Let's break down each of the inspector's concerns and your counter-arguments to see who has a stronger argument based on common electrical code (primarily based on the NEC). Keep in mind that code interpretations can vary by jurisdiction, so the inspector ultimately has the final say in your location. The NEC is a model code, states/municipalities can change/alter that code.1. Conduit Body Suitability (406.
9.B.1)



Inspector's Claim

The conduit bodies in the provided spec sheet (https://rexel-cdn.com/products/12248413specshturl.pdf?i=78820FB5-A252-486E-9707-623DD6FC7930) don't meet 406.9(B)(1) for temporary use.

Your Claim

They are 3R rated (Rain Tight).

Analysis



NEC 406.9(B)(1) (2023 NEC)

This section requires that for receptacles installed in a wet location, the enclosure must be weatherproof whether or not the attachment plug cap is inserted. This typically means a "while-in-use" weatherproof cover. (2020 NEC may be similar)

The Specification Sheet

The spec sheet states they are NEMA 3R rated. This does provide protection from rain, sleet, and snow. However, it doesn't necessarily guarantee a weatherproof connection when a plug is inserted.

Problem

NEMA 3R rating is generally not sufficient to meet the full intent of 406.9(B)(1) for a temporary receptacle that will be used outdoors.

Conclusion

The inspector likely has a valid point here.

You are probably wrong. To meet 406.9(B)(1), you'd typically need a conduit body with a weatherproof "while-in-use" cover that encloses the receptacle even when a plug is inserted.2. Offer Contingency on Stem Wall



Inspector's Claim

The offer does not count until the stem wall is poured.

Analysis

This is not typically an electrical code issue. This sounds like a contractual issue. Inspectors generally don't get involved in contractual agreements between contractors and their clients. It's usually based on their requirements when they will inspect.

3. Energizing Before Roof Sheathing (110.3(A)(9), 110.27(B), 408.20)



Inspector's Claim

Electrical equipment shall not be energized until the roof sheathing is installed, citing 110.3(A)(9), 110.27(B), and 408.
20.

Your Claim

You've framed the equipment 1" from the building for later installation, and it's all 3R rated.

Analysis



NEC 110.3(A)(9)

"Examination, Identification, Installation, and Use of Equipment. Equipment that is listed, labeled, or identified for a specific purpose shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing, labeling, or identification." This is a general requirement. Does the equipment's listing or instructions require a completed building? Unlikely.

NEC 110.27(B)

"Enclosure Types. Enclosures for electrical equipment shall be of such construction and design as to provide adequate physical protection to prevent accidental contact with energized parts or exposure to physical damage." This deals with physical protection. If the equipment is properly enclosed and protected from damage, this section shouldn't prevent energization.

NEC 408.20

"Supports and Arrangement. Switchboards and panelboards shall be adequately supported to withstand the forces encountered during operation." This is more about the physical mounting of the panel once it is installed.

Key Issue

The inspector's concern likely stems from the potential for damage or unsafe conditions during construction before the building is fully enclosed. The roof sheathing provides significant protection from the elements and helps stabilize the building.

Your Argument

Framing the equipment away from the building and using 3R-rated enclosures partially addresses these concerns. However, it doesn't completely eliminate the risks. It doesn't provide the same level of protection as a fully enclosed building. The AHJ may believe a complete roof is part of the system protection.

Conclusion

This is a gray area. The inspector might be overreaching, BUT their concern about safety during construction is legitimate.

It depends on their interpretation of the NEC for temporary installations and what risks they perceive. 3R helps, but it doesn't solve every potential problem.

Your Argument - "Framed 1" Away"

This shows good faith and an attempt to mitigate risk. However, it doesn't change the core issue of potential damage and weather exposure before the building is complete.

Overall Assessment



Conduit Bodies

The inspector is likely correct. You need weatherproof "while-in-use" covers to comply with 406.9(B)(1) for temporary receptacles in wet locations.

Offer Contingency

This is a business matter, not an electrical code matter.

Energizing Before Roof Sheathing

The inspector's position is debatable. While the NEC doesn't explicitly prohibit energizing before roof sheathing in all cases, the inspector is likely invoking their authority to ensure safety during construction.

What You Should Do


Talk to the Inspector

Calmly and respectfully ask for clarification on exactly what their concerns are with energizing before the roof sheathing. Ask what would be acceptable to satisfy their concerns.2.

Provide Documentation

If your equipment has specific installation instructions regarding weather exposure or protection, provide those to the inspector.3.

Offer Solutions

For the receptacle, replace the conduit bodies with boxes that accommodate "while-in-use" weatherproof covers. For the energizing issue, propose additional temporary protection measures: Temporary barricades around the equipment. Extra protection against rain and snow (tarps, etc.) A written procedure for ensuring safety during energization.4.

Be Prepared to Compromise

The inspector has the authority. Sometimes, the best course of action is to comply with their requirements, even if you believe they are not strictly required by code. It's better than a failed inspection and delays.5.

Appeal (If Necessary)

If you strongly believe the inspector is incorrect and cannot reach a compromise, you usually have the right to appeal their decision to a higher authority within the inspection department. However, consider this a last resort.

*In Summary: You need to address the conduit body issue. The energizing issue is more subjective and depends on the inspector's interpretation and your ability to demonstrate that the installation is safe. Good luck! Flag for review