RLyons
Senior Member
- Location
- Changed for anonymity
How was this ever legal? No GFI no overflow drain! 
code violation pictures
- Thread starter 69gp
- Start date
- Status
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
That type of box is not permitted to be solely supported by raceways
Isn't there supposed to be an additional cover for that? I could be wrong but if there was I wouldn't have too much issue with it. I have seen similar equipment for dishwashers and booster pumps many times with water able to run everywhere above just like in this photo, but seems they all had an additional cover over the breakers or other control devices so overspray, splashes, etc, were not a direct threat.How was this ever legal? No GFI no overflow drain!
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
How was this ever legal? No GFI no overflow drain!
The last time I saw one of those counters was in a manufacture diner those counters were all custom and had the warmers built in, the panel was a local sub panel made by GE and no it didn't have another door over the breakers just like the Square D 4/8 space panels don't, I think they were from a time GFCI's were not required in comercial kitchens, actully GFCI's were not required in dwelling kitchens till 1987 which was only ones within 6' of the sink that also served the counter top, which was expanded to include all counter top receptacles in 1996 so as old as that counter top is, I don't think GFCI's were required back then.
Will B
Member
- Location
- Fremont, CA
250.8 violation. It appears to be a standard 3/8" malleable beam clamp. I have been called by an inspector for stacking the ground lugs, but can't find anything in the code book about it. Anyone?
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
250.8 violation is somewhat questionable. The beam clamp is bonded but is the steel permitted to be connected via the beam clamp is the question? Why is it any different than if that beam were simply another piece of steel that was part of the structure? How is that piece of steel it is clamped to attached to other steel members?
I think the stacking of lugs comes down to listing instructions of the lugs, and nothing specific in NEC.
Will B
Member
- Location
- Fremont, CA
The 250.8 violation is due to the beam clamp not being listed for grounding. As far as the stacking of lugs is concerned, the paint has not been removed, so there is a violation of 250.12. I don't stack grounding lugs, so I'm not savy of the listing instructions for these lugs.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
I agree with you to some extent on the beam clamp. The issue is the steel framing member is what we are trying to bond to. Chances are that steel member is also attached to other steel members that we also want to be bonded to, and at some point at least one of them has earth contact or is concrete encased in earth contact. Those other components may be welded or bolted together and really are not much different than the beam clamp. If the beam clamp were replaced with a short length of angle iron and bolted on to the same position, nobody would object to landing the conductor on this piece of angle iron even though it is effectively about the same as the beam clamp at current carrying capabilities.
I'm not up to par on the listing of the lugs and stacking them, but IIRC that is what the issue ended up being when this topic has come up here before. May not apply to all lugs either.
Will B
Member
- Location
- Fremont, CA
Thank you for your input, kwired.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
Your welcome. I'm not saying an inspector will agree with me, or I will be able to convince the inspector I am right, but I see some logic there.
Will B
Member
- Location
- Fremont, CA
I understand and see your point of view. Thanks again.
mgookin
Senior Member
- Location
- Fort Myers, FL
- Occupation
- Retired inspector, plans examiner & building official
Most memorable inspection was a fuse box in a shower in an apartment building. The tenant said she had to turn off the water heater in order to take a shower without being electrocuted.
Second most memorable was a duplex receptacle beneath (by about 5") a hose bib on a column.
Second most memorable was a duplex receptacle beneath (by about 5") a hose bib on a column.
mjf
Senior Member
- Location
- Placerville, CA, USA
- Occupation
- Retired PV System Designer
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
Many receptacles for clothes washers are installed in areas that could become wet should there be a problem with the water supply hoses to the washer. This is still not considered a wet location though, as that wet condition is not considered normal operation conditions.
mjf
Senior Member
Maybe if the hose bib valve was leaking during the installation or inspection process?
I would at least put an in-use cover on the receptacle under the above condition. But not required by code.
It was mgookins' reference to "receptacle beneath (by about 5") a hose bib" that made me question what the violation he was refering to was. Not sure if this column they're mounted in/on is indoors or outdoors, if it is GFCI protected or not, or if there is a in-use cover installed.
James S.
Senior Member
- Location
- Mesa, Arizona
Didn't get a picture of it but went to a house yesterday where they removed a wall and after relocating a couple of wires couldn't get the breaker to stay on. What I saw was a mwbc wire that was ran under a wood floor for about 3". Looked to be from the original rough. Just laid it down on the concrete till it got to the basement and then went down. The crazy part is that the homeowners didn't seem to mind it and had splice on to it with butt connectors and were going to run it an additional 3' under the floor to get it back into the nearest wall. :slaphead:
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
If homeowners don't know there is something wrong there, why should they mind?
cpinetree
Senior Member
- Location
- SW Florida
Kitchen Remodel
Kitchen Remodel
Found these splices inside a wall on a kitchen remodel.
Also notice the lack of protection at the hacked away metal stud in the corner.
Kitchen Remodel
Found these splices inside a wall on a kitchen remodel.
Also notice the lack of protection at the hacked away metal stud in the corner.
bobbymari
Senior Member
- Location
- los angeles ca
- Status