Dishwasher plumbing....need advise

[Bob Elliott]

Originally Posted by jpope

I don't think it's a stupid rule. I have seen the results of "muck" from disposals backing up into the dishwasher drain line. It's pretty disgusting. It also creates a horrendous smell in the dishwasher.

A properly installed air gap device eliminates the possibility of anything getting back into the drain line. Not allowing the connection to a disposal also eliminates this potential. So I agree with both "rules."

A high-loop is only effective as long as the sink/disposal drains do not back up. If the sink happens to flood above the high-loop, contaminates will make it back into the line.

Jeff ,if you read my excerpt from GE above would you agree that ignoring local code voids the warranty?

(See bold text.)

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

Originally Posted by belliott

Jeff ,if you read my excerpt from GE above would you agree that ignoring local code voids the warranty?

In almost any instance, when the manufacturers installation requirements are ignored, their warranties are void.

So yes, I agree. Improper installation of the drain line may very well result in voiding of the manufacturers warranty.

[Christopher Currins]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

So here's a good question for IL and CA folks: if we aren't code inspectors and you think it's a stupid rule, why write it up?

This reason that Bob and Jeff acknowledged is good enough.

ignoring local code voids the warranty

[Bob Elliott]

Originally Posted by ccurrins

This reason that Bob and Jeff acknowledged is good enough.

Yep,that is how I see it.

In my town we must look at this stuff and think about wording.
Example: NM cable being used in most of my area is not allowed and this is well known so Do I mention it is against code?

Pex is not allowed in the city either so what is written?

Best way I have found is to mention a suggestion it be looked into otherwise you will not be actually helping your client even if you have every legal right to be snowblind.

Otherwise you also should ignore IRC codes and all other issues involving specs.

It has been mentioned on the forum we should go by state codes "only" if we are state licensed, but then again we are not code inspectors.
We all use the 4" baluster rule right?

[Christopher Currins]

Originally Posted by belliott

Yep,that is how I see it.

In my town we must look at this stuff and think about wording.
Example: NM cable being used in most of my area is not allowed and this is well known so Do I mention it is against code?

Pex is not allowed in the city either so what is written?

Best way I have found is to mention a suggestion it be looked into otherwise you will not be actually helping your client even if you have every legal right to be snowblind.

Otherwise you also should ignore IRC codes and all other issues involving specs.

It has been mentioned on the forum we should go by state codes "only" if we are state licensed, but then again we are not code inspectors.
We all use the 4" baluster rule right?

Yes wording can be tricky. As Will says he bases it on "best national, or nationally recognized, building practices".

Glad I don't inspect in Chicago though, with copper plumbing, and all electric in conduit, and the new fad split faced block.

[Bob Elliott]

Originally Posted by ccurrins

Yes wording can be tricky. As Will says he bases it on "best national, or nationally recognized, building practices".

Glad I don't inspect in Chicago though, with copper plumbing, and all electric in conduit, and the new fad split faced block.

Split block is becoming the old fad though they use it a lot on commercial which is fine.

Personally I have no issues if it is done right.

Will has some good advise however we all must think for ourselves and then decide.I mix advise,best practice and doing what is best for my client so if anyone does not like that ...tough apples.
Never been one to follow the crowd myself...

Remember you get sued by the client, not the code book. Hopefully neither.(big reason I like narrative report style)