david
Senior Member
- Location
- Pennsylvania
Is their any language in the NEC that prohibits the use of NM cable in building types I & II
If not prohibited then its permitted?
- Thread starter david
- Start date
- Status
david
Senior Member
- Location
- Pennsylvania
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
Permitting it to be used in
(1).
(2).
(3).
Is not a statement prohibiting it from being used in building types I and II.
If I am to reject NM in building types I and II, I would like to find a code section prohibiting the use of it in types I and II.
Permitting it to be used in
(1).
(2).
(3).
Is not a statement prohibiting it from being used in building types I and II.
If I am to reject NM in building types I and II, I would like to find a code section prohibiting the use of it in types I and II.
david
Senior Member
- Location
- Pennsylvania
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
There needs to be a statement NM, NMC and NMS shall not be permited in buildings required to be construction types I and II.
Without a code section to site how can I reject the use of NM in types I and II?
There needs to be a statement NM, NMC and NMS shall not be permited in buildings required to be construction types I and II.
Without a code section to site how can I reject the use of NM in types I and II?
pierre
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
334.10 Uses Permitted. Type NM cable shall be permitted to be used in the following:
(2) &(3) tell us the building types it is permitted to be installed in. (notice it does not say building Type I or II)
334.12 Uses Not Permitted.
(1) In any dwelling or structure not specifically permitted in 334.10(1), (2), and (3)
Since Type I and II are not specifically mentioned, they are not permitted.
334.10 Uses Permitted. Type NM cable shall be permitted to be used in the following:
(2) &(3) tell us the building types it is permitted to be installed in. (notice it does not say building Type I or II)
334.12 Uses Not Permitted.
(1) In any dwelling or structure not specifically permitted in 334.10(1), (2), and (3)
Since Type I and II are not specifically mentioned, they are not permitted.
- Location
- Logan, Utah
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
pierre,
I have been wondering about the wording of this section.
Let's say I have a building that due to it's size it is permitted to be built out of type V construction, but I decide to build it out of type II would I still be allowed to use romex?
The way I read that section it might be interpreted that way, just curious to see what others say.
Chris
pierre,
I have been wondering about the wording of this section.
Let's say I have a building that due to it's size it is permitted to be built out of type V construction, but I decide to build it out of type II would I still be allowed to use romex?
The way I read that section it might be interpreted that way, just curious to see what others say.
Chris
pierre
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
Chris
I guess it does not matter what the reason would be if you use Type I or II construction, but when you do... NM is not permitted.
Chris
I guess it does not matter what the reason would be if you use Type I or II construction, but when you do... NM is not permitted.
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
Chris and Pierre:
The code says NM is permitted in "structures permitted to be of Types III, IV, and V construction...".
If the building is allowed to be type III, and you build it as type I, you are still allowed to use NM.
Steve
Chris and Pierre:
The code says NM is permitted in "structures permitted to be of Types III, IV, and V construction...".
If the building is allowed to be type III, and you build it as type I, you are still allowed to use NM.
Steve
pierre
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
Steve
Have you looked at Annex E?
Steve
Have you looked at Annex E?
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
I agree with Steve.
If I choose to build one part of a building beyond code does not mean the rest of the building must also be built beyond code.
I agree with Steve.
If I choose to build one part of a building beyond code does not mean the rest of the building must also be built beyond code.
- Location
- Logan, Utah
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
Thanks for the replies,
I tend to agree with iwire and steve. If 334.10(3) were worded to say constructed of then I think pierre would be right but where it says permitted to be of I think you could use romex in the example I posted above.
JMHO, Chris
Thanks for the replies,
I tend to agree with iwire and steve. If 334.10(3) were worded to say constructed of then I think pierre would be right but where it says permitted to be of I think you could use romex in the example I posted above.
JMHO, Chris
david
Senior Member
- Location
- Pennsylvania
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
I want to say that I agree that the intent of this section is to exclude Types I and II. The language just is not there. You are permitted to walk does not exclude you from running.
Other structures permitted to be of Types III, IV, and V construction except as prohibited in 334.12. Cables shall be concealed within walls, floors, or ceilings that provide a thermal barrier of material that has at least a 15-minute finish rating as identified in listings of fire-rated assemblies.
How are we to apply this to detached garages, tool sheds and other accessory buildings?
I want to say that I agree that the intent of this section is to exclude Types I and II. The language just is not there. You are permitted to walk does not exclude you from running.
Other structures permitted to be of Types III, IV, and V construction except as prohibited in 334.12. Cables shall be concealed within walls, floors, or ceilings that provide a thermal barrier of material that has at least a 15-minute finish rating as identified in listings of fire-rated assemblies.
How are we to apply this to detached garages, tool sheds and other accessory buildings?
david
Senior Member
- Location
- Pennsylvania
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
334.12 Uses Not Permitted.
(1) In any dwelling or structure not specifically permitted in 334.10(1), (2), and (3)
Thanks Pierre we are still under 2002 Was that a change in 2005? I pull the 05 out and take a look.
334.12 Uses Not Permitted.
(1) In any dwelling or structure not specifically permitted in 334.10(1), (2), and (3)
Thanks Pierre we are still under 2002 Was that a change in 2005? I pull the 05 out and take a look.
pierre
Senior Member
- Location
- Westchester County, New York
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
"How are we to apply this to detached garages, tool sheds and other accessory buildings?"
These are not "fire rated assemblies".
Fire rated Assemblies are not the space, but the construction. For single family and 1 & 2 family dwellings, detached garages, sheds and most other accessory buildings are not fire rated at all.
In single family dwellings, most likely the only fire rated assemblies will be associated with the wall between living space and the garage, and the walls around a furnace room (not furnace area).
334.12(1) tells me that Types I & II are not specifically mentioned in 334.10 (1), (2) or (3) so those Types of building construction no matter why they are installed shall not have NM cable installed.
The language may not be what we would like, but it is there.
"How are we to apply this to detached garages, tool sheds and other accessory buildings?"
These are not "fire rated assemblies".
Fire rated Assemblies are not the space, but the construction. For single family and 1 & 2 family dwellings, detached garages, sheds and most other accessory buildings are not fire rated at all.
In single family dwellings, most likely the only fire rated assemblies will be associated with the wall between living space and the garage, and the walls around a furnace room (not furnace area).
334.12(1) tells me that Types I & II are not specifically mentioned in 334.10 (1), (2) or (3) so those Types of building construction no matter why they are installed shall not have NM cable installed.
The language may not be what we would like, but it is there.
sandsnow
Senior Member
- Location
- Southern California
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
I don't see the comparison. Is it in the 2005 maybe??
If you're saying the "types" in the top row correlate to the ICC, then I would ask where is that stated in the text??
I've "heard" NFPA vs. ICC construction types are close but not an exact match.
Irritating of the NFPA not to put in a reference for ICC codes. After all, who in the states uses the NFPA Building Code?? I know NFPA Codes are sold worldwide and are intended as international standards. I would hazard a guess that a big chunk of their sales comes from the states.
Any info on a comparative analysis would be appreciated.
Steve
I don't see the comparison. Is it in the 2005 maybe??
If you're saying the "types" in the top row correlate to the ICC, then I would ask where is that stated in the text??
I've "heard" NFPA vs. ICC construction types are close but not an exact match.
Irritating of the NFPA not to put in a reference for ICC codes. After all, who in the states uses the NFPA Building Code?? I know NFPA Codes are sold worldwide and are intended as international standards. I would hazard a guess that a big chunk of their sales comes from the states.
Any info on a comparative analysis would be appreciated.
ryan_618
Senior Member
- Location
- Salt Lake City, Utah
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
Regarding the NFPA 5000: There is one small city in Texas with a population of about 40,000 that has adopted it. Thats it. Compare that to the more than 40 states that have adopted the IBC. The NFPA needs to accept its defeat in this arena and stop refering to a document that nobody uses.
Regarding the NFPA 5000: There is one small city in Texas with a population of about 40,000 that has adopted it. Thats it. Compare that to the more than 40 states that have adopted the IBC. The NFPA needs to accept its defeat in this arena and stop refering to a document that nobody uses.
david
Senior Member
- Location
- Pennsylvania
Re: If not prohibited then its permitted?
These are not "fire rated assemblies".
Of course their not fire rated, But they are ether light framing, heavy timber or non- combustible exterior and combustible non-load bearing walls or some combination of what The NEC calls types III, IV Or V
Their is no exception given to say other structures not accessory to I family, II family Dwellings. The code simple says in other structures permitted to be types III, IV and V. Most accessory structures to Single family Dwellings would be other structures Type V.
So Light framing garages accessory to Single family dwellings, am I to understand that in a garage you cannot have exposed NM Cable?
These are not "fire rated assemblies".
Of course their not fire rated, But they are ether light framing, heavy timber or non- combustible exterior and combustible non-load bearing walls or some combination of what The NEC calls types III, IV Or V
Their is no exception given to say other structures not accessory to I family, II family Dwellings. The code simple says in other structures permitted to be types III, IV and V. Most accessory structures to Single family Dwellings would be other structures Type V.
So Light framing garages accessory to Single family dwellings, am I to understand that in a garage you cannot have exposed NM Cable?
- Status