I think this is a code violation?
Im going to start with i think this is a damp location, and the fittings and boxs that they used is what I think is the violation. You can't see but the background is just like the side I took the picture from. It was an open side building, I would not say it was a wet location as it is sheltered but I would not say it was dry location either as it is open to the outside. What do you think? Is this a code violation or not? I stated my thoughts on it what are yours.
Greetings Rob,
Thank you for posting the question. I guess we should start by looking at the definition of Damp Location.
Location, Damp. (Damp Location)
Locations protected from weather and not subject to saturation with water or other liquids but subject to moderate degrees of moisture.
Now, the Informational note SHOULD NOT be where we focus because that is just a list of items and none of which exactly meet this application. I guess the closest is roofed open porch.
I think to me I have to look at each location microscopicly, if thats such a word. So, if I have a roofed building like this, knowing the metal grid above the play area is energized anyway. However, i guess the common sense approach is would you under normal conditions expect water (moisture) to get all the way under the building and actually to the raceway or fittings? I guess it's subjective and its like saying a crawlspace is a damp location just because it may be earth and vents to allow air intrusion...well I say NO all the time since chances are the lumber on the floor joists are not treated and also 95% of the time standard insulation batts. So, to me its a dry location.
So, based on allowing yourself to strictly follow "Informational notes" without context then it is indeed in the world of "Damp"....but reality is it really?...Ultimately that is a call the AHJ will have to make that call.
What I do know, you can't go wrong calling it "Damp" based on examples and wiring it accordingly or it's possible the wiring method is so far under the roof system it is judged "Dry".
Sadly this is where folks desire the NEC to be more specific BUT I like the NEC being ambitious on many things because it allows flexibility where an argument can be made.
Just my thoughts my friend.
Paul Abernathy great read and information paul!