Romex connector in cover?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cletis

Senior Member
Location
OH
This obviously does not
Look code compliant. Article? Ul listing?IMG_2333.JPGIMG_2334.JPG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
For the one with four cables, have to go with 110.3(B) and failure to heed manufacturers instructions.
 
IMHO, lack of protection from physical damage to the cables, just as they sit, plus twisting, kinking, when the cover is removed. Another one of those "what were they thinking" moments.
 
OK those are NEC issues, but can you come up with anything on entry through the panel cover?

Maybe accessibility issue? How can you pull the cover off to work on the panel?

Also, 110.(A)(8) and 110.3(B)
 
Did you take these pictures yourself?

It looks like somebody put in a new panel, converted the old panel into a junction box, then refed the circuits contained therein. Maybe the door is now access to the junction box with no intention of ever taking the entire cover off again. You can bolt the door down to require tools to open it.
 
Did you take these pictures yourself?

It looks like somebody put in a new panel, converted the old panel into a junction box, then refed the circuits contained therein. Maybe the door is now access to the junction box with no intention of ever taking the entire cover off again. You can bolt the door down to require tools to open it.
There is a possibility that makes this somewhat more acceptable.
 
Do you live and or/work in Ohio?

If not, you may be surprised at what passes for acceptable around here if you ever visit. :D

Same with VA. Neat and workmanlike means the wires are in the panel when the df is installed. or the NM isnt hanging on the ground in the crawlspace.

I think a prerequisite for being an inspector here is a severe allergy to crawlspaces. and they dont carry Epipens.

I've been to Youngstown numerous times. Nothing there was wired by anyone with a BAC less than .15. :lol:
 
Me says Nae, nothing would make this acceptable or "in a workman like manner".
What is workman like is pretty debatable though.

Unless the AHJ has an official document that explains what is/is not workman like, I would have a hard time accepting that as the only reason for failing the installation, same can sort of be said for what is subject to physical abuse. Both should be more of a design issue IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top