Originally Posted By: jtedesco
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Let’s hear from some of the others who have been following this discussion.
–
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
www.nachi.org/tedescobook.htm
Let’s hear from some of the others who have been following this discussion.
www.nachi.org/tedescobook.htm
Originally Posted By: jfarsetta
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
So, Joe… Then where does it end for the HI? The best defense for the HI is to follow the standards of practice. Every HI org has one. Even if you dont belong to an org, pich someone’s SOP, and reference it in your report.
Most SOPs are pretty close. I was recently threatened with a lawsuit for allegedly missing something on an inspection. The first thing my insurer asked was if I followed a SOP, and do I reference it in my report. The answer was "yes" and "yes".
Quite frankly, there are literally hundreds of things wrong with each and every house we inspect; that is, if one follows the letter of every construction code out there. Interpretations run wild. That is why we do not perform Code inspectins.
Observation is a good thing, and a mention of a concern in a report is not the issue. It comes down to common sense.
--
Joe Farsetta
Illigitimi Non Carborundum
"Dont let the bastards grind you down..."
Originally Posted By: jtedesco
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| Quote: |
| Observation is a good thing, and a mention of a concern in a report is not the issue. It comes down to common sense. |
OK, Joe so we will call it Observation and Common Sense, I am just trying to make people aware of some of the situations that may come back to haunt someone someday.
--
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
www.nachi.org/tedescobook.htm
Originally Posted By: Bob Badger
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| jtedesco wrote: |
| If I was allowed to speak without any interruption about each item, I am sure that the issues I mention would be clearer, and easier to understand. |
Now that is funny. 
Everyone stop posting and let Joe speak uninterrupted.
Oh wait he means me! 
Joe you have a Web site of your own that you can speak as uninterrupted as you want. Post here and expect that I, or others will have differing opinions.
You have the floor, what exactly would you like the HIs to say about the work in the opening picture? Spell it right out so it is clear and easy to understand.
--
Bob (AKA iwire)
ECN Discussion Forums
Mike Holt Code Forum
Originally Posted By: jtedesco
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Bob:
--
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
www.nachi.org/tedescobook.htm
Originally Posted By: Blaine Wiley
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| Quote: |
| Besides the apparent lack of cable support, where is the disconnect for the electric water heater? |
Our water heaters around here are passed if there is a lock on the circuit breaker in the service panel. They do not require a disconnect within sight of the water heater. I do not know what the NEC says on the issue, but the local AHJ (all of them) pass this type installation. If a disconnect would be required on a water heater, how would that differentiate from a dishwasher which is hard wired and not within sight of the service panel?
Originally Posted By: Bob Badger
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| bwiley wrote: |
| Our water heaters around here are passed if there is a lock on the circuit breaker in the service panel. |
That is correct because a breaker lock is one of the allowed disconnecting means for appliances.
| bwiley wrote: |
| If a disconnect would be required on a water heater, how would that differentiate from a dishwasher which is hard wired and not within sight of the service panel? |
Correct again the following are allowable disconnecting means for appliances.
1) the branch-circuit switch or circuit breaker shall be permitted to serve as the disconnecting means where the switch or circuit breaker is within sight from the appliance or is capable of being locked in the open position.
2)A unit switch(es) with a marked-off position that is a part of an appliance and disconnects all ungrounded conductors shall be permitted as the disconnecting means required by this article where other means for disconnection are provided in the following types of occupancies.
The 'other' means are other switches or breakers and the location of these changes with the occupancy.
--
Bob (AKA iwire)
ECN Discussion Forums
Mike Holt Code Forum
Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
, and generally would not apply a strict interpretation of the model codes. They are not enforcing the codes, or making a call that something is a “violation”. An HI just shouldn’t get involved with interpretation of code terms, like what is “sufficient” space.
However, on the flip side of that an HI may flag items that could be a significant hazard, even if they are completely "legal". Take an older home without GFCI receptacles in the kitchen and bathrooms. Could be completely legal, but should get flagged every time in my book.
I also think an HI has to consider the safety of the homeowner when evaluating these questionable items. Are those things a potential hazard to the homeowner, or could it be a hazard to tradesmen that may work on that installation that are expected to have knowledge of those hazards?
Just my opinion and 2-nickels ... 
--
Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
Originally Posted By: ssmith3
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| jtedesco wrote: | ||
Please explain "PRV with a Valve" |
Pressure Relief Valve
–
Scott Smith
Marinspection
Vice President NorCal NACHI Chapter
I graduated from collage. Now my life is all mixed up.
Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Good eyes Scott, if that is indeed a shutoff valve. There should not be a shutoff valve before a relief valve … more correctly a TPRV (temperature and pressure relief valve) … also commonly called a “T&P Valve”. Model codes like the IRC would not allow a shutoff valve there (e.g. IRC P2803.6).
But I think we are getting "off topic" here ... 
--
Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
Originally Posted By: jtedesco
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Thanks, and you are still in the track here because the NEC includes the following:
| Quote: |
| 422.47 Water Heater Controls.
All storage or instantaneous-type water heaters shall be equipped with a temperature-limiting means in addition to its control thermostat to disconnect all ungrounded conductors. Such means shall be as follows: (1) Installed to sense maximum water temperature; and (2) Either a trip-free, manually reset type or a type having a replacement element. Such water heaters shall be marked to require the installation of a temperature and pressure relief valve. Exception No. 1: Storage water heaters that are identified as being suitable for use with supply water temperature of 82?C (180?F) or above and a capacity of 60 kW or above. Exception No. 2: Instantaneous-type water heaters that are identified as being suitable for such use, with a capacity of 4 L (1 gal) or less. FPN: See ANSI Z21.22-1999/CSA 4.4-M99, Relief Valves for Hot Water Supply Systems. |
--
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
www.nachi.org/tedescobook.htm
Originally Posted By: Blaine Wiley
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Again, I’m not good with pictures but that looks like a ball valve to me, not a TPR. It just looks like an extension of the drain valve to get past the platform. Again, just from my view of the picture.
Originally Posted By: Ryan Jackson
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I am in the process right now of selling my home (actually I have a buyer’s earnest money right now), and I can tell you this: If this buyer brought an HI to my house and that HI wrote up nonsense like this, I would be doing everything but choking the hell out of him. Stuff like this is petty, and as Bob has stated, code compliant, other than the possible 110.26 issue on the contactor.
There you have it...an opinion from another inspector, as requested.
Joe: No offense meant by my post, just a disagreement 
--
Ryan Jackson, Salt Lake City
Originally Posted By: Harold Endean
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Joe, and Bob,
Again here as on other boards you know I respect you both. You both (as I do) want nothing but safety for each and every one. As an AHJ I can enforce the NEC in some cases. ( new work and renovations) but I can't follow everyone around to make sure that every one does the work correctly. The poor HI has to come into a house and try to find problems and tell people (who lived in this house for many years) that there house is/was wired wrong. The homeowner will say, "How dare they tell me that my house is wired wrong", that will bring nothing but anger against the HI. Hopefully the HI is experienced enough to know what the real dangers are and what doesn't meet the NEC. The HI can make suggest that GFCI protection should be installed where required, ( Kitchens, baths, outside, etc.) but they can't "Fail" a house because it isn't in there. They can't say that the Federal Pacific panel is a fire hazard, but they should suggest that it be replaced with a newer style because the old Fed. Pac. is obsolite and parts are very expensive. The list could go on and on. but I will get off my soap box now. Harold
Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Ryan … No offense meant here either, and I really like your posts, but you are really off base if you think there is no issue with a shutoff valve installed ahead of a TPRV (if that really is one as Blaine pointed out).
Defective water heaters without a TPRV have blown through roofs, and ya just know Harry Homeowner who has a problem with the TPRV gettin his basement wet is going to shut that valve to "fix" the problem.
But based on your past posts, I think ya really meant to comment on the electrical items discussed as not being a huge issue ...  ... we can find some common ground there.
P.S. Interesting that the NEC requires a TPRV on smaller/residential water heaters. I never noticed that the NEC requires a plumbing valve, even if it's an electric water heater ... hmmmmmmm.
Just my opinion (from another inspector also) and 2-nickels ... 
--
Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Joe … I don’t understand why you went back and changed your posts. I thought it was a good discussion and debate on the topic, which was helpful to members to better understand the safety requirements of model codes like the NEC that HI’s use as a guide … and where to draw the line, which many here struggle with. Some of the comments don’t make sense now.
–
Robert O’Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
Originally Posted By: Ryan Jackson
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
| roconnor wrote: |
| Ryan ... No offense meant here either, and I really like your posts, but you are really off base if you think there is no issue with a shutoff valve installed ahead of a TPRV (if that really is one as Blaine pointed out).
But based on your past posts, I think ya really meant to comment on the electrical items discussed as not being a huge issue ...  ... we can find some common ground there. Just my opinion (from another inspector also) and 2-nickels ...  |
Yes Robert, that's what I meant. I agree about the PRV issue.
--
Ryan Jackson, Salt Lake City
Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Okay Ryan … Thats what I thought, and I have a warm and fuzzy feeling again …
Now I have to go check the IPC and UPC to see if it tells me how a water heater should be wired ...
--
Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong