Nm or Mc cable for fire alarm?

[Steed]

In Massachusetts, building dept is asking that mc cable be used for all fire alarm. Non plenum ceiling, under 100 person capacity.

Commercial building being used as a liquor store.

Anything I am missing here?

 

[peter d]

Every town in Mass. has unique fire alarm requirements. That being said, I am not aware of any state wide rule requiring MC cable. I have used low energy cable for F.A. in MA and I have also used MC as well.

I would ask to see if there is a local ordinance in place for this requirement. This wouldn't happen to be a border town with RI by any chance?

 

[jumper]

Just note that the IBC uses 50 people, not the 100 in the NEC, as the cut off point.

Might be a factor, depends on what codes your area uses/enforces.

 

[MasterTheNEC]

In Massachusetts, building dept is asking that mc cable be used for all fire alarm. Non plenum ceiling, under 100 person capacity.

Commercial building being used as a liquor store.

Anything I am missing here?

Key question...are they asking or enforcing the statement. What is the type of construction? I,II,III,IV or V...? And is it worth the fight?

We still have cities that require anti-short bushings on MC Cable, We have cities who prohibit Aluminum Conductors for Service Entrance Cables, we have cities that want alot of things and in many cases electricians simply comply to avoid the fight. Its an example of time versus effort and if they are open minded enough to embrace change.

I am not sure I would use Type NM-B for a "Fire Alarm" application...and many manufacturers make FPLP MC for Fire Alarm applications (not for intelligible systems with voiceover) but for NAC (ie: strobe, horn and so on applications).

 

[Steed]

Every town in Mass. has unique fire alarm requirements. That being said, I am not aware of any state wide rule requiring MC cable. I have used low energy cable for F.A. in MA and I have also used MC as well.

I would ask to see if there is a local ordinance in place for this requirement. This wouldn't happen to be a border town with RI by any chance?

I will inquire about that next week when I meet with the town. South east MA thankfully haha

Just note that the IBC uses 50 people, not the 100 in the NEC, as the cut off point.

Might be a factor, depends on what codes your area uses/enforces.

That is very good to know thank you.

Key question...are they asking or enforcing the statement. What is the type of construction? I,II,III,IV or V...? And is it worth the fight?

We still have cities that require anti-short bushings on MC Cable, We have cities who prohibit Aluminum Conductors for Service Entrance Cables, we have cities that want alot of things and in many cases electricians simply comply to avoid the fight. Its an example of time versus effort and if they are open minded enough to embrace change.

I am not sure I would use Type NM-B for a "Fire Alarm" application...and many manufacturers make FPLP MC for Fire Alarm applications (not for intelligible systems with voiceover) but for NAC (ie: strobe, horn and so on applications).

They are asking. Not worth fighting over, if reason isn't enough or perhaps there is a local ordinance in place it is what it is. Type II construction

 

[jumper]

Type II construction

That could be a problem. Regular runs in Type II will not work, needs conduit.

334.10 Uses Permitted.
Type NM, Type NMC, and Type
NMS cables shall be permitted to be used in the following,
except as prohibited in 334.12:

(5) Types I and II construction where installed within
raceways permitted to be installed in Types I and II
construction.

 

[Steed]

That could be a problem. Regular runs in Type II will not work, needs conduit.

334.10 Uses Permitted.
Type NM, Type NMC, and Type
NMS cables shall be permitted to be used in the following,
except as prohibited in 334.12:

(5) Types I and II construction where installed within
raceways permitted to be installed in Types I and II
construction.

Ah that clears things up. Thanks for the help!

 

[peter d]

That could be a problem. Regular runs in Type II will not work, needs conduit.

334.10 Uses Permitted.
Type NM, Type NMC, and Type
NMS cables shall be permitted to be used in the following,
except as prohibited in 334.12:

(5) Types I and II construction where installed within
raceways permitted to be installed in Types I and II
construction.

But assuming type FPL cable could be used, that section does not apply.

 

[jumper]

But assuming type FPL cable could be used, that section does not apply.

Well yeah, article 334, the one I cited, is for NM so FPL would not apply.