I am not sure there is enough benefit to make it worthwhile to mandate banning Romex. But Chicago and a lot of nearby suburbs have done so, mostly to make the Unions happy. It's all about money.
Fixed it for you.
I am not sure there is enough benefit to make it worthwhile to mandate banning Romex. But Chicago and a lot of nearby suburbs have done so, mostly to make the Unions happy. It's all about money.
Pierre,...
What I tried to convey is the idea that there were discussions during the years that the larger occupied buildings were took longer to evacuate during fires, etc... the longer time was a concern due to the lethal fumes from burning NM cable.
With the NM being concealed within walls why would that be an issue? In reality the conductors would be less likely to overheat being that they are not confined within a metallic raceway.it would be with potential damage to cable. There is a LOT more going on in commercial buildings than in your house.
Not all the cable is in the walls.
Not all the cable is in the walls.
I share the opinion that a conduit/metal cable system is a safer system and commercial/public spaces should use it.
334.12(A)(2) Does not allow romex to be used in drop ceilings.
So, where are the cables that would be a problem?
Roger
So why not just protect those particular cables in conduit or tubing?Hell, I don't know....every commercial building I see seems to have conduit exposed all over the place. Coming out of the surface mounted panels, going from light to light etc. If it were romex it would be a mess.
You don't have any wiring in walls?Also, most commercial buildings here have grid ceilings so I guess it wouldn't be allowed anyway.