# Nmb in crawlspace: 2005 vs. 2008=wtf



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

Ever use EMT??


----------



## electricrick (Sep 8, 2010)

Drill it out or pipe it. I believe they make a halved pvc conduit that will screw to the bottom of the joist for protection but i don't know how much it costs. I'd suck it up and drill it out or have the apprentice do it.


----------



## zoltan (Mar 15, 2010)

jrannis said:


> Ever use EMT??


Says running boards or bored holes are accepted methods. Home runs and various circuts are already in place. I was thinking of adding running boards as the quickest fix.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 6, 2009)

Yeah I agree with the op, it's ridiculous.

Basements fine, crawl space, meh.


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

Crawlspaces usually have a sill plate. That's where I like to run my wires.


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

NC did not accept that new change thank God. What a pita that would be.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

It was a good change in my opinion.

As most of us know crawl spaces can range from easy and pleasant to almost imposable and miserable.

The idea is if you are in one of those tight crawl spaces they do not want the cables to get damaged by someone forcing their way through.

Worst case is say you are forcing your way through a tight spot damage a cable and get shocked, you will not be able to get away. 

Anyway, I try to stay out of crawls I am too old and fat for that crap. :jester:


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

I have discovered that people really understand when you tell them that you need to cut an access hole here and there. 
One HO told me not to worry, she was some kind of artist that worked with materials similar to stucco and "could make it look better than new".


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> It was a good change in my opinion.
> 
> As most of us know crawl spaces can range from easy and pleasant to almost imposable and miserable.
> 
> ...


So how many lives will it save having that dreaded NM not exposed in crawl spaces.. :blink:

Those people in NC need to throw out the state leaders for not adopting this part of the NEC!!!!

How could we come all this way to 2010 and have that dreaded NM exposed all around us.. OH THE HUMANITIES!! 

Bob.. sometime I think your off your rocker... this is one of them.. :whistling2:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> So how many lives will it save having that dreaded NM not exposed in crawl spaces.. :blink:
> 
> Those people in NC need to throw out the state leaders for not adopting this part of the NEC!!!!
> 
> ...


Right back at you, you are getting that worked up just because you have to drill some holes?

Yeah the NEC is just crazy forcing us to drill some holes. :laughing:

You should look into medication.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> Right back at you, you are getting that worked up just because you have to drill some holes?
> 
> Yeah the NEC is just crazy forcing us to drill some holes. :laughing:
> 
> You should look into medication.


Yea right.. like *YOU* don't need any help in that department.. :laughing:


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> It was a good change in my opinion.
> 
> As most of us know crawl spaces can range from easy and pleasant to almost imposable and miserable.
> 
> ...


 
If the romex is secured properly even a fat guy(me) could crawl around and and not have to force your way thru them. I respect your opinion Bob. But as many houses I have crawled under....as many unsecured wires I have crawled over under and thru.....I don't believe I have ever damaged a cable.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

jwjrw said:


> If the romex is secured properly even a fat guy(me) could crawl around and and not have to force your way thru them.


Huh?

I don't know what crawl spaces are like where you are but some around here are not that big, you literally could be belly crawling with joists on top of your back.

Keep in mind they write the NEC for all parts of the country with the goal of safety, not to make our job easy.

It also applies to new work in old places.




> But as many houses I have crawled under....as many unsecured wires I have crawled over under and thru.....I don't believe I have ever damaged a cable.


Which means ............. absolutely nothing.:no:


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

zoltan said:


> I've been wiring a remodel/addition, and today a helper asked if we need to drill out the joists in the crawler. I say no that's a PITA. Tonite I look in the 08 NEC and sure enough 334.15 changed from "nmb in unfinished basements" to nmb in unfinished basements and crawlspaces".
> So as I understand it I can no longer staple nmb to the bottom of joists in a resi crawler? I've been under 2005 till recently so this is quite a shock.
> If so, what's the cheapest way to add running boards? Unstaple, screw up some 5/8" x 4" and re-staple?


Since nobody wants to asnswer the question I'll give it a shot. :laughing:

Yes, just unstaple the cables, screw up some running boards and restaple them. :thumbsup:


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> Huh?
> 
> I don't know what crawl spaces are like where you are but some around here are not that big, you literally could be belly crawling with joists on top of your back.
> 
> ...


Not true. It means if a screw up like me hasn't damaged cables with their back it probably won't happen. I think this one adds cost to a house that is unnecessary. IMO


----------



## captkirk (Nov 21, 2007)

I really have to post some pics of the last few crawl spaces I was in.....An Efing mess.....I cant beileve how lazy some guys are..not to mention hacks....Even in crawl spaces I drill out the beams or staple along the sill plate...God forbid some guys went a little above code min..


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

captkirk said:


> I really have to post some pics of the last few crawl spaces I was in.....An Efing mess.....I cant beileve how lazy some guys are..not to mention hacks....Even in crawl spaces I drill out the beams or staple along the sill plate...God forbid some guys went a little above code min..


 
We all have seen wires not secured and ran in a bunch. Hack work.
If the wires are ran neatly and secured every other joist I think it's fine.
I believe we do neat quality work. I have drilled a few out where it would of looked bad to run them on the joists so I agree there are times to do that. All in all I think its a waste of man hours. But I WOULD be doing it if NC adopted it.


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

jwjrw said:


> Not true. It means if a screw up like me hasn't damaged cables with their back it probably won't happen. I think this one adds cost to a house that is unnecessary. IMO


I sit really much cost difference to drill and pull than it is to pull and staple. I really don't think that it is.


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

electricmanscott said:


> I sit really much cost difference to drill and pull than it is to pull and staple. I really don't think that it is.


 
Maybe not. Depends how many wires you run in the crawl. It could add an hour or more depending on how much room you have to crawl around. I hate going under houses so I want to get in and get out as quick as I can.


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

The creeper.....best tool to get around down there. In fact I got an old one on Tuesday that needs the white suit. And my wires will be running anyway possible with no regard to 08 nec, bad enough I got to subject myself to going down there.


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Shockdoc said:


> The creeper.....best tool to get around down there. In fact I got an old one on Tuesday that needs the white suit. And my wires will be running anyway possible with no regard to 08 nec, bad enough I got to subject myself to going down there.


A creeper would never roll under most of the houses here.
One that has been "conditioned" it would but not one with dirt.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

jwjrw said:


> Not true. It means if a screw up like me hasn't damaged cables with their back it probably won't happen. I think this one adds cost to a house that is unnecessary. IMO


I have worked with electricity most of my life, I do not think a GFCI has ever saved my life.

Does that mean GFCIs are a waste of money?


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

I should really read the ROPs before I comment, the reason for the change was not what I said above. As a matter of fact I was far from the mark.




> *7-58 Log #2399 NEC-P07 Final Action: Accept
> (334.15)
> ____________________________________________________________
> Submitter: *Mike Holt, Mike Holt Enterprises
> ...


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> I have worked with electricity most of my life, I do not think a GFCI has ever saved my life.
> 
> Does that mean GFCIs are a waste of money?


 
How many guys have been electrocuted crawling under a house with NMB on the joists? Could you not still damage the cables ran thru holes in the joists trying to move around and get shocked? IMO which means nothing...it is not going to make the house any safer. Tomorrow I may crawl under one and get shocked but I don't think I have ever heard or anyone doing that. I read the change was like in a basement. To keep HO's from hanging stuff on the cables. IDK.
If I move to a state that adopted it I'll do it.


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> I should really read the ROPs before I comment, the reason for the change was not what I said above. As a matter of fact I was far from the mark.


 
I had just posted that I thought read the change was made to make the crawl like a basement when I saw your post.:thumbsup:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Well it changes things entirely in your favor.

How did you used to run NM in crawls?

Did you staple it under and at times perpendicular to the joists?


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> I should really read the ROPs before I comment, the reason for the change was not what I said above. As a matter of fact I was far from the mark.


 

Bob do me a translation of that ROP....the for dummies version please.


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> Well it changes things entirely in your favor.
> 
> How did you used to run NM in crawls?
> 
> Did you staple it under and at times perpendicular to the joists?


 
I came away from that bottom section saying it was for shocks......

I will run on the bottom edge and perpendicular. Whatever looks the cleanest. I'll run around the sill also. I try to run most stuff overhead if I can. I hate crawl spaces. I can afford the extra wire it takes.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

jwjrw said:


> I will run on the bottom edge and perpendicular.


Without change what you have been doing has been a violation.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

I am going to stop trying to make intelligent posts, I am working on Barqardi 151 and some coke.

:drink::drink:


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> Without change what you have been doing has been a violation.


 
So almost every house I have ever been under is a violation?:blink:
I thought the change was to make us stop and it was legal before 08?:blink:
I'm confused again.
It's still an accepted pratice here to run along the bottom of the joist and secure to it. Still passes inspections.


----------



## rbj (Oct 23, 2007)

*Stapling in crawls*

[334.15 (C)] does not resolve a damage problem by permitting two 6AWG or three 8AWG conductors to be directly attached to the lower edges (Carpenter terminology "face") of crawl space joists. Unrealistically...when has any wireman ever strung single conductors in residential wood framing for a circuit of any type within the structure? Seems to be plain and simple...who(m) ever wrote this code, never wired a house in their life. Maybe hacked it though. 
I agree with jw. Back to the drawing board on this one.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

jwjrw said:


> So almost every house I have ever been under is a violation?


Yes.




> 334.15 Exposed Work. In exposed work, except as provided
> in 300.11(A), cable shall be installed as specified in
> 334.15(A) through (C).
> (A) To Follow Surface. *Cable shall closely follow the surface
> of the building finish or of running boards.*



Without the addiction of the word crawl space in C you would have to follow A in crawl spaces.


----------



## Mr. Sparkle (Jan 27, 2009)

I really can't say that code bothers me, with the right tools you can drill and pull runs in holes in roughly the same amount of time as stapling to the underside of the joists, which I always looked at as hacky anyway....not to mention it is a pain in the ass.


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

Hmmm....interesting. If I understand you it has always been illegal to run them along the bottom without a running board to protect them. Wow most houses here are wired like that and pass. I guess our AHJ interpertets it differently? IDK


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> Well it changes things entirely in your favor.
> 
> How did you used to run NM in crawls?
> 
> Did you staple it under and at times perpendicular to the joists?


I remember seeing something in the code where you could not run NM more than 12" stapled to the bottom of floor beams, from the outside wall.

I saw where someone ran NM in the center of the span and the deflection of the floor beams caused the staple to dig into the NM and eventually causing a fire.

For that reason, I always use insulated staples even where not required.


----------



## leland (Dec 28, 2007)

Bob Badger said:


> It was a good change in my opinion.
> 
> As most of us know crawl spaces can range from easy and pleasant to almost imposable and miserable.
> 
> ...


Makes sense,But, Using that logic: how does a running board protect that from not happening?
If that was a major concern,wouldn't they just require conduit?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Instead of getting involved with running boards or drilling holes, I have always just ran the romex over to either the outside wall or a beam and stapled to the side of that to get across the basement. It uses a bit more romex, but it saves time and energy so it evens out, IMO.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

leland said:


> Makes sense,But, Using that logic: how does a running board protect that from not happening?
> If that was a major concern,wouldn't they just require conduit?


My logic was wrong, I was way off base with my first few post in this thread. :icon_redface:

Although one dissenting CMP member seems to have the same concerns.


----------



## r_merc (Jul 5, 2008)

*NC Gets it right (for once)*



jwjrw said:


> NC did not accept that new change thank God. What a pita that would be.


DITTO!!:thumbsup:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

r_merc said:


> DITTO!!:thumbsup:


Actually that is bad for you.

That means the NEC prohibits running NM under joists in crawl spaces.


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> Actually that is bad for you.
> 
> That means the NEC prohibits running NM under joists in crawl spaces.


 

Luckily our inspectors think its legal to run on the bottom....I ain't telling them differently....:whistling2::no:


----------



## r_merc (Jul 5, 2008)

Bob Badger said:


> Actually that is bad for you.
> 
> That means the NEC prohibits running NM under joists in crawl spaces.


No that means in NC I don't have to drill in a crawl space. 

To me do a neat job by running it with the floor joists or girders and there isnt a problem anyway.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

r_merc said:


> No that means in NC I don't have to drill in a crawl space.
> 
> To me do a neat job by running it with the floor joists or girders and there isnt a problem anyway.


Actually it means you cannot drill holes to avoid the requirement to closely follow the surface
of the building finish. 

Meaning you cannot run perpendicular to and under the joists.




> *334.15 Exposed Work.* In exposed work, except as provided
> in 300.11(A), cable shall be installed as specified in
> 334.15(A) through (C).
> 
> ...


----------



## r_merc (Jul 5, 2008)

Bob Badger said:


> Actually it means you cannot drill holes to avoid the requirement to closely follow the surface
> of the building finish.
> 
> Meaning you cannot run perpendicular to and under the joists.


Well then you need to educate the dozen or so jurisdictions that I work in to that fact. The majority of rope pullers around here pull straight lines perpendicular or not. I dont think it is good installation technique but it is what is accepted here in this area as Code compliant by the AHJ's


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> Actually it means you cannot drill holes to avoid the requirement to closely follow the surface
> of the building finish.
> 
> Meaning you cannot run perpendicular to and under the joists.


So to be code compliant you have to install runners or goaround the sill?
Do I understand this correctly now?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

jwjrw said:


> So to be code compliant you have to install runners or goaround the sill?
> Do I understand this correctly now?


Or any beam. Usually there is either the outside wall or a beam in close proximity. It's much easier to bring the run over to the sill or beam instead of drilling or installing running boards.


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

HackWork said:


> Or any beam. Usually there is either the outside wall or a beam in close proximity. It's much easier to bring the run over to the sill or beam instead of drilling or installing running boards.


 
Yea I knew it was legal to run down the side of the beam. Running and securing under the bottom part which has been and is still done here and still passes is what got me.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

jwjrw said:


> Yea I knew it was legal to run down the side of the beam. Running and securing under the bottom part which has been and is still done here and still passes is what got me.


What gets me is how you can run a large feeder with high fault current under the joists all day long, but a 15 Amp branch circuit is forbidden


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

r_merc said:


> Well then you need to educate the dozen or so jurisdictions that I work in to that fact. The majority of rope pullers around here pull straight lines perpendicular or not. I dont think it is good installation technique but it is what is accepted here in this area as Code compliant by the AHJ's


Before the change adding 'Crawlspace' do you see any permission to run it 'through the air' between expossed joists?



jwjrw said:


> So to be code compliant you have to install runners or go around the sill?


Or up over and down each joist bay and I don't think stapling NM to the bottom side if a sub floor is wise.




> Do I understand this correctly now?


I am still not sure I do. :laughing:


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Bob Badger said:


> I am still not sure I do. :laughing:


 
The wording is difficult to follow. I think I'm still confused.....nothing new.
I'd rather run overhead anyway. I hate going under houses. :thumbup:


----------



## den (Mar 28, 2009)

My first job starting out I had to change some 12gua romex that I had stapeled to the floor joists and drill them in. This was in a brand new shop on a farm and it had a second story loft on one end and I had put the romex on the bottom of joists. This was going to have a drop ceiling under the wires as this was their office. The inspector cited this code even tho this was not a basement or crawl space?? He didn't want the wires coming loose and falling down.


----------



## rbj (Oct 23, 2007)

jwjrw said:


> Yea I knew it was legal to run down the side of the beam. Running and securing under the bottom part which has been and is still done here and still passes is what got me.


jwjrw,

You may be correct still. Prior to 336 being changed to 334 Non Metallic Sheathed cable, stapling NM to bottom joisting in crawl spacing was maintained by the 336.6 exposed rules that made an exception to *336.8 In Unfinished Basements*. 

Some States still permit the crawl space stapling without guard strips as most of us old timers have done for as long as anyone can remember. Maybe getting old confuses some local AHJ's trying to keep up with the NEC also.....


----------

