Thread: Exposed and unprotected wiring

Would you call this as an unprotected and exposed wiring condition.

Location Sub-structure. Damp soil with NM cables all over the place.

Brain dead today...

Best

Ron

Similar Threads:

• Transformer & Low Volt Wiring in Main Panel
• From the old board, Abandon Wiring
• exposed roofing nails
• Protection of wiring in the attic
• From the old board, Knob and Tube Wiring

Originally Posted by Ron Bibler

Would you call this as an unprotected and exposed wiring condition.

No, I don't use 'condition' in my inspection report.

Yes, I would call out the wiring wrapped around plumbing pipes and squeezed through hole with a heat duct. In my report, that's a " * Repair * ".

Originally Posted by Ron Bibler

Brain dead today...

I'd recommend a brain protector for those crawlspaces.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

No, I don't use 'condition' in my inspection report.

Yes, I would call out the wiring wrapped around plumbing pipes and squeezed through hole with a heat duct. In my report, that's a " * Repair * ".

I see lots of violations among the photos, but I am curious: What 'repair' would be made for the NM cable wrapped around the copper pipes and those passing through the same hole as the heat duct?

I mean, what code section would you use the substantiate the 'repair'?

Originally Posted by dana1028

I see lots of violations among the photos, but I am curious: What 'repair' would be made for the NM cable wrapped around the copper pipes and those passing through the same hole as the heat duct?

I mean, what code section would you use to the substantiate the 'repair'?

We still use 'code of the west' where I live.

I just know it's unsafe, and I know it is preventable, therefore repairable. An electrician might have to go back to the nearest junction and pull the wire so it's hung properly.

If we keep this post active someone will come up with the code.

Originally Posted by dana1028

I see lots of violations among the photos, but I am curious: What 'repair' would be made for the NM cable wrapped around the copper pipes and those passing through the same hole as the heat duct?

I mean, what code section would you use the substantiate the 'repair'?

Did you see the notched framing ?

Best

Ron

That must have been done in the dark.


__________________
Thermostat

Originally Posted by John Kogel

We still use 'code of the west' where I live.

I just know it's unsafe, and I know it is preventable, therefore repairable. An electrician might have to go back to the nearest junction and pull the wire so it's hung properly.

What specifically are you considering unsafe? The conductor touching the metal water pipe? The conductor touching the metal ducting? The conductor in the same cavity as the ducting?

"Hung properly" - I cannot determine from the photo that the wire is not 'hung properly'. NM cable is required to be secured within 12" of termination and every 4 1/2' otherwise....there is not enough of the photo to determine that the NM cable does is not secured within these parameters.

Conductors are allowed to touch metal water pipes - as the copper water pipes are required to be bonded to the service - so any possible fault will be cleared.

Conductor touching the metal ducting? The NM has an equipment grounding conductor to clear a fault should one occur.

Conductor in the same hole/cavity as ducting? So what.

There are 1000's of 'I don't likes' I observe during my inspections [municipal inspector] - but I'm not allowed to whilly-nilly demand contractors change things because I don't like it; I have to be able to provide a specific code section.

Notched framing - as I said, I see lots of violations in those photos....just having a hard time with the particular photo of conductors passing through the floor at the ducting. Do I like it? Probably not; would I pass it?.... I don't see that I have a choice....but I'm more than willing to change that opinion if someome can give me a code section to stand on.