-
Welcome to The Building Code Forum
Your premier resource for building code knowledge.
This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.
Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.
Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.
An average day
- Thread starter ICE
- Start date
steveray
SAWHORSE
We see it all the time, particularly on the PV crap...
This was sent to the permit clerk by an owner that intends to install an EV charger. It came with the bid from the electrician.
Owner: If I decide to have them install a full sized circuit breaker, does that impact the permit at all? Here's part of their quote:
Contractor:
Note: It is always preferable to install a full sized circuit breaker for your EV charger. However, because your electrical panel is already very full of circuit breakers we will need to install a thin sized circuit breaker. This is acceptable per both U.L. Listing and National Electric Code but may put more stress on the thinner circuit breaker. This may or may not cause this thin circuit breaker to fail at some future time.
You have the option to install a full sized circuit breaker, but this would require us to install a new sub panel, which would cost approximately $1,200. This is not necessary at this time if we install the thin circuit breaker, but if this is an option you would like to consider, please contact us to discuss
Owner: If I decide to have them install a full sized circuit breaker, does that impact the permit at all? Here's part of their quote:
Contractor:
Note: It is always preferable to install a full sized circuit breaker for your EV charger. However, because your electrical panel is already very full of circuit breakers we will need to install a thin sized circuit breaker. This is acceptable per both U.L. Listing and National Electric Code but may put more stress on the thinner circuit breaker. This may or may not cause this thin circuit breaker to fail at some future time.
You have the option to install a full sized circuit breaker, but this would require us to install a new sub panel, which would cost approximately $1,200. This is not necessary at this time if we install the thin circuit breaker, but if this is an option you would like to consider, please contact us to discuss
TheCommish
SAWHORSE
can you change some lighting circuits to thin break to put the full size breaker in for the EV?
Yeah it's fascinating how often people stubbornly push to get something they want without paying for what they need. It puts contractors in a tough spot because they are providing a service and they can't just say no to work that's technically permissible. "Customers always right anyways" mentality I guess...
The job is a water heater replacement. The installer is an out of state contractor. I performed a virtual inspection with the owner. I asked for the single-wall vent to be supported rather than hanging on to the transite vent. I also asked for a separation from combustibles.
The owner called the contractor and was informed and I quote, "they do not take responsibility of the oversight if the inspection fails local government agency." This is a company that up-sells an expansion tank whenever possible. They tell the customer that code requires the expansion tank yet they will not go beyond the top of the water heater to correct even the easiest violation.
Now notice the vent for the furnace. It is single-wall that terminates at a transite pipe. While there is no prohibition for a water heater reusing a transite vent, that's not true with a furnace. The furnace is not being inspected at this time and quite possibly, has been approved as is.
The owner called the contractor and was informed and I quote, "they do not take responsibility of the oversight if the inspection fails local government agency." This is a company that up-sells an expansion tank whenever possible. They tell the customer that code requires the expansion tank yet they will not go beyond the top of the water heater to correct even the easiest violation.
Now notice the vent for the furnace. It is single-wall that terminates at a transite pipe. While there is no prohibition for a water heater reusing a transite vent, that's not true with a furnace. The furnace is not being inspected at this time and quite possibly, has been approved as is.
Last edited:
Paul Sweet
SAWHORSE
I'm sure there are several pages of fine print that boil down to the contractor not being responsible for anything.
The correction stated that cable is not allowed in a raceway, ..that it is in a wet location. The contractor....a California Licensed Electrical Contractor, asked me what a raceway is.
I was expecting a problem with the GEC protection that I asked for, but nary a word about that.
Edison spotted the meter in the same location as the old panel. Note the cable guys plastic box that is mounted to the wall in the upper right corner of the picture.
Sluggo made his usual mess of things.
I was expecting a problem with the GEC protection that I asked for, but nary a word about that.
Edison spotted the meter in the same location as the old panel. Note the cable guys plastic box that is mounted to the wall in the upper right corner of the picture.
Sluggo made his usual mess of things.
Last edited:
The job is an electric service panel upgrade...200 amps. This is the contractors idea of a GEC connection to the water main pipe.
At the second 200 amp service panel of the day I got this #6 at the water main because as he informed me the maximum size GEC required on a residential service is #6. I guess paint is okay on residential.
At the second 200 amp service panel of the day I got this #6 at the water main because as he informed me the maximum size GEC required on a residential service is #6. I guess paint is okay on residential.
Last edited:
Years ago we were having sensitivity training. I don't recall the actual title of the training but the trainer was sensitive for sure. When she said that cross dressors is a protected class I asked this question, "So if I come to work tomorrow in a dress and high heels and Woody laughs at me, I can sue the ******?" ...to which she said yes. I looked at Woody and said, "I'm going to stop at Goodwill on the way home." To which Woody said, "Goodwill??? I'll take you to Macy's and we'll do this up right."
Last edited:
I was inspecting for solar when I came across this. According to the computer the panel passed a final inspection a month ago. I was reluctant to ask the girl that hosted the inspection to stick her hand into the panel....but I just had to know....
Last edited:
The ones entering the main breaker? That is a UL issue.
We require smoke and CO alarms. I only do remote live stream or videos for the alarms. Today I received a four part video that was created by the owner. The house is two story and video #1 was the first floor. I got a tour of it all and at the end he proudly stated, "As you can see there are no alarms on the first floor." Then he went upstairs to the bedrooms that do not have alarms. Instead of just stating that the bedrooms lack alarms he panned each entire room to prove that.
Last edited:
Mech
REGISTERED
Is the owner also an upset customer?
His English was passable and he was nonchalant. The roofing contractor sent the video. I previously provided the contractor and the owner with the requirements and installation instructions.
Service entrance conduit.
250.92(B)
250.92(B)
Last edited:
Not my inspection.
The inspection was for a photovoltaic system and a de-ration of the premises main breaker from 200amp to 175amp. The de-ration is required to acomodate a 60amp solar contribution. Upon arrival the inspector was provided a copy of the load calculations. He noticed that there is a 50amp breaker labeled EV charger that was not included in the load calc. The EV charger lacked a permit.
The inspector wrote a correction to obtain a permit for the EV charger. He included the fact that the charger has a max output of 48amp and a 60amp circuit is required.
The contractor obtained a permit for the EV charger. The contractor realized that the load calculation with an EV charger would not work at 175amp. The contractor removed the 50amp breakers and installed a pair of 20amp breakers which are labeled "SPARE".
The inspector turned it down as a blatant act of subterfuge. The contractor appealed the decision to a supervisor. The supervisor overrode the inspector. The explanation given was that as long as there is no EV charger circuit breaker...there is no EV charger. If in the future an EV charger breaker is installed that would violate the CEC and would be dealt with at that time. This of course this comes from the premise that we do not anticipate violations.
I suppose that the next step would be a refund of the money spent for the EV charger permit. Every penny counts when there's a Tesla Model S in the driveway.
The inspection was for a photovoltaic system and a de-ration of the premises main breaker from 200amp to 175amp. The de-ration is required to acomodate a 60amp solar contribution. Upon arrival the inspector was provided a copy of the load calculations. He noticed that there is a 50amp breaker labeled EV charger that was not included in the load calc. The EV charger lacked a permit.
The inspector wrote a correction to obtain a permit for the EV charger. He included the fact that the charger has a max output of 48amp and a 60amp circuit is required.
The contractor obtained a permit for the EV charger. The contractor realized that the load calculation with an EV charger would not work at 175amp. The contractor removed the 50amp breakers and installed a pair of 20amp breakers which are labeled "SPARE".
The inspector turned it down as a blatant act of subterfuge. The contractor appealed the decision to a supervisor. The supervisor overrode the inspector. The explanation given was that as long as there is no EV charger circuit breaker...there is no EV charger. If in the future an EV charger breaker is installed that would violate the CEC and would be dealt with at that time. This of course this comes from the premise that we do not anticipate violations.
I suppose that the next step would be a refund of the money spent for the EV charger permit. Every penny counts when there's a Tesla Model S in the driveway.
steveray
SAWHORSE
I like the G-clef trap about 56 seconds in....