Which those departments typically know little to nothing about electrical, mechanical or constructions codes/methods. All they are looking into is things that effect food safety. They may pick on electrical items that are located in food zones and want them to be something that is easily sanitized, won't easily collect foreign materials which can get into food and things of that nature. A common electrically related issue they likely intervene with would be luminaires with some sort of containment for glass lamps if that applies. Things like GFCI protection is not really a food safety issue, not having proper device box for a receptacle isn't exactly a food safety issue either, nor would they necessarily even look for this if it is behind a cover that is flush with the wall.Food trucks are not covered by the NEC. They're typcially part of the health department regulations.
That's very likely. I'm surprised the NFPA hasn't created an electrical standard for food trucks that can be adopted by health departments.Which those departments typically know little to nothing about electrical, mechanical or constructions codes/methods.
If they thought they could make money from it, they would.That's very likely. I'm surprised the NFPA hasn't created an electrical standard for food trucks that can be adopted by health departments.
I think that's what the inspector's think they do it for. And that's how it's sold to the public, but the reality is that it generates revenue and covers the city/county/state from liability. The idea that the government does anything for true public safety makes me giggle.In WA it’s not about making money, but ensuring safety for the public. Our AHJ requires permits and inspections, not just electrical, but DWV, propane, FW. They are treated like like a factory assembled structure.
The permit is for revenue, the inspection is for safety.I think that's what the inspector's think they do it for. And that's how it's sold to the public, but the reality is that it generates revenue and covers the city/county/state from liability. The idea that the government does anything for true public safety makes me giggle.
"Anything"? The death rate dropped in half from 1966 to 1976 as pre-FMVSS vehicles aged out of the fleet and were replaced with vehicles designed in accordance with the FMVSS.... The idea that the government does anything for true public safety makes me giggle.
"Anything"? The death rate dropped in half from 1966 to 1976 as pre-FMVSS vehicles aged out of the fleet and were replaced with vehicles designed in accordance with the FMVSS.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
You have to protect the electorate. A dead tax payer doesn't pay taxes. And you get to look like you care about the people and thus increase votes. I am not against safety or the enforcement of standards. But for-profit companies (even if they claim to be non-profit) and revenue-reliant governments do not care about the issues they support beyond making sure the money keeps flowing and the voters keep voting. Wrapping anything in the blanket of "safety" automatically grants it immunity from scrutiny, because then the counter argument is "Why would you be against safety?""Anything"? The death rate dropped in half from 1966 to 1976 as pre-FMVSS vehicles aged out of the fleet and were replaced with vehicles designed in accordance with the FMVSS.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Giggle? I was an IMSA certified traffic signal tech and the signal techs for the city it was all about public safety. Lamp out, signal pole knock down, cabinet damage, conflict monitoring testing…I think that's what the inspector's think they do it for. And that's how it's sold to the public, but the reality is that it generates revenue and covers the city/county/state from liability. The idea that the government does anything for true public safety makes me giggle.