Spirit of the code vs. letter of the code.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jon456

Senior Member
Location
Colorado
I consider myself a code wonk: I like that things are spelled out in black & white and not subject to arbitrary determinations. That said, the purpose of the code is to ensure safe and professional installations. It should not be a replacement for common sense. Case in point...

I installed some 1/2" EMT inside a steel-framed partition wall. The junction box feeding the conduit is mounted on the top track. Each of the three conduit descend then turn 90 degrees and pass through holes I punched in the steel studs. The holes are just large enough to fit the EMT, so there is no possibility of free vertical movement of the conduit.

20201130_131818_resized_1.jpg

The inspector refused to pass the inspection, stating that the conduit needed to be secured within 3' of the top junction box. I acknowledge that this is the "letter of the code." But, IMO, it exceeds the "spirit of the code" and it seems ridiculous to me for the inspector to insist upon it. That conduit is protected inside a wall and it will be impossible for it to move physically, either vertically or horizontally, without ripping the wall open and disassembling the conduit from the connectors. Even if, by some miracle, the set screws in the connectors all un-torqued themselves and fell out inside the wall, that conduit simply cannot move. :rolleyes:

It's no big deal for me to add a Caddy bracket between the studs and clamp the conduit to it. But will that make the installation any safer or better in any way? No. :cautious:
 
I think you know you are wrong. Just fix it. I agree it's not going anywhere, but the code is the code and there are lots of arbitrary requirements found there.

We don't get to pick which of the arbitrary requirements we want to obey. We have to obey all of the arbitrary requirements. In fact virtually all of them are arbitrary in some way or another. Why is it number 14 wire has to be protected by a 15 amp circuit breaker even though it's really rated for 20 or 30 amps? It's just a rule we have to work with.
 
I think you know you are wrong. Just fix it. I agree it's not going anywhere, but the code is the code and there are lots of arbitrary requirements found there.
I already stated that I would fix it. But I disagree with you that "virtually all of the code requirements are arbitrary." In fact, I would argue that most of the code requirements make sense, including the requirement to secure conduit within 3 feet of termination: it's to ensure the conduit cannot accidentally be pulled out of the junction box.

I'm just saying that it's impossible in this case for the conduit to separate from the boxes. And I think it can be justifiably argued that the top steel track constitutes "securing the conduit."
 
I'm wondering why he didn't want it fastened at the lower junction boxes also.
 
I already stated that I would fix it. But I disagree with you that "virtually all of the code requirements are arbitrary." In fact, I would argue that most of the code requirements make sense, including the requirement to secure conduit within 3 feet of termination: it's to ensure the conduit cannot accidentally be pulled out of the junction box.

I'm just saying that it's impossible in this case for the conduit to separate from the boxes. And I think it can be justifiably argued that the top steel track constitutes "securing the conduit."
But it’s still not “within 3’ of the termination”.
If the conduit fitting to the box met the requirements there wouldn’t be another requirement to secure the conduit within 3’.
Looks like it would be an extremely easy fix to secure the conduit within 3’ of the top and bottom boxes.
 
Horizontal holes are permitted to support the tubing but it still requires something other than a hole to secure it within 3' of the box.
After reviewing the language of 358.30(A) and 358.30(B) again, I agree. The difference is in the words "securely fastened" vs. "supported." Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top