Horizontial Romex

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Riograndeelectric

Senior Member
Location
Lakewood Colorado
I had an inspector fail me on a residential job where I had ran 12-2 Romex horizontal thru bored holes in a unfinshed gargage . Inspector said Romex must be protected from physical damge.. No where in Article 334 or 300 does it say that horizontal runs must be protected. I have even looked in the IRC and it does not mention this either.
Has any one else had a probelm like this or any Idea whre this code might be.I was not there when the Inspector came to ask him what code he was siting. Thanks
 
Every AHJ has a different definition of exactly what "exposed to physical damage" means, since this is not defined in the code.

Some jurisdictions automatically qualify any exposed romex as being exposed to physical damage, and some jurisdictions don't care. Many have height qualifications.

Welcome to the grey areas!
 
Was this a detached garage, by chance? I'm not certain that you can even run exposed romex legally in a detached structure.
 
Check 336-6(a) Instead of horizontal runs He probably wants vertical runs stapled to the stud, or
336-6(b) protection from physical damage.
 
Riograndeelectric said:
Inspector said Romex must be protected from physical damge.. No where in Article 334 or 300 does it say that horizontal runs must be protected.
Click to expand...

334.15 Exposed Work also requires Romex to closely follow the building finish or running boards. The way that is interpreted in my jurisdiction is any Romex below 8' must closely follow the framing members or be protected by wood blocking or a running board. One way to do this is to make all your horizontal runs above the ceiling frame. (Yes, this does "waste" a lot of Romex.) The article specifies that the cable be protected from physical damage. Did you think this only applied to the vertical portions of the cable? The horizontal segments of Romex between studs in the installation you describe are completely "unprotected."
 
Many jurisdictions including ours, defines exposed romex in a garage as unprotected. Simply because of the nature of work that takes place in the garage. Many time you will go in a old garage and see the rake or shears hanging from the romex just because it was handy.

Just because it's not in the code doesn't mean that it's a bad idea.

Now that said I don't see a lot of that here anymore since most all the garages are all drywalled now.
 
So....

So....

mdshunk said:
Not at all, if it's detached. Read the new 2005 version of 334.10, and make sure you're sitting down.
Click to expand...

In a detached garage, structures, unfinished conduit would be allowed as well as type MC?
 
Riograndeelectric said:
I had an inspector fail me on a residential job where I had ran 12-2 Romex horizontal thru bored holes in a unfinshed gargage . Inspector said Romex must be protected from physical damge.. No where in Article 334 or 300 does it say that horizontal runs must be protected. I have even looked in the IRC and it does not mention this either.
Has any one else had a probelm like this or any Idea whre this code might be.I was not there when the Inspector came to ask him what code he was siting. Thanks
Click to expand...

Here in Orange County (FL), anything below 7' exposed, is subject to physical damage, and must be protected per ART.334.15
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top