NM buried in chase in gypcrete floor

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sierrasparky

Sierrasparky

Senior Member
Location
USA
Occupation
Electrician ,contractor
I ran across a piece of Romex installed in a shallow chase of a gypcrete floor on the second story.
With this even covered with a steel plate I think it is not legit.
 
(A) Type NM. Type NM cable shall be permitted as follows:
(1) For both exposed and concealed work in normally dry
locations except as prohibited in 334.10(3)
Click to expand...

this is a concealed and normally dry chase.

334.10(3) has some restrictions that might apply.
 
petersonra said:
this is a concealed and normally dry chase.

​
​
​
334.10(3) has some restrictions that might apply.
Click to expand...

that is only part of the codes.
Sec 334.12 uses not permited.
(B) Types NM and NMS.​
​
​
​
Types NM and NMS cables ​
shall not be used under the following conditions or in the
following locations:
(1) Where exposed to corrosive fumes or vapors
(2) Where embedded in masonry, concrete, adobe,
fill, or plaster
(3) In a shallow chase in masonry, concrete, or adobeand covered with plaster, adobe, or similar finish​
(4) In wet or damp locations


So if the cable is left exposed and a metal plate is placed along the entire run this is OK. Is a metal plate good for the 15 min. fire rating needing?
 
Sierrasparky said:


that is only part of the codes.
Sec 334.12 uses not permited.
(B) Types NM and NMS.​
​
​
​
Types NM and NMS cables ​
shall not be used under the following conditions or in the
following locations:
(1) Where exposed to corrosive fumes or vapors
(2) Where embedded in masonry, concrete, adobe,
fill, or plaster
(3) In a shallow chase in masonry, concrete, or adobeand covered with plaster, adobe, or similar finish​
(4) In wet or damp locations


So if the cable is left exposed and a metal plate is placed along the entire run this is OK. Is a metal plate good for the 15 min. fire rating needing?
Click to expand...
it is not embedded nor is it covered with one of the banned finishes.

I don't see how a metal plate can't meet the 15 minute fire rating.
 
Sierrasparky said:
I ran across a piece of Romex installed in a shallow chase of a gypcrete floor on the second story.
With this even covered with a steel plate I think it is not legit.
Click to expand...
Firstly, it is Nonmetallic-Sheathed Cable or Type NM and give a look at 334.12(B)(3) and tell me if you think what you did is compliant?
 
Replace it with Type UF-B Cable and install it under 340.10(4) and then protect it in accordance with 334.15(B) as you would Type NMC.

FYI- We don't even make Type NMC simply because we make Type UF.....
 
MasterTheNEC said:
Firstly, it is Nonmetallic-Sheathed Cable or Type NM and give a look at 334.12(B)(3) and tell me if you think what you did is compliant?
Click to expand...

I have not done this work. It was something I observed.
I had thought it was not compliant.
I see now that if the groove is not filled and a proper thickness metal plate covers it then it is ok.
 
Sierrasparky said:
I have not done this work. It was something I observed.
I had thought it was not compliant.
I see now that if the groove is not filled and a proper thickness metal plate covers it then it is ok.
Click to expand...
I am with ya brother...I was speaking in general terms of what I believe should have been done...No Worries
 
Sierrasparky said:
How does 334.15 work into the picture?
Click to expand...
Because in my response the use of UF is permitted per 340.10(4) and then it also states that the UF has to be installed in accordance with Art. 334 Part II and III. Is 334.15 not included in Part II of Article 334?

You are using it in the same respect as Type NMC...are you not?
 
MasterTheNEC said:
Because in my response the use of UF is permitted per 340.10(4) and then it also states that the UF has to be installed in accordance with Art. 334 Part II and III. Is 334.15 not included in Part II of Article 334?

You are using it in the same respect as Type NMC...are you not?
Click to expand...

It appears to me that 334.15 only applies to exposed work, whether it is UF or NM, is not material.
 
MasterTheNEC said:
So are you saying the LAST paragraph in Section 334.15(B) is a misnomer and should not be their?
Click to expand...

Type NMC cable installed in shallow chases or grooves
in masonry, concrete, or adobe shall be protected in accordance
with the requirements in 300.4(F) and covered with
plaster, adobe, or similar finish.
Click to expand...

I thought you said it was not NMC cable.
 
petersonra said:
I thought you said it was not NMC cable.
Click to expand...
No but it is UF being used as Nonmetallic-Sheathed Cable and in doing so has to meet the requirements of part II and III of Article 334. So normal Type NM cant't be installed in shallow grooves of this material [which I will assume is like concrete or masonry as expressed in 334.12(B)(3)]. ...since 340.12(10) also has the same concerns about being subject to physical damage, and the original question depicts the use of what I would consider the installation as depicted in 334.15(B) in the last paragraph...it would stand to reason it is being used as NM cable, as per 340.10(4) then it has to also be a type of NM Cable that can be in the very installation in question...which is Type NMC.
Dude....just say we agree to disagree.....im sticking with my position...:angel:..lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top