FoCoNoCo
Member
- Location
- Fort Collins, CO
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor, Master Electrician
Hi Everyone,
I'm new to this forum. I've been a big fan of MikeHolt.com, the practice exams on this website are probably the #2 most helpful thing that assisted me in passing the electrical exams here in Colorado, besides actually doing electrical work!
I run a small EC business in Northern Colorado. We employ 20 electricians, and we work mostly on new residential construction.
I'm proud to say that I have a good relationship with the dozens of inspectors in our area. We have city inspectors for our bigger metro areas, then we have state inspectors for rural areas, and independent agencies (SafeBuilt, ProCode) for smaller towns. Within each agency, there is constant turnover, it is rare that we get to deal with the same inspector for more than a year in any particular area. It's nice when we do, because we always get into a good rhythm with the inspectors that are around for a while.
In my experience, approaching an inspector with a respectful demeanor, and a calm, reasonable defense to how we do things has always been the way to go. Also, it's usually easier to just make the change requested, especially if the code in question leaves a bit of grey area. I won't waste time if I'm not confident in my understanding.
That said, I've got a few things I'd like to hear some feedback about, from other professionals in the trade:
1.) Inspector insists that wet bars must have two dedicated 20a small appliance circuits. His claim is that 210.11 and 210.52 makes it clear that a wet bar and a kitchen are to be treated the same. My counterpoint is that if this is true, every dining room, breakfast room, and pantry must also have (2) dedicated circuits each, (which of course is ridiculous). His rebuttal is "if you read the code", which I have done, and I can't see how his viewpoint could possibly be correct. I would argue that the code actually gives leeway to run wet bar circuits with kitchen outlet circuits (which we would never do), and thus a single dedicated wet bar circuit is already above-and-beyond. For context, we are talking about a wet bar that has a single 1.0a u/c refrigerator and no other appliances, just a handful of countertop outlets (which we choose to layout according to "kitchen code").
2.) Inspector insists that garage door opener outlets cannot be run on the same circuit as the wall outlets because the words "no other outlets" is in 210.11(C)(4). And then in 210.52(G)(1) it says "In each attached garage and in each detached garage with electric power, at least one receptacle outlet shall be installed in each vehicle bay and not more than 1.7 m (51⁄2 ft) above the floor." My argument is that "no other outlets" refers to installing outlets outside of the garage, same as it means for kitchens, bathrooms, and laundry rooms. The second part, to me, is expressing that the outlets on the walls need to be in a place that can be accessed easily, not a limitation to exclude outlets on the ceiling.
3.) Inspector insists that a furnace that is hooked up to permanent power during construction must be GFCI protected. Which means we have to install a GFCI breaker. In 590.6 (Temporary Installations), the only mention of GFCI protection has to do with receptacles. So my argument is that because the furnace is hard-wired, it does not have a receptacle that would require the GFCI protection. My concern with this is that a furnace is more likely to trip, which can lead to frozen pipes, which can lead to extensive water damage. I would assume this is why furnaces are not required to be GFCI protected once construction is complete.
I'd like to think I'm pretty open-minded about the code. We change a handful of things every year, and I don't always agree with the inspectors on it, but it can be a give and take thing. Keep in mind, we have done 40-50 houses in this inspector's jurisdiction, and all of these are new, recent "requirements". I've attempted to talk to him, he tells me that he will discuss it with the other inspectors in his office, and then he doesn't get back to me. His boss won't return messages. I'm not trying to get anyone in trouble, I just want to have a real conversation with someone. In the end, the code needs to dictate these things, and I have a hard time seeing where I'm wrong... but...
I'd love to hear if anyone else agrees with the inspector on the issues raised above. I really want to be open to the possibility that I am not understanding something in the code. None of these citations are new to the code, and we've wired thousands of houses "the other way" with no failed inspections (for these things anyhow).
I'm looking forward to your responses!
I'm new to this forum. I've been a big fan of MikeHolt.com, the practice exams on this website are probably the #2 most helpful thing that assisted me in passing the electrical exams here in Colorado, besides actually doing electrical work!
I run a small EC business in Northern Colorado. We employ 20 electricians, and we work mostly on new residential construction.
I'm proud to say that I have a good relationship with the dozens of inspectors in our area. We have city inspectors for our bigger metro areas, then we have state inspectors for rural areas, and independent agencies (SafeBuilt, ProCode) for smaller towns. Within each agency, there is constant turnover, it is rare that we get to deal with the same inspector for more than a year in any particular area. It's nice when we do, because we always get into a good rhythm with the inspectors that are around for a while.
In my experience, approaching an inspector with a respectful demeanor, and a calm, reasonable defense to how we do things has always been the way to go. Also, it's usually easier to just make the change requested, especially if the code in question leaves a bit of grey area. I won't waste time if I'm not confident in my understanding.
That said, I've got a few things I'd like to hear some feedback about, from other professionals in the trade:
1.) Inspector insists that wet bars must have two dedicated 20a small appliance circuits. His claim is that 210.11 and 210.52 makes it clear that a wet bar and a kitchen are to be treated the same. My counterpoint is that if this is true, every dining room, breakfast room, and pantry must also have (2) dedicated circuits each, (which of course is ridiculous). His rebuttal is "if you read the code", which I have done, and I can't see how his viewpoint could possibly be correct. I would argue that the code actually gives leeway to run wet bar circuits with kitchen outlet circuits (which we would never do), and thus a single dedicated wet bar circuit is already above-and-beyond. For context, we are talking about a wet bar that has a single 1.0a u/c refrigerator and no other appliances, just a handful of countertop outlets (which we choose to layout according to "kitchen code").
2.) Inspector insists that garage door opener outlets cannot be run on the same circuit as the wall outlets because the words "no other outlets" is in 210.11(C)(4). And then in 210.52(G)(1) it says "In each attached garage and in each detached garage with electric power, at least one receptacle outlet shall be installed in each vehicle bay and not more than 1.7 m (51⁄2 ft) above the floor." My argument is that "no other outlets" refers to installing outlets outside of the garage, same as it means for kitchens, bathrooms, and laundry rooms. The second part, to me, is expressing that the outlets on the walls need to be in a place that can be accessed easily, not a limitation to exclude outlets on the ceiling.
3.) Inspector insists that a furnace that is hooked up to permanent power during construction must be GFCI protected. Which means we have to install a GFCI breaker. In 590.6 (Temporary Installations), the only mention of GFCI protection has to do with receptacles. So my argument is that because the furnace is hard-wired, it does not have a receptacle that would require the GFCI protection. My concern with this is that a furnace is more likely to trip, which can lead to frozen pipes, which can lead to extensive water damage. I would assume this is why furnaces are not required to be GFCI protected once construction is complete.
I'd like to think I'm pretty open-minded about the code. We change a handful of things every year, and I don't always agree with the inspectors on it, but it can be a give and take thing. Keep in mind, we have done 40-50 houses in this inspector's jurisdiction, and all of these are new, recent "requirements". I've attempted to talk to him, he tells me that he will discuss it with the other inspectors in his office, and then he doesn't get back to me. His boss won't return messages. I'm not trying to get anyone in trouble, I just want to have a real conversation with someone. In the end, the code needs to dictate these things, and I have a hard time seeing where I'm wrong... but...
I'd love to hear if anyone else agrees with the inspector on the issues raised above. I really want to be open to the possibility that I am not understanding something in the code. None of these citations are new to the code, and we've wired thousands of houses "the other way" with no failed inspections (for these things anyhow).
I'm looking forward to your responses!
