# Vapor boxes required as code??



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Um.... does 'vapor tight' mean 'in-use cover'? I.E., 406.9(B)(1).






And telling an inspector to F$#% himself won't help you in the future.


----------



## Pete m. (Nov 19, 2011)

I'm thinking that may be energy code driven. i.e. gaskets that seal to the back of the vapor barrier and/or sheetrock.

The inspector still owes you a code section.

Pete


----------



## litenin20 (Feb 8, 2013)

No inside the house, a vapour tight box is the same as a regular fiberglass or blue nail on, but hd a runt gallery astound the outside.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

litenin20 said:


> No inside the house, a vapour tight box is the same as a regular fiberglass or blue nail on, but hd a runt gallery astound the outside.



Oh, you mean these:

















Whatever a runt gallery is. Not sure how they would astound anything.


----------



## Pete m. (Nov 19, 2011)

Not going to attempt to defend your inspector or your work. It sounds like you might have made an honest mistake and, if it is a code requirement, so did the inspector by not catching it on the rough.

Telling him to f-off might have been a bit extreme IMHO. I would still ask for the ADOPTED code and section you have violated.

Pete


----------



## litenin20 (Feb 8, 2013)

I told him that because he could only tell me no that they were in the code look it up. He would no reference where. Until he does I'm not cutting every box out. If it is a mistake I will fix it.


----------



## litenin20 (Feb 8, 2013)

Yes those type 
boxes


----------



## Pete m. (Nov 19, 2011)

litenin20 said:


> I told him that because he could only tell me no that they were in the code look it up. He would no reference where. Until he does I'm not cutting every box out. If it is a mistake I will fix it.


Not sure about the laws in WI but I would find it strange that you have no method to appeal the inspectors decision. And, if said inspector doesn't provide the section you have allegedly violated what would you appeal?

Pete


----------



## Wirenuting (Sep 12, 2010)

Page 34 & 35,
The inspector is a weenie and should have told you. But I believe its in their building code for energy efficiency.

www.alliedmoulded.com/UserFiles/My Media/10.5383.Allied.LR.pdf


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Pete m. said:


> Not sure about the laws in WI but I would find it strange that you have no method to appeal the inspectors decision. And, if said inspector doesn't provide the section you have allegedly violated what would you appeal?
> 
> Pete



You'd be appealing the red tag. It would be pretty cut-n-dried if the AHJ can't back up the requirement.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

I'm not sure what the exact code citation is, but we caulk any open hole on outside walls to conform with the code.

I will spend a little time to try to find the specific code.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

I think this is what you are looking for....

SPS 322.38  Vapor Barriers.
(2) Frame assemblies. (a) General. Except as provided under par. (c), all frame walls, frame floors and frame ceilings that comprise the thermal envelope, shall have a vapor barrier installed on the warm-in-winter side of the thermal insulation.

Since you are cutting the vapor barrier to "access" the box, you need a way to reseal it. As I said before, simply caulking satisfies this in my experience, but since you pissed off the inspector, I don't know what he will require.

What area of the state?

"vapor barriers" is actually a different word in the code, but the forum language police doesn't like that word


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Building code here requires a vapour boot sealed to the vapour barrier with acoustical sealant or Tuck Tape. Either that or something like an airtight Nuteck box.


----------



## litenin20 (Feb 8, 2013)

Deep Cover said:


> I think this is what you are looking for....
> 
> SPS 322.38  Vapor Barriers.
> (2) Frame assemblies. (a) General. Except as provided under par. (c), all frame walls, frame floors and frame ceilings that comprise the thermal envelope, shall have a vapor barrier installed on the warm-in-winter side of the thermal insulation.
> ...


I'm near Appleton, where do you normally apply caulk? Before the drywall is hung? Thanks for the reference to state code, haven't had other inspectors say anything to me on other resi jobs.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

It will normally be caught on rough inspection so we will do it on rough.


----------



## litenin20 (Feb 8, 2013)

The rough in inspection happened before the insulators were there. He didn't come back until Dinah was completed.


----------



## A Little Short (Nov 11, 2010)

litenin20 said:


> The rough in inspection happened before the insulators were there. He didn't come back until Dinah was completed.


Who's Dinah?


----------



## litenin20 (Feb 8, 2013)

Stupid auto correct final. Inspection


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

litenin20 said:


> Stupid auto correct final. Inspection


The inspector is at fault here he should have said he was going to enforce the 2009 energy cold rules on boxes on outside walls,making you cut open the walls after passing the rough ? He's got not pot to piss in,in my opinion.

He clearly is trying to knock you out of business by making you look bad in front of your client.

Totally unprofessional conduct on his part.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HARRY304E said:


> The inspector is at fault here he should have said he was going to enforce the 2009 energy cold rules on boxes on outside walls,making you cut open the walls after passing the rough ? He's got not pot to piss in,in my opinion.
> 
> He clearly is trying to knock you out of business by making you look bad in front of your client.
> 
> Totally unprofessional conduct on his part.


Why? If an infraction was missed by an inspector during rough-in inspection, it doesn't make it legitimate.

If the code changed since the OP pulled his permit, then he has a legitimate complaint. Otherwise, he has a job to do and that job is going to suck. There's no easy way to get it done.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> I think this is what you are looking for....
> 
> SPS 322.38  Vapor Barriers.
> (2) Frame assemblies. (a) General. Except as provided under par. (c), all frame walls, frame floors and frame ceilings that comprise the thermal envelope, shall have a vapor barrier installed on the warm-in-winter side of the thermal insulation.
> ...


I don't know how inspectors down there interpret things but I can tell you how it works up here in the frozen north. Vapour barriers up here are considered sacred. I think the code rules start with "Thou shalt..."

Normal plastic or steel device boxes aren't airtight. To be considered airtight, there is a self-closing gasket at the opening where the cable enters the box. There is also a gasketed flange where the box meets the wall board. If we use a standard device box, we install a vapour boot which is later sealed to the vapour barrier by the insulator.

Up here, using a standard box and caulking around the outside isn't acceptable. If it's okay down there, then the OP has a legitimate beef but it's not with the inspector, it's with the insulator. Ultimately, the integrity of the vapour barrier is his responsibility and the infraction should have been noticed by the building inspector.

We normally use T & B or Hubbell airtight plastic boxes on exterior walls. They're more money but they're quick and easy. It sounds like things are evolving down there and you guys might consider using them if the inspectors start getting serious about vapour barrier integrity.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

HARRY304E said:


> The inspector is at fault here he should have said he was going to enforce the 2009 energy cold rules on boxes on outside walls,making you cut open the walls after passing the rough ? He's got not pot to piss in,in my opinion.
> 
> He clearly is trying to knock you out of business by making you look bad in front of your client.
> 
> Totally unprofessional conduct on his part.


I disagree Harry. Maybe there are other ways to satisfy this code such as what Pete stated...foam backers on face plates.


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

99cents said:


> I don't know how inspectors down there interpret things but I can tell you how it works up here in the frozen north. Vapour barriers up here are considered sacred. I think the code rules start with "Thou shalt..."
> 
> Normal plastic or steel device boxes aren't airtight. To be considered airtight, there is a self-closing gasket at the opening where the cable enters the box. There is also a gasketed flange where the box meets the wall board. If we use a standard device box, we install a vapour boot which is later sealed to the vapour barrier by the insulator.
> 
> ...


The electrician (helper) is responsible for caulking boxes, not the insulators.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Deep Cover said:


> I disagree Harry. Maybe there are other ways to satisfy this code such as what Pete stated...foam backers on face plates.


It should have been enforced on the rough,it sounds like to me that this inspector does not have the proper experience in the field and common sence to be an inspector .


----------



## Deep Cover (Dec 8, 2012)

HARRY304E said:


> It should have been enforced on the rough,it sounds like to me that this inspector does not have the proper experience in the field and common sence to be an inspector .


No, it sounds as if the OP is in new territory and doesn't know the appropriate codes.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Deep Cover said:


> The electrician (helper) is responsible for caulking boxes, not the insulators.


It shouldn't be. Do you also seal punctures to the vapour barrier where your cable passes through?

At least around here, the insulator is responsible for all breaks in the vapour barrier caused by electrical, plumbing, etc.

I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that, if sealing around a standard box is accepted practice, the electrical inspector would not have picked it up during rough-in inspection. The only way to tell is after the insulation and vapour barrier was installed.

It becomes a matter of responsibility. If the box wasn't sealed, it got past the insulator, the electrician, the building inspector and the home builder. One could argue that the electrical inspector was the only guy who had any smarts. He was the guy who finally noticed the infraction.

By the way, foam cover gaskets don't work. They actually make matters worse. They funnel the cold air infiltration through the device and you can actually feel the cold air when you walk past it.

The OP asked what he could do to prevent this situation in the future and that one is easy. Install Nuteck airtight boxes.


----------



## freeagnt54 (Aug 6, 2008)

Does the inspector have a way of telling that it isn't sealed without opening up the wall?

Tell him you talked to the insulation contractor and that he applied the vapor barrier after rough.


----------

