Using a Minnie strap/ Conduit Clips as addiquate raceway

[bphgravity]

Re: Using a Minnie strap/ Conduit Clips as addiquate raceway

Article 80 was intended for third world countries like Mexico and California.

90.4 is probably the most misinterpreted sections of the NEC. Considering this section indicates the AHJ is responsible for interpreting the rules, they have to first interpret this one. Kind of makes for a strange paradox.

 

[geezer]

Re: Using a Minnie strap/ Conduit Clips as addiquate raceway

90.4 is probably the most misinterpreted sections of the NEC. Considering this section indicates the AHJ is responsible for interpreting the rules, they have to first interpret this one. Kind of makes for a strange paradox.

Scary, isn't it?

 

[iwire]

Re: Using a Minnie strap/ Conduit Clips as addiquate raceway

Originally posted by geezer:

Article 80 is not code it is informational only. I do not know anyplace that specifically adopted it.

Are you saying that because you know of none there are none?

Originally posted by geezer:
The inspector may look at "250.118... shall be one or more or a combination of the following", and interpret the "or more, or a combination of the following" along with, "in a manner that establishes an effective ground fault current path" from 250.4(A)(4), and "shall be installed in a manner that creates a permanent, low-impedance circuit..." from 250.4 (A)(5), to mean that for the particular type of installation discussed in this post that a EGC must be included in the EMT. The inspector may simply be attempting to assure that the installation complies with the"performance requirements of this section"

I do not believe that is a correct use of those code sections. I believe that is going beyond the authority the NEC grants.

To each their own.

 

[sandsnow]

Re: Using a Minnie strap/ Conduit Clips as addiquate raceway

Originally posted by bphgravity:
Article 80 was intended for third world countries like ........ California.

LMAO with tears in my eyes

Actually were beyond help here, but thanks for thinking of us

 

[geezer]

Re: Using a Minnie strap/ Conduit Clips as addiquate raceway

Fair question.

Of course it may be adopted in some areas, however as you brought Article 80 into this discussion I will ask you if it is adopted in your jurisdiction?

Probably not really a fair question, I should not have implied that you presume to know what every jurisdiction has adapted. My apologies to you on that.

The state where I live has not adapted Article 80, I listed it for the benefit of third world counties, LIKE CALIFORNIA

90.4 is similar enough to 80.13 to suit my purposes for this discussion.

We do agree there, what we do not agree on is that requiring an additional EGC is an 'interpretation'.

I do not believe that requiring an additional EGC is an interpretation either. I consider it to be a decision based on a judgment as to whether or not the installation meets the requirements of the code. In this particular case: 250.4 (A)(4)&(5).


My use of the word "interpret" may have been misleading. It was meant to apply to 250.118... "shall be one or more or a combination of the following". The word was used as well as the reference to 90.4 to illustrate that the "or more, or a combination of the following" may be interpreted to mean "or more, or a combination of the following".

I do not believe that is a correct use of those code sections. I believe that is going beyond the authority the NEC grants.

I do think that it is a correct use of the code sections.

In my State, authority is not granted by the NEC but by the State itself. It also grants the authority to its inspectors to make interpretations, judgments, and decisions.

 

[tx2step]

Re: Using a Minnie strap/ Conduit Clips as addiquate raceway

Originally posted by geezer:

In my State, authority is not granted by the NEC but by the State itself. It also grants the authority to its inspectors to make interpretations, judgments, and decisions.

Which State?

Edited to fix my quote syntax error

[ September 20, 2005, 06:33 PM: Message edited by: tx2step ]

 

[iwire]

Re: Using a Minnie strap/ Conduit Clips as addiquate raceway

Originally posted by geezer:
Probably not really a fair question, I should not have implied that you presume to know what every jurisdiction has adapted. My apologies to you on that.

No apology needed, the way I worded my post suggested if I did not know about article 80s adoption than it had not been adopted anywhere.

You where right to call me on that.

Originally posted by geezer:
I do not believe that requiring an additional EGC is an interpretation either. I consider it to be a decision based on a judgment as to whether or not the installation meets the requirements of the code. In this particular case: 250.4 (A)(4)&(5).

I am not buying it, 250.118 says one EGC is enough you can not require me to run another.

Originally posted by geezer:
In my State, authority is not granted by the NEC but by the State itself.

I agree more or less, the NEC does not have the power to give anyone authority.

What happens is an area adopts the NEC and if they do not make amendments to it the inspector has to follow the rules contained in the NEC.

Originally posted by geezer:
It also grants the authority to its inspectors to make interpretations, judgments, and decisions.

 

[geezer]

Re: Using a Minnie strap/ Conduit Clips as addiquate raceway

OK, I give (not really).