ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade General Discussion Area Is "Code Minimum" Really an Option?

Of course, there is a difference between code minimum and bad judgment. I take it back about the code being right - at least it isn't always right.

I'm frustrated, though, by electricians who go over code where it isn't necessary and trash-talk me because I do my work differently. Those are just arbitrary rules some guy makes up as he goes along. It reminds me of the "Dukes of Hazzard" when the sheriff stands a speed sign up behind a tree. It just isn't fair.

This topic hit a little too close to home.

twh,

When I became an AHJ I told myself that I wasn't going to judge the EC jobs I see by what I use to do. If the job meets code, then so be it! I See too many times where the AHJ would criticize the EC for doing the work in their own way and not to what the AHJ likes. When you have 10 EC's they will do it maybe 10 different ways. If they all meet code they should all pass.
Going above and beyond the code is always welcome. The only bad thing I see about that is when a HO tries to compare 2 bids to a job. The HO might only look at the bottom line and not realize that EC # 1 is going above and beyond the code.

When I use to bid jobs, I would always bid it exactly to what the print said. Then I would also hand them another bid for the "Extras" that were needed in order to get the job passed. Many times Arch. people would forget to add HVAC units, recpt. in basement, or in front/back yards, etc.

We are quick to criticize someone who wastes natural resources - like water, gas, plastic or paper. Shouldn't we also fail the wire size that is too large as a waste of copper and the energy taken to mine, refine, manufacture and ship? Future generations might think so.

If you look at copper.org, they say using larger wire saves electricity. (less I2R losses)

In some ways, I'm almost glad that someone brought up "environmental" issues. While I don't intend to open the entire environmental debate here, you have opened the door to some other 'angles' to the 'code minimum' contradiction.

The first, most obvious point to make is that if we wanted to be 'energy efficient,' we wouldn't have so many square corners. Want greater comfort and lower HVAC bills? Restore vaulted ceilings; they allow for much better convection. Likewise, a lot of mold issues would be prevented with 'better than minimum' bath fans- and a vent in the door!

To return to an example cited earlier, that second light switch might mean more wire - but also means the light won't be left on nearly as often.

More basic, you bring into this discussion the interplay between the various codes. Especially with the introduction of 'energy codes,' knowing only the NEC simply isn't enough. "Bid to print" and you're setting the stage for quite a dispute when the electrical plans cause the HVAC to fail inspection.

I think it comes down to the 'golden rule:' He with the gold writes the rules. I suppose it's no surprise that GC's and developers want as little as possible; they won't be living there! The situation is only made worse by a legal climate that ensures that no reputable contractor will ever get involved in building tract homes.

That last part is critical; something as simple as the route a wire takes can make a huge difference to the ease with which later modifications are made.

One of the biggest problems I see when people up size the wire, is that they forget to up size boxes. I have seen HO's try to stick 3 #12/2 ga cables into a standard size (3" X 2" X 1-1/2") metal nail on box. Then they don't understand why they fail a job.