Failed inspection...Not sure if the inspector is correct

Status
Not open for further replies.

pkelectrical

Member
Location
NJ
Had inspection and failed for "Romex cannot be stapled down on studs fastened to the wall"
I have done this many times. On the pictures it is a regular 2x4, I know it should been a treated stud but as far as the installation is that a violation?
2015_09_14_17_16_19.jpg
 

GerryB

Senior Member
Had inspection and failed for "Romex cannot be stapled down on studs fastened to the wall"
I have done this many times. On the pictures it is a regular 2x4, I know it should been a treated stud but as far as the installation is that a violation?
View attachment 13367
I would say it looks great. I don't believe the stud has to be treated either. A carpenter I work with was complaining about failing an inspection one time because he didn't use treated wood for the sill plates? the 2x4's in contact with the floor. A few services I've done recently where we installed plywood it wasn't treated and we didn't paint it and it was no problem.
 

Sierrasparky

Senior Member
Location
USA
Occupation
Electrician ,contractor
What about protection from physical damage?
I've always had to protect and enclose. Sleeve in EMT.
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
:thumbsup::thumbsup:

Those may well be 2x4s, but they are not structural in any way and therefore I would not call them studs. Studs inside a wall are a different beast.

To me also the problem is not whether the NM can be stapled to a wood backing board of any kind but whether the NM can be run exposed on the wall at that height in that location.
The characterization of the "room" is not clear from the picture. Is it an unfinished basement? A utility room? Is the NM subject to damage at that height when not recessed into a stud cavity?
 

pkelectrical

Member
Location
NJ
It is in unfinished garage. It is a lifted Hurricane Sandy home.
Inspector also added: "Build a wall, or install it in a conduit"
 

growler

Senior Member
Location
Atlanta,GA
So he's not talking about protection from physical damage?

IMO, that is code compliant because it is on a running board. Unfortunately my opinion holds no weight there.


I think it's just one of those gray areas where the inspector can call it as he sees fit. He can say it's subject to physical damage and there isn't anything you can do about it. I know plenty of inspectors that would just let it go as is.

How much is a little conduit, connectors and straps going to cost? Won't even take very long.
 
Location
NE (9.06 miles @5.9 Degrees from Winged Horses)
Occupation
EC - retired
Our city inspectors won't allow that installation either. In a sheet rocked wall or sleeved in conduit. They feel that portion coming down the studs is subject to damage. I don't use running boards, most don't in this area, so anything above is drilled through or on the side of joists.
 

ritelec

Senior Member
Location
Jersey
I would think physical protection..

Question also,

Would a 1900 cover plate plate be more acceptable than a mudd ring with surface cover?
I mean, I think some 30 years ago I heard of someone getting knocked down for installing a flush cover on a surface box.

I try not to do it because of this 30 year old memory, it looks weird (diy, home ownerish imo, same as running open nm down a 2x4), and could catch someone and injure them especially with square corner cover plate.

2cents
 

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
Looks fine to me but unfortunately the inspector gets to decide if it's subject to physical damage (you should have been given a code section that was violated). Not sure if it really applies but the requirement for treated wood in contact with masonry in a basement is in the building code.
 

pkelectrical

Member
Location
NJ
I would think physical protection..

Question also,

Would a 1900 cover plate plate be more acceptable than a mudd ring with surface cover?
I mean, I think some 30 years ago I heard of someone getting knocked down for installing a flush cover on a surface box.

I try not to do it because of this 30 year old memory, it looks weird (diy, home ownerish imo, same as running open nm down a 2x4), and could catch someone and injure them especially with square corner cover plate.

2cents

Not sure how much damage a square plastic cover can do. They are very fragile and break easily. It is about being code complaint and not as much how it looks. These are Sandy homes, and the builders just want them done as fast and as cheap as possible and people just want to get back in their homes since they have been out of the homes for 1-3 years.
Installing in conduit is fine but it takes a lot longer since I can only put 2 14/2 in a pipe without derating.
 

mgookin

Senior Member
Location
Fort Myers, FL
Have you considered putting another 2x4 each side and some plywood? That would render it not exposed. Might be your quickest way out if the inspector will accept it.
 

mwm1752

Senior Member
Location
Aspen, Colo
The wire IMO is subject to physical damage as any object could come in contact with it -- now within a stud wall would be a different situation as a running board -- nm run low horizontally in a open stud wall is subject to physical damage IMO -- I would agree that setting studs on edge & covering with drywall would suffice the situation.
 

ritelec

Senior Member
Location
Jersey
Not sure how much damage a square plastic cover can do. They are very fragile and break easily. It is about being code complaint and not as much how it looks. These are Sandy homes, and the builders just want them done as fast and as cheap as possible and people just want to get back in their homes since they have been out of the homes for 1-3 years.
Installing in conduit is fine but it takes a lot longer since I can only put 2 14/2 in a pipe without derating.

use two

I'm from north jersey and went down there……. was a mess….. actually was amazing.. one side of the street or half the block was pristine, the other side of the street or block was a wreck…………


builders??? I try to stay away from them..

good luck shore dweller. :- )
 

gadfly56

Senior Member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Professional Engineer, Fire & Life Safety
Not sure how much damage a square plastic cover can do. They are very fragile and break easily. It is about being code complaint and not as much how it looks. These are Sandy homes, and the builders just want them done as fast and as cheap as possible and people just want to get back in their homes since they have been out of the homes for 1-3 years.
Installing in conduit is fine but it takes a lot longer since I can only put 2 14/2 in a pipe without derating.

Putting the NM on running boards in this location should be fine. Rick Napier would be a better source, but since this is NJ, insist that the inspector quote you chapter and verse, or you could call the DCA in Trenton.
 

RICK NAPIER

Senior Member
Location
New Jersey
This article appears to support the inspectors position though most inspectors don't have a problem with it.

334.15(C) In Unfinished Basements and Crawl Spaces. Where cable is run at angles with joists in unfinished basements and crawl spaces, it shall be permissible to secure cables not smaller than two 6 AWG or three 8 AWG conductors directly to the lower edges of the joists. Smaller cables shall be run either through bored holes in joists or on running boards. Nonmetallic-sheathed cable installed on the wall of an unfinished basement shall be permitted to be installed in a listed conduit or tubing or shall be protected in accordance with 300.4. Conduit or tubing shall be provided with a suitable insulating bushing or adapter at the point the cable enters the raceway. The sheath of the nonmetallic-sheathed cable shall extend through the conduit or tubing and into the outlet or device box not less than 6 mm (1⁄4 in.). The cable shall be secured within 300 mm (12 in.) of the point where the cable enters the conduit or tubing. Metal conduit, tubing, and metal outlet boxes shall be connected to an equipment grounding conductor complying with the provisions of 250.86 and 250.148.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top