Receptacles in Unfinished Basements

[augie47]

Is it a violation to install romex on the face of a block wall with straps in order to feed a receptacle ?
In '08, 334.15(C) permits the romex to be installed in conduit or tubing and references back to 300.4. As long as the Romex follows the surface (block) is the tubing required ?

 

[infinity]

It's been done that way for a 100 years around here, first with AC cable then with NM cable.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

IMO, it is unclear in the nec. This is an authority having jurisdiction call referencing 334.15(B) In general if the romex follows a surface but is on the side of a stud, for instance, then it is compliant, On the face of the studs opens up doors

 

[kwired]

IMO it all comes down to what is considered subject to physical damage, and you can have several different opinions of how subject it is on the same install.

 

[augie47]

IMO it all comes down to what is considered subject to physical damage, and you can have several different opinions of how subject it is on the same install.

I think that's the case. I see nothing in the NEC prohibiting it so it becomes a dangable judgement call based on "subject to damage"

 

[GoldDigger]

NM running horizontally between receptacles at hammer handle height seems subject to damage. The same NM horizontally on the wall above six feet, less so. JMO.

 

[dfmischler]

In my poured concrete basement the AHJ required that a 2x4 be run down the wall to just below the height of the wall box (about 4 feet from the floor), and the box and NM cable are fastened to it. Then the 2x4 and cable are covered by the required insulation.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

NM running horizontally between receptacles at hammer handle height seems subject to damage. The same NM horizontally on the wall above six feet, less so. JMO.

Those installs would violate 334.15 (A)