around here that would be a big no no ,we work around the same siding guys alot and i have seen them use 3 inch nails,i have even went as far as to draw on the out side of the house where my wires are on the inside so they wont hit them,these same guys once drove a nail through the buss bars on a panel,needless to say i was not very nice to them that time,a real carpenter or siding man never puts nails in between the wall studs or on the top plates between the studs,the mexican framers around here put the nail gun down on top plates and start pulling the trigger i think on purpose
I would point to 300.4 D. The sheathing is required support for the framing members. Common sense needs to prevail somewhere. That install would clearly cause an issue down the road. The NEC can not for see every possible install so it is up to the AHJ and the installer to use their head a little bit.
It is funny how nobody has an issue if the AHJ cuts them a little slack but goes nuts when something like this is an issue.:roll:
I agree with you that some of the cables may be in violation of (D).
But they would not be here in MA as the measurement is reduced to 3/4". :grin:
Thank God you are not an inspector, your lack of respect for the NEC and your overconfidence would make you a very bad inspector. (IMPO)
Hell no, I would not install that way but unless it is really an NEC violation it is none of the inspectors businesses if the contractor is a moron.
Interesting, so under that interpretation all the words of 300.4 that follow that first line are not needed.
Why is it that the list after that first line keeps growing, apparently the CMPs do not feel the first line 300.4 covers it all.
Why did they just add the section about conduits below roof decks if the first line of 300.4 already gave the inspector the tools to prevent that installation?