Hot Water Heater Wiring

[jtedesco1]

Larry:

That may be true, but I don't understand it if they ignore the simple "follow the surface" rule, especially since Wayne Lilly is a member of the Code Panel who writes the rules for the Article covering "Rope"

CODE-MAKING PANEL NO. 8

Articles 342, 344, 348, 350, 352, 353, 354, 356, 358, 360, 362, 366, 368, 370, 372, 374, 376, 378, 380, 384,
386, 388, 390, 392, Chapter 9 Tables 1 through 4, Annex C

Julian R. Burns,

Chair

Burns Electrical/Quality Power Solutions, Incorporated, NC [IM]
Rep. Independent Electrical Contractors, Incorporated

John S. Corry,

Corry Electric Incorporated, CA [IM]
Rep. Associated Builders and Contractors, Incorporated

Joseph G. Dabe,

City of St. Paul, MN [L]
Rep. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

George R. Dauberger,

Thomas & Betts Corporation, TN [M]
Rep. National Electrical Manufacturers Association

James C. Dollins,

AFC Cable Systems, MA [M]
Rep. The Aluminum Association

Ronald E. Duren,

PacifiCorp, WA [UT]
Rep. Electric Light & Power Group/EEI

M. Shan Griffith,

Kelloff, Brown & Root, Incorporated,
TX [u]
Rep. Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers,
Incorporated

David H. Kendall,

Carlon, Lamson & Sessions, OH [M]
Rep. Society of the Plastics Industry Incorporated

Wayne A. Lilly,

City of Harrisonburg, VA [E]
Rep. International Association of Electrical Inspectors

Richard E. Loyd,

R & N Associates, AZ [M]
Rep. American Iron and Steel Institute

Stephen P. Poholski,

Newkirk Electric Associates,
Incorporated, MI [IM]
Rep. National Electrical Contractors Association

Dennis L. Rowe,

New York Board of Fire Underwriters,
NY [E]
Rep. New York Board of Fire Underwriters

George F. Walbrecht,

Underwriters Laboratories
Incorporated, IL [RT]

Alternates

Richard Berman,

Underwriters Laboratories Incorporated,
IL [RT]
(Alt. to G. F. Walbrecht)

Duane A. Carlson,

PRS Consulting Engineers, WA [u]
Rep. Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers,
Incorporated
(Alt. to M. S. Griffith)

Charles W. Forsberg,

Shaker Heights, OH [M]
Rep. Society of the Plastics Industry Incorporated
(Alt. to D. H. Kendall)

Dr. Jack A. Gruber,

Wheatland Tube Company, PA [M]
Rep. American Iron and Steel Institute
(Alt. to R. E. Loyd)

James M. Imlah,

City of Hillsboro, OR [E]
Rep. International Association of Electrical Inspectors
(Alt. to W. A. Lilly)

Alan Manche,

Schneider Electric/Square D Company,
KY [M]
Rep. National Electrical Manufacturers Association
(Alt. to G. R. Dauberger)

Jamie McNamara,

City of St. Paul, MN [L]
Rep. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
(Alt. to J. G. Dabe)

C. Ernest Reynolds,

Hatfield-Reynolds Electric Company,
AZ [IM]
Rep. Independent Electrical Contractors, Incorporated
(Alt. to J. R. Burns)

Richard Temblador,

Alflex Corporation, CA [M]
Rep. The Aluminum Association
(Alt. to J. C. Dollins)

Ronald J. Toomer,

Toomer Electrical Company
Incorporated, LA [IM]
Rep. National Electrical Contractors Association
(Alt. to S. P. Poholski)

James Van Den Heuvel,

West Electric Incorporated,
WI [IM]
Rep. Associated Builders and Contractors, Incorporated
(Alt. to J. S. Corry)

Leslie R. Zielke,

South Carolina Electric & Gas Company,
SC [UT]
Rep. Electric Light & Power Group/EEI
(Alt. to R. E. Duren)

[Larry D. Kage]

Originally Posted by jtedesco1

Larry:
That may be true, but I don't understand it if they ignore the simple "follow the surface" rule, especially since Wayne Lilly is a member of the Code Panel who writes the rules for the Article covering "Rope"

I don't understand it either...but, then again, it's not important for me to understand why some AHJ will allow something and why another won't especially where it appears to be a minor difference.

[Russel Ray]

I suspect some AHJs use their own brand of common sense, while many others go "strictly by the book."

[Larry D. Kage]

Originally Posted by rray

I suspect some AHJs use their own brand of common sense, while many others go "strictly by the book."

Well said.

[Pierre Belarge]

It really has nothing to do with common sense. As many inspectors as there are, sometimes there are that many answers. Not all inspectors are well trained and will inspect as they have wired in the past... HMMMMM!!!
I am not saying that is good, it is a real problem out there. The better trained inspectors will inspect to the code as it is written. The "special permission" part of the code is hardly ever invoked, as it will require a signature of the AHJ, and that is very difficult to get... who wants to be responsible for a written document changing the code and then possibly have to go to court to defend it... it is easier to enforce the code.

With that said, the subject of physical protection is very subjective, therefore will require a conversation with the inspector to get his thoughts on what subject to physical protection really is.

For the picture used in this thread, I do not see the physical protection issue, but we can only see so much from a picture. There are other issues to deal with in the wiring method of the pictured WH, but that is not the question here.

I have seen water heaters wired using various methods, and I have seen those different methods butchered... it is not the method I see as a problem, sometimes it is the installer.

[Paul W. Abernathy]

Agreed Pierre......My point was NM is VERY allowed to Water Heaters and I did not want someone making a blanket statement that it was not....we do it all the time.

Subject to physical damage.......IF done correctly and tight with the cold water pipe and well coming from the BACK side of the water heater along the wall.....very tough arguement for physical damage.......in THIS case...

The AHJ MUST envoke his opinion as well........having a set of "MACHINES" does not allow the AHJ to do their job and look at things based on the environment...

The code is a GUIDE LINE and MINIMUM.........we MUST allow AHJ's to have leeway.....

In MY original post........and I see THOUSANDS of the NM to waterheaters a year both in doing them....and inspecting them....never once have they been called out....the water heater alone gives an element of protection....

JUST cant always be BLACK and WHITE when posting NEC.....because of my experience I get ALLOWANCES done in many cases because of something that may be vague or need clarrification and they call me...I have many AHJ's who call me to clarrify things....even if we did not do the work.

[Paul W. Abernathy]

Joe,

Guess we envoked the 334.30 (B)(2) since it was only 2' ( 90% directly over the water heaters TOP ) to the connection point.

So it was to equipment less than 4' from its last point of attachement.

Larry- I am saying the NM to a Water Heater in the manner shown is NOT something I would red flag in a home inspection is all I am saying....nothing more...nothing less....

Petty in my opinion........IF it poses no real threat to physical damage....you are NOT code inspectors and I don't feel it is a safety hazard....go ahead and call an electrician out if they wish......

Just my opinions.....

[Paul W. Abernathy]

P.S....it is along the surface.........only breaks the surface to run to the equipment.....Has nothing to do with what Mr. Lilly agrees with...it is allowed and is subject to IF they feel it is subject to physical damage.....

Heck for all I really know he wont inspect it....point is.....none of them around here or where I have been CARE about that issue.....thats PETTY if the wire is on the TOP of the water heater...directly to it from the wall......HOW would you infer it can obtain physical damage.....hell wires running along the bottom of the JOISTS in a crawl can be subject to phyiscal damage...but they are DONE everyday.....