Spot the Volation(s) 10/24/08

Status
Not open for further replies.
480sparky

480sparky

Senior Member
Location
Iowegia
Not much in the violation photo department this week. This is about all I could find.

Wired a new garage, and saw this on the house.

DSC_1693a.jpg


DSC_1695a.jpg
 
Oh took me a minute to see.... Since the conduit on the bottom is not supported - THAT FACT makes the box it is coming out of - "Accessible"..... :rolleyes:
 
e57 said:
Oh took me a minute to see.... Since the conduit on the bottom is not supported - THAT FACT makes the box it is coming out of - "Accessible"..... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The box it is coming out of does not have a weatherproof cover.
 
The plate on the wall could have been a nice way to cover the hole- seems like a bit of an ace in the hole idea if you ask me - IF properly implemented...
Suppose there is no box behind it, that means that there probably romex running inside the conduit. And there is a high probability that it is not UF.
I would have prefered to see a strap on the bend.
If they did use UF inside the conduit, and if they did not use a box behind that lovely round cover, the conduit is bonded at the top through the RAB box.
What was your reasoning for the violation sparky?
 
iwire said:
I will go with 334.12(B)(4)
Click to expand...

You sunk my battle ship!

The funny part I see about the violation on this one is, the long term damage will be to the wood structure getting water in it on a regular basis causing dry rot. Not so much that the wiring method will be a big issue.
 
iwire said:
I will go with 334.12(B)(4)
Click to expand...

Since the picture does not show what is inside, I don't see there is an actual violation on that point.

I might buy the unsupported/unsecured argument for the lower section, although it is trivial in this case.
 
Last edited:
acrwc10 said:
The funny part I see about the violation on this one is, the long term damage will be to the wood structure getting water in it on a regular basis causing dry rot. Not so much that the wiring method will be a big issue.
Click to expand...

since we cannot see what is behind the round plate I would not even make that argument. it might be just a hole bored through the side of the house that has been properly caulked and the plate installed to just hide the hole and caulk.
 
petersonra said:
Since the picture does not show what is inside, I don't see there is an actual violation on that point.
Click to expand...

If it's NM it's a violation regardless of it being out of sight or not. :wink:

If I was an inspector could I issue a red tag based on that photo? Heck no, but I can certainly form my own biased opinion and share it here. :grin:
 
petersonra said:
since we cannot see what is behind the round plate I would not even make that argument. it might be just a hole bored through the side of the house that has been properly caulked and the plate installed to just hide the hole and caulk.
Click to expand...

Just play along, it's more fun to just assume' that the house will rot, fall down then burst into flames. After all this is the best photo we have today for "spot the violation". :D :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top