In general, no inspector has the discretion to determine such things. As a practical matter, they often take it upon themselves to do so and no one wants to challenge it for fear of the inevitable retaliation.
Ahhhh, welcome to the state of New Jersey, where, in accordance with "90.4 Enforcement", the AHJ has exactly that authority, as is the case in every jurisdiction that adopts the NEC and does not otherwise modify or delete 90.4.
In a lot of cases, the only AHJ is the inspector. On bigger jobs that I have done in the past, I was famous for sending a crazy amount of RFI's to the engineer. I was pretty good at the CYA game. It's the smaller jobs that we tend to get burned on, when the local inspector is the one who is in charge of rule interpretation. That's when I ended up having to do things twice.
Unfortunately, this is exactly why our codes are written like they are! Because people are unsafe. Why would a duplex receptacle in a garage ceiling installed for the use of a garage door opener have to be GFCI protected? Because some Darwin Award winner decided to plug in a weedeater and go out barefooted during a lightning storm! Not all of our codes are a result of electrical issues, they are from people issues.
^^^This right here.
It does not work that way. As a practical matter it probably does, at least some times. The inspector can NEVER be the AHJ. The AHJ is determined by the enabling legislation. Typically the building department or contractor board. The inspector is usually a mere employee of the AHJ and as such has no more power to interpret things than he does to grant special permission.
Yes. You are correct. But those of us who worked all of our careers in the field dealing with these people know very well what we have to do. We have to choose our battles wisely when dealing with inspectors. If we go over the inspectors' head and take it to the chief just to prove that we are right, we lose! We are the ones that have to deal with this guy on several inspections after, sometimes for years. There was one guy in Orlando, FL that I proved wrong (and it was small, stupid thing) I took it to the chief electrical inspector and had it overturned. I paid the price for that move every single time he inspected one of my jobs after that. That's why I say he is the AHJ. The man/woman can make your life hell if he/she wants to.
Why are we going on about this? Aside from being a distinction without a difference in most cases, the substance of the original question here is about undefined language, not internal processes of AHJs. Regardless of who within an AHJ makes the ultimate decision or by what process, the AHJ is the one who interpets the meaning of 'physical damage' and 'severe'. Other than the dictionary and common understanding, there's nothing else to appeal to, unlike with certain other terms (such as 'readily accessible') where the NEC offers its own clarifying definition.
It is unwise to use absolute terms when making a claim. I can provide more than one example where the fire sub-code official (as an example), who is the AHJ in the area of fire protection, as delegated by the legislature and the NJ DCA, is also the inspector for the jurisdiction.
This would be a violation of due process, but maybe that is not an issue in NJ.
Because the door rails can become energized and are easily reached.
