Inspector Failed My Inspection

[ivsenroute]

This is in a convenience store next to the coolers. Does anyone see a problem with this? I am secured within 12" of the box and every 48" just to be safe. Yes, this is a public area, but I don't think it's subject to physical damage.

 

[augie47]

I would assume 334.10(3), requiring cables to be within walls.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I agree with Augie plus in a store like that it is definitely subject to damage. Nm cannot be outside the walls in non-residential buildings

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Sleeve the NM in a stick of emt or pvc

 

[augie47]

The picture does not show the NM path. Is it installed above a drop ceiling ??

 

[Eddie702]

I agree sleeve it. Is NM allowed in commercial buildings in your area?

 

[ivsenroute]

The picture does not show the NM path. Is it installed above a drop ceiling ??

Yes, that too!

 

[roger]

Yes, that too

334.12 Uses Not Permitted.
(A) Types NM, NMC, and NMS. Types NM, NMC, and
NMS cables shall not be permitted as follows:

(2) Exposed in dropped or suspended ceilings in other
than one- and two-family and multifamily dwellings

 

[Strathead]

I hate to be a snob, but . I just don't do romex in commercial. Let someone else do that.

 

[Fred B]

I hate to be a snob, but . I just don't do romex in commercial. Let someone else do that.

Agreed, never Romex, MC or pipe it.

Also just because you see a staple doesn't mean it's secured, the staple in the sheetrock might hold for a little bit but will easily pull out by hand. (sorry but I tried this before and it does just very shortly pulls out)

 

[hillbilly1]

I hate to be a snob, but . I just don't do romex in commercial. Let someone else do that.

Same here, but most of my competitors are resi guys. Other than chain stores, most commercial around here is built like a house, Sheetrock ceilings and all. I still have a lot of customers that want it done right. There was a plumber in the supply house the other day that was wanting to put up nuclear exit signs in a restaurant that was built like that, not because the city wanted them, but because the insurance company wanted exit signs.

 

[garbo]

I hate to be a snob, but . I just don't do romex in commercial. Let someone else do that.

In many of my local areas ( no state license ) starting st least back to the 1980's you were not allowed to use type MC cable outside of one & two family dwellings.One township did not allow type AC ( Ya BX ) in industrial or commercial sites. Had to go with MC cable.

 

[ptonsparky]

Yes, PP place for nm cable. It is nice and flat with a connector, so give yourself points for that.

 

[TwistLock]

If strictly talking about ‘subject to physical damage’, look at handle on cooler (door handing) and where heavy cases of beverages would be stacked to stock cooler every week.
Not to mention cooler requiring occasional maintenance (?)

 

[rambojoe]

This is in a convenience store next to the coolers. Does anyone see a problem with this? I am secured within 12" of the box and every 48" just to be safe. Yes, this is a public area, but I don't think it's subject to physical damage.
View attachment 2579487

But it is nice and flat and straight!

 

[NEC Inspector]

I am very liberal with my approach to "subject to physical damage". That said, I know inspectors that say if it is visible and accessible, it is subject to physical damage. If you want to avoid trouble jurisdiction to jurisdiction and inspector to inspector, that is the safest route.

Definitely needs to be in a wall because it is not residential. Ditto on being above ceiling.

 

[Joe.B]

Definitely needs to be in a wall because it is not residential. Ditto on being above ceiling.

Are you saying that would be okay if it was residential?

 

[NEC Inspector]

Are you saying that would be okay if it was residential?

Eh... I could be persuaded on the subject to physical damage portion. NM is permitted to be run exposed, so unless I see an actual hazard that could damage the wiring, I could be ok with it kinda tucked in a corner out of the way like that. Close call for me. I am an anomaly in the inspection industry for my liberality on that subject.

A requirement not to install something "subject to physical damage" is code for "anything that makes the inspector nervous on an entirely subjective level". Almost as bad as "neat and workmanlike manner".

334.10(3) is the section that requires cables to be in walls for other than one-and-two-family and multifamily, and 334,12(2) limits installation above ceiling to other than one-and-two-family and multifamily.

 

[Joe.B]

Eh... I could be persuaded on the subject to physical damage portion. NM is permitted to be run exposed, so unless I see an actual hazard that could damage the wiring, I could be ok with it kinda tucked in a corner out of the way like that. Close call for me. I am an anomaly in the inspection industry for my liberality on that subject.

Would you allow it to be painted? Or would that be a violation of 310.8.

Or would you consider painting to be "physical damage" and would running NM cable on a surface that's likely to be painted make it "subject to physical damage"?

Just saying....

 

[tortuga]

I would assume 334.10(3), requiring cables to be within walls.

Also just to add to the 334.10(3) reference I don't think NM cable is permitted in any type II construction just
Type III and up.
I think the convenience stores I worked on were constructed as "Type II-B", which is defined as "Unprotected Non-Combustible". Some larger retail falls under 518 assembly occupancy.