UL Listed romex connectors in recessed cans

Status
Not open for further replies.
electricmanscott said:
Do you have anything to back that up? :confused:

I have myself used thousands of these "connectors" with zero problems. I can't be the only one that uses them.

I also use the "wagos" if the fixtures has them. I'm completely insane! :D

Just to reiterate, the inspector is a dummy and is way overstepping his authority as far as i am concerned.
Click to expand...

OMG! YOU USE WAGO'S? You're gonna die, fur sure!
 
How are you going to seal the openings in the cans after you take the wires out?....You better just replace the hole can...All 50....
 
stickboy1375 said:
I dont believe that is equivalent to the original j-box, but I do know I have done that in the past. But FWIW, the clamp in the closed position should satisfy the requirement.
Click to expand...

As would LEAVING THE WIRE IN THE CLAMP in the first place. What a crock this is. Really makes me mad.
 
Instead of installing new cans, You could just rewire all 50 cans and abandon the wire previously ran however leaving them in the KOs thus solving the problem of sealing the kos
 
iwire said:
Instead of getting mad, or yelling how about a code section? :smile:

I think it is a bad call as well but I don't immediately see a way around it using only the NEC.
Click to expand...

A code section that allows you to use the factory clamp?

How about one that forbids it?
 
I don't think you guys get it.

I am talking about not removeing the romex from the clamps at all not just cut it off and leave the scrap.
50 recessed fixtures need to be rewired and then you have 50 fixtures with open kos???

All for no other reason than a highly ignorant inspector.

Get real.

I would go down swinging if it were me.
 
UL Listed romex connectors in recessed cans

I tried to wend my way thru the responses here and..,I don't know -guess I lost my head-I'm an inspector and this seems like much adoo about nothing.!
The article referenced by the inspector does not come into play at all here.
The two code possibilities would be either "conductors entering a box ,enclosure,panel etc,and methods of securing as per type of conductor and type of box" or "manufacturers installation instructions". Both of theses possibilities allow for proper installation of RX conductors in a code compliant manner utilizing the manufacturer supplied clamps,inserts,strain relief ,etc ,methods.
In other words-you can install RX in a metal jem box using the supplied knockouts and clamps and it will be legal and safe.If you run your finger around the entry edge will you possibly find some"flash"?
Answer -yes, but that is not in itself a code violation.
The correct install method[having the RX sheath enter and be secured under the clamp method so as to act effectively as a 'bushing' allows the installation to be code compliant.
 
UL Listed romex connectors in recessed cans

It is dissappointing to see a call like this-It unfortunately brings to mind the kind of calls made by those not really familiar with NEC CODE or its actual application in the field.

As I said before-If someone called me re; this I'd find a way to look at it again and have an enlightening conversation.
I would go see it for myself.As described it seems too simple a call.
You don't happen to have a picture of the issue in question do you?
 
mthead said:
It is dissappointing to see a call like this-It unfortunately brings to mind the kind of calls made by those not really familiar with NEC CODE or its actual application in the field.

As I said before-If someone called me re; this I'd find a way to look at it again and have an enlightening conversation.
I would go see it for myself.As described it seems too simple a call.
You don't happen to have a picture of the issue in question do you?
Click to expand...

I don't have a picture, but we're using the small, knockout openings on the ends of the jbox with the built-in cable clamp.

http://www.junolightinggroup.com/Ins...TC%20P5142.pdf

I should say we were using them. Because the general wanted to sheetrock ASAP, my guys went back and re-wired the cans in question so they would pass inspection. It ended up only being 17. The Halo's we used had plastic connectors built into them, and the Elite fluorescent cans didn't come with anything built in, so we had used 3/8" romex connectors (2 screw connectors). Only the Juno cans were found to be unacceptable.

I'm still hoping to hear from the Chief Building Official. I'll keep the forum informed.

Thanks for all your input everyone.
 
electricmanscott said:
A code section that allows you to use the factory clamp?

How about one that forbids it?
Click to expand...

90.4 gives the AHJ the responsibility for approving equipment.

From 90.4

The authority having jurisdiction for enforcement of the Code has the responsibility for making interpretations of the rules, for deciding on the approval of equipment and materials
Click to expand...

It is pretty darn clear.

Again, I think it is a bad call but that does not change the rules.

Luckily for you and me in MA they amended 90.4 check it out and you will see what I mean.
 
Last edited:
electricmanscott said:
All for no other reason than a highly ignorant inspector.
Click to expand...

Actually you are being ignorant in regards to the rules contained in the NEC.

I would go down swinging if it were me.
Click to expand...

You would not have to be swinging as long as your working in our area, the rules are different.

You can bet I would try to talk to this inspectors boss as it is a bad call and I doubt the inspector is actually the AHJ but it can still go either way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top