Mud rings instead of MP1s

Status
Not open for further replies.

4SPARKS

Member
Location
New Jersey
I recently installed as I have many times before mud rings mounted to studs(metal) for data and phone terminations. Well an inspector came in and failed this installation the reason given was that the product was not UL listed for this application. Through various conversations with inspectors, manufacturers, UL reps, it seems the mud ring UL literature does not mention this application specifically but in using both products a mud ring is much sturdier and on a big job as this is less prone to damage and will support my device plate better. So my question is where in the code does it require or state what kind of box needs to be used for this application and does the code require it to be UL listed for that application I would really like to fight this more on principal than anything.
 

4SPARKS

Member
Location
New Jersey
mud rings for data wires

mud rings for data wires

I recently installed as I have many times before mud rings mounted to studs(metal) for data and phone terminations. Well an inspector came in and failed this installation the reason given was that the product was not UL listed for this application. Through various conversations with inspectors, manufacturers, UL reps, it seems the mud ring UL literature does not mention this application specifically but in using both products a mud ring is much sturdier and on a big job as this is less prone to damage and will support my device plate better. So my question is where in the code does it require or state what kind of box needs to be used for this application and does the code require it to be UL listed for that application I would really like to fight this more on principal than anything.
 
I recently installed as I have many times before mud rings mounted to studs(metal) for data and phone terminations. Well an inspector came in and failed this installation the reason given was that the product was not UL listed for this application. Through various conversations with inspectors, manufacturers, UL reps, it seems the mud ring UL literature does not mention this application specifically but in using both products a mud ring is much sturdier and on a big job as this is less prone to damage and will support my device plate better. So my question is where in the code does it require or state what kind of box needs to be used for this application and does the code require it to be UL listed for that application I would really like to fight this more on principal than anything.

My understanding is as long as you have your communication wire installed in an EMT conduit and the conduit terminates within 3/4 of an inch of the plaster ring opening included with bushing,connector or coupling you should be good to go. Correct me if I'm wrong.
 

sparkyboys

Senior Member
Location
Columbus, ga
well here in Ga. even though its only data and coaxial cable, the mud rings still have to be attached a 4sq box-piped in with 1" emt, stubbed out with a plastic bushing and strapped per spec code. that is the way we have always done it.

314.16 C 1, 314.19, 314.20
 
Last edited:

Sierrasparky

Senior Member
Location
USA
Occupation
Electrician ,contractor
well here in Ga. even though its only data and coaxial cable, the mud rings still have to be attached a 4sq box-piped in with 1" emt, stubbed out with a plastic bushing and strapped per spec code. that is the way we have always done it.
Where in the code does it require such. That must be a customer spec.
 

4SPARKS

Member
Location
New Jersey
wire is exposed down beam doesnt need to be in conduit and strapped accordingly it was actually commented how "neat" the installation was but the issue was the ul listing on the mud ring at least from the inspectors standpoint
 
I recently installed as I have many times before mud rings mounted to studs(metal) for data and phone terminations. Well an inspector came in and failed this installation the reason given was that the product was not UL listed for this application. Through various conversations with inspectors, manufacturers, UL reps, it seems the mud ring UL literature does not mention this application specifically but in using both products a mud ring is much sturdier and on a big job as this is less prone to damage and will support my device plate better. So my question is where in the code does it require or state what kind of box needs to be used for this application and does the code require it to be UL listed for that application I would really like to fight this more on principal than anything.

Rationale,

May I suggest if plaster rings and 4 by 4 boxes are good enough for electrical installations. Since communication wiring does carry a small amount of voltage it would still fall under acceptable installation methods. If Code has a section on extra low voltage then this installation if accepted for regular line voltage should also apply for extra low voltage and is covered by code.

Try it,
 

LarryFine

Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
Location
Henrico County, VA
Occupation
Electrical Contractor
My opinion is that it's not a requirement that what you use is UL listed at all, and he's full of hot air.
 

paul

Senior Member
Location
Snohomish, WA
You don't even need the mudring. If you wish, you could cut a small hole in the rock and put your screws right into the sheetrock for the device. This inspector is on a power trip. What about the caddy plates where you screw the mudring onto it without a box?

sparkyboys,

Last I checked, low voltage doesn't have to be installed as a 300 wiring method. Correct me if I'm wrong, but 314.16 C 1, 314.19, 314.20 need not apply.
 

tom baker

First Chief Moderator
Staff member
Telecom applications are not subject to the rules in Chapters 1-7 unless a specific reference is made in chapter 8. See section 90.3
Ask your inspector to show you the specific rule that applies in chapter 8.
A mud ring is not required. There may be a requirement for fire stopping.
 

sparkyboys

Senior Member
Location
Columbus, ga
Maybe not in homes or some small retail businesses, but as for schools hospitals, doctor offices, data centers, warehouses/office buildings. These are the types of jobs that I do. I have seen it on all spec codes. Yes spec codes are diff than most NEC codes, but if its in the specs, then DO NOT whip that code book in front of the inspector. Cause if he asks for those specs and its different than the NEC, NEC does not override the specs.
 

celtic

Senior Member
Location
NJ
IMHO, 110.3(B) is the violation, barring a 90.4 exception, you are SOL on this.

As an EI, personally, I would let it fly....to me, it's no different than an ERICO MP* :

13656667.jpg

http://www.erico.com/products/CADDYcfcLwVltgMntngBrckt.asp
 
Last edited:
Maybe not in homes or some small retail businesses, but as for schools hospitals, doctor offices, data centers, warehouses/office buildings. These are the types of jobs that I do. I have seen it on all spec codes. Yes spec codes are diff than most NEC codes, but if its in the specs, then DO NOT whip that code book in front of the inspector. Cause if he asks for those specs and its different than the NEC, NEC does not override the specs.

Just for curiosity, if you have a NEC code, does each State also have a State electrical code that superceeds NEC. In additon does each City have independent codes that superceeds State. Could you clarify also if the NFPA 70E is used in conjuction with the NEC or overides, I am not familiar with how your system works could please educate me, much appreciated.
 

TOOL_5150

Senior Member
Location
bay area, ca
I recently installed as I have many times before mud rings mounted to studs(metal) for data and phone terminations. Well an inspector came in and failed this installation the reason given was that the product was not UL listed for this application. Through various conversations with inspectors, manufacturers, UL reps, it seems the mud ring UL literature does not mention this application specifically but in using both products a mud ring is much sturdier and on a big job as this is less prone to damage and will support my device plate better. So my question is where in the code does it require or state what kind of box needs to be used for this application and does the code require it to be UL listed for that application I would really like to fight this more on principal than anything.

You stated low voltage use... Id ask for a code reference with this non-electrical installation. Inspector is off his rocker.

~Matt
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
Maybe not in homes or some small retail businesses, but as for schools hospitals, doctor offices, data centers, warehouses/office buildings. These are the types of jobs that I do. I have seen it on all spec codes. Yes spec codes are diff than most NEC codes, but if its in the specs, then DO NOT whip that code book in front of the inspector. Cause if he asks for those specs and its different than the NEC, NEC does not override the specs.

I am really not sure what your point is here. :confused:
 

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
IMHO, 110.3(B) is the violation,

Really?

Can you show us instructions included with the listing or labeling of a 'mudring' that requires that they be used with a box? :)

BTW, Chapter 1 (110.3) does not apply to Chapter 8 unless it is mentioned in Chapter 8. :cool:
 

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
My opinion is that it's not a requirement that what you use is UL listed at all, and he's full of hot air.

I agree. And who really cares? If you look at the application does it really matter if the ring is listed for this or not?
 

corbel

Member
I am thinking is it worth it to ask for variation from the inspector. I think using the mud rings are actually much better than the MPS1's. Also, what about asking him to site the code violation? And finally, what do you think the DCA's interpertation would be?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top