# Where do you draw the line on code violations



## kg7879 (Feb 3, 2014)

I am just curious where you guys draw the line as far as code violations go.

I am at job that has no organization and circuits are being pulled that are like 3,5,13 with one neutral or two circuits that are same phase that share a neutral and I am just amazed at how scabby this contractor is.

The foremen says they will figure it all out but the best part is a lot of these circuits are not labeled at either end.


----------



## readydave8 (Sep 20, 2009)

I'm not sure if I can explain where I draw a line, but the 2 circuits that are on the same phase and sharing a neutral is definitely below the line.


----------



## AK_sparky (Aug 13, 2013)

Same phase with a shared neutral is definitely a no-no. That's a fire waiting to happen.

If I 'cross the line' it will not be on safety issue like current capacity on a conductor or proper bonding. I'll cut corners on the number of outlets needed, or cheat the support requirements on conduit by a few inches.


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

Two circuits on same phase leg with a netrual like that is a no-no ... That pretty much below of that line... 

That is no ezcuse to mark the circuit on the panelboard.. That only take couple extra minuites and be done with it as long your mind stay fresh... ( alert )


----------



## Essex (Feb 4, 2015)

Not sure how it works in the USA but in the UK we can code an existing installation as such:

C1 - immediately dangerous
C2 - potentially dangerous 
C3 - not to current regulations but not dangerous. 

Generally speaking if a report warrants a either a C1 or C2 code for any reason this would mean the electrical installation is considered 'unsatisfactory'. If there are no codes or just C3 codes then the installation is considered 'satisfactory'. 

Unfortunately due to the way the British Standard is written it is open to interpretation and many electricians disagree on there interpretation.


----------



## Essex (Feb 4, 2015)

In the UK we call your situation a 'borrowed neutral'. It is completely unacceptable in a new install and would warrant a C2 code in an Electrical Installation Condition Report.


----------



## 360max (Jun 10, 2011)

kg7879 said:


> I am just curious where you guys draw the line as far as code violations go.
> 
> I am at job that has no organization and circuits are being pulled that are like *3,5,13* with one neutral or two circuits that are same phase that share a neutral and I am just amazed at how scabby this contractor is.
> 
> The foremen says they will figure it all out but the best part is a lot of these circuits are not labeled at either end.


3 (red), 5 (blue), and 13 (black) are permitted to share a neutral (providing they all originate from same panel). All the jobs I've been on for years do not allow shared neutrals, although permitted by code.


----------



## papaotis (Jun 8, 2013)

in my world two cicuits max share a nuetral, unless i screwed up!


----------



## Nom Deplume (Jul 21, 2013)

360max said:


> 3 (red), 5 (blue), and 13 (black) are permitted to share a neutral (providing they all originate from same panel). All the jobs I've been on for years do not allow shared neutrals, although permitted by code.


This used to be common practice, but now the code requires a breaker handle tie for a mwbc. The circuits would have to be adjacent to each other like 1-3-5 or 3-5-7


----------



## 360max (Jun 10, 2011)

Nom Deplume said:


> This used to be common practice, but now the code requires a breaker handle tie for a mwbc. The circuits would have to be adjacent to each other like 1-3-5 or 3-5-7


forgot about handle ties 210.4(B)


----------



## Jarp Habib (May 18, 2014)

Reach down, pull the handle next to your seat and hope the canopy whips away into the Jetstream fast enough for your ejector seat to clear. 

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk


----------



## AK_sparky (Aug 13, 2013)

Jarp Habib said:


> Reach down, pull the handle next to your seat and hope the canopy whips away into the Jetstream fast enough for your ejector seat to clear.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk


Doesn't work in a flat spin though...poor Goose...


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Essex said:


> > Not sure how it works in the USA but in the UK we can code an existing installation as such:
> 
> 
> Think 52 individual electrical _fiefdoms_ Essex....
> ...


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

To be honest, methinks i'm becoming desensitized working in this _farm-a-thon_ _hack-o-rama_ ever day....:no:~CS~


----------



## Aegis (Mar 18, 2011)

360max said:


> 3 (red), 5 (blue), and 13 (black) are permitted to share a neutral (providing they all originate from same panel). All the jobs I've been on for years do not allow shared neutrals, although permitted by code.


I'm not following what you're saying here, unless you're joking.

These are the phases
3 is black
5 is blue
13 red

But you would run it as 

3 is red
5 is blue
13 black

So not only is the full set spaced out on the panel, the colors don't match up to their phases. This to me is very unorganized.


----------



## flyboy (Jun 13, 2011)

Essex said:


> In the UK we call your situation a 'borrowed neutral'. It is completely unacceptable in a new install and would warrant a C2 code in an Electrical Installation Condition Report.


"Borrowed neutral"...I can't explain why, but I actually read that with a British accent. :laughing:


----------



## AK_sparky (Aug 13, 2013)

Aegis said:


> I'm not following what you're saying here, unless you're joking.
> 
> These are the phases
> 3 is black
> ...


In the USoA they don't use Black-Red-Blue, where we use Red-Black-Blue.

In Canada you can use this little trick to help your apprentice remember the colour order:

Punch the apprentice in the arm, then ask him what colour his arm is.
-Red
Then ask him what colour his arm will be tomorrow.
-Black and Blue!


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

360max said:


> 3 (red), 5 (blue), and 13 (black) are permitted to share a neutral (providing they all originate from same panel). All the jobs I've been on for years do not allow shared neutrals, although permitted by code.





Aegis said:


> I'm not following what you're saying here, unless you're joking.
> 
> These are the phases
> 3 is black
> ...


Unless I'm missing something, or your all joking ... What makes you think this is a 3 phase panel :blink:


----------



## Aegis (Mar 18, 2011)

AK_sparky said:


> In the USoA they don't use Black-Red-Blue, where we use Red-Black-Blue.


We're talking about organizing 3 phases and keeping the colours matched to it's phase, who said anything about black red blue? 




emtnut said:


> Unless I'm missing something, or your all joking ... What makes you think this is a 3 phase panel :blink:


This is how I read it. The original poster said 3, 5 and 13. In the next sentence he mentions another issue which is 2 circuits of the same phase sharing a neutral. Why would he say this as a separate problem if it's already happening in a single phase environment with 3,5 and 13?


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

Aegis said:


> This is how I read it. The original poster said 3, 5 and 13. In the next sentence he mentions another issue which is 2 circuits of the same phase sharing a neutral. Why would he say this as a separate problem if it's already happening in a single phase environment with 3,5 and 13?


I think he was just saying there are 2 and 3 wire mwbc's.

You guys messed me up when I saw the color coding :laughing:

Way back in the day .. I could actually calculate the neutral imbalance using 120 degree phases  .... all I remember now, is that it isn't a problem :thumbsup:


----------



## Aegis (Mar 18, 2011)

I just came from a job that I had to clean up. Decades of hacks using whatever colour wire. Reds for neutrals, yellows for blacks, blacks for reds, brown for blues, blues for neutrals, whites for... The job was a death trap.


----------



## kg7879 (Feb 3, 2014)

I do not have an issue with mwbc other than the customer is paying for dedicated neutrals and this hack of contractor is tripping over dollars to save pennies.

This issue is since this job is so unorganized I am fairly confident that mwbc is not going to get a handle tie. Electrically 3,5,13 will work but I cant stand the thought of a person coming in after us to service something and they go de energize one of those circuits thinking they are being safe and then they go open the neutral and ruin the equipment and potentially shock themselves.

I really just do not understand contractors that do this sort of shoddy work. It really does not take that much more effort to do it right and in the end I do not think it saves them any money.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

It's an everyday affair ....:no:

The OP asks where the line is drawn

as an objective overview to this, what % of your locality is 100% compliant?:001_huh:

i'd wager we could walk through NFPA headquarters , and reveal them less than pristine...


~CS~


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

Aegis said:


> I just came from a job that I had to clean up. Decades of hacks using whatever colour wire. Reds for neutrals, yellows for blacks, blacks for reds, brown for blues, blues for neutrals, whites for... The job was a death trap.


Some guys get all the good jobs :laughing:

Makes them even better when a suit comes in, and asks if it will take very long :no:


----------



## Barjack (Mar 28, 2010)

kg7879 said:


> I am just curious where you guys draw the line as far as code violations go.
> 
> I am at job that has no organization and circuits are being pulled that are like 3,5,13 with one neutral or two circuits that are same phase that share a neutral and I am just amazed at how scabby this contractor is.
> 
> The foremen says they will figure it all out but the best part is a lot of these circuits are not labeled at either end.


As a matter of perspective, up until NEC 2008 came into effect, any installation that included MWBC's without handle ties was considered safe. I don't think its that big of a deal.

For me, the difficulty of an attic run is inversely proportional to the amount of staples the cable gets. :whistling2:


----------



## AK_sparky (Aug 13, 2013)

Barjack said:


> For me, the difficulty of an attic run is inversely proportional to the amount of staples the cable gets. :whistling2:


Staples in an attic.....hahahahahha, ya right! (I've been doing a lot of reno on my house in a nasty attic; I may be a little cynical at the moment...)


----------



## Aegis (Mar 18, 2011)

emtnut said:


> Some guys get all the good jobs :laughing: Makes them even better when a suit comes in, and asks if it will take very long :no:


I friggin gate this on a death trap of a clean up job, a suit saying "So it'll be done by the end of today?"

It's like a plane crashed into a city building, "So guys, clean up by the end of today? Good."


----------



## AK_sparky (Aug 13, 2013)

Aegis said:


> I friggin gate this on a death trap of a clean up job, a suit saying "So it'll be done by the end of today?"
> 
> It's like a plane crashed into a city building, "So guys, clean up by the end of today? Good."


Cases like that I give my best estimate plus 25-50%, and follow it up by saying it will take as long as it takes, and don't budge. If they keep pushing for a timeline, I tell them I can lie to them but it won't do anyone any good. And then I just keep working with no further comment.

Wanting to know how long it will take, or not having a good understanding of actual work involved is one thing, but I can't stand when they breathe down your neck saying it HAS to be done so and so fast.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

kg7879 said:


> I am just curious where you guys draw the line as far as code violations go.
> 
> I am at job that has no organization and circuits are being pulled that are like 3,5,13 with one neutral or two circuits that are same phase that share a neutral and I am just amazed at how scabby this contractor is.
> 
> The foremen says they will figure it all out but the best part is a lot of these circuits are not labeled at either end.


(Looks left and right) Wherever the violation begins, I draw the line. :thumbup:


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

The one that gets me is the guys knocking out the plastic and cutting the tab on quad or tandem breakers so that they fit into a rejection stab on a panel. Scumbolla's.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> The one that gets me is the guys knocking out the plastic and cutting the tab on quad or tandem breakers so that they fit into a rejection stab on a panel. Scumbolla's.


The cheater breakers are just as illegal to use and cost more money. In some situations, such as QO, the price is insane.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Jrzy said:


> The cheater breakers are just as illegal to use and cost more money. In some situations, such as QO, the price is insane.


All true, but at least those ones will grab the stab properly even though they may be ''overloading'' the bus. (probably not much usually). The surgical attacks on the breakers are worse than those women who shoot collegen into their lips and end up looking like blowfish.......


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

Maybe just cause I'm old and fussy, But I have zero tolerance for any violations, and I would stand my ground. If I got ran off...GOOD.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

joebanana said:


> Maybe just cause I'm old and fussy, But I have zero tolerance for any violations, and I would stand my ground. If I got ran off...GOOD.


Funny that the older one gets the less tolerance we have for things like shoddy workmanship.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Funny that the older one gets the less tolerance we have for things like shoddy workmanship.


Code violations do not equal shoddy workmanship.

The NEC has more and more become what it says that its not supposed to be, a design manual. I violate code all the time, but my workmanship is top notch. I've got pictures around here some place.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

The overwhelming majority of buildings I work in (resi, small commercial) have numerous violations. I simply put the blinders on, do what I'm supposed to do and get out. I couldn't live enough lifetimes and there's not enough money in the world to fix all the hack work that I see.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

MTW said:


> I couldn't live enough lifetimes and there's not enough money in the world to fix all the hack work that I install.


FIFY :thumbup:















:yawn:





:sleep1:


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Jrzy said:


> Code violations do not equal shoddy workmanship.
> 
> The NEC has more and more become what it says that its not supposed to be, a design manual. I violate code all the time, but my workmanship is top notch. I've got pictures around here some place.


If ones work can't pass an inspection it's 'shoddy'.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

MechanicalDVR said:


> If ones work can't pass an inspection it's 'shoddy'.


No, it's not.

The NFPA and the idiots and scumbags on the CMP do NOT get to define the word "shoddy" or phase "shoddy workmanship".


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Jrzy said:


> FIFY :thumbup:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Alright, that was pretty funny. :laughing::laughing:


----------



## Barjack (Mar 28, 2010)

MechanicalDVR said:


> If ones work can't pass an inspection it's 'shoddy'.



I have to disagree. There are several new "inspectors" in my area that I've had to rightly argue to get my work passed. They never site a code article and mostly fail the work based on opinion, not code. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Barjack said:


> I have to disagree. There are several new "inspectors" in my area that I've had to rightly argue to get my work passed. They never site a code article and mostly fail the work based on opinion, not code.


That describes just about every inspector in my area.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

Ever get yelled at because "I've never been questioned!"? One guy told me without a code book in my hands, I couldn't talk to him.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

MechDVR, I have used this scenario many times in the past. A customer in a condo calls you to come install an under cabinet light. They have one there already, but it has a cord and plug going into the counter receptacle, and they want to get rid of the cord and plug and have the new light hardwired. Since it's a condo, there is no attic above or basement below, no access at all.

As you know, code won't allow you to come out of the counter receptacle to power the light, and that is downright stupid. The reason is for design, not safety. The code is wrong and should be changed. I would come out of that counter receptacle without a second thought, because I do not respect the code. The fact that it wouldn't pass inspection is meaningless to me, it does NOT make the workmanship "shoddy".

You know what would be shoddy workmanship? Ripping open half of that condo owner's unit to run a cable 30 foot to the nearest switchbox or outlet that isn't on the SABC. Making 20 holes that need to be patched for no good reason is shoddy workmanship.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Barjack said:


> I have to disagree. There are several new "inspectors" in my area that I've had to rightly argue to get my work passed. They never site a code article and mostly fail the work based on opinion, not code.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


There are exceptions to most rules.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

MTW said:


> The overwhelming majority of buildings I work in (resi, small commercial) have numerous violations. I simply put the blinders on, do what I'm supposed to do and get out. I couldn't live enough lifetimes and there's not enough money in the world to fix all the hack work that I see.


Yeah and when you point out the violation the customer thinks
the motive is to run up the bill.:no:


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

MechanicalDVR said:


> If ones work can't pass an inspection it's 'shoddy'.


I thought the same thing. Violates code all the time? What?:no:


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Barjack said:


> I have to disagree. There are several new "inspectors" in my area that I've had to rightly argue to get my work passed. They never site a code article and mostly fail the work based on opinion, not code.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Ask for a code to be cited ,or ask when their retirement party is

~CS~


----------



## Barjack (Mar 28, 2010)

Here is a good example of what we deal with: 










This is from the inspection of a service upgrade. Now even though he said the doorbell transformer was double tapped, it wasn't. It was simply pigtailed to the breaker powering that circuit. 

After speaking to him, we find that he wanted the 100VA doorbell transformer on its own circuit. 

This red tag held up the sale of the house. 

This inspector is not directly employed by the city, but rather from an independent firm. After speaking with the head inspector, he reversed the red tag. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Switched (Dec 23, 2012)

Well doorbells consume vast amounts of energy!

I tell HO's all the time when they get the little home inspection report from the sale/purchase of a home. There are code violations and there are safety hazards, they can be the same thing or they can be completely different things.

A non-dedicated circuit to a bathroom receptacle is a code violation, but what is the safety concern? Overloading a CB and having to reset it?

Doesn't matter much anyway, what we install today will be a code violation 3 years from now.:whistling2:


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Barjack said:


> Here is a good example of what we deal with:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So your work was shoddy, and then it wasn't shoddy. All based on some private for-profit company's opinion. 

See how that works MechDVR?


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

Jrzy said:


> So your work was shoddy, and then it wasn't shoddy. All based on some private for-profit company's opinion.
> 
> See how that works MechDVR?


This is a good example of that point. All of a sudden a third party inspector
has some semi quasi authority and can halt progress yet at the same time is totally wrong.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Jrzy said:


> So your work was shoddy, and then it wasn't shoddy. All based on some private for-profit company's opinion.
> 
> See how that works MechDVR?


NO, what I see is a bunch of double talk and just plain old BS. If a person hires a licensed electrical contractor and that EC can't do work that passes a 'NEC code' inspection (and that EC doesn't respect the code) why shouldn't the person just hire some trunk slammer that wanted half as much for the same end results ?


----------



## Barjack (Mar 28, 2010)

MechanicalDVR said:


> NO, what I see is a bunch of double talk and just plain old BS. If a person hires a licensed electrical contractor and that EC can't do work that passes a 'NEC code' inspection (and that EC doesn't respect the code) why shouldn't the person just hire some trunk slammer that wanted half as much for the same end results ?



I'm sorry if you think it's BS but it really happened. 

I'm still sore about it because it cost people money and put the company I work for in a bad light. I tend to take these things personally. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Barjack said:


> I'm sorry if you think it's BS but it really happened.
> 
> I'm still sore about it because it cost people money and put the company I work for in a bad light. I tend to take these things personally.
> 
> ...


Wasn't directed at you brother, didn't mean for you to take it as if it were. I fully understand taking pride in your work and companies reputation.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Jrzy said:


> FIFY :thumbup:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Cool story bro


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

MechanicalDVR said:


> NO, what I see is a bunch of double talk and just plain old BS. If a person hires a licensed electrical contractor and that EC can't do work that passes a 'NEC code' inspection (and that EC doesn't respect the code) why shouldn't the person just hire some trunk slammer that wanted half as much for the same end results ?


Because the NEC is filled with crap, rules that should not be there by the NEC's own declaration.

Shoddy work is messy work or dangerous work. I don't do either one of those. However, I break the NEC on a daily basis. My customers know that and thank me for it. 

I have never installed an AFCI and I don't plan on it. If I do, I will remove them the next day. You really think customers want to pay an extra $40+ for a breaker that does nothing other than give profits to the manufacturer?


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Jrzy said:


> Because the NEC is filled with crap, rules that should not be there by the NEC's own declaration.


I couldn't agree more. 



> Shoddy work is messy work or dangerous work. I don't do either one of those. However, I break the NEC on a daily basis. My customers know that and thank me for it.


It's the same thing with permits. We never get them unless we have no choice. 



> I have never installed an AFCI and I don't plan on it. If I do, I will remove them the next day. You really think customers want to pay an extra $40+ for a breaker that does nothing other than give profits to the manufacturer?


Not only that, one callback from AFCI nuisance tripping will eat into any profit you made on that job.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Barjack said:


> Here is a good example of what we deal with:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wow, just wow. :no: That inspector probably has never wired a thing in his life.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

I don't install AFCI's when I replace outlets or extend a circuit, I don't install multi-pole breakers on MWBC's, I cut the ballast disconnects off, I will tap things off of a countertop circuit like Hax mentioned, I don't install 20 amp circuits in a dining room, and many other things along those lines.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

I used to be very particular about letter of the law code compliance. I think the value of learning code is understanding why the rules exist so you get an idea of what the hazards are and why.

The more time I spend in the trade the more my priorities shift to:
1) Safety.
2) Functionality
3) Code compliance.

If you try to meet the first two, the third one usually happens by accident.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

The majority of my work is under permit and gets inspected. I wish didn't have to install AFCI breakers --they suck. I'm phasing out of resi and AFCI breakers are just one of
the reasons.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

lighterup said:


> The majority of my work is under permit and gets inspected. I wish didn't have to install AFCI breakers --they suck. I'm phasing out of resi and AFCI breakers are just one of
> the reasons.


It's a simple process that I have developed.

I pull out the AFCI breakers from every panel that I have to go in and figure out nuisance tripping problems, and replace them with normal breakers. I then keep those AFCI breakers and loan them to the homeowners who need a permit pulled for their job. Once the inspection is done, I put the normal breakers in and everyone is happy.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

Jrzy said:


> It's a simple process that I have developed.
> 
> I pull out the AFCI breakers from every panel that I have to go in and figure out nuisance tripping problems, and replace them with normal breakers. I then keep those AFCI breakers and loan them to the homeowners who need a permit pulled for their job. Once the inspection is done, I put the normal breakers in and everyone is happy.


What if any of those trips were caused by something that could/should've been seen/diagnosed/fixed?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Majewski said:


> What if any of those trips were caused by something that could/should've been seen/diagnosed/fixed?


What if the manufacturers didn't lie and pay off the CMP?

Then AFCIs would have never been installed in the first place and therefore never tripped. I would have never been called to the house. And whatever evil, horrible thing that made the AFCI trip would still be there like it has been for the last hundred years.

Show me one bit of proof that an AFCI actually works.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

Jrzy said:


> What if the manufacturers didn't lie and pay off the CMP?
> 
> Then AFCIs would have never been installed in the first place and therefore never tripped. I would have never been called to the house. And whatever evil, horrible thing that made the AFCI trip would still be there like it has been for the last hundred years.
> 
> Show me one bit of proof that an AFCI actually works.


I'm not arguing this, I'm just asking what if it was caused by a real issue and YOU were the person to continue hiding it. That "what if" is my question and concern.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

Majewski said:


> I'm not arguing this, I'm just asking what if it was caused by a real issue and YOU were the person to continue hiding it. That "what if" is my question and concern.


There is another on going post that CS started about glowing terminations
and technology invented to open the circuit breaker ..
I think it's well established on ET that most members all agree that AFCI
technology is not working as promised. It's the manufacturers attitude that
the electricians are doing "something wrong" when an AFCI trips.

Jrzy , I pretty sure most here (today on this thread) agree with your position
on AFCI's. the question I have is , aren't you concerned about litigation being
brought against you , especially if you're removing code compliant / required
products right in front of your customers? If there is a fire the buck will be
passed down to you. I don't believe your customers will back you in the
event of property damage or death of individual(s).


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Majewski said:


> I'm not arguing this, I'm just asking what if it was caused by a real issue and YOU were the person to continue hiding it. That "what if" is my question and concern.


That's exactly what I answered.

AFCIs don't work. They shouldn't have been installed in the first place.

Any issue that trips them is a non-issue.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

Jrzy said:


> That's exactly what I answered.
> 
> AFCIs don't work. They shouldn't have been installed in the first place.
> 
> Any issue that trips them is a non-issue.


Are you serious? You're just pulling everyones leg here , right?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

lighterup said:


> There is another on going post that CS started about glowing terminations
> and technology invented to open the circuit breaker ..
> I think it's well established on ET that most members all agree that AFCI
> technology is not working as promised. It's the manufacturers attitude that
> ...


I got 15 years of doing unlicensed sidework, AFCI's are the least of my possible legal troubles :laughing:

I explain things to my customers and suggest they look it up for themselves. Most customers don't want permits and don't want hassles from BS like AFCI's.

The last thing I expect a customer to do is rat me out when they were complicit in me removing them. They want things to go smoothly with insurance as well. In the worse case scenario, I'll just say they were mistaken and there never were AFCI breakers there, prove that there were.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

I also think afcis have "opportunities" to be better aka work as they claim but it's the litigation side that I wouldn't throw caution to the wind with... As for CS thread/post on glowing connections, I want to make my own tests with different breakers hooked up and see what happens, it'll be a fun homework assignment.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

Jrzy said:


> I got 15 years of doing unlicensed sidework, AFCI's are the least of my possible legal troubles :laughing:
> 
> I explain things to my customers and suggest they look it up for themselves. Most customers don't want permits and don't want hassles from BS like AFCI's.
> 
> The last thing I expect a customer to do is rat me out when they were complicit in me removing them. They want things to go smoothly with insurance as well. In the worse case scenario, I'll just say they were mistaken and there never were AFCI breakers there, prove that there were.


It's your business. Do you have a lawyer on retainer? If he/she does not
see a problem with this , then I guess you're good to go.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

lighterup said:


> Are you serious? You're just pulling everyones leg here , right?


Maybe you are not following me here.

AFCIs are not proven to work. They should not be installed. Anything that trips an AFCI doesn't bother me because the AFCI shouldn't have been installed in the first place.

Now let's look at GFCIs, we know for a fact that they work. There is a huge amount of proof that they can help save lives. We can do tests of our own and see it. Therefore I would never remove a GFCI and I will always look for the cause of the ground fault that is tripping it.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

Lol...... Imma need to go look for maw hot wheels now.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

Used to be pretty commom to see AFCIs trip on neutral-ground faults. That's the only thing I'd try to troubleshoot out of those circuits, but I hear tell that the GFP function is being eliminated, anyway.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Majewski said:


> Lol...... Imma need to go look for maw hot wheels now.


You're such a fake Jew. The last time you were a black guy with a fro.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

Jrzy said:


> You're such a fake Jew. The last time you were a black guy with a fro.


I'm guessing this in reference to the belief that I'm someone else? Either way I'm saving this as my signature! Lol


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Majewski said:


> I'm guessing this in reference to the belief that I'm someone else? Either way I'm saving this as my signature! Lol


PeterD says your FrunkSlammer. That may be true, I'm not sure. Most things match except for the rampant hatred for America.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

Jrzy said:


> PeterD says your FrunkSlammer. That may be true, I'm not sure. Most things match except for the rampant hatred for America.


I don't have hatred for any country! I'm going to have to look up this guy and read some previous posts, I noticed it says banned.... Must be for a reason, hope I don't get banned! Lol oh wait, toy cars....


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

This is just my personal opinion, so please don't take it too darn serious or harsh, but I believe (see above) that Chicken Steve's whole big anti afci breakers campaign came about because Steve's underfunded electrical concern cannot seem to be able to purchase the afci breaker and still turn a profit on the wiring job. Maybe that has changed during the ensuing years, but I will always hold to the belief that, that was the kernel of the war. 

I like to follow my own advice- Charge Large! and let the CS's of the world sort out the details of the codes..........


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

macmikeman said:


> This is just my personal opinion, so please don't take it too darn serious or harsh, but I believe (see above) that Chicken Steve's whole big anti afci breakers campaign came about because Steve's underfunded electrical concern cannot seem to be able to purchase the afci breaker and still turn a profit on the wiring job. Maybe that has changed during the ensuing years, but I will always hold to the belief that, that was the kernel of the war.
> 
> I like to follow my own advice- Charge Large! and let the CS's of the world sort out the details of the codes..........



Or ,quite possibly the trade has been _rather_ good to Steve , so in his twilight years he's looking to pass it on with a modicum of integrity

Fowl conspiracy as it may seem to you Mac.....~CS~:no:


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Jrzy said:


> Because the NEC is filled with crap, rules that should not be there by the NEC's own declaration.
> 
> Shoddy work is messy work or dangerous work. I don't do either one of those. However, I break the NEC on a daily basis. My customers know that and thank me for it.
> 
> I have never installed an AFCI and I don't plan on it. If I do, I will remove them the next day. You really think customers want to pay an extra $40+ for a breaker that does nothing other than give profits to the manufacturer?


Yeah yeah yeah, you are just a working class hero a real robbing hood of da hood. Carry on being a legend in your own mind.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Yeah yeah yeah, you are just a working class hero a real robbing hood of da hood. Carry on being a legend in your own mind.


Why you mad tho?


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Jrzy said:


> Why you mad tho?



I'm not mad nor angry. Just calling it how it seems to be. The last few posts of yours have explained a lot of things.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

MechanicalDVR said:


> I'm not mad nor angry. Just calling it how it seems to be. The last few posts of yours have explained a lot of things.


That I am awesome?


----------



## zac (May 11, 2009)

Jrzy said:


> That I am awesome?


No self nicknames are allowed. That's low hanging fruit.


Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

jrzy said:


> that i am awesome?


*Not even close to a word I would use when referring to you.*


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

MechanicalDVR said:


> *Not even close to a word I would use when referring to you.*


Awww, that's cute. He mad. :thumbup:


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

macmikeman said:


> This is just my personal opinion, so please don't take it too darn serious or harsh, but I believe (see above) that Chicken Steve's whole big anti afci breakers campaign came about because Steve's underfunded electrical concern cannot seem to be able to purchase the afci breaker and still turn a profit on the wiring job. Maybe that has changed during the ensuing years, but I will always hold to the belief that, that was the kernel of the war.
> 
> I like to follow my own advice- Charge Large! and let the CS's of the world sort out the details of the codes..........


I work for a company that charges top dollar for labor and material and we don't install AFCI's unless it's a permitted and inspected job, and even then we don't always do. We simply don't want the trouble they cause.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

MTW said:


> I work for a company that charges top dollar for labor and material and we don't install AFCI's unless it's a permitted and inspected job, and even then we don't always do. We simply don't want the trouble they cause.


nothing personal , but they are a bunch of hacks. 


Anyway, it's time for your mactip of the day! 

BR series Eaton AFCI's work seamlessly regardless of your sloppy ground touches neutral work you do, and the constant trip issues sure have gone the way of the stagecoach. Whether they can detect an arc and prevent a fire is another story altogether, and you have certainly read my view on what actually is working inside one in addition to a thermal magnetic trip device , and they do cost more, but .......... put one in and the entire industry has to deep pockets you in event of a fire , since they make so many promises, and pushed it in to code so deep. Sleep well .


----------



## readydave8 (Sep 20, 2009)

Jrzy said:


> The last thing I expect a customer to do is rat me out when they were complicit in me removing them.


I would not agree nor disagree with most of what you have posted in this thread, but this sentence is totally absurd. You will definitely find customers that beg you to do illegal work, and if things go wrong, totally blame you. This is not a theory but a fact.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

readydave8 said:


> I would not agree nor disagree with most of what you have posted in this thread, but this sentence is totally absurd. You will definitely find customers that beg you to do illegal work, and if things go wrong, totally blame you. This is not a theory but a fact.


Maybe.

I've dealt with a lot of customers who were dealing with insurance after Sandy. The last thing a homeowner with damage to his/her home wants to do is throw a wrench into the process which will add even more time to what it currently takes to get a check from the insurance company. 

Also remember that the work I did is not the cause of the fire in the situation we are talking about, I don't do dangerous or shoddy work. Removing AFCI's doesn't cause fires. And since AFCI's don't actually work, they don't prevent fires either.


----------



## Barjack (Mar 28, 2010)

Jrzy said:


> Also remember that the work I did is not the cause of the fire in the situation we are talking about, I don't do dangerous or shoddy work. Removing AFCI's doesn't cause fires. And since AFCI's don't actually work, they don't prevent fires either.


I would not want to argue from that position in a court of law.

The fact is, code requires AFCI's to be installed. Whether they actually work or not is irrelevant. Any attorney will use your actions to pin the liability on you.

The whole "I won't blame you if there's a fire." from the client becomes moot once the litigation starts.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

I _agree_ BarJack

But i would suggest performance culpability be passed up to CSPC, NEMA,CMP-2,UL officials 

If there was a way to do so.....

~CS~


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Barjack said:


> I would not want to argue from that position in a court of law.
> 
> The fact is, code requires AFCI's to be installed. Whether they actually work or not is irrelevant. Any attorney will use your actions to pin the liability on you.
> 
> The whole "I won't blame you if there's a fire." from the client becomes moot once the litigation starts.


Like I said, I never removed anything. The customer doesn't know what happened, how could they? They don't even know what an AFCI breaker looks like. :whistling2:


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Barjack said:


> I would not want to argue from that position in a court of law.
> 
> The fact is, code requires AFCI's to be installed. Whether they actually work or not is irrelevant. Any attorney will use your actions to pin the liability on you.
> 
> The whole "I won't blame you if there's a fire." from the client becomes moot once the litigation starts.


Blame is a funny thing, let someone lose a pet or something else that they value and watch how a great customer turns into a sworn enemy quick fast and in a hurry.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

macmikeman said:


> nothing personal , but they are a bunch of hacks.


Cool story bro.


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

I'll believe all the nuisance tripping has gone away when I see it. I don't trust any of the brands and will take a long time to get me to feel any different. I put them in because I have to and charge accordingly.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

readydave8 said:


> ...You will definitely find customers that beg you to do illegal work, and if things go wrong, totally blame you. This is not a theory but a fact.


 Absolutely. The onus is on the contractor. The customer can play dumb and reap the benefits. It happened to a buddy of mine before he got licensed.

Lady knew she was hiring an apprentice, he did a chit ton of work for her, when payment time came she stonewalled him. He pushed and she ran to the board and reported him for unlicensed work.

I can definitely see a customer doing the same to EC for unpermitted or non-compliant work.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

MTW said:


> Cool story bro.



You should come and work for me Peter.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

macmikeman said:


> You should come and work for me Peter.


:blink:

Actually you're right, they are hacks. :thumbsup:


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

macmikeman said:


> nothing personal , but they are a bunch of hacks.
> 
> 
> Anyway, it's time for your mactip of the day!
> ...


I second that (BR series afci's).
I religiously used S##m#ns OCP breakers until I gave up and tried
something different (plus there was a call back). Many of these were
the 2 pole multl wire breakers.
Since using BR , I have not had any call backs (only been about a year).


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

Big John said:


> Absolutely. The onus is on the contractor. The customer can play dumb and reap the benefits. It happened to a buddy of mine before he got licensed.
> 
> Lady knew she was hiring an apprentice, he did a chit ton of work for her, when payment time came she stonewalled him. He pushed and she ran to the board and reported him for unlicensed work.
> 
> I can definitely see a customer doing the same to EC for unpermitted or non-compliant work.


My brother is a driver for an Amish crew that does home improvement
work. The Amish GC does most of his own plumbing , electric ..everything
because the majority is "finished basement projects.
They do a lot of work in ritzy neighborhoods (surprise ..surprise!..)
My brother says this has happened to his boss several times ...they wait
till the final payment is due , then act all surprised that no permits were
pulled for the job . Refuse to pay until permits and inspections are done.:laughing:


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

lighterup said:


> My brother is a driver for an Amish crew that does home improvement
> work. The Amish GC does most of his own plumbing , electric ..everything
> because the majority is "finished basement projects.
> They do a lot of work in ritzy neighborhoods (surprise ..surprise!..)
> ...


That can be handled very easy at the signing of the proposal. I do that anytime somebody wants to go without permitting the job. It's written in that's an extra cost if required, and *they* must provide drawings adequate to pass building dept approval. In writing.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

macmikeman said:


> That can be handled very easy at the signing of the proposal. I do that anytime somebody wants to go without permitting the job. It's written in that's an extra cost if required, and *they* must provide drawings adequate to pass building dept approval. In writing.


Brilliant.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

macmikeman said:


> That can be handled very easy at the signing of the proposal. I do that anytime somebody wants to go without permitting the job. It's written in that's an extra cost if required, and *they* must provide drawings adequate to pass building dept approval. In writing.


Good point , but the Amish contractor is totally illegal. He does not have ANY licenses at all. This aggravates me because I live in a large Amish area and
he is just one of many that do this. I'm glad the guy gets ripped off. I hope he gets caught. Impossible to compete at this level. One of the reasons I'm phasing out of resi here.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

lighterup said:


> Good point , but the Amish contractor is totally illegal. He does not have ANY licenses at all. This aggravates me because I live in a large Amish area and
> he is just one of many that do this. I'm glad the guy gets ripped off. I hope he gets caught. Impossible to compete at this level. One of the reasons I'm phasing out of resi here.


That kind of surprises me.... I figured they all were so moral and ethical.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

Majewski said:


> That kind of surprises me.... I figured they all were so moral and ethical.


Oh no..no no no no. Don't want to get me goin on that:no:


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Majewski said:


> That kind of surprises me.... I figured they all were so moral and ethical.


Only to other Amish. The rest of us English are considered dead people to them.


----------



## dawgs (Dec 1, 2007)

lighterup said:


> Good point , but the Amish contractor is totally illegal. He does not have ANY licenses at all. This aggravates me because I live in a large Amish area and he is just one of many that do this. I'm glad the guy gets ripped off. I hope he gets caught. Impossible to compete at this level. One of the reasons I'm phasing out of resi here.


Chris, is your brother a worker or does he just drive them around?


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

lighterup said:


> My brother is a driver for an Amish crew that does home improvement
> work. The Amish GC does most of his own plumbing , electric ..everything
> because the majority is "finished basement projects.
> They do a lot of work in ritzy neighborhoods (surprise ..surprise!..)
> ...


They're probably Mennonite and not Amish.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

dawgs said:


> Chris, is your brother a worker or does he just drive them around?


He takes them there and then later picks them up. Occasionally he
takes a peak to see what their doing . Calls me to tell me what he saw
when it looks really bad. He was a helper with me years ago , so he
knows poor work when he sees it.

I think they should be held to the same standard as "yankee" 
contractors. Just sayin.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

lighterup said:


> Good point , but the Amish contractor is totally illegal. He does not have ANY licenses at all. This aggravates me because I live in a large Amish area and
> he is just one of many that do this. I'm glad the guy gets ripped off. I hope he gets caught. Impossible to compete at this level. One of the reasons I'm phasing out of resi here.


There's no license required for residential electrical work in Ohio. How is it illegal then?

I'm not defending them as I've heard other stories about really bad work done by Mennonite contractors. But to say it's illegal is not really truthful if no license is required in the first place.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

Oh so our money is good enough for him to take but he sees us as dead people? Sounds like a stand up guy(s)!


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

MTW said:


> There's no license required for residential electrical work in Ohio. How is it illegal then?
> 
> I'm not defending them as I've heard other stories about really bad work done by Mennonite contractors. But to say it's illegal is not really truthful if no license is required in the first place.


In Ohio , we are under the Ohio Residential Code ( for resi work).
The state does not regulate a state license or enforce resi jobs , it is a state
law that they regulate commercial work. 
Resi work is enforced at the county or local municipalities level. 
At the county or local level , in order to do Plumbing , Electric , HVAC ,
Refrigeration and a couple others they require your State license in
order to register and pull permits.Permits are required for any work done
on a residential property that is an improvement. NOT Maintenance work.
Most building departments are a "sub building department" as an extension
from the department of Ohio Building and Codes.

I think this answers your question. Yes , permits are required. Yes state certification is required.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

MTW said:


> They're probably Mennonite and not Amish.


No . Amish


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

lighterup said:


> No . Amish


Well I'd tell ya to hope his barn burns down but we both know it'll just rise up 2hrs later.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

lighterup said:


> In Ohio , we are under the Ohio Residential Code ( for resi work).
> The state does not regulate a state license or enforce resi jobs , it is a state
> law that they regulate commercial work.
> Resi work is enforced at the county or local municipalities level.
> ...


Alright, I stand corrected then. 

If I were a homeowner, I wouldn't want contractors to get permits either. It adds unnecessary cost and invites government paid hacks aka inspectors in to find problems that don't exist and to make everyone's life miserable for no reason.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

Majewski said:


> Well I'd tell ya to hope his barn burns down but we both know it'll just rise up 2hrs later.


Farming went downhill , Amish need to support there lives too. They 
entered the construction market over the last 20 years or so in huge numbers. It has not been untl the last 3-4 years that the electrical
contracting market has been affected.
I was called a few months ago by an Amish GC. He said he needed
an electrician to work with him in Cleveland. I turned it down because
Cleveland officials are still being investigated (some are in jail) for
extorting contractors out of $$$ for job approvals. I don't need the work
that bad.
Any how , the Amish GC admitted to me , he did not need me in our own
back yard cause the Building official in our area does not require his
brother-in-law ( who used to have an electricians license , but let it go)
to register or pull electrical permits on the jobs they do in our county. 
Yet , "yankee" contractors do.
I did not ask the AHJ @ the county about this because if it's true , he's
not going to fess up and if it's false then it's false. It would not surprise
me if it's true.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

I didn't realize any of that. I understand your frustrations now, that sucks.


----------



## SdCountySparky (Aug 6, 2014)

Now if these circuits have a shared neutral you have to have a breaker tie between the breakers how would you do that with Ckt 3,5,13?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

SdCountySparky said:


> Now if these circuits have a shared neutral you have to have a breaker tie between the breakers how would you do that with Ckt 3,5,13?


The requirement for a handle tie for a MWBC is relatively new, I think it started in the 2008 code.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

lighterup said:


> Good point , but the Amish contractor is totally illegal. He does not have ANY licenses at all. This aggravates me because I live in a large Amish area and
> he is just one of many that do this. I'm glad the guy gets ripped off. I hope he gets caught. Impossible to compete at this level. One of the reasons I'm phasing out of resi here.


Funny how when you get down to the nitty gritty with most supposed 'highly' religious groups there is rampant corruption issues in many ways.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Funny how when you get down to the nitty gritty with most supposed 'highly' religious groups there is rampant corruption issues in many ways.


Truth!!!


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Open live parts, unsafe pool wiring, and zip cord used for permanent wiring are about the only things that actually concern me. Most code violations aren't real safety hazards.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:


MTW said:


> Open live parts, unsafe pool wiring, and zip cord used for permanent wiring are about the only things that actually concern me. Most code violations aren't real safety hazards.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

lighterup said:


> :laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:


Care to explain what's funny?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

MTW said:


> Open live parts, unsafe pool wiring, and zip cord used for permanent wiring are about the only things that actually concern me. Most code violations aren't real safety hazards.


I don't even do pools or hot tubs. I've received 11 calls for both this season and I turned them all done. 

I don't do them for the liability. But I know many of the calls are just to see if they can get the work done for less than the installer's electrician, who is most likely a bottom feeder already.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

MTW said:


> Care to explain what's funny?


No , I don't


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

lighterup said:


> No , I don't


Ok Cletis.


----------



## Barjack (Mar 28, 2010)

Jrzy said:


> I don't even do pools or hot tubs. I've received 11 calls for both this season and I turned them all done.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't do them for the liability. But I know many of the calls are just to see if they can get the work done for less than the installer's electrician, who is most likely a bottom feeder already.



I really don't see what the big deal is about pools.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Barjack said:


> I really don't see what the big deal is about pools.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Who said anything about a big deal?


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

I also don't like to touch pools...unless I have my trunks.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Majewski said:


> I also don't like to touch pools...unless I have my trunks.


The freedom of no trunks is much nicer.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

MechanicalDVR said:


> The freedom of no trunks is much nicer.


Does Lighterup approve of this non compliance?


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

macmikeman said:


> Does Lighterup approve of this non compliance?


I would need a code reference to see this as non compliance.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

MechanicalDVR said:


> The freedom of no trunks is much nicer.


That's hot.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

:laughing:


macmikeman said:


> Does Lighterup approve of this non compliance?


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Majewski said:


> That's hot.


Not as hot as night time nude scuba diving with a college coed crowd...but still liberating.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Not as hot as night time nude scuba diving with a college coed crowd...but still liberating.


I see what you're doing, you're trying to lure me into the water. No sir, I will not! Lol jk


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Example of a code I could care less about- 210.5 (C)(1)b. Where more than one voltage system the method of identification must be documented in a manner thats readily available or permanently posted at each branch circuit panel board.

If a handyman type doesn't know the difference between a 480/277volt circuit breaker and a 240/120 volt one, they got no business anyplace near the electric room anyway. Stuff like this in the code book is just extra headache crapppola and causes bids to go up for unnecessary reasons in my opinion. It all worked real well in the old days before the plaque madness got into the code and now it is taking over and I gots to have a full time engraver on the crew just to stay compliant with all the places where permanent means of notifications are required.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

You don't just use post-it notes?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> Example of a code I could care less about- 210.5 (C)(1)b. Where more than one voltage system the method of identification must be documented in a manner thats readily available or permanently posted at each branch circuit panel board.
> 
> If a handyman type doesn't know the difference between a 480/277volt circuit breaker and a 240/120 volt one, they got no business anyplace near the electric room anyway. Stuff like this in the code book is just extra headache crapppola and causes bids to go up for unnecessary reasons in my opinion. It all worked real well in the old days before the plaque madness got into the code and now it is taking over and I gots to have a full time engraver on the crew just to stay compliant with all the places where permanent means of notifications are required.


That's a safety issue, IMO. Not a design issue. It should be followed.

I found a few good online plaque makers for generator signs. I can give you the links if you say something nice about me.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Jrzy said:


> That's a safety issue, IMO. Not a design issue. It should be followed.
> 
> I found a few good online plaque makers for generator signs. I can give you the links if you say something nice about me.



Do you put engraved labels on 4'' square coverplates on the jboxes up in the ceiling tile? Sharpie is not a permanent method of labeling for the environment..... Do you do an arc flash hazard study before you open any panel covers up? That's a safety issue also.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> Do you put engraved labels on 4'' square coverplates on the jboxes up in the ceiling tile? Sharpie is not a permanent method of labeling for the environment.....


 It's not required to be permanent on the JB's. I always label them, I hate when people don't.



> Do you do an arc flash hazard study before you open any panel covers up? That's a safety issue also.


That's not electrical code. OSHA doesn't apply to me.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Damn, I can't beat this guy. I guess its time for personal attacks.......:whistling2:


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> Damn, I can't beat this guy. I guess its time for personal attacks.......:whistling2:


You can't afford a good stove.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Jrzy said:


> You can't afford a good stove.


Jees, Acid Trip is right , you say such mean things I thing I will pretend to cut my wrists now .


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

macmikeman said:


> Jees, Acid Trip is right , you say such mean things I thing I will pretend to cut my wrists now .



Lidocaine makes it painless :thumbsup:


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

Like the rub on stuff!


----------



## Meadow (Jan 14, 2011)

Majewski said:


> Like the rub on stuff!



Yup!


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

I friggin love that stuff!


----------



## Gnome (Dec 25, 2013)

Barjack said:


> The whole "I won't blame you if there's a fire." from the client becomes moot once the litigation starts.


Or it isn't the client but their grieving relatives. Grandpa's son could care less what Grandpa verbally agreed to 'cause "*everyone *knows Grandpa wouldn't agree to something like that".


----------

