Sump pump gfi protecting water heater power vent

Status
Not open for further replies.
OP here....

Heard back from mr inspector, sort of.

It's from the IRC, which I figured, and he will send me the code reference when he gets a chance.
 
Last edited:
peter d said:
Which NEC edition does the IRC reference?
Click to expand...

The IRC does not reference the NEC. It has its own electrical sections. It only has a few minor differences from the NEC.

Edit: Actually it does in a way.

SECTION E3401 GENERAL

E3401.1 Applicability.
The provisions of Chapters 34 through 43 shall establish the general scope of the electrical system and equipment requirements of this code. Chapters 34 through 43 cover those wiring methods and materials most commonly encountered in the construction of one- and two-family dwellings and structures regulated by this code. Other wiring methods, materials and subject matter covered in NFPA 70 are also allowed by this code.

E3401.2 Scope.
Chapters 34 through 43 shall cover the installation of electrical systems, equipment and components indoors and outdoors that are within the scope of this code, including services, power distribution systems, fixtures, appliances, devices and appurtenances. Services within the scope of this code shall be limited to 120/240-volt, 0- to 400-ampere, single-phase systems. These chapters specifically cover the equipment, fixtures, appliances, wiring methods and materials that are most commonly used in the construction or alteration of one- and two-family dwellings and accessory structures regulated by this code. The omission from these chapters of any material or method of construction provided for in the referenced standard NFPA 70 shall not be construed as prohibiting the use of such material or method of construction. Electrical systems, equipment or components not specifically covered in these chapters shall comply with the applicable provisions of NFPA 70.
 
Last edited:
jumper said:
The IRC does not reference the NEC. It has its own electrical sections. It only has a few minor differences from the NEC.

Edit: Actually it does in a way.

SECTION E3401 GENERAL

E3401.1 Applicability.
The provisions of Chapters 34 through 43 shall establish the general scope of the electrical system and equipment requirements of this code. Chapters 34 through 43 cover those wiring methods and materials most commonly encountered in the construction of one- and two-family dwellings and structures regulated by this code. Other wiring methods, materials and subject matter covered in NFPA 70 are also allowed by this code.

E3401.2 Scope.
Chapters 34 through 43 shall cover the installation of electrical systems, equipment and components indoors and outdoors that are within the scope of this code, including services, power distribution systems, fixtures, appliances, devices and appurtenances. Services within the scope of this code shall be limited to 120/240-volt, 0- to 400-ampere, single-phase systems. These chapters specifically cover the equipment, fixtures, appliances, wiring methods and materials that are most commonly used in the construction or alteration of one- and two-family dwellings and accessory structures regulated by this code. The omission from these chapters of any material or method of construction provided for in the referenced standard NFPA 70 shall not be construed as prohibiting the use of such material or method of construction. Electrical systems, equipment or components not specifically covered in these chapters shall comply with the applicable provisions of NFPA 70.
Click to expand...

In the absence of any reference to a particular NEC code edition, it can be assumed it means the latest edition printed prior to the printing of the code which is citing it. And specifically not including any NEC amendments or future code editions which came out afterwards.
 
mgookin said:
In the absence of any reference to a particular NEC code edition, it can be assumed it means the latest edition printed prior to the printing of the code which is citing it. And specifically not including any NEC amendments or future code editions which came out afterwards.
Click to expand...

In section 44, referenced standards, they use the 2011 edition of the NEC, and point to 3401.1 and 3401.2. So, they refer indirectly to the edition through section 44. I guess that way each new edition has to change only the reference in section 44 and not everywhere they use "NEC".
 
Little Bill said:
Yep, I would just pick up that sump pump and put it in another room, probably dryer in there too and it shouldn't run as much!:p
Click to expand...
:)

I guess sump pump maybe doesn't necessarily get that kind of choice too often, but you could certainly put the water heater in an area that doesn't require GFCI protection.

Neither appliance requires GFCI protection (per 210.8 anyway) it is the fact they are commonly located in unfinished basement spaces or garages that kicks in the need for GFCI protection for the receptacle they plug into.
 
OP Here

So, since I had a deadline from he builder to correct the problem, so it's already fixed.

And, I heard back from the inspector. While he did not, and probably could not, give me a direct code reference, he simply said
"the municipality having jurisdiction takes precedence and this is how our agency interprets the code."

Whatever code that may be, whatever section that may be, I will probably never know.:?
 
mikhen said:
OP Here

So, since I had a deadline from he builder to correct the problem, so it's already fixed.

And, I heard back from the inspector. While he did not, and probably could not, give me a direct code reference, he simply said
"the municipality having jurisdiction takes precedence and this is how our agency interprets the code."

Whatever code that may be, whatever section that may be, I will probably never know.:?
Click to expand...

PA has a state-wide code and only cities of the "first class" are allowed to enact stricter standards. Only Philadelphia meets the standard. So if you aren't in Philly, the inspector needs a good drubbing about the head and shoulders.
 
Based on the inspectors citing of code that apparently does not exist, you could justify getting paid extra to do what he is requiring. Why should you take the hit?
 
OP here. Insanity prevails. Met the inspector today at another location. He failed us for a different reason. I'll start another thread
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top