Re-using Old Home Runs

Status
Not open for further replies.
CopperTone said:
I lost 2 jobs just like this last week - maybe to the OP? I insisted on all new homeruns. Mostly because of liability - I don't want to tap into anything existing and be responsible for that circuit. I insist on all new - I've even convinced many a homeowner or GC to remove all sheetrock and start with a clean slate - it is a better job in the end.

Maybe that's why I didn't get the job - but then again at least I won't get sued some day. (my fault or not)
Click to expand...

I will never give a new work price again until I see that all sheetrock is in fact removed. I have been hosed by too many shady kitchen and bath gcs. If I am doing demo and opening sheetrock I am getting paid for it.
 
Got an opionion from the Mass board of electricians

Got an opionion from the Mass board of electricians

I contacted the board and they agreed with everybody but me.

In Mass we have our own code. It is the NEC with modifications. Our rule 3 (see post #2) addressses "additions or modifications to an existing installation...." Until today I misunderstood its meaning. It could be written more clearly in my opinion.

Thanks to M.D. for providing the most persuasive arguements
 
mkgrady said:
That answer doesn't seem to meet the minimum character reply. You should turn yourself in to the autorities for circumventing the rule. As an alternative, you may slap yourself on the wrist. I'd insert a smiley face if I could figure out how.
Click to expand...
Look at my quote in your post. It is possible to change the color of text.
 
Re-using Old Home Runs

iwire said:
I am also from MA I agree with M. D.s interpretation of MA rule 3 and the NEC.

If you install a new receptacle outlet it must have a full size EGC back to the source. There is no exception for this.

Will an electrical inspector let it slide, ya sure they might.
Click to expand...

Not this Inspector....
 
Can you get a full sized ground to the other end of the circuit? Perhaps a ground to the main grounding electrode via a number 6 terminated in junction at the end of the circuit.
 
So if you have a 12awg nm,with a bare egc thats 14awg.It's been safe inside the walls for how many years handling faults.I dont think it's unsafe. It may not be code though.P.S i thought a wire is rated for the insulation not the copper.The copper can handle way more amps then the insulation melts?The egc is bare but i guess its touching other insulation surrounding it.
 
zappy said:
So if you have a 12awg nm,with a bare egc thats 14awg.It's been safe inside the walls for how many years handling faults.I dont think it's unsafe. It may not be code though.P.S i thought a wire is rated for the insulation not the copper.The copper can handle way more amps then the insulation melts?The egc is bare but i guess its touching other insulation surrounding it.
Click to expand...

What the ????
 
I still say no harm/no foul.

I will continue to add wiring to existing circuits that have undersized grounds.

It's not a hazzard IMO.

If an inspector one day turns me down I will ask for a code reference and explain to the HO that additional work will be require at their expense because of the inspectors interpetation.

Once again, it's all about interpetation.
 
You say interpretation I say conscience choice to ignore what is required.:D

It is easy, work you do today has to meet todays code. If you found 1000' of the reduced ground NM today could you install it?
 
220/221 said:
I still say no harm/no foul..
Click to expand...

Yikes

220/221 said:
I will continue to add wiring to existing circuits that have undersized grounds..
Click to expand...

double yikes

220/221 said:
It's not a hazzard IMO..
Click to expand...

The NFPA does not recognize it as an effective path for clearing the fault current required in branch circuit wiring ,.. no opinion required...so once again ,.. yikes

220/221 said:
If an inspector one day turns me down I will ask for a code reference and explain to the HO that additional work will be require at their expense because of the inspectors interpetation...
Click to expand...

Good luck with that.

220/221 said:
Once again, it's all about interpetation.
Click to expand...
yes,. that,.. and enforcement and oh yeah,.. liability
 
zappy said:
P.S i thought a wire is rated for the insulation not the copper.The copper can handle way more amps then the insulation melts?The egc is bare but i guess its touching other insulation surrounding it.
Click to expand...
Seriously?

Okay. The thinner a conductor is, the hotter a given amount of current will make it. The conductor is sized to carry the required amount of current, while not getting too hot.

The wire may be designed to not damage the insulation, but it's done the other way around: The insulation type determines how much current the wire can be safely rated to carry.

Remember, proper wiring is as much about protecting the environment from the electricity as it is about protecting the wiring from the environment. Note the "F" in NFPA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top