wrote in message
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 13:19:32 -0400, "Twayne"
wrote:
"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
s.com
On 9/10/2009 6:38 PM spake thus:
BTW it is strange that you also don't need AFCIs or GFCIs on any
receptacles in the kitchen that don't serve the countertop.
I bet someone plugged that loophole in the 2011. I will have to
look at the ROP when I get a minute. The draft is out too.
As you know, it all ultimately depends on the inspector. A friend of
mine had to install GFCIs in his remodeled kitchen even in some
remote outlets not on the countertop; one was under an island (no
sink nearby), the other was a wall outlet.
It only depends on the inspector within the realm of the
requirements. He can not unilaterally allow or disallow anything
that is specced in either the NEC, NFPA or local code ordnances
etc.. GFCI's are either required in some locatiosn or they are not.
Any inspector who sees it otherwise should be reported so he can be
removed from his job. The inspector is NEVER the one who interprets
the code: that's why there are committees to decide/implement local
requirements and even those must still be done within the confines
of the NEC etc. NEC, NFPA and so on are MINIMUM requirements and
often locall communities will clarify or add to those requirements,
but they cannot remove an NEC requirement for, say, 3-prong
receptacles or anything else. They can only ADD TO the NEC per its
permitted modifications statements.
HTH,
Twayne`
The inspector IS the one who interprets the code. He doesn't write it,
but it is his reading of the code that he enforces. Two inspectors in
the same city may differe significantly in what they allow or dissalow
in some particular instances.
They DO, but it's not their job to. They in theory all should
inspect/pass the same things every time. They can only interpret where
the local zoning/code office has failed to clarify. Anything else and
they are deficient in their duties. They are "inspectors", not
"interpretors". They are NOT free to interpret a case that is covered
in the local code enforcement's rulings unless it is specifically
spelled out to be dependent on certain things which way accept/deny
goes.
I know they still do it, but the first one I see doing it and I know
he's wrong is in for some rude surprises.
My Dad was an electrician for many years, and he got to know what each
inspector in the area wanted to see. If he knew which inspector he was
going to be dealing with, he could be sure he was not going to get any
defects. What satisfied one would rub the other the wrong way, and
vise versa.
That's "yesterday" and went on a lot. It still does to a degree but
it's a lot less than it used to be. And if it happens, the inspector
has to write up his findings and WHY his decision keeps the code. I had
a neighbor with an inspector that didn't like conduit changing to Romex
at one of the boxes; wasn't familiar with the new Romex connectors I
used and had never seen one. Since I did the wiring, I knew exactly how
it had been done. It only took one trip to the code enforcement office
to get it fixed. That's where I decided "never again under my watch".