Has Anybody Heard Of This?

Status
Not open for further replies.
tufts46argled said:
So tell me how? Small town, board backs inspector! What's your options? I've fought with some small town inspectors, easier to just do what they want than try and fight, even when they don't have a clue!

Ohhhh I've been to that town - the guy should've retired several decades ago and everything needed to be the way he thought he did it before..... (He got retired fortunatley for that small town... I think he caost every resident several thousand unecessisarily.)

Problem I have lately is inspectors that are new, and haven't seen some of the things they come across outside of what they have been told in some class they barely/mis understood. Commercial guys who've never seen resi, and Resi guys who've never seen commercial - OJT???? :mad: I say fight them tooth and nail - FIGHT THE POWER! Otherwise we are sheep to the misinformed. What cost you $10 on one job will cost you $1000 on the next IMO.
 
Simple philosophy: It's as illegal to improperly fail as it is to improperly pass. :mad:






What you can do with this philosophy is up to you. :rolleyes:
 
LawnGuyLandSparky said:
I recall back in the day, inspectors didn't like GFCI protected circuits sharing boxes with non-gfci protected circuits.

That is not that far from true.

Check out 680.23(F)(3).
 
Bob NH said:
680.23 applies only to underwater luminaires in permanently installed pools.

I assumed most are aware that 680 applies to pools and such.

My point was that there are times when GFCI circuits must be kept separate from non-GFCI circuits.
 
Last edited:
I've tagged EC's in my area for this same thing. Every time I do I hear the same thing,"that's how the old inspectors let us do it". What bothers me is when they ask "since this circuit is fed with 12/2 can't I just put it on a 15 amp breaker?" I allow this because the code allows it. But what bothers me is down the road someone could see the 12/2 on the 15 amp breaker and think "wow, somebody didn't know what they were doing" and put a 20 amp breaker in. Wish the code would change on this.
 
sguinn said:
. But what bothers me is down the road someone could see the 12/2 on the 15 amp breaker and think "wow, somebody didn't know what they were doing" and put a 20 amp breaker in. Wish the code would change on this.

So what do you recommend when upgrading the wire size for voltage drop?
 
stickboy1375 said:
So what do you recommend when upgrading the wire size for voltage drop?
I see your point and I would recommend a little tag on the hots stating what the deal was, just to avoid any confusion down the road.:smile:
 
sguinn said:
I've tagged EC's in my area for this same thing. Every time I do I hear the same thing,"that's how the old inspectors let us do it". What bothers me is when they ask "since this circuit is fed with 12/2 can't I just put it on a 15 amp breaker?" I allow this because the code allows it. But what bothers me is down the road someone could see the 12/2 on the 15 amp breaker and think "wow, somebody didn't know what they were doing" and put a 20 amp breaker in. Wish the code would change on this.


Using larger conductors for voltage drop is done everyday. The guy who sees #12 and changes a 15 to a 20 amp CB is a hack. My guess is that the NEC will never change this, and I'm glad that they won't. Increased conductor sizing for VD is good design .
 
sguinn said:
I see your point and I would recommend a little tag on the hots stating what the deal was, just to avoid any confusion down the road.:smile:


What confusion? Most people don't go around changing breaker sizes without first investigating. If you do, then you should not be an electrician.
 
infinity said:
Using larger conductors for voltage drop is done everyday.

Agreed :smile:

infinity said:
The guy who sees #12 and changes a 15 to a 20 amp CB is a hack.

Agreed :smile:

infinity said:
My guess is that the NEC will never change this

Agreed :smile:

infinity said:
Increased conductor sizing for VD is good design .

Agreed and I would not be surprised if the NEC at some point requires it.
 
The circuit rating is dictated by the circuit breaker not by wire/cable. It is 15A in this case. Wires that can handle 15A current shall be OK to use for the circuit. So #12 is obviously good in this case.
 
stickboy1375 said:
What confusion? Most people don't go around changing breaker sizes without first investigating. If you do, then you should not be an electrician.

You have no idea what I have to deal with, it's kind of like the old west. Licensing not enforced by mandate of the board of commissioners, homeowners with no clue wiring houses, general contractors wiring houses, plumbers wiring houses..............................It's kind of like living in an iron lung, you can see the world, you just can't do anything about it. As someone that frequents this site signature reads"I'm just a squirrell trying to find a nut".:confused:
 
sguinn said:
You have no idea what I have to deal with, it's kind of like the old west. Licensing not enforced by mandate of the board of commissioners, homeowners with no clue wiring houses, general contractors wiring houses, plumbers wiring houses..............................It's kind of like living in an iron lung, you can see the world, you just can't do anything about it. As someone that frequents this site signature reads"I'm just a squirrell trying to find a nut".:confused:

wow .
 
I think inspectors and Plan checkers should back off when presented with the code in black and white. Just the other day I had a 15 IQ plan checker tell me I had to have a fuseable disconnect mounted not higher than 48" for a handicap power assisted door. You know the kind that is around 2 amps. He quoted the switch code for accessibility but didnt read the second sentence that stated that the code did not apply to motor disconnects, nor did he bother to read the motor code. It is one of these third party officials that are trying to justify their pay. He also INSISTED that fault calcs are never figured on what is there but on what the utility may install in the future.....hmmm like a utility will ever size a transformer to full load or higher than the switchgear. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

Ken
MEP Test Dummy
 
sguinn said:
You have no idea what I have to deal with, it's kind of like the old west. Licensing not enforced by mandate of the board of commissioners, homeowners with no clue wiring houses, general contractors wiring houses, plumbers wiring houses..............................It's kind of like living in an iron lung, you can see the world, you just can't do anything about it. As someone that frequents this site signature reads"I'm just a squirrell trying to find a nut".:confused:


Sorry to hear that.
 
lpelectric said:
There used to be an inspector around here who said it was against the electrical code to have more than 4 receptacles on a small appliance branch circuit. He also said it was code to have the grounds facing up on receptacles. He also made installers use #2 copper for the ground rods on a 400 ampere service. If he didn't like your work, he told the general contractor that if you stayed on the job, he wouldn't sign off. Never mind that you were willing to go along with his whims, if he didn't like you, he'd throw you out of town.
Good riddance. :smile: He finally retired. Phew! :confused:

This is why it is better to have third party agencies available to do electrical inspections. Most municipalities have a list of agencies to choose from, this guy wouldn't get any calls if he were 3rd party.
 
elohr46 said:
This is why it is better to have third party agencies available to do electrical inspections. Most municipalities have a list of agencies to choose from, this guy wouldn't get any calls if he were 3rd party.

He WAS 3rd party. He was the only one doing any inspections anywhere around here for the longest time. He had a "working" relationship with the local Building Inspector (AHJ) and would throw a guy out of town if he could get away with it. He did many times. He's gone and so's the old BI, and things are much better now, but are still in need of improvement. :smile:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top