NFPA 73 - Electrical Inspection Code for Existing Dwellings, 2002 Edition

Document Scope:

Applies to accessible electrical equipment and those portions of the electrical system of existing one- and two-family residential dwellings that are accessible during an inspection without removing any part of the building structure or finish.

[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 01-28-2003).]

I have not followed the NFPA 73 since the 1993 TCR.

The NFPA 73 proposals started on page 598 of the 1993 NFPA TCR.

There is 29 various NFPA documents in this TCR.

NPFA 70 is not one of those 29 NFPA documents.

Joe, Do you have any idea how many States has adopted the NFPA 73 ?

I have heard very little of NFPA 73 since 1993.

Glenn

I am not aware of the states who have adopted this code. Maybe NFPA can help. It's really a very basic set of simple rules.

Joe

[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 01-29-2003).]

Joe,

I have some questions on this. First, I must admit that I am not familiar with the document, but I infer from the post it involves inspection of existing occupancies.

How often will existing occupancies be inspected?
Who will pay for these inspections?
Where will we find the numbers of qualified inspectors needed?
Who will pay for mandated repairs if the owner cannot?
What would be the AHJ's course of action in cases of non-compliance, willfull or otherwise?
What standards or other NFPA documents, such as the NEC, would apply?
Has this been adopted anywhere by an AHJ and then thrown out on constitutional grounds?

Len

In my state where the emphasis is on affordable housing, the answer will be 0.

oh, it may be adopted, but adoption and implimentation are totally different avenues right?

This code includes most of the same information already found in the NEC and is very basic. I would suggest reading this code first before jumping to conclusions with concerns about who goes where. The end result is to be sure that electrical safety is considered.

[This message has been edited by pseudonym (edited 01-30-2003).]

Am I to understand that adoption of such a document will give some government agency the right to come into my home at will and enforce this?

Joe,

Isn't this code used for existing commercial buildings? Isn't it for dwellings that has 3 or more? This kind of a code wouldn't be for a single/duplex type of a house would it? Maybe under the fire provention, but not on a normal yearly inspection. right?

I type too fast and don't look at my words. I meant to say, FIRE PREVENTION, in my last post.

if this means you want to send a bumblecrat to my home every year to inspect for electrical vbiolations,then I feel it's wrong and intrusive!


[This message has been edited by ga.sparky56 (edited 01-27-2003).]

I like this rule found in the 73 code:

2.9.8
Receptacles not having acceptable blade retention when tested with a listed retention tester shall be replaced.


[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 01-29-2003).]

I see a lot of room for abuse of power.

I find myself in conflict over this one. On one hand, I see how a document such as this could work to correct problem before they become a burned out shell. (Would the adoption of this mean the end to stablock panels?)

On the other hand, It's one more example of government saying that it has a right to poke it's nose into my business, with all of the tax spending bumblecrats that go with it. I have nothing to hide, but that doesn't mean that I welcome intrusions.

The compromise on this one will be tough.

TW

We have a thumb's up, and a thumb's down, maybe we need a thumb's straight out.

i understand the dislike of a police state, or a draconian shop.(ref ACLU of late)

bueracracy being the double edged sword...

having too little is as bad as having too much.

There is no way that you could use this type of code for routine inspections of homes. You would need probable cause and a search warrant to enter a home on a routine basis for this type of inspection. You could require something of this type at the time of sale.
Government intrusion into the lives of US citizens is, in my opinion, already excessive and is something that should be reduced, not increased.
Don

Joe:
Here in NJ, we have CCO inspections forresi, comm, and ind. properties that change type of occupancy or ownership.
I, as the electrical AHJ do a "visual" type inspection, and look for obvious life safety violations. The other inspectors also do the same for there technical areas (plumbing, bldg, fire, etc)
I'm going to obtain the NFPA 73, read it, and discuss if we can use it as a guide. I cannot "use" it without it being adopted, either by the State, or a municipality, as part of the UCC, or local ordinance.
John

Why, then, have none of the supporters of NFPA 73, even answered one question posted in my previous reply?
This code was, as I remember, a dead dog from day one. It's unenforcable expect by a police state. Bring this up at a town meeting in New Hampshire and you just may get stoned.

Adopted by the USA? What happened to states rights? Besides, a bill containg this code would die on the floor and never even make it to committee. This "code" has ex post facto written all over it and would also die under judicial review. Why?

1) It violates Article 1, Sections 9 and 10 of the Constitution of the United States: "...Congress shall pass no 'ex post facto' laws..."

2) It violates the Fourth Ammendment of the Constitution of the United States: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Inspections of this type are called "fishing expeditions" in a court of law, and are not allowed under the rules of evidence.


Unfortunately, the two best examples of this philosophy actually being implemented were Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

[QUOTE]"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety", --- Ben Franklin, who amongst his many other talents, was also a pioneer in our profession.[QUOTE/]

Joe, if you, pseudonym, and others wish the kind of safety NFPA 73 provides, then by all means move to Birmingham - but remember the old Chinese proverb, "BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR..."

Respectfully,
Len B

These inspections are usually done if the home sells by a home inspector(I know,I know,what are their qualification?}.But no matter what they see in violation,it usually just becomes a bargaining point for the buyer.Should the seller or the buyer be forced to correct this?I as a buyer would want the seller to and vice versa.
Maybe due to limited qualified inspectors,the home inspectors should be required to report any violations to the local inspector for further inspection and risk losing their license( aren't they licensed?)if they dont report a violation.The owner should be required to repair it.

I dont know what to do about the millions that dont sell but at least this would be a starting point.

I had thought NFPA 73 to be a two page generic (in the electrical sense) document for use by non-electrical inspectors?

In the past i had asked those to seek it out for rentals....

perhaps i was wrong.

I agree Len_B, (et all) with intrusion.

I wonder what ol' Ben Franklin's take on the Patriot act, Tips program, and Homeland Security would be.......

My apologies to anyone who was offended by the wording in my post. Certainly no offense was intended.

none taken here ga.sparky56,
some of us realize the sentiments towards McCarthyism.

Perhaps Mr. David Shapiro sheds some light on the subject at hand on pg 38 of Jan 03 EC mag, re; "New Rules for Old Wiring"

I see NJ is a leader??

The rules and regulations in the State of New Hampshire as they relate to the subject at hand:

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/indexes/319-c.html



[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 01-29-2003).]

I agree.
I do not oppose the inspection of premises where electrical work is being performed to ensure compliance with codes applicable at the time of installation. The consent to inspection is implied in a permit or by the act of engaging in the work.

What I oppose:
The authority of a code enforcement officer being able to enter my home without either: my express permission(consent) or a warrant(requiring probable cause). This is required of police officers. AHJ mandated inspections of existing installations would violate this. (4th ammendment)
The very distinct possibility that inspections under NFPA 73 will result in the wrongful application and/or enforcement of current electrical codes to premises built or electrical work performed prior to their adoption.(ex post facto)

What I fear:
The flooring safety inspector requiring me to replace my plank entry floor because it doesn't meet traction requirements under RSA 2144568-9999 non-slip foyer flooring for residences.
The refrigerator inspector requiring me to repair or replace my refrigerator under RSA 8675309 because the meat compartment is more than 3 degrees above the maximum allowable temperature of 44 degrees.

In the home, slip and fall(9000 deaths in 2001), and food poisioning(11,500 deaths in 2001) are the two leading causes of accidental death according to National Safety Council statistics. http://www.nsc.org/library/rept2000.htm
Each are responsible for many more deaths annually than electrical fires (38,300 fires with 284 deaths in 1998 per NFPA), of which the NFPA estimates approximately one third were caused by fixed wiring. http://www.nfpa.org/Research/NFPAFactSheets/Electrical/electrical.asp

I strongly advocate safety at home and in the workplace. I have 5 smoke detectors and a carbon monoxide detector hardwired with battery backup to safeguard my family.
I am urgently trying to convince one of my employers to comply with OSHA 29CFR1910.269 - NFPA 70E-2000 regarding arc flash PPE.
I will support all voluntary efforts to educate the public about electrical and fire safety, including INVITING the electrical inspector or a qualified electrical/fire safety person to inspect their home.

But I just don't want the G-Men pushing down my door.

Len

great post Len

Len's fears are my fears. I would rather see existing ordinances enforced, or better yet,in locales where there is no inspection/enforcement, that something be put in place. As sparky said nothing at all can be as bad as too much.I have nothing but respect for Joe T.and his demands for safe,code compliant electrical work.