Code requirement for abandoned service feeders

[RICK NAPIER]

Thanks for proving once again why most electricians I know (myself included) avoid permits and inspections wherever possible. :thumbsup:

In NJ that could result in a $500 to $2000 fine from the building dept. and fines as high as $10,000 for your first offense and $20,000 on subsequent offenses from the Electrical Board of Examineers. Also an Insurance Company could refuse to cover the installation since it was not legally done.

 

[peter d]

In NJ that could result in a $500 to $2000 fine from the building dept. and fines as high as $10,000 for your first offense and $20,000 on subsequent offenses from the Electrical Board of Examineers. Also an Insurance Company could refuse to cover the installation since it was not legally done.

And? We have fines here too, it doesn't really deter anyone from avoiding permits if they can.

I know someone that did a $1.2 million dollar whole house renovation without a single permit.

 

[iwire]

Then abide by 300.15 in which a listed type of device, enclosure, fitting, or box is required
300.15 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, or Fittings — Where Required
A box shall be installed at each outlet and switch point for concealed knob-and-tube wiring. Fittings and connectors shall be used only with the specific wiring methods for which they are designed and listed. Where the wiring method is conduit, tubing, Type AC cable, Type MC cable, Type MI cable, nonmetallic-sheathed cable, or other cables, a box or conduit body shall be installed at each conductor splice point, outlet point, switch point, junction point, termination point, or pull point, unless otherwise permitted in 300.15(A) through (L).
(A)Wiring Methods with Interior Access. A box or conduit body shall not be required for each splice, junction, switch, pull, termination, or outlet points in wiring methods with removable covers, such as wireways, multioutlet assemblies, auxiliary gutters, and surface raceways. The covers shall be accessible after installation.
(E) Integral Enclosure. A wiring device with integral enclosure identified f or the use, having brackets that securely fasten the device to walls or ceilings of conventional on-site frame construction, for use with nonmetallic-sheathed cable, shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body.
(F) Fitting. A fitting identified for the use shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body where conductors are not spliced or terminated within the fitting. The fitting shall be accessible after installation.
(H) Insulated Devices. As permitted in 334.40(B), a box or conduit body shall not be required for insulated devices supplied by nonmetallic-sheathed cable.

That does not apply to dead cables.

 

[jumper]

[Repeating the same thing over and over again hoping for a change in results has a definition.

Such as you keep trying to convince us that enforcing non existent codes is legal/moral and yet you have not gotten any support for this aberrant behavior.:roll:

Ya might wanna examine this situation and discuss such with actions with your boss. You could easily be setting yourself up as a liability.

 

[tommydh]

If I recall the NEC is the minimum required standards if the AHJ sees fit to require something above and beyond in reason and not contradicting the NEC then they may.

 

[iwire]

If I recall the NEC is the minimum required standards if the AHJ sees fit to require something above and beyond in reason and not contradicting the NEC then they may.

No, the AHJ cannot just require more than the code anymore than a cop can enforce more than the law.

An AHJ can make legally adopted amendments but that is not the same thing.

 

[mwm1752]

That does not apply to dead cables.

Can you assure the cable will always be dead? Most reasons that electricians abandon cables is they do not know where both ends terminate and if one end is in a j box there is a possibility of the cable being energized. Even if a branch circuit cable is cut on both ends in a concealed space then there is no danger of energizing but such a simple action of capping is still so outrageous to you.

 

[mwm1752]

Such as you keep trying to convince us that enforcing non existent codes is legal/moral and yet you have not gotten any support for this aberrant behavior.:roll:

Ya might wanna examine this situation and discuss such with actions with your boss. You could easily be setting yourself up as a liability.

This has been in place long before I had gotten here

 

[nizak]

Tieing the conductors together and relying on the OCPD to open upon energizing seems risky.

How many times has someone attempted to kill a circuit with a piece of wire only to have it stick in the device and start glowing.

Better hope that it's not an FPE or Zinsco circuit breaker on the other end.

Just a thought.

 

[mjf]

Can you assure the cable will always be dead? Most reasons that electricians abandon cables is they do not know where both ends terminate and if one end is in a j box there is a possibility of the cable being energized. Even if a branch circuit cable is cut on both ends in a concealed space then there is no danger of energizing but such a simple action of capping is still so outrageous to you.

I have NEVER abandoned a cable for the reason you stated above.....now you're grasping at straws.