300.11 Violation?

Status
Not open for further replies.

A/A Fuel GTX

Senior Member
Location
WI & AZ
Occupation
Electrician
Or wrap the tie wrap around both MC's and then through the staple.

That would make it right?. I don't see the difference although I don't disagree with you. I'm thinking the real reason for 300.11 is to prevent someone from using back to back Minnies from one conduit to support another. I do the tie wrap thing with Romex all the time and never get called for it. Same principle here with the MC but I don't do much commercial so I thought I'd see what the consensus is. BTW, what's a Colorado Jim?
 

ActionDave

Chief Moderator
Staff member
Location
Durango, CO, 10 h 20 min from the winged horses.
Occupation
Licensed Electrician
That would make it right?.
By the letter of the law, yes.
I don't see the difference although I don't disagree with you. I'm thinking the real reason for 300.11 is to prevent someone from using back to back Minnies from one conduit to support another. I do the tie wrap thing with Romex all the time and never get called for it. Same principle here with the MC but I don't do much commercial so I thought I'd see what the consensus is. BTW, what's a Colorado Jim?
I agree with you. As long as the MC is not in danger what difference it make. That is why I added the line admitting I have done the same thing.
I just Googled the " Colorado Jim". Nice idea......
Finally we get at least one thing named after my state. I wish I was the Coloradan that came up with them.

They work great. Best thing is you can strip and make up and then add them or even better, send a helper around to install them.
 

Dennis Alwon

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Chapel Hill, NC
Occupation
Retired Electrical Contractor
I would never reject that install in that situation. There is no weight added to the other mc because all you are doing is keeping it from moving out of the stud space. Technically the inspector may be correct but IMO its a bad call.
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
I would never reject that install in that situation. There is no weight added to the other mc because all you are doing is keeping it from moving out of the stud space. Technically the inspector may be correct but IMO its a bad call.
In this case the "supported" part is not critical but the "secured" part is. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top