SER cable exposed

Status
Not open for further replies.

gregor

Member
Location
Cincinnati
We are renovating a four story building. the basement is classified per building department as vacant,1st floor is M (commercial)2,3 &4 are R-2(multi-family). we ran ser cable exposed thru the basement thru the commercial spaces up to the other floors for sub panels for each apt.When the cable passes thru the comm. area it is enclosed in a drywall chase.The inspector says we need to enclose the cable in the basement per 334.10.3. We are trying to appeal this call since the exposed cable is not in the commercial space. Has anyone had a similar experience or any advice.
 

eprice

Senior Member
Location
Utah
But he might reply with 334.10(3)

Edit: I see that section has already been referenced in the opening post. If the area in question is not a one- or two-family dwelling, and if it is not a multifamily dwelling, then it must be an "other structure" and 334.10(3) would be the applicable part of 334.10.
 

gregor

Member
Location
Cincinnati
The cable is exposed in the basement of this building.The inspector says that since there is a section of this building that is not considered a dwelling unit then it must be wired as an "other structure". We disagree. We think that the space that is commercial should be wired as " other structure" and the rest is a dwelling unit.
 

tshea

Senior Member
Location
Wisconsin
Who has access to the basement? The dwelling or the commercial?
Actually the question should be who does not have access the commercial or the dwelling?
 

eprice

Senior Member
Location
Utah
If I understand your description of the building, the floor with M occupancy lies between the R occupany area and this basement in question. I can't see how the basement could be considered part of the R occupancy. It is classified as "Vacant" so it is something other than residential. 334.10(3) sure seems to me like the part of 334.10 that would govern.
 

rcarroll

Senior Member
I would consider this a "mixed use" building & agree with eprice. If you have a building inspector, who is not the electrical inspector, check with him/her & see if there is to be an ocuppancy separation between the basement & M ocuppancy. If there is, then I would think the ser would be above the sheetrock & you would be fine. Ron
 

gregor

Member
Location
Cincinnati
If the basement was classified for R so the apartment residents could use it for storage and the floor above it classified M and the other floors above that are classified R would I be able to run my SER exposed in the basement? Or since that one level is class. M does the entire building become " other Structure" per code 334.10.3 or does each floor get wired as it is classified? Does the code spell this out? Another question is if the entire building is type 3 construction what is the intent of code section 334.10.3 and 334.10.4?
 

rcarroll

Senior Member
IMO, the M occupancy makes this a mixed use building & not a multifamily dwelling & 334.10(3) applies. I still wonder if there is not a 1 hour separation between the basement & 1st. floor.
 

eprice

Senior Member
Location
Utah
gregor said:
If the basement was classified for R so the apartment residents could use it for storage and the floor above it classified M and the other floors above that are classified R would I be able to run my SER exposed in the basement? Or since that one level is class. M does the entire building become " other Structure" per code 334.10.3 or does each floor get wired as it is classified? Does the code spell this out?

Now, if that were the scenario, then I would be less certain. The problem is 334.10(3) seems to be talking about the structure as a whole, whereas 334.10(1) and (2) are talking about dwellings, which may or may not occupy an entire building. I guess I would say that if the basement were part of a dwelling, then 334.10(1) or (2) could apply and the SER could be run exposed. But, if the basement is separated from the dwelling areas, despite it being classified as group R, I'm still not sure that it would meet the definition of a dwelling in the NEC.

Another question is if the entire building is type 3 construction what is the intent of code section 334.10.3 and 334.10.4?

Interesting question. In other words, what does 334.10(4) allow that is not already allowed in 334.10(3), right? I would say that, if the installation meets the criteria set in 334.10(4) and does not need to rely upon 334.10(3) in order to be allowed, and since 334.10(4) does not include the requirement for concealment, then concealment is not required.

What if it does have a 1hour rating between basement and 1st floor?

In the context of the scenario described in your original post, with the basement being classified as "vacant", I don' see that the 1 hour separation between basement and 1st floor would make any difference to the requirement that it be concealed.
 

rcarroll

Senior Member
gregor said:
What if it does have a 1hour rating between basement and 1st floor?
What I'm trying to get at, without knowing how the building is built, is that you run the ser cable through the floor joists,bar joists, whatever is installed, then 2 layers of sheetrock or 1 layer plus rc channel is installed on the bottom of the joists. Thus, you have a 1 hour assembly & your ser cable is protected. This is how it's done on a mixed use building I am currently inspecting. Check the full set of plans & see if this is not the case. Good luck.
 

Gmack

Banned
Location
Michigan
This is from the commentary of the 2005 NEC Handbook. From what I gather it would appear that if NM type cable was allowed "anywhere" in the building by the [building code] then this inspector would have to allow it in the basement also. Provided it is installed to NEC.

Did you wire the dwellings with NM? Did the inspector approve that part?

Commentary:

A well-established means of codifying fire protection and fire safety requirements is to classify buildings by types of construction, based on materials used for the structural elements and the degree of fire resistance afforded by each element. The five fundamental construction types used by the model building codes are Type I (fire resistive), Type II (noncombustible), Type III (combination of combustible and noncombustible), Type IV (heavy timber), and Type VA (wood frame). Types I and II basically require all structural elements to be noncombustible, whereas Types III, IV, and V allow some or all of the structural elements to be combustible (wood).
The selection of building construction types is regulated by the building code, based on the occupancy, height, and area of the building. The local code official or the architect for a building project can be consulted to determine the minimum allowable (permitted) construction type for the building under consideration. When a building of a selected height (in feet or stories above grade) and area is permitted to be built of combustible construction (i.e., Types III, IV, or V), the installation of nonmetallic-sheathed cable is permitted. The common areas (corridors) and incidental and subordinate uses (laundry rooms, lounge rooms, etc.) that serve a multifamily dwelling occupancy are also considered part of the multifamily occupancy, thereby allowing the use of nonmetallic-sheathed cable in those areas.
If a building is to be of noncombustible construction (i.e., Type I or II) by the owner's choice, even though the building code would permit combustible construction, the building is allowed to be wired with nonmetallic-sheathed cable. In such an instance, nonmetallic-sheathed cable may be installed in the noncombustible building because the Code would have permitted the building to be of combustible construction.
Annex E provides charts and other explanatory information to assist the user in understanding and categorizing the exact types of construction under consideration. A table to cross reference building types to the various building code types of construction is also provided in Annex E.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top