It’s all about the little details

[jap]

I agree it's all about the details, which we do not have enough of to judge.

The pipe is not shown coming down the outside wall so for all we know, the meter and panel is located inside the bedroom closet.

Gig em on that instead.

JAP>

 

[HEYDOG]

So it's not a violation.

JAP>

It can be if the inspector says it is not installed in a neat and workman like manner! I picked up my first code book in 1980. A lot of things have changed over the years. From my experience with inspectors, if you want to get their attention right away is install your installation haphazardly. Don’t worry about if it looks good…it still works …right. The inspector is going to start looking at things more closely. If you don’t care about what is obvious…then you probably don’t care about what is not so obvious. I know that it is a matter of interpretation. ANSI has a standard on “Neat and Workman Like”.

 

[jap]

It can be if the inspector says it is not installed in a neat and workman like manner! I picked up my first code book in 1980. A lot of things have changed over the years. From my experience with inspectors, if you want to get their attention right away is install your installation haphazardly. Don’t worry about if it looks good…it still works …right. The inspector is going to start looking at things more closely. If you don’t care about what is obvious…then you probably don’t care about what is not so obvious. I know that it is a matter of interpretation.

Which is generally best worked out discussing it sitting on a tailgate over a cup of coffee.

JAP>

 

[acrwc10]

it’s so funny reading the comments “what’s the code section?”. This is an issue of “neat and workmanship” call, this is right on the front of a $2,000,000.00 plus house. It looks awful and the coupling is just above the roofline under the flashing. The brace kit hadn’t been installed yet, the service drop does connect to the riser and it comes from across the street.
I really hesitate calling out neat and workmanship like, but when my name is on the permit as signing it off and you can see it looks like crap from a block away, it gets called.

 

[gadfly56]

it’s so funny reading the comments “what’s the code section?”. This is an issue of “neat and workmanship” call, this is right on the front of a $2,000,000.00 plus house. It looks awful and the coupling is just above the roofline under the flashing. The brace kit hadn’t been installed yet, the service drop does connect to the riser and it comes from across the street.
I really hesitate calling out neat and workmanship like, but when my name is on the permit as signing it off and you can see it looks like crap from a block away, it gets called.

By the NFPA's own standards, "neat and workmanlike" is an unenforceable requirement. That's why you see "within 12 inches" or "not to exceed 36" and such like throughout the code. If there was anything like a common industry understanding that could be expressed as something more evident than "I know crap when I see it", there'd be a fighting chance.

 

[acrwc10]

By the NFPA's own standards, "neat and workmanlike" is an unenforceable requirement. That's why you see "within 12 inches" or "not to exceed 36" and such like throughout the code. If there was anything like a common industry understanding that could be expressed as something more evident than "I know crap when I see it", there'd be a fighting chance.

So you approve of leaving work like this?

 

[ptonsparky]

So you approve of leaving work like this?

Other than some physical issues of if it needs support or bracing etc., it looks good from my house. MDSW does not like the color of a house a few miles down the road. I could care one way or another, other than I can see her flinch as we drive by. The issue is subjective.

 

[petersonra]

So you approve of leaving work like this?

I don't like work that does not "look good". but, my subjective dislike of any work does not make it a code violation. It is only a code violation if it violates the code in some way.

 

[gadfly56]

So you approve of leaving work like this?

If I was an inspector, and there wasn't some standard like "within 2° of vertical in any plane", I might try moral suasion ("Dude, I know it's not a code thing, but do you want your name associated with that?"), but that's as far as I'd push it.

 

[acrwc10]

If I was an inspector, and there wasn't some standard like "within 2° of vertical in any plane", I might try moral suasion ("Dude, I know it's not a code thing, but do you want your name associated with that?"), but that's as far as I'd push it.

110.12 Mechanical Execution of Work

Electrical equipment shall be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner.
Informational Note: Accepted industry practices are described in ANSI/NECA 1-2015, Standard for Good Workmanship in Electrical Construction, and other ANSI-approved installation standards.

there is a standard to apply.

 

[petersonra]

110.12 Mechanical Execution of Work

Electrical equipment shall be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner.
Informational Note: Accepted industry practices are described in ANSI/NECA 1-2015, Standard for Good Workmanship in Electrical Construction, and other ANSI-approved installation standards.

there is a standard to apply.

an informational note does not create a code requirement.

 

[acrwc10]

an informational note does not create a code requirement.

you are correct but it does tell you where to find the standard that is being refenced.

 

[petersonra]

you are correct but it does tell you where to find the standard that is being refenced.

it is just information and creates no requirement at all to abide by the information presented.

 

[petersonra]

(C) Explanatory Material. Explanatory material, such as references
to other standards, references to related sections of this
Code, or information related to a Code rule, is included in this
Code in the form of informational notes. Such notes are informational
only and are not enforceable as requirements of this
Code.

Pretty unequivocable.

 

[acrwc10]

Pretty unequivocable.

I would disagree, the requirement of 110.12 says “Shall be”, then gives a reference to base it on. Why is it so hard to accept that crooked, sloppy work is not “neat” and should not be acceptable? (Unless you are the one doing said work). Inspectors should not be saying “I would have done it better”, just “this is not up to trade standards”. The code also requires “qualified” person do the work, does the NEC set a standard for what makes a person qualified?

 

[Tulsa Electrician]

It would look good on this house.
It's a real house.
I bet all the switches say foo and no.
I do agree it's not very professional work.

 

[Sea Nile]

Nothing that I know of says it has to be straight.

If the electrician is straight, then he or she should be able to eyeball it and get the panel straight. Hard to tell if you stand crooked. If I see a crooked panel, my first instinct is to ask whoever installed it if they were straight when they installed it.

 

[retirede]

If the electrician is straight, then he or she should be able to eyeball it and get the panel straight. Hard to tell if you stand crooked. If I see a crooked panel, my first instinct is to ask whoever installed it if they were straight when they installed it.

By straight, do you mean sober?

 

[mtnelect]

In my tool bag there is a level ?

 

[jap]

it’s so funny reading the comments “what’s the code section?”. This is an issue of “neat and workmanship” call, this is right on the front of a $2,000,000.00 plus house. It looks awful and the coupling is just above the roofline under the flashing. The brace kit hadn’t been installed yet, the service drop does connect to the riser and it comes from across the street.
I really hesitate calling out neat and workmanship like, but when my name is on the permit as signing it off and you can see it looks like crap from a block away, it gets called.

Are we looking at the same picture?

JAP>