# Can I use NM-B for exterior flood light?



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Yes. ..........


----------



## Sonny1027 (Mar 20, 2009)

Thank you 480.

Genuinely appreciate your prompt response.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

Sonny1027 said:


> Thank you 480.
> 
> Genuinely appreciate your prompt response.


Even though it's wrong?


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> Even though it's wrong?


According to........?


----------



## chenley (Feb 20, 2007)

480sparky said:


> Yes. ..........


X2 - That's how we do it out neck of the woods LawnGuy :thumbsup:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> Even though it's wrong?


If wiring nm to a box mounted on a dwelling is illegal then every a/c disco is in violation. The interior of the box is not a wet location-- nowhere in the code does it state that. If it did we would not be allowed to install a breaker in an exterior box.

I'm with Ken on this one.


----------



## raider1 (Jan 22, 2007)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> Even though it's wrong?


Code section please.

Chris


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

He doesn't need one....he's right:thumbsup:


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

You can use NM-B wire as long as you come in the back of the box.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

william1978 said:


> You can use NM-B wire as long as you come in the back of the box.


I agree.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

william1978 said:


> You can use NM-B wire as long as you come in the back of the box.


And not go through a raceway from the box to the light. At least under the '08.


----------



## ralph (Apr 6, 2008)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> Even though it's wrong?


 UH OH,

I hope this isnt going to be another ridiculous thread of when and where NM is installed legally or illegally for outdoor use. We had one before that went on for a while , and JWC was all over it . There has to be more interesting topics to have in our industry.


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> Even though it's wrong?



We're gonna need some proof....reference...etc


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

480sparky said:


> And not go through a raceway from the box to the light. At least under the '08.


 Yes, your correct.


----------



## vinster888 (May 3, 2009)

round here they are willing to accept nm cable in a conduit outside as long as the conduit is vertical. therefore no water should accumulate in / under sheathing. say you are running a circuit to a new disconnect out of soffit or lb down the wall into a hub or 90 directly in to disconnect


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

Outside of the building envelope you're OUTSIDE. Inside a box outside of the building envelope you're still not INSIDE, you're outside.


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> Outside of the building envelope you're OUTSIDE. Inside a box outside of the building envelope you're still not INSIDE, you're outside.


So according to you, all exterior boxes need uf going into them. Is ignorance blissful? You'd never make it as an inspector,making up your own codes like that!


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> Outside of the building envelope you're OUTSIDE. Inside a box outside of the building envelope you're still not INSIDE, you're outside.


So are your circuit breakers listed for wet location when you install them in an exterior panel?


----------



## Sonny1027 (Mar 20, 2009)

480sparky said:


> And not go through a raceway from the box to the light. At least under the '08.


Hi 480,

I was going to drill a large enough hole in the sheathing so that an NM-B connector would fit in it. Then screw the connector to the 1/2" threaded opening in the back of the Red Dot weather proof box, secure the NM-B cable with the connector, caulk the back of the box with silicon caulk and screw it to the sheathing.

Is that legal? or do I have to use something else?

Thank you,


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

Sonny1027 said:


> Hi 480,
> 
> I was going to drill a large enough hole in the sheathing so that an NM-B connector would fit in it. Then screw the connector to the 1/2" threaded opening in the back of the Red Dot weather proof box, secure the NM-B cable with the connector, caulk the back of the box with silicon caulk and screw it to the sheathing.
> 
> ...


That is perfectly legal and the most commonsense method.


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

steelersman said:


> That is perfectly legal and the most commonsense method.


I agree with you.. Again. :jester:


~Matt


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

Dennis Alwon said:


> So are your circuit breakers listed for wet location when you install them in an exterior panel?


They don't have to be, since the panel itself is listed for a wet location and lists the types of breakers it accepts to ensure that wet location listing is complied with... 

I say - if you recess a box into a wall cavity it's indoors. But if you're using a RAB or a Mulberry or other surface-mount box outdoors, it's outdoors. 

And yes... all those outdoor panels you freaky people in the West  love so much would require UF to the first indoor box. I don't care if 20,000 inspectors let it slide. They're all wrong and I'm right.


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> They don't have to be, since the panel itself is listed for a wet location and lists the types of breakers it accepts to ensure that wet location listing is complied with...
> 
> I say - if you recess a box into a wall cavity it's indoors. But if you're using a RAB or a Mulberry or other surface-mount box outdoors, it's outdoors.
> 
> And yes... all those outdoor panels you freaky people in the West  love so much would require UF to the first indoor box. I don't care if 20,000 inspectors let it slide. They're all wrong and I'm right.


Whatever you say man :thumbsup:

~Matt


----------



## chenley (Feb 20, 2007)

I'll agree with the 20,000 inspectors and keep doing it the way I've been doing it. NM straight into a weatherproof box.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

chenley said:


> I'll agree with the 20,000 inspectors and keep doing it the way I've been doing it. NM straight into a weatherproof box.


And... is it safe and OK... yes. To that I will agree. I would do it myself if I dabbled in residential droppings... But TECHNICALLY it IS a code violation.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Why is it that a plastic bottle lasts hundreds of years *buried* in a land fill, but running plastic romex into a weather proof box is such a safety risk?? :blink:


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

i've ran romex in pvc underground before....i think i like being a hack:thumbsup:


----------



## Sonny1027 (Mar 20, 2009)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> And... is it safe and OK... yes. To that I will agree. I would do it myself if I dabbled in residential droppings... But TECHNICALLY it IS a code violation.


Hi Sparky,

If you were doing this job, what type of cable / wiring method would you use to be code compliant?

Thank you,


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Sonny1027 said:


> Hi Sparky,
> 
> If you were doing this job, what type of cable / wiring method would you use to be code compliant?
> 
> Thank you,


it's a non-issue...ignore what he is saying...what you propose to do is safe and is accepted everywhere except maybe chicago or other place that have ridiculous codes


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> And... is it safe and OK... yes. To that I will agree. I would do it myself if I dabbled in residential droppings... But TECHNICALLY it IS a code violation.


I think the problem with you is that you are a one trick pony. You are the typical commercial guy who I've seen try to do resi wiring using all metal boxes and 12-2 and all 20 amp breakers, everything overkill. Funny as hell. They are lost as hell too and take forever. By the way, how about a code section for your argument? I know you've been asked before in this thread and still haven't provided one, at least not one that I've seen.


----------



## acmax (Apr 20, 2009)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> And... is it safe and OK... yes. To that I will agree. I would do it myself if I dabbled in residential droppings... But TECHNICALLY it IS a code violation.


Thats right,let the noise flow out of that hole in your face. OR post what code you say is violated?:whistling2:


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

NolaTigaBait said:


> it's a non-issue...ignore what he is saying...what you propose to do is safe and is accepted everywhere except maybe chicago or other place that have ridiculous codes


Yes.. Chicago's ridiculious codes that have kept the entire city and suburbs intact through thick and thin... while NoLa was destroyed by a little wave... Like Florida and IT'S "non ridiculious" codes in Hurricane Andrew...


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> Yes.. Chicago's ridiculious codes that have kept the entire city and suburbs intact through thick and thin... while NoLa was destroyed by a little wave... Like Florida and IT'S "non ridiculious" codes in Hurricane Andrew...


huh, what's the difference in new orleans....either way the wire would have to be replaced...last time i checked you can't submerge emt


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> Yes.. Chicago's ridiculious codes that have kept the entire city and suburbs intact through thick and thin... while NoLa was destroyed by a little wave... Like Florida and IT'S "non ridiculious" codes in Hurricane Andrew...


This was posted by GOOSE 134 about Chicago.. they don't seem very bright either :laughing:










In their infinite wisdom, the city of Chicago has sold the rights to our parking meters and all affiliated revenues to a private company. They sold it for $1 billion for a lease that lasts 75 or 80 years. Prices have gone up dramatically. Most neighborhoods are now a quarter per 15 minutes. Within three years downtown meter parking will be more than minimum wage.
Yea, city government!

What's brilliant about it is that politicians deflect all the blame to a company that will be collecting the money when my 2 year olds retire.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

Type NM cable is not permitted in areas subject to excessive moisture or dampness. That being said, the inside of a weatherproof box in NOT such an environment. I too would like to see a code section stating otherwise.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Okay, the name calling is not really necessary whether it be about a city or a person. Let's look at the code. 



> 300.9 Raceways in Wet Locations Above Grade.
> Where raceways are installed in wet locations above grade, the interior of these raceways shall be considered to be a wet location. Insulated conductors and cables installed in raceways in wet locations abovegrade shall comply with 310.8(C).


Now I see that raceways in a wet location above grade shall have wiring listed for wet location but I see nothing about enclosures above grade. The interior of enclosures below grade must also be considered wet location. art. 300.5(B)



LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> I don't care if 20,000 inspectors let it slide. They're all wrong and I'm right.


Now to say you are correct and the world is wrong how about some substantiation.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> They don't have to be, since the panel itself is listed for a wet location and lists the types of breakers it accepts to ensure that wet location listing is complied with...
> 
> I say - if you recess a box into a wall cavity it's indoors. But if you're using a RAB or a Mulberry or other surface-mount box outdoors, it's outdoors.
> 
> And yes... all those outdoor panels you freaky people in the West  love so much would require UF to the first indoor box. I don't care if 20,000 inspectors let it slide. They're all wrong and I'm right.


I'd still like to see a Code reference that says the inside of a box mounted to an exterior wall is a wet location.


----------



## I Conduit (May 4, 2009)

steelersman said:


> I think the problem with you is that you are a one trick pony. You are the typical commercial guy who I've seen try to do resi wiring using all metal boxes and 12-2 and all 20 amp breakers, everything overkill. Funny as hell.


What is overkill about using 12/2 NM with 20 amp cbs? Is there a limit on how many recepts. you can put on a 15 or 20 amp circuit in a sfd?


----------



## cdnelectrician (Mar 14, 2008)

I think he should just run 1/2" rigid conduit right from the RAB box to the panel, pull some RW90 and be sure to use a bullet hub on the back of the box so no water gets in. No more of that dangerous romex stuff.:thumbup:


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

I Conduit said:


> What is overkill about using 12/2 NM with 20 amp cbs? Is there a limit on how many recepts. you can put on a 15 or 20 amp circuit in a sfd?


It's overkill, because it's more than the code requires. Now if yuo were being paid extra to do that then cool.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

cdnelectrician said:


> I think he should just run 1/2" rigid conduit right from the RAB box to the panel, pull some RW90 and be sure to use a bullet hub on the back of the box so no water gets in. No more of that dangerous romex stuff.:thumbup:


this is the only way to go...if we start doing it this way, we will all become rich


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

I Conduit said:


> What is overkill about using 12/2 NM with 20 amp cbs? Is there a limit on how many recepts. you can put on a 15 or 20 amp circuit in a sfd?





The NEC is silent on the VA rating of a general receptacle in a dwelling unit.

Why goto the expense of using 12/2 when 14/2 is ample? [Unless of course, steelerman's option comes into the equation]



steelersman said:


> Now if you were being paid extra to do that then cool.


:thumbsup:


----------



## jbfan (Jan 22, 2007)

Celtic said:


> The NEC is silent on the VA rating of a general receptacle in a dwelling unit.
> 
> Why goto the expense of using 12/2 when 14/2 is ample? [Unless of course, steelerman's option comes into the equation]
> 
> :thumbsup:


Because #14 is outlawed!
It has been that way long before I started working in this area.
I have heard from the supply that they are considering allowing #14 to used next year.

I have had a roll of 14/2 and 14/3 on my truck for 3-4 years, and still have plenty left.
I always bid my prices with #12, even when I work in areas that allow #14.


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

jbfan said:


> Because #14 is outlawed!
> It has been that way long before I started working in this area.
> I have heard from the supply that they are considering allowing #14 to used next year.
> 
> ...


That's a GD crying shame! I don't understand states that outlaw something that the NEC allows. It is utterly ridiculous. I'm glad my state keeps it simple and just enforces the NEC. They don't have their own ammendments.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

steelersman said:


> I don't understand states that outlaw something that the NEC allows.


Yeah, me neither. The people that make these rules must think they are being heroes or going to save the world or something. :no:


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

Peter D said:


> Yeah, me neither. The people that make these rules must think they are being heroes or going to save the world or something. :no:


Am I detecting a little sarcasm from you Peter?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

steelersman said:


> Am I detecting a little sarcasm from you Peter?


Kinda, but truth be told I really do wonder if they think they're being heroic or something? I don't know what would possess someone to make an idiotic rule like "minimum #12 AWG for all circuits in a dwelling unit" other than pure stupidity.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Kinda, but truth be told I really do wonder if they think they're being heroic or something? I don't know what would possess someone to make an idiotic rule like "minimum #12 AWG for all circuits in a dwelling unit" other than pure stupidity.


They own a lot of stock in copper wire companies?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

480sparky said:


> They own a lot of stock in copper wire companies?



Yeah, or the Copper.org goon squad paid him a visit. :whistling2:


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

jbfan said:


> Because #14 is outlawed!
> It has been that way long before I started working in this area.
> I have heard from the supply that they are considering allowing #14 to used next year.
> 
> ...


 i use #14 for lighting and bedroom circuits... thats ridiculous


----------



## jbfan (Jan 22, 2007)

It is not the entire state, just the county I live in.
The city allows #14 and so do the neighboring counties.
I just don't do much work in those areas.


----------



## I Conduit (May 4, 2009)

steelersman said:


> It's overkill, because it's more than the code requires. Now if yuo were being paid extra to do that then cool.


I don't think the code requires 15 amp circuits by calculation methods. It says in 210.11(A) & (B) that the load be "evenly proportioned among the branch circuits". I see no reason to fill up the panelboard with 15 amps breakers when you can save space using 20 amp cb's. So to me it's more of a design issue than a requirement.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

I Conduit said:


> I don't think the code requires 15 amp circuits by calculation methods. It says in 210.11(A) & (B) that the load be "evenly proportioned among the branch circuits". I see no reason to fill up the panelboard with 15 amps breakers when you can save space using 20 amp cb's. So to me it's more of a design issue than a requirement.


 to me, it's the ease of wiring with #14...and it's a little cheaper


----------



## I Conduit (May 4, 2009)

NolaTigaBait said:


> to me, it's the ease of wiring with #14...and it's a little cheaper


what is the cost difference of a 1,000' roll of #14 nm compared to #12 nm? Are you required in your area to follow all the arc fault rules? More breakers at $35 bucks a pop?


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

I Conduit said:


> what is the cost difference of a 1,000' roll of #14 nm compared to #12 nm? Are you required in your area to follow all the arc fault rules? More breakers at $35 bucks a pop?


not really... the main thing is ease of installation


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

I Conduit said:


> what is the cost difference of a 1,000' roll of #14 nm compared to #12 nm? Are you required in your area to follow all the arc fault rules? More breakers at $35 bucks a pop?


Hey slim, just because I use #14 and you use #12 doesn't mean I'm going to have to have more circuits. It all depends on the person doing the wiring and how many things they put on a circuit. The code doesn't dictate that slapper. So you keep on wasting your money and overkilling homes for no extra money in your pocket and I'll keep on gettin it the smart and efficient way.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

Any second now, this whole thread could implode into a standard flame war of #14 vs. #12, in the hallowed tradition of "twist vs. non-twist", "tape vs. no tape", and of course, the all time favorite "ground up vs. ground down". Let's all hope...

But since we are on the subject... Last time I checked Bartow County, Ga didn't allow the use of #14 period. And Gilmer County had an odd rule that there were to be no 15 A circuits, but you could come from the switch to the light fixture in #14.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

InPhase277 said:


> Any second now, this whole thread could implode into a standard flame war of #14 vs. #12, in the hallowed tradition of "twist vs. non-twist", "tape vs. no tape", and of course, the all time favorite "ground up vs. ground down". Let's all hope...
> 
> But since we are on the subject... Last time I checked Bartow County, Ga didn't allow the use of #14 period. And Gilmer County had an odd rule that there were to be no 15 A circuits, but you could come from the switch to the light fixture in #14.


every parish or county has their own crazy rules...theres a parish across the lake that doesn't require green wire nuts on the grounds


----------



## jbfan (Jan 22, 2007)

NolaTigaBait said:


> every parish or county has their own crazy rules...theres a parish across the lake that doesn't require green wire nuts on the grounds


Must be a local thing. I have never used green wire nuts, not required here.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

NolaTigaBait said:


> every parish or county has their own crazy rules...theres a parish across the lake that doesn't require green wire nuts on the grounds


I would say that is not a crazy rule. The parishes (I still don't get that) that do require green wire nuts have the crazy rule.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

yeah they are required in orleans parish...i use them, they make me feel good


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

InPhase277 said:


> I would say that is not a crazy rule. The parishes (I still don't get that) that do require green wire nuts have the crazy rule.


it's crazy to me...when you come from a place that requires something to another place that doesn't it takes time to get used to


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> Outside of the building envelope you're OUTSIDE. Inside a box outside of the building envelope you're still not INSIDE, you're outside.


Interesting but the NEC does not say that we can not use NM 'outside' it says we can't use it in wet locations. If the inside of a breaker panel or disconnect is in fact a wet location that seems like bad news for fuses and breakers.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

InPhase277 said:


> ....... The parishes (I still don't get that) ........


What's just as strange is there's only 46 states in the US. The other 4 are Commonwealths.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

Bob Badger said:


> Interesting but the NEC does not say that we can not use NM 'outside' it says we can't use it in wet locations. If the inside of a breaker panel or disconnect is in fact a wet location that seems like bad news for fuses and breakers.


I think there was a proposal for the '11 NEC to treat the inside of exterior boxes, etc. as wet locations.

I would need to check to be sure though.


----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

JohnJ0906 said:


> I think there was a proposal for the '11 NEC to treat the inside of exterior boxes, etc. as wet locations.
> 
> I would need to check to be sure though.


Yup.

http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF/ROP/NEC P3.pdf

Page 70. (115 on the PDF)

Anyone recognize the submitter's name? :laughing:

I also noticed a proposal to allow short sections of NM-B in raceway outside.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)




----------



## JohnJ0906 (Jan 22, 2007)

Thanks Bob. I couldn't figure out how to post that. :thumbsup:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

I may have to kill Mike if this gets accepted.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> I may have to kill Mike if this gets accepted.


This would effectively end the practice of putting panels outdoors as is common in the western and southern states. I don't think it stands a snowball's chance in hell of passing.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Peter D said:


> This would effectively end the practice of putting panels outdoors as is common in the western and southern states. I don't think it stands a snowball's chance in hell of passing.


Given the trend of the NEC lately I would not bet against it,:no: that said I can see areas that traditionally place panels 'outside' amending any new NEC restriction against it.


----------



## Sonny1027 (Mar 20, 2009)

Peter D said:


> This would effectively end the practice of putting panels outdoors as is common in the western and southern states. I don't think it stands a snowball's chance in hell of passing.


What about wallpacks? Technically they are weatherproof enclosures that house the ballast, lamp socket & lamp and NM-B is brought into the fixyure and spliced.

Do you think they will be included if that proposal is accepted?

Thank you,


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> Given the trend of the NEC lately I would not bet against it,:no:


Yeah, good point.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Sonny1027 said:


> What about wallpacks? Technically they are weatherproof enclosures that house the ballast, lamp socket & lamp and NM-B is brought into the fixyure and spliced.
> 
> Do you think they will be included if that proposal is accepted?
> 
> Thank you,


If the proposal pases as it is written above it would apply to wall packs and any other electrical enclosure.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Sonny1027 said:


> What about wallpacks? Technically they are weatherproof enclosures that house the ballast, lamp socket & lamp and NM-B is brought into the fixyure and spliced.
> 
> Do you think they will be included if that proposal is accepted?
> 
> Thank you,


If this code change were to pass, it would have far reaching effects for practically everything installed outdoors with a vague "enclosure" used as the wording. 

Personally, I think this code change proposal is as dumb as they get.


----------



## micromind (Aug 11, 2007)

In my opinion arc-fault breakers, handle ties on MWBCs, TR receptacles and a few other new requirements were about as dumb as it could get too. But they were rammed through, and now we're stuck with them. 

The proposed requirement fits the current national trend toward socialism/communism perfectly. I'd bet it'll sail right through. 

Think about it for a sec; manufacturers profit margins would be up, the egos of the members of the code making panels would be inflated, inspectors with ten-pound-badges would have a new item to bust us on, buildings would cost more (resulting in increased tax revenue), the list of winners goes on and on.

The only losers would be the electricians trying to comply with yet another requirement, and society in general trying to pay for yet another requirement. 

Rob


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Comparing all those new rules is like comparing apples to footballs.

This particular proposal is by a private citizen.

The handle tie for MWBCs was pushed by the IBEW.

I may be wrong but I don't think the manufacturers pushed the TR change but that one actually has some real substantiation for it.

And of course AFCIs where pushed by the makers.


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

I'm going to put in a proposal that if accepted would make #14 and #12 obsolete. The smallest conductors allowed would be #10. Also, all receptacles would have to be re-manufactured to accept #10 for stab-ins. But you would be allowed to still use 20 amp breakers just not 15 amp ones. Also no more aluminum conductors will be allowed.

I'm doing this in the best interest of my copper investments.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

steelersman said:


> I'm going to put in a proposal that if accepted would make #14 and #12 obsolete. The smallest conductors allowed would be #10. Also, all receptacles would have to be re-manufactured to accept #10 for stab-ins. But you would be allowed to still use 20 amp breakers just not 15 amp ones. Also no more aluminum conductors will be allowed.
> 
> I'm doing this in the best interest of my copper investments.


Then I'm going to propose the ban of plastic boxes and raceways. That should help my stock in steel very nicely.


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

steelersman said:


> I'm doing this in the best interest of my copper investments.


If that were true, your proposal would require a #8 minimum AND 
an EGC in every pipe run :thumbsup:


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

480sparky said:


> Then I'm going to propose the ban of plastic boxes and raceways. That should help my stock in steel very nicely.


Yes. Good idea. I'm against all plastics as well. Also while I'm at it, no more quick clamps in the metal boxes. Romex connectors must be used, as I'm going to be investing in those also. Yes, no more plastic. Steel only. I like the Steelers also!


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

Also, no more die cast fittings. Steel only! :thumbsup:


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

Bob Badger said:


> The handle tie for MWBCs was pushed by the IBEW.


 Hey Bob, Was 210.4 (B) really pushed by the IBEW? I didn't know that. The ones that cried the most about this change that I heard were union members.:laughing:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

MWBC?? I even looked on the "Slang" page for it


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

Black4Truck said:


> MWBC?? I even looked on the "Slang" page for it


Multiwire Branch Circuit


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> MWBC?? I even looked on the "Slang" page for it


Multiwire branch circuit


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

william1978 said:


> Hey Bob, Was 210.4 (B) really pushed by the IBEW?


That is what I heard but I can't find any real proof of it so take it for what it's worth.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Celtic said:


> Multiwire Branch Circuit


 
Thanks.. now I can say that idea really sucks :no:


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

Bob Badger said:


> That is what I heard but I can't find any real proof of it so take it for what it's worth.


 Ok thanks.:thumbsup:


----------



## tiger4life (Dec 31, 2008)

steelersman said:


> Hey slim, just because I use #14 and you use #12 doesn't mean I'm going to have to have more circuits. It all depends on the person doing the wiring and how many things they put on a circuit. The code doesn't dictate that slapper. So you keep on wasting your money and overkilling homes for no extra money in your pocket and I'll keep on gettin it the smart and efficient way.


I prefer my grounds down:whistling2::jester:



http://WWW.NECEXAM.COM


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

tiger4life said:


> I prefer my grounds down:whistling2::jester:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.necexam.com


 Not the grounds down debate. Welcome to the forum.:thumbsup: What exactly is the link for?


----------



## tiger4life (Dec 31, 2008)

Thanks for the welcome and the link is nothing really just a study course I used for my Masters exam. Like one of those ebook things. 
As far as grounds lol my father-in-laws lake house has grounds up and every time I go there I want to pull out my tools and get to work. Do not want to start any thing on my first post.


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

tiger4life said:


> Thanks for the welcome and the link is nothing really just a study course I used for my Masters exam. Like one of those ebook things.
> As far as grounds lol my father-in-laws lake house has grounds up and every time I go there I want to pull out my tools and get to work. Do not want to start any thing on my first post.


 I'm a grounds down person myself.:thumbsup:


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

tiger4life said:


> I prefer my grounds down:whistling2::jester:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.necexam.com


Excellent! You are already off on the right foot here!


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Yeah, me neither. The people that make these rules must think they are being heroes or going to save the world or something. :no:


No, this used to be the code in NYC too, no #14 awg anywhere for anything. And there was a darn good reason - they upped the standards. (Now up yours!) Because back in the day NM #12 or #14 was pretty indistinguishable, (as was BX cable) from the outside, and they KNEW because they caught many contractors sneaking #14 onto 20a circuits for added PROFIT. (Not just switchloops.) 

See, the local code panels were a little more, let's say "in touch" with the way greedy self-serving scumbag contractors operate, and knew all too well they'd sell their mothers to turn a profit if they could. IT was easy enough to check that a 30a or 40a circuit was done properly, but no building inspector could be tasked with opening every outlet and switch to make certian that #14 and #12 were not mixed.

So keep it in mind, you brought this on yourselves. Higher standards mean more education and more intense installs and that does equate to more money in your pocket. Problem is, way too many of you are falling over yourselves to be and do the cheapest... think being the low bidder means you won, then sit here all day wondering why the hell it's so hard to make a buck. 

Physicians heal thyselves...


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> No, this used to be the code in NYC too, no #14 awg anywhere for anything. And there was a darn good reason - they upped the standards. (Now up yours!) Because back in the day NM #12 or #14 was pretty indistinguishable, (as was BX cable) from the outside, and they KNEW because they caught many contractors sneaking #14 onto 20a circuits for added PROFIT. (Not just switchloops.)
> 
> See, the local code panels were a little more, let's say "in touch" with the way greedy self-serving scumbag contractors operate, and knew all too well they'd sell their mothers to turn a profit if they could. IT was easy enough to check that a 30a or 40a circuit was done properly, but no building inspector could be tasked with opening every outlet and switch to make certian that #14 and #12 were not mixed.



Another one from the LGLS playbook. They changed the rules because of the evil, greedy contractors. So predictable. :laughing:


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Another one from the LGLS playbook. They changed the rules because of the evil, greedy contractors. So predictable. :laughing:


 
How dare you put words in my mouth. I *NEVER *said "evil."


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> How dare you put words in my mouth. I *NEVER *said "evil."


You're right. They're my words. You just heavily implied it.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

It is true that businesses who fail to regulate themselves will be regulated. That said, I sure would like to read something a little more official regarding the substantiation for the banning of #14 in NYC.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 20, 2007)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> ...... but no building inspector could be tasked with opening every outlet and switch to make certian that #14 and #12 were not mixed.........


Has anyone there noticed NM comes in colors now? 14 is white, 12 is yellow?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> How dare you put words in my mouth. I *NEVER *said "evil."


Uh... you said greedy, self-serving, and scumbag, but you get upset when someone threw in evil? What's the big deal?

I remember watching the Oliver North trial on TV some time back. They often put words in his mouth, and he handled it the best way I've ever seen, and I've used his tactic myself since then. His response, more or less, was, "No, I didn't say that, but it sounds like something I might say, so I don't mind if you think that I said that".


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

480sparky said:


> Has anyone there noticed NM comes in colors now? 14 is white, 12 is yellow?


Yeah, some manufactures even color code the MC. :laughing: I got this slide rule thing one time a while back to decode the color stripes. I only remember two or three of the common one's, so I'm not sure what good color coding the MC does, really.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Uh... you said greedy, self-serving, and scumbag, but you get upset when someone threw in evil? What's the big deal?


I was making the assumption that his getting "upset" was just a jest because it's so ludicrous as you just pointed out.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Yeah, some manufactures even color code the MC. :laughing: I got this slide rule thing one time a while back to decode the color stripes. I only remember two or three of the common one's, so I'm not sure what good color coding the MC does, really.


I have it all memorized.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> No, this used to be the code in NYC too, no #14 awg anywhere for anything. And there was a darn good reason - they upped the standards. (Now up yours!) Because back in the day NM #12 or #14 was pretty indistinguishable, (as was BX cable) from the outside, and they KNEW because they caught many contractors sneaking #14 onto 20a circuits for added PROFIT. (Not just switchloops.)
> 
> See, the local code panels were a little more, let's say "in touch" with the way greedy self-serving scumbag contractors operate, and knew all too well they'd sell their mothers to turn a profit if they could. IT was easy enough to check that a 30a or 40a circuit was done properly, but no building inspector could be tasked with opening every outlet and switch to make certian that #14 and #12 were not mixed.
> 
> ...


Question #1.. why are you so bitter??

Question#2 .. don't they do rough inspections in NYC?? Any "greedy scumbag contractor" would not like to have the job stopped because he has to run new wires. Why is a building inspector checking the wiring. The NY Board of Fire Underwritters has been doing that since the first Insurance company had to write a check for fire damage.

Question #3.. are those "greedy scumbag contractors" union or non-union


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

Black4Truck said:


> Question #1.. why are you so bitter??
> 
> Question#2 .. don't they do rough inspections in NYC?? Any "greedy scumbag contractor" would not like to have the job stopped because he has to run new wires. Why is a building inspector checking the wiring. The NY Board of Fire Underwritters has been doing that since the first Insurance company had to write a check for fire damage.
> 
> Question #3.. are those "greedy scumbag contractors" union or non-union


Good questions. :thumbsup: The answer to #3 is probably union.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

Black4Truck said:


> Question #1.. why are you so bitter??


Do I come off as bitter?



> Question#2 .. don't they do rough inspections in NYC?? Any "greedy scumbag contractor" would not like to have the job stopped because he has to run new wires. Why is a building inspector checking the wiring. The NY Board of Fire Underwritters has been doing that since the first Insurance company had to write a check for fire damage.


You obviously know nothing of the ways of The Board of Standards and Appeals of NYC.




> Question #3.. are those "greedy scumbag contractors" union or non-union


Union and nonunion. When it comes to the ways of businessmen in the game for profit (at any costs) it doesn't make a difference. This is why labor is insulated from owner(s) via a shop super and G.F.


----------



## bobelectric (Feb 24, 2007)

480sparky said:


> What's just as strange is there's only 46 states in the US. The other 4 are Commonwealths.


 Gov.Rendell is taxing us into "Commonwealth". All broke.


----------



## I Conduit (May 4, 2009)

steelersman said:


> Hey slim, just because I use #14 and you use #12 doesn't mean I'm going to have to have more circuits. It all depends on the person doing the wiring and how many things they put on a circuit. The code doesn't dictate that slapper. So you keep on wasting your money and overkilling homes for no extra money in your pocket and I'll keep on gettin it the smart and efficient way.


The code does dictate how many circuits needed for lighting and receptacles for a dwelling by calculation method. You can do bare minimum all you like but just because other electricians like to go one better than you that doesn't make it overkill.


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

I Conduit said:


> The code does dictate how many circuits needed for lighting and receptacles for a dwelling by calculation method. You can do bare minimum all you like but just because other electricians like to go one better than you that doesn't make it overkill.


Overkill artist you are.


----------



## Sharp electrician (Jun 17, 2009)

just do it! if its 7 foot high and under a roof it'll work for 100 years guaranteed.


----------



## captkirk (Nov 21, 2007)

Oh no not this argument again. It lasted for weeks on Mike Holts Forum.


----------



## McClary’s Electrical (Feb 21, 2009)

480's right on this one,,,,lawnguy is wrong!!


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

Everybody knows that you can only use #14 if you pre twist the wirenuts and install the ground pin down. Tape is optional. :jester:



The code only applies to *raceways* in the whole "_NM outside_" thing, and it is still vague as it uses the infamous "*where subject to*" phrase that is very open to interpetation.



In *my* area, raceways outside are often *not subject to* dampness or wetness.

And....14 is way easier to work with and carries enough current for some lights and receps just fine.:thumbsup: 12 will carry more current so if you want to use it it will be a higher quality installation. Hell, use 10 if you want.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

220/221 said:


> Everybody knows that you can only use #14 if you pre twist the wirenuts and install the ground pin down. Tape is optional. :jester:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


yeah, all these guys act like if you pull nm in conduit outside it's the end of the world. It's been done here for years...i've seen some from the 70's that still works and looks fine.


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

NolaTigaBait said:


> yeah, all these guys act like if you pull nm in conduit outside it's the end of the world. It's been done here for years...i've seen some from the 70's that still works and looks fine.


I agree. There is nothing wrong with NM in a conduit outside either. Hell I'll even go as far as to say it would probably last just as long directly buried in the dirt.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

I guy I know In West VA installed 1970's NM (I think the covering was heavier then?) outside in trees and underground over the years it has been replaced but the first replacement was 20 years after installation.

NOT AN ENDORSEMENT


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

hey, if i can avoid doing it than i won't run it....but, most applications(adding circuits to outside panels) it is the only way($$$$ wise)


----------



## drsparky (Nov 13, 2008)

#14 white, #12 yellow, #10 orange, UF sand colored
Now fat inspectors do not have to climb ladders or go in trenches.:mellow:


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

drsparky said:


> #14 white, #12 yellow, #10 orange, UF sand colored
> Now fat inspectors do not have to climb ladders or go in trenches.:mellow:


UF is sand colored? I've never seen that. I've only seen the standard gray color. Whatchoo talkin bout Willis?


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

I have seen white, gray, and black here on Long Island.


----------



## drsparky (Nov 13, 2008)

I haven't played with UF for awhile. In 2001 when they first started shipping the new colors we started to get all the UF in an ugly tan color. I assumed it was part of the switch. I haven't been in a Home Depot or Lowe's in a few years to see if they are still doing it.


----------

