bphgravity
Senior Member
- Location
- Florida
In early October, my jurisdiction will be having a contractor workshop and conference to discuss changes to inspection requirements and to go over any issues the contractors may have. Our director has instructed us to come up with issues we are seeing in the field that we wish to have changed or at least reviewed for change.
One issue I have not liked since the moment I started woring here is our allowance for NM to be installed in underground/under slab/in the slab raceways to islands or floor recptacles etc..
It's apparently not enough to simply state, "it's not to code", so I am trying to determine te real issue or problem with this allowance. Other than the obvious code violation, is there a true hazard or potential hazard in the long term permitting this to continue. Many other jurisdictions in the area have enforced UF or individual conductors with wet location listing. At this point, our director feels this practice has never been a real problem and it does not make any sense to force contractors to change now.
Any help or thoughts about this.?
One issue I have not liked since the moment I started woring here is our allowance for NM to be installed in underground/under slab/in the slab raceways to islands or floor recptacles etc..
It's apparently not enough to simply state, "it's not to code", so I am trying to determine te real issue or problem with this allowance. Other than the obvious code violation, is there a true hazard or potential hazard in the long term permitting this to continue. Many other jurisdictions in the area have enforced UF or individual conductors with wet location listing. At this point, our director feels this practice has never been a real problem and it does not make any sense to force contractors to change now.
Any help or thoughts about this.?