NH Journeyman Electrician common mistakes
NH Journeyman Electrician · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Answering ampacity, box-fill, and conduit-fill questions from memory of the table layout instead of opening the actual Table 310.16, Table 314.16(B), or Chapter 9 tables and reading the row for the exact conductor size, insulation type, and terminal rating given in the question.
Most candidates learned these tables during apprenticeship and assume they remember them. The exam deliberately varies insulation temperature rating, ambient temperature, and number of current-carrying conductors, so a remembered value from one column produces a plausible but wrong answer.
What to do instead
Before exam day, drill 40 to 60 mixed problems where you must state the table number and column you used before computing. On the exam, write the table and column reference next to each calculation so a misread row is visible when you check your work.
Skipping the ampacity adjustment and correction steps and using the base table value directly when the question states more than three current-carrying conductors in a raceway or an ambient temperature above 30 degrees C.
The base ampacity is the first number found, so it feels like the answer. Adjustment factors in Table 310.15(C)(1) and correction factors in Table 310.15(B)(1) are applied in a second step that candidates forget under time pressure, especially when the question buries the conductor count in a feeder description.
What to do instead
Adopt a fixed three-line scratch format for every ampacity item: base ampacity, times adjustment factor, times correction factor. If any line is blank, the problem is not finished. Practice until the format is automatic.
Treating every conductor in a raceway as current-carrying when counting for adjustment, or ignoring that a neutral counts only when it carries harmonic current or is part of a multiwire branch circuit on a wye system with nonlinear loads.
The rule has exceptions that candidates memorize as slogans rather than conditions. Grounded conductors on balanced linear loads do not count, and equipment grounding conductors never count, but candidates either count everything or count nothing.
What to do instead
Write out the counting rule in your own words with the three conditions that make a neutral count, then apply it to ten practice scenarios that include a 120/208 wye feeder, a 480V three-wire circuit, and a circuit with a high harmonic load.
Applying the 125 percent continuous-load multiplier to the wrong quantity, for example multiplying the overcurrent device size instead of the continuous load, or applying it to the total load including the noncontinuous portion.
The 125 percent factor appears in branch-circuit, feeder, and service calculations with slightly different wording, and candidates blend the versions. The arithmetic then looks reasonable and escapes review.
What to do instead
Separate continuous and noncontinuous loads into two columns on scratch paper, apply 125 percent only to the continuous column, then add. State the article you are using (210.19, 210.20, 215.2, or 215.3) beside the calculation.
Confusing grounding and bonding requirements: sizing the equipment grounding conductor from Table 250.122 when the question asks about the grounded conductor, or assuming a grounding electrode conductor can serve as the fault return path.
The words sound interchangeable and the tables look similar. Candidates also carry over residential habits where the grounded conductor and grounding electrode conductor meet at one point, then misapply that to a subpanel.
What to do instead
Build a one-page comparison sheet listing what each conductor does, which table sizes it, and where each terminates. Practice ten items where you must first name the conductor's function before selecting a table.
Reciting a code change from a summary list without knowing which edition introduced it or what the previous text said, so the answer matches a different code cycle than the one the exam uses.
Candidates study change summaries spanning several cycles and lose track of which change belongs to which edition. Exam items often test the current requirement and offer the prior edition's rule as a distractor.
What to do instead
For each change you study, record three facts: the edition, the section number, and the old rule in one sentence. Verify the edition the exam is based on before studying any change list.
Answering licensing-law items from general trade intuition, for example assuming any electrical work can be performed by an apprentice without supervision or that a license from another state transfers automatically.
Candidates spend most study time on the NEC and treat the statute and rules as common sense. The licensing statute contains specific supervision ratios, scope boundaries, and penalty provisions that intuition gets wrong.
What to do instead
Read the licensing statute and administrative rules directly, once end to end, and make a table of who may perform what, under whose supervision, and what the penalties are. Then answer practice items only from that table.
Missing the distinction between actions that require a license, actions that require a permit, and actions that require an inspection, and choosing the license answer for a question about permits or notifications.
All three appear in the same statute and rules, and candidates collapse them into one idea of 'getting approval.' The question stem usually names one of the three explicitly.
What to do instead
Underline the operative noun in each administrative question (license, permit, inspection, notification, continuing education) before reading the options, and build a separate short list for each.
Ignoring the exceptions and informational notes attached to a code section and applying the general rule to a case the exception covers, such as assuming all receptacles in a dwelling require GFCI protection regardless of location or distance.
Candidates read the main paragraph and stop. Exceptions are often printed in smaller type or on the following page, and the exam builds items directly on them.
What to do instead
When you look up a section during practice, read the entire section through the last exception and any associated table before answering. Mark exceptions with a highlighter in your codebook so they are visible during a lookup.
Spending too long on one calculation item, then rushing the remaining items and misreading simple requirements such as receptacle spacing, working clearance distances, or box-fill counts.
Calculation items feel solvable and candidates refuse to abandon them. The clock then forces fast reading on items that reward careful reading of a single number.
What to do instead
Set a personal time cap per calculation item, mark and move on when it is hit, and reserve the final minutes for the short factual items. Practice full-length timed sets so the pacing decision is rehearsed rather than improvised.