or anyone else who can direct me in what I can do or not do on a project.
Click to expand...
If the State or local govt gives such authority to one or more organizations, agencies, departments, or persons, then that set becomes the AHJ. Single or plural, makes no diff.

Hopefully it's limited and non-contradictory. How's it in Cali? ;)
 
FionaZuppa said:
Being compliant with NEC doesn't always mean being compliant with the AHJ, as long as the AHJ is not violating the NEC. AHJ asking for more than what NEC prescribes is lawful, but you can surely challenge it if the ask poses a burden. If NEC says use cable staple every 18" but AHJ says they want every 12", unless you can prove using a few more staples is a cost burden, the AHJ will prevail.
Click to expand...

Dennis Alwon said:
Local inspectors cannot tell me that I have to have an unspliced grounding electrode conductor to my 2 rods, just for example. He may want it but it is not a code requirement and thus he is incorrect, unless there is a local amendment.
Click to expand...


It has to be written someplace. We go by the NEC which has been adopted into law by the AHJ. If the AHJ wants to modify something they can't do that without a formal local amendment process and publishing a public amendment that then becomes part of the NEC that they use. They can't say, for instance, I want copper instead of aluminum when inspecting a job when the NEC clearly says aluminum is acceptable. Things like this can cost the EC and owner considerable money that they were not prepared for, and I would say that they would be within their rights to sue.

-Hal
 
FionaZuppa said:
The NEC view of it.

100(I)
Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). An organization, office, or individual responsible for enforcing the requirements of a code or standard, or for approving equipment, materials, an installation, or a procedure.
Click to expand...
In this issue the code is 100% misleading, and unconstitutional....as far as making rules that amend or change the NEC, the AHJ is the enforcer of the legally adopted codes.

When the NEC is adopted it is adopted as written by the NFPA or it is adopted with amendments. Only the code as legally adopted can be enforced, The definition is only talking about the enforcement of the legally adopted rules. Nothing in that definition gives the enforcer the authority to write new rules. However there is some room for interpretation in 90.4 that lets the AHJ interpret the rules found in the legally adopted code. It does not permit the AHJ to write new rules

Annex H does a much better job with this, especially section 80.13. This is in an Annex and not part of the code, because in most cases the administrative rules found in Annex H are covered by state law or local ordinances.
 
There are a handful, or so, of entities that enforce portions of the NEC but are not State or Local governments. The ones I can think of are projects under the DoD, mining subject to MSHA, mobile homes/housing, and commercial watercraft. There are also AHJ such as 'owner's agents', but these are only legal under contract law.

I know of no legal standing for an insurance company to be an AHJ, except possibly under contract law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top