ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Admin 19
Recent Posts
Anyone hiring inspectors?
by HotLine1. 03/27/17 08:03 AM
Old decora style outlets
by Admin. 03/25/17 11:40 AM
ESA Arc flash course
by TheShockDoctors. 03/24/17 10:15 AM
fuse rejectors
by HotLine1. 03/24/17 07:53 AM
Another Forum Update
by Admin. 03/22/17 03:04 PM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
231,629 Are you busy
166,464 Re: Forum
160,718 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 52 guests, and 7 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#86072 - 09/05/03 04:15 PM Do you see any additional violations?  
Joe Tedesco  Offline
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Boston, Massachusetts USA
The missing screw, and open knockout have been identified by the inspector, and the receptacle is secured with a single 6/32 screw.

The drill bit just happens to be sitting on top of the box.

Do you see any additional violations? If so, please cite the rule in the NEC.

[Linked Image]

[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 09-06-2003).]

Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#86073 - 09/05/03 04:43 PM Re: Do you see any additional violations?  
rmiell  Offline
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 242
La Junta, Co. USA
Since there is a commpression conduit fitting, I would think this is outdoors. It is not weatherproof, nor is the cover. Of course, since manufacturers do not make UL listed raintight compression connectors, this whole job is suspect. (Article 314.15(A))

Box fill might be exceeded, if more than 3 conductors are installed. (Article 314.16)

Is the box supported correctly? (Article 314.23 (A))

Now, where is that article about stupidity????


#86074 - 09/05/03 05:14 PM Re: Do you see any additional violations?  
Joe Tedesco  Offline
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Boston, Massachusetts USA

I did not think about the box fill with the 2 wire device deduction in this octagon box.

If it had 2 - 12 AWG THW, for example, and the box was one of the sizes in the table how would we determne if it was too small?

I am pretty sure that this was in a hotel along a wall in an equipment room, and not out 0f doors, if it was I would have taken more pictures of it.

The connector issue is strange, and we have to be careful when they are used in locations that include those other than dry that are defined in Article 100 under "Locations"

The stupidity code? I think that is still being edited and maybe we can ask a few of the members here for some advice, or maybe they can direct us to a place were we can find rules that apply?

You still have one more item to identify before the Red Tag can be left on the Job .....

Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

#86075 - 09/05/03 05:30 PM Re: Do you see any additional violations?  
Electricmanscott  Offline
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,457
Holden, MA USA
This is obviously an old installation which was very common. Why are we applying current codes to this? Can I have my drill bit back now.

#86076 - 09/05/03 06:06 PM Re: Do you see any additional violations?  
resqcapt19  Offline
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
In my area compression type connectors are almost always because they are required by the job specs. It is a very rare set of specs that permit the use of set screw connectors and couplings.


#86077 - 09/05/03 06:09 PM Re: Do you see any additional violations?  
wa2ise  Offline
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 782
Oradell NJ USA
Is there a green pigtail wire to tie the outlet's ground to the box?

And there's a missing screw that should be holding the cover to the box.

#86078 - 09/05/03 06:17 PM Re: Do you see any additional violations?  
ThinkGood  Offline
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,081
Milwaukee, WI
Somebody knocked out a knockout and didn't un-knock it properly.

NEC 314.17(a)???

Oh, also, the device is upside-down [Linked Image]

[This message has been edited by ThinkGood (edited 09-05-2003).]

#86079 - 09/05/03 06:34 PM Re: Do you see any additional violations?  
Joe Tedesco  Offline
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Boston, Massachusetts USA

You are correct, but if the existing receptacle secured to this flat cover was replaced ..... could the

AHJ make you bring it up to the current code?

Then the greenEBJ, the screws to be more than one securing the receptacle to the cover would be violations.

The KO and missing screw were identified in the first post here.

The drill? That was BJ's and he borrowed it from Bill and Reno was looking for it too because he said that Sparky was using it to do work for Websparky and some of the other electricians in the UK, Belgan, Australia, and France!!

Who owns the drill bit??

Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

#86080 - 09/06/03 02:24 PM Re: Do you see any additional violations?  
electure  Offline

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,259
Fullerton, CA USA
Here's one that's a couple of shades of grey.
If it was installed by'02 Code, 406.4(C)..."shall be held rigidly against the cover by more than one screw..."
If by '99 Code, 410-56(f)(3)..."shall be secured by more than one screw"....
If by '96 Code, 410-56(i) only said "Receptacles installed in raised covers shall not be secured solely by a single screw".
This installation appears to be older than the '99 Code. So it wouldn't be subject to that rule.

The box is a 4"X1-1/2" octogonal. Even if the conductors were #10, the box has the necessary volume. (I also seem to remember that in the "bad old days", there was only a 1 conductor per device deduction made from the box fill)...S

#86081 - 09/06/03 02:27 PM Re: Do you see any additional violations?  
PCBelarge  Offline
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 681
Dobbs Ferry, NY, USA
One cannot rely on the fitting for continuity of the equipment ground when using a round box.


Pierre Belarge

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Member Spotlight
lil suzi
lil suzi
Posts: 57
Joined: August 2003
Show All Member Profiles 

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.019s Queries: 15 (0.004s) Memory: 0.8172 MB (Peak: 0.9936 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-03-28 10:07:57 UTC