Sum of breakers not to exeeded 300% ???

[cowboyjwc]

Having seen this general type of question and response an innumerable number of times, it makes me wonder why there isn't some kind of standard form for a "red tag" that requires a reference to the code that is violated? Could/should the NEC require (and include) such a form? Though, of course, the AHJ could always choose to do otherwise...

I didn't realize how old this thread was when I first replied today, but I thought you CA guys might want to see this.

Assembly Bill 1236 (Section 19870 of the California Health and Safety Code) places added responsibility on inspector when writing correction notices or notices of violation. The inspector will need to identify and define the code violation and will only be allowed to impose added correction different from the approved plans under specific circumstances.

1. There is a violation of the code.
2. The plans are partially incomplete.
3. There is a deviation, addition, or deletion from the approved plans.
4. The permit is expired or has been revoked.

To comply with Section 19870 of the California Health and Safety Code, the inspector shall document the following information when issuing a correction notice or notice of violation.

1. A written description of the violation.
2. The code section of the violation.

This law also requires the enforcement official's supervisor to review and approve (or deny) an inspectors determination when the contractor or his/her agent asserts that the correction results in a cost of 10% or more of the overall cost of the project. The supervisor must respond in five working days measured from the submittal date of the cost determination by the contractor.

 

[dcspector]

Thank you . . . I think.

You are welcome and concur.

 

[480sparky]

Actually an island used to have the same requierments as the counter for spacing, as did a pennisula, but it was changed two or three code cycles back. Sometimes you remeber something, but you just can't remember which year it was in effect.

The 24" rule was introduced in the 1990. In 1993, it was reduced to require only one receptacle.

 

[cowboyjwc]

The 24" rule was introduced in the 1990. In 1993, it was reduced to require only one receptacle.

I just didn't have my other books close at hand and of course he didn't say when he was called on it.:grin:

It was resinded because they found out that it was actually causing more accidents than it was preventing.

 

[cschmid]

It's a 10KAIC rated breaker. I need a 22K.

man you are being picky now never seen a home owner who cared about the AIC rating before..fact is wonder how many DIYers making a living at scab work care about it either.

 

[hurk27]

I just didn't have my other books close at hand and of course he didn't say when he was called on it.:grin:

It was rescinded because they found out that it was actually causing more accidents than it was preventing.

I can remember back when they allowed this permission to allow the receptacle below the counter top, I was appalled, it was a whole turn around of the 2' cord requirement that was put in place back in 1969, it was to stop kids from getting injured or killed from pulling hot kitchen appliances over onto them. then there were several cases of kids that were either injured and I think a couple was killed, that brought out the "93"change and the new magnetic connected cords, but it was too late because there are still millions of older appliances in use.
But the new Bun coffee maker I have has a permanent 2' cord so go figure.:roll: