[FONT=Verdana]Home inspectors are not code inspectors. Memorizing codes without understanding the underlying principles can lead to serious problems. I am not going to contribute to an industry problem that is already worsening by citing codes in a home inspection forum. To do so is to do a grave disservice to home inspectors.
The fact is that there is no such thing as “The code” as you have suggested. A little knowledge is dangerous. In the electrical industry alone, there are dozens of interrelated codes and standards. In my advanced National Electrical Code classes, I drive the point home by unpacking several large boxes of codes and standards as I talk about the NEC. I have direct and indirect references to every one of the codes and standards that connect them to the NEC. They are incorporated by reference. Even that, however, is not necessary to do. Local jurisdictions can, and often do, turn to other standards, in part or in whole, at their discretion.
Aside from the fact that the NEC is not the sole body of work governing the electrical construction industry, it is NOT universally or simultaneously adopted or enforced. Not all provisions are adopted in all jurisdictions.
In addition to building codes pertaining to electrical systems, there are codes and standards for every other aspect of construction and for household appliances and other equipment. For an inspector to arm himself with code references in a debate with experts in any given field is foolish at best. It could have disastrous consequences.
My advice to all home inspectors is to drop words such as “allowed”, allowable”, “required”, and “prohibited” from their vocabularies when doing home inspections. Any inspector who really wants to understand any building codes should first understand the underlying principles. Only then should he proceed to memorizing codes. That is especially true with electrical systems.
Assuming an inspector has devoted the time and energy to learning one trade in depth, what about all the other trades? How many people have the mental capacity to completely master multiple disciplines? You clearly have not or you would not have needed to ask “So what codes does it violate?
[/FONT]
I use that and similar statements in my reports. As soon as an inspector starts talking about things being “required”, and so on, he is painting himself into a corner.
Nice 6 paragraph post. But you failed to mention a particular code that GFCI protection for a stove receptacle would violate.
If someone puts a new kitchen in their home who will inspect the receptacle for the stove? Will that be someone other than the electrical inspector who’s following the NEC?
You are completely missing the point. In Colton’s initial post he said “When the GFCI was tripped the gas came out but no strike to light it. Seems dangerous to me.” He was right. It IS dangerous.
You are so fixated with the NEC that you cannot see the problem. Go back and read the entire thread. The problem is that there is unburned combustible gas flowing into a confined space. Just because the NEC doesn’t address gas being dispensed into the room (and the fact that your oven is doing the same thing) does not make it acceptable. I have never known of anyone before now who thinks that allowing natural gas to flow freely into a confined space is acceptable. I generally avoid using the phrase “common sense” but in this case I would think that this would be a simple matter of a little common sense.
If you think your oven is OK, that’s your business. To tell home inspectors that it is acceptable to have combustible gas flowing into a room is wrong. Your lack of knowledge of gas codes and appliances aside, I would still think that you would have enough sense to recognize the hazard. It is NOT acceptable to fill a room with a combustible gas.
I am really dumb founded to believe that when the power goes out the gas continues to flow on an electronic ignition gas applieance. This is the Year 2012.
Back in 1962, I had to keep my thumb on a pilot gizzmoo to light the damn thing. If I would let go, no gas and no light.
Whether a friggin GFCI or not, you need power to light the darn thing.
Read This;
What happens in this style ignition system is that the thermostat or electronic control switches power to the oven ignitor and gas valve circuit which are connected in series (one after the other). As power flows through the ignitor it heats and draws current (measured in amperage). Once the oven ignitor draws a specific amount of current the oven valve opens to allow gas to flow to the oven burner where the glowing hot ignitor (glow bar) ignites it. Power must continually flow through the ignitor and oven gas valve for gas to be released into the oven burner to create a flame. Once the set temperature is achieved the control stops all power to the ignition circuit which causes the ignitor to dim and the oven gas valve to close, stopping any burner flame. Cycling on and off continues to maintain the specific temperature the control is set for.
It should usually only take in the area of 30-90 seconds for the oven ignitor to reach the proper resistance to allow the proper amperage to reach the gas valve to open it and for the ignitor to ignite the gas at the oven burner. http://www.appliance411.com/faq/gas_range_ignition_systems.shtml#glow
I don’t think we had electronic ignition in 62 Joe, but we do now and the safety features are there like they were over 40 years ago.
No power, no gas.
GFCI or not, same difference. No power no lighty.
What is so hard to understand?
As I have said many times, I don’t like talking code on home inspector forums but I have a copy of the 1992 National Fuel Gas Code and it was covered then. So, I can verify that it has been that way for at least 20 years. Also, as I said in earlier messages, the NFG is only one of several codes that cover combustible gases.
The point that I have been trying to make is that a reasonable person shouldn’t need a code to tell him that is not a good idea to have combustible gases filling a room. Where I come from, we call that thinning the herd. The problem with that is that innocent children and pets might also go up with the person who thought it was OK to light the match.
