• 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.

Because I Said So

jar546

jar546

CBO
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
12,721
Location
Not where I really want to be
For those struggling to find a code section when inspecting electrical, I found this obscure section of the NEC that might come in handy. I call this the ICE code.

110.3(D) Because I Said So.​

Where an electrical inspector determines, based on years of experience, gut instinct, or a general feeling of unease, that an installation is just not right, the inspector shall be permitted to require modifications, corrections, or outright removal of the installation, even in the absence of a specific NEC reference.

Informational Note: Compliance with this section is mandatory, regardless of logic, precedent, or the installer’s insistence that “it meets Code.” Appeals are futile.
 
We have a corollary around here:
Where an city council person determines, based on years of experience, gut political instinct, or a general feeling of unease, that treatment of a constituent is just not right, the city council person shall be permitted to veto modifications, corrections, or require outright approval of the installation, especially in the absence of a specific NEC reference.
 
BN4537 said:
It's like 110.2, but clearer...
Click to expand...
110.2 applies only to the choice of equipment and conductors, not how they are installed.

As someone who is inspected rather than doing the inspections, I for one am very glad that there is no such 110.3(D) in the NEC, and dislike vaguely written code requirements that some inspectors may be inclined to try to use as such.

Cheers, Wayne
 
jar546 said:
For those struggling to find a code section when inspecting electrical, I found this obscure section of the NEC that might come in handy. I call this the ICE code.

110.3(D) Because I Said So.​

Where an electrical inspector determines, based on years of experience, gut instinct, or a general feeling of unease, that an installation is just not right, the inspector shall be permitted to require modifications, corrections, or outright removal of the installation, even in the absence of a specific NEC reference.

Informational Note: Compliance with this section is mandatory, regardless of logic, precedent, or the installer’s insistence that “it meets Code.” Appeals are futile.
Click to expand...
First introduced in the summer of 1996. The concept started as a grassroots effort to inject common sense to the NEC and quickly spread to the companion construction codes. Oddly enough, while awaiting formal ratification it was discovered that we don't need no stinking badges and it just took hold among the bold.

The use of 110.3(D) as a genuine NEC code section came about some years later. In the beginning there was no Internet, as such the only people that knew the actual code was some of the inspectors.

Once everyone had all of the knowledge that mankind has ever gained, at their fingertips; a formal underground adoption became necessary. I must say that the honor of having the reference made to me by the illustrious forum owner is not lost on me. However note that I mentioned the 'grassroots' nature. What Jeff calls ICE Code is better described as ICEBERG Code.

If anyone thinks we can be figured out by the meager efforts at a forum....well think again.
 
I just heard Sinatra, singing "I did it my way!" in the background?

Maybe some of you have heard it while on inspection?
 
jar546 said:

110.3(D) Because I Said So.​

Informational Note: Compliance with this section is mandatory, regardless of logic, precedent, or the installer’s insistence that “it meets Code.” Appeals are futile.
Click to expand...
And the reaction to that, at least in California, was finally:


Which does not actually solve the inspection problem. But certainly is a reflection of frustration with building code, as interpreted by inspectors.

Dear Assemblymember Schultz:
The American Planning Association, California Chapter (APA California) is pleased to support your AB 306, which
would temporarily pause for six years new updates to the state building code or local modifications to those
standards that would affect residential developments, except for emergency changes necessary to protect health
and safety
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top