Romex in garage

Status
Not open for further replies.
In case anyone has missed it physical damage is not the primary issue assuming a detached garage. :)

It's lack of a 15- minute finish rating, that is the code and it's not really a judgment call.
 
iwire said:
It's lack of a 15- minute finish rating, that is the code and it's not really a judgment call.
Click to expand...

Now that I've had some time to think about this, it seems pretty absurd to have a 15 minute finish rating requirement for NM cable in a residential garage, considering there is usually a large quantity of exposed NM in a basement.

I don't understand the logic of this one at all (for dwelling units.)

I know the code is the code, but it doesn't have to make sense, right? ;)
 
peter d said:
Now that I've had some time to think about this, it seems pretty absurd to have a 15 minute finish rating requirement for NM cable in a residential garage, considering there is usually a large quantity of exposed NM in a basement.

I don't understand the logic of this one at all (for dwelling units.)

I know the code is the code, but it doesn't have to make sense, right? ;)
Click to expand...


Same for all residential outbuildings, I'm not sure I know what i'm missing? What is the 15 min's for?
 
peter d said:
Now that I've had some time to think about this, it seems pretty absurd to have a 15 minute finish rating requirement for NM cable in a residential garage, considering there is usually a large quantity of exposed NM in a basement.

I don't understand the logic of this one at all (for dwelling units.)

I know the code is the code, but it doesn't have to make sense, right? ;)
Click to expand...

The requirement is not for dwelling units it is for other structures Section 334.10(3)

IMHO a detached garage would be considered an "other structure" not a dwelling.
 
stickboy1375 said:
What is the 15 min's for?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing it has to do with protecting the cables from adding to the "smoke load" of a fire. 15 minutes is an eternity in the propagation of a fire so I think they added some serious fudge factor when they chose that number.

Translation: if you're not out of the building within a few minutes of a fire starting, you're dead. So we (the code makers) don't want to add more combustibles to the mix, so we'll require them to be protected.

But of course this doesn't take into account the many toxic chemicals that will be released when the contents of a building are burning. So there goes the logic again. :roll:
 
peter d said:
I don't understand the logic of this one at all (for dwelling units.)

I know the code is the code, but it doesn't have to make sense, right? ;)
Click to expand...

I can't explain it either, but push comes to shove it is cheaper to use metalic cable then provide 15 minute finish.

There is more to the ROP, it was on the next page and did not notice it.




Explanation of Negative:​
DALY, J.: The Proposal should have been Accepted in Principle with the
following additional text added into the existing 334.10(3):
Add an Exception immediately following 334.10(3) to read: “Exception: A
thermal barrier of material that has at least a 15-minute finish rating shall not
be required when Type UF cable is installed as nonmetallic- sheathed cable in
animal housing facilities classified as storage occupancies.”
Add a Fine Print Note after FPN No. 2 to read: “FPN No. 3 to Exception:
Classification of animal housing facilities as storage occupancies is defined in
NFPA 1-2006, Uniform Fire Code, NFPA 101-2006, Life Safety Code, and
NFPA 5000-2006, Building Construction and Safety Code.”
Revise existing “FPN No. 1” to “FPN No. 1 to (3)” and “FPN No. 2” to “FPN
No. 2 to (3)”.
The three NFPA Codes classify any type of animal housing facility as a
storage occupancy, defined as an “occupancy used for the storage or sheltering
of goods, merchandise, products, vehicles, or animals.” A storage occupancy is
typically characterized by the presence of few people, usually only owners and
employees. If members of the public enter the building, the building can no
longer be considered simply a storage occupancy. Additional information is
contained in the NFPA Journal, November/December 2004 issue, page 22.
At its July 2004 meeting, the NFPA Standards Council approved an expansion
of NFPA 150, Racetrack Stables, to include life and fire safety requirements for
both humans and animals in all types of animal housing facilities and it
changed the name of the committee to the Technical Committee on Animal
Housing Facilities.​
____________________________________________________________
Click to expand...

There was also this one.



7-42 Log #109 NEC-P07
Final Action: Reject​


(334.10)

​
​
____________________________________________________________​


Submitter:​
Jeffrey Hudecek, Owosso, MI​


Recommendation:​
Add the reference to three floors above grade to the​

beginning of the second sentence of 334.10(3) to read as follows:
“ In any building exceeding three floors above grade, cables shall be
concealed within walls, floors, or ceilings...”.
Also, add a new fine print note to call attention to the definition of the first
floor in 362.10 to read as follows:
“FPN: See 362.10 for definition of first floor of a building. ”​

Substantiation:​
There are thousands of nondwelling buildings where​

nonmetallic sheathed cable is an acceptable wiring method where it is not
concealed within 15-minute fire rated construction. There are thousands of
commercial and farm buildings where there are no concealed spaces for wiring,
and surface installed cable is perfectly acceptable. In agricultural buildings for
example, Type UF, which is installed using the rules in Article 334, is the
preferred wiring method. It certainly seems as though 334.10(3) is saying that
Type UF cable is not permitted to be installed in an agricultural building unless
concealed within a fire rated wall, ceiling or floor. concealing cables in
agricultural and some commercial buildings is not recommended because of
potential rodent damage, yet surface installed cable is preferred.​

Panel Meeting Action: Reject​

Panel Statement: ​
​

The substantiation provides only a description of​


installations where there are no concealed spaces and agriculture installations
where Type UF cable is preferred. No substantiation has been submitted to
address why the 15 minute finish rating for these and other commercial and
non-residential installations in buildings lower than three stories should not be
required.​

​
​
Number Eligible to Vote: 14​

Ballot Results: Affirmative: 14
​
Click to expand...

​
 
Last edited:
Ya gotta love it!

DSC04136a.jpg
 
480sparky said:
No heat, and no money in the budget for cold-start fluoros.
Click to expand...

but lots of money for the electric bill? Never mind the fact of the extra work to get the same light output with incandescent. Somebody didn't do the math....:confused:
 
Last edited:
stickboy1375 said:
but lots of money for the electric bill? Never mind the fact of the extra work to get the same light output with incandescent. Somebody didn't do the math....:confused:
Click to expand...

This is a building a school uses for the track/football field. When it was designed, the architect missed a ton of stuff. The wiring in this building, for one. They went $300K over budget on a $1.2mil job.
 
Last edited:
stickboy1375 said:
Thats it? Around here it would have been 1.2 mil over budget on a 300k dollar job...
Click to expand...

Hey, I sure made out like a bandit when all was said & done.

Pulled all the control wiring/tele/RG6/FO between the crows nest, scoreboard, two concession stands and the main building, installed switches for the garbage disposals in the conc. stands (yes, they forgot those!), lights under the bleachers (it was rather dark under there during the games), motion sensors in the restrooms (no switches there, either!), wiring the maintainence shed above.....

That's all I can think of right now. I'm sure there's more, but my memory's not what it used to be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top