ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues Lawyer's New Home & An Inspector Wired It!

Picture #1:

The non-GE circuit breakers violate the manufacturer's warranty, but may not be a listing violation. If it is, I would cite 110.3(B).

110.12 would be a stretch, but a missing 3/4" KO (not visible in pic) violated 110.12(A).

200.6(B) is violated by the neutral with only one white (and barely visible) stripe.

The EGC and Neutral electrically connected after the first bond creates a parallel path for the neutral current violating 250.6(A), 310.4, and 250.142(B).

This would be speculative, but 110.3(B) is probably violated because I will bet any amount of money that he doesn't own or use a torque wrench or torque screwdriver. I showed him mine once, and explained why I had them, and he said that I "think too much" and shook his head in a patronizing manner.

Anyone care to add?

[This message has been edited by sparky66wv (edited 12-13-2002).]

That's what I get for not looking at the close-up picture. The green wire is in with the feeders, supposely making this a sub-panel.

Have seen installations where a green wire has been in parallel with the grounded conductor between the meter enclosure and the Main disconnect ( panelboard) on non-metallic raceway systems. Yes I know it is a violation.

Picture #2:

334.30 would be a violation if the 4.5' is "as measured along the length of the cable". I can't remember where I read the last quoted part, so this may be a moot point.

However, 334.30(B)(2) is violated as well as 334.15(C).

Picture #3:

310.15(B)(2)(a) is violated due to bundling of the cables, as well as 334.15(C).

Picture #4:
More 334.15(C) violations and this one crosses the 110.12 line too.

Picture #5:
334.15(B) for physical protection and/or 334.30 and 310.11(C) for means of support.

Picture #6:
More of #5 with 334.30 and 110.12 violated with the run of NMB Cable in the upper left hand corner of the picture.

Picture #7:
Another 334.15(B) and 334.30 violation.

Picture #8:
More bundling, 310.15(B)(2)(a) and 334.15(C).

Picture #9:
More 310.15(B)(2)(a), 334.15(C) and 334.30.

If you look at the local code, there are no violations. The AHJ and his inspectors has the right to approve any items he wishes.

I see several items that appear to be not "to code." Some of them don't affect safety at all. All in all the instalation may meet the standard of a reasonable level of safety.

I would not do finish work at the level it appears to have been done, but my work in progress has looked much worse.

George,
there are some no-no's here that 90.4 would not cover ,that most compitent trademan would consider.

remember, the 'code book' swings both ways.

sorry, any defense here would be a weak one.

ECN Discussion Forums

Read the Rules, Policies, and Disclaimers

Just a reminder that the ECN board members should be aware of!



[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 12-22-2002).]

sparky66wv

Please don't take any of my comments as personal. I was only calling attention to a blank profile where some choose to make remarks about something they have no experience with. I agree with many replies here, but not all, and as far as my space for violations I will always support the negative comments when possible and ask that the person who sent the image follow up.

Your "inspector" and his method of installation may be questionable and in violation of the code. So how can we submit a complaint?

It sounds like 66 has it handled, He has an owner that is willing to fix things and pay for the fixes. Like I said in an earlier post sometimes it is not worth it to fight for marginal performance and just pay for good performance. I have found this out through the years with many different types of contractors. The only question I have is if 66 were to rewire this house would he have to pull a permit and have the same inspector inspect the rewire. That could be a sticky situation.
Scott

The only inspections in my area are for the PoCo (Services only) and in the City of Lewisburg (Building Inspector, not IAEI...)

This house is in a rural area, hence, no inspections except for the PoCo.

This inspector is an Electrical Contractor first and foremost, and doesn't like doing inspection work (unless it's for me, 'cuz I'm an easy $75) and he is one of about 4 or 5 that I can choose from. My favorite inspector, not this guy, is moving away (and wants me to get my certs...)

I should go take the IAEI tests, but now that I have a helper, and I can't legally let him work alone (a little conflict of interest there) it wouldn't be cost effective for me to pull off a job to go do an inspection.

I guess that extra credential wouldn't hurt even if I never used it...

However, I would LOVE to get mandatory electrical inspections at all levels here...

Joe,

No problem, since I was the only person who knew who this guy is, I thought you were speaking directly to me.


I wish I knew how to voice my opinion to the powers that be. I can post pics and b!tch and moan, but I honestly don't now what to do from here besides continuing to judge my own work on a much higher standard and not expect much from anyone else (besides Jimmy).

I learned from a past experience that even the Local Fire Marshall Deputies are too ignorant to back me up. And politics plays a big part, this EC/Inspector has been in business along time, is really a nice guy, and is a deacon in the church, etc.

I guess I'm just really disappointed in his work.

Any ideas?

Thanks,

-Virgil