Garage interior wiring

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jeff48356

Senior Member
Location
Livonia, Michigan
My neighbor had a new garage built, and he did his own wiring. He ran a 50A 240V service with a sub-panel, and installed several outlets on each wall, on separate circuits from the sub-panel. He ran the wires through the studs, like you would normally do inside a house. But the inspector didn't pass it, saying that it wasn't code to run wires through studs in a garage unless he finishes the walls with drywall or pegboard. Instead of re-doing all his wiring, he decided to cover all the walls with pegboard.

What is the reason for the code saying that you can't have wires running through studs in an unfinished garage?
 
So what Rob is pointing out will mean that the pegboard won't be good enough, it is not the physical protection from impact that section refers to, but damage from fire, and the resultant fumes from the sheath.

That would mean all the NM cable, including that to the overhead light(s) and door opener needs to be covered too.

If the inspector is concerned only about impact damage, that is more of a judgement call, nothing says that the cable can't be run through bored holes.
 
I believe it is subject to damage if you run the cables thru the studs. Many inspectors don't expect the garage to have sheetrock but if you run parallel to the studs and run thru the ceiling joist they are okay with it.

The 2011 ( article 334.10(1)) made some effort to address this by adding that one & two family dwellings and their attached or detached garages, and their storage buildings be allowed to run the wire without sheetrock. You would still need to protect it by running parallel with joists etc.
 
my 2 cents is that 334.10(3) does not apply to dwelling garages and was never intended to. 2011 makes that clear.

it is a judgment call of the AHJ whether or not the NM is subject to damage.

IMHO the peg board should take care of the problem.
 
Twoskinsoneman said:
my 2 cents is that 334.10(3) does not apply to dwelling garages and was never intended to. 2011 makes that clear.

it is a judgment call of the AHJ whether or not the NM is subject to damage.

IMHO the peg board should take care of the problem.
Click to expand...

I'm not well versed on construction types so what would a detached garage fall under?
 
Dennis Alwon said:
I believe it is subject to damage if you run the cables thru the studs. Many inspectors don't expect the garage to have sheetrock but if you run parallel to the studs and run thru the ceiling joist they are okay with it.

The 2011 ( article 334.10(1)) made some effort to address this by adding that one & two family dwellings and their attached or detached garages, and their storage buildings be allowed to run the wire without sheetrock. You would still need to protect it by running parallel with joists etc.
Click to expand...

Thats the view of all the inspectors with whom I work.
 
augie47 said:
Thats the view of all the inspectors with whom I work.
Click to expand...
Our area has also always allowed building on residences to be wired with nm without the need for sheetrock. Heck they used to allow us to just drill thru the studs and they would accept it.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Our area has also allowed building on residences to be wired with nm without the need for sheetrock. Heck they used to allow us to just drill thru the studs and they would accept it.
Click to expand...
I just summarized this for the undercupboard lighting thread.

The Code definitely allows NM to be exposed, but:
2011 NEC
Article 334 Nonmetallic-Sheathed Cable: Types NM, NMC, and NMS
II. Installation

334.10 Uses Permitted
(A) Type NM. Type NM cable shall be permitted as follows:

(1) For both exposed and concealed work in normally dry locations . . .
Click to expand...
2011 NEC
Article 334 Nonmetallic-Sheathed Cable: Types NM, NMC, and NMS
II. Installation

334.15 Exposed Work
In exposed work, except as procided in 300.11(A), cable shall be installed as specified in 334.15(A) through (C).

(A) To Follow Surface.Cable shall closely follow the surface of the building finish or of running boards.
Click to expand...
2011 NEC
Article 334 Nonmetallic-Sheathed Cable: Types NM, NMC, and NMS
II. Installation

334.24 Bending Radius

Bends in types NM, NMC, and NMS cable shall be so made that the cable will not be damaged. The radius of the curve of the inner edge of any bend during or after installation shall not be less than five times the diameter of the cable.
Click to expand...
And, as has been pointed out, 2011 added text to clearly allow unfinished dwelling garages to be wired with NM.

In my personal experience, dwelling garages are wired with exposed NM, unless some form of wall covering is installed.

The problem with the OP neighbor's wiring (drilled through stud to stud) is that the NM will tend to be a tool (or material) retainer, used to stack stuff in the cavity between studs, or, when in the ceiling, a hanger to suspend things from . . . definitely not "physically protected".
 
Not knowing where you are in the country, here in Indiana this was addressed by the state to allow it as long as a wall has a covering on one side it is not considered subject to be damaged, this started when we were tagged by an inspector for running horizontally through the studs under the stairs to a basement without covering on either side, so we had to re-run the NM, to come from above, which can be hard to do when you have a double floor joist above the wall, but we also got clarification that this applies to a garage or out building also.

So here as long as a wall has a covering on one side (which most out side walls in a garage do) we can run horizontally through the studs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top