chuckhunter
Member
Does the 2008 code eliminate the three story rule for using romex wiring?
Romex Height Restriction
- Thread starter chuckhunter
- Start date
- Status
rcarroll
Senior Member
- Location
- Fort Collins, Colorado
Look at 334.10
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
But watch out for 334.12(A)(2).
NM Cable permitted installations...
NM Cable permitted installations...
Don,
While Section 334.12(A)(2) could possibly have been worded to be more clear for the user?
Section 334.12(A)(2) Uses Not Permitted for Types NM, NMC, and NMS: Exposed in dropped or suspended ceilings in other than one- and two-family and multifamily dwellings.
? Installation of said cable above a drop ceiling would not be considered as exposed would it ??
NM Cable permitted installations...
Don,
While Section 334.12(A)(2) could possibly have been worded to be more clear for the user?
Section 334.12(A)(2) Uses Not Permitted for Types NM, NMC, and NMS: Exposed in dropped or suspended ceilings in other than one- and two-family and multifamily dwellings.
? Installation of said cable above a drop ceiling would not be considered as exposed would it ??
- Location
- Logan, Utah
Here is the NEC definition of "exposed" as applied to wiring methods
NM cable installed above a suspended ceiling system would most definitely be exposed.
Chris
NM cable installed above a suspended ceiling system would most definitely be exposed.
Chris
- Location
- Logan, Utah
Your very welcome.
I think it is easy for any of us to overthink things and look right past the obvious.
Chris
New knowledge for me...
New knowledge for me...
It appears (blatantly obvious? to me now?) as though this use not permitted has been around since at least the 2002 cycle in one word form or anther.
It definitely begs the statement: You gotta read this Code like you NEVER read it before.
I have to admit I was not aware of this exclusion for NM cable until today (but hey? I?m slow?)
(Although I am not here to discuss any particular installation I may? or may not have? done in the past?)
Thanks again, Chirs
mweaver
New knowledge for me...
It appears (blatantly obvious? to me now?) as though this use not permitted has been around since at least the 2002 cycle in one word form or anther.
It definitely begs the statement: You gotta read this Code like you NEVER read it before.
I have to admit I was not aware of this exclusion for NM cable until today (but hey? I?m slow?)
(Although I am not here to discuss any particular installation I may? or may not have? done in the past?)
Thanks again, Chirs
mweaver
- Location
- Logan, Utah
I learn new stuff on this site just about every day. That is why I love this site.
Chris
Chris
- Status