# Attic wiring, is this code compliant?



## NDC

This is in Ontario. I took some pictures of the attic wiring at a clients home. I have never seen attic wiring installed this way. It looks like the circuits were added recently too. They say that the wiring was put in to add a few lights to bedrooms and it was inspected.
Is this to code? The wiring is so close to the roof and run along the joists. Shouldn't it be on running boards if the headroom is more than 1m?


----------



## Glock23gp

Looks good and out of the way for anyone else going up there... 
Clearance from any roof nails... 
Not laid directly in joists to smash while wading thru insulation. 
J box out of insulation and labeled. 

Only thing I see an inspector would call is the nmb not stapled close enough to the box, but for an attic looks good to me.

I'm south of the border though

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk


----------



## Switched

It should be in GRC, you resi guys are gonna blow houses up and fry little babies with wiring like that!:thumbsup:


You have to install it on running boards all through the attic?


----------



## Navyguy

I was going to ask you if you were in my attic? Looks a lot like mine (sans junction boxes).

Only 1.5" required from roof sheeting; same as vertical studs.

Running boards are for cables run on the bottom edge of joists or over rafters when they are subject to mechanical damage (less then 3 ft). Nothing in the code book that I am aware for cable run on the bottom of rafters where they are not subject to mechanical damage.

Junction box is accessible and it is even labelled (a bonus).

Looks good to me.

Cheers

John


----------



## NDC

Navyguy said:


> I was going to ask you if you were in my attic? Looks a lot like mine (sans junction boxes).
> 
> Only 1.5" required from roof sheeting; same as vertical studs.
> 
> Running boards are for cables run on the bottom edge of joists or over rafters when they are subject to mechanical damage (less then 3 ft). Nothing in the code book that I am aware for cable run on the bottom of rafters where they are not subject to mechanical damage.
> 
> Junction box is accessible and it is even labelled (a bonus).
> 
> Looks good to me.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> John


Thanks, do you have a code reference for the 1.5" from roof sheathing?
How does one interpret this rule?
_12-514 Protection on joists and rafters (see Appendix G)
Cables shall not be run on or across
(a) the upper faces of ceiling joists or the lower faces of rafters in attic or roof spaces, where the vertical distance
between the joists and the rafters exceeds 1 m; or_


----------



## Navyguy

I can look it up, but I think it is the same rule that relates conduit on steel decking with the 1.5".

As far as the other, subject to mechanical damage. Just like you do not need a running board when you staple wire on the bottom of joists in a basement if they are boxed in or in a crawl space; they are not subject to mechanical damage, in this case being stepped / crawled on.

Cheers

John


----------



## ElectricMetalTuba

There are longer roofing nails used at the ridge. 

More importantly, rot happens at the seams of sheeting. If I was repairing rotten top cords with a circular saw those wires would be a PITA. Unless some how, I was also an electrician.:brows: 

It is always best to put runs along the side a rafter brace.:hammer:


----------



## splatz

I don't speak Canadian but this I read that as 



NDC said:


> Cables shall not be run on or across
> (a) the upper faces of ceiling joists
> 
> or
> 
> the lower faces of rafters in attic or roof spaces, where the vertical distance
> between the joists and the rafters exceeds 1 m[/I]


So where the cable is running under the rafters, the rafters have to be 1m above the joists. You couldn't run it over close to the wall where there's less space between the joists and rafters.


----------



## PlugsAndLights

An argument can be made that this does not meet the letter of 12-514. 
None the less, I'd consider those wires suitably isolated/protected from 
damage and therefore meet the intent of the rule. 
YMMV
P&L


----------



## 99cents

He used painter's tape to ID his cables. FAIL!

It's in Section 13.


----------



## RePhase277

99cents said:


> He used painter's tape to ID his cables. FAIL!
> 
> It's in Section 13.


We've always been told that Canadians were extremely superstitious, and therefore the code book goes from 12 straight to 14.


----------



## 99cents

RePhase277 said:


> We've always been told that Canadians were extremely superstitious, and therefore the code book goes from 12 straight to 14.


Actually, it does. You need to know the secret handshake to see Section 13.


----------



## zac

I myself have installed that many wires in a pancake box, but would say wire fill could have been called in the above picture.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## sbrn33

99cents said:


> Actually, it does. You need to know the secret handshake to see Section 13.


Is it still called a handshake when you don't really use your hands?


----------



## B-Nabs

Promises of a glimpse at Section 13 are how 99 lures people into his minivan.


----------



## PlugsAndLights

zac said:


> I myself have installed that many wires in a pancake box, but would say wire fill could have been called in the above picture.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


Yep, if that's an 1 1/2 deep oct'n, it's over filled. Good eye @zac . 
P&L


----------



## PlugsAndLights

sbrn33 said:


> Is it still called a handshake when you don't really use your hands?


If it's not _her_ hand, it's the "Trump Handshake". :blink:
P&L


----------



## Navyguy

PlugsAndLights said:


> Yep, if that's an 1 1/2 deep oct'n, it's over filled. Good eye @*zac* .
> P&L


I was looking at that originally late last night too when I first commented. Was not sure how many wires were running past the box compared to how many were running into the box. I thought there was six wires, and could not tell how deep the box was. It could be eight wires, but who knows.

Even if it was over-filled, I would be happy that I was not face first in insulation trying to sort I out!

Cheers

John


----------



## 99cents

Octagon boxes are for lights. 4 X 4 deeps are for JB's.


----------



## NDC

PlugsAndLights said:


> An argument can be made that this does not meet the letter of 12-514.
> None the less, I'd consider those wires suitably isolated/protected from
> damage and therefore meet the intent of the rule.
> YMMV
> P&L


If this meets code then I will be running attic wiring in this manner from now on. Whenever I do attic wiring I remove the insulation and staple it to the ceiling joist. I was also under the impression that if wiring is in an attic space that it may need to be derated because it can get very hot up there.
I saw a picture of it once but can't find it now.


----------



## Majewski

Am I the only one who thinks this is a large attic space?


----------



## NDC

Majewski said:


> Am I the only one who thinks this is a large attic space?


It's a huge attic! The last picture is actually of a second attic space over the back of the house and not so much room. The first 3 pictures are over the front of the house and I was able to stand up in the attic and walk around.


----------



## Majewski

I wish I worked in attics like that!!!!!! I would never leave.


----------



## PlugsAndLights

NDC said:


> If this meets code then I will be running attic wiring in this manner from now on. Whenever I do attic wiring I remove the insulation and staple it to the ceiling joist. I was also under the impression that if wiring is in an attic space that it may need to be derated because it can get very hot up there.
> I saw a picture of it once but can't find it now.


OK, couple things here, and I like lists :
1) Want to make sure that's code compliant, all you have to do is move
the wire from bottom of ridge beam and loop up onto the side in each 
space. Keep it towards the bottom. Personally though, I'd put it where 
they did. YMMV 
2) No need for staples anywhere wires run on top of joists etc. Code says
supported, not stapled. 
3) I can see the case for derating wire in attics, but it's done (without
derating) every day and and I've never heard of a defect resulting. If the 
ESA etc thought this was problem, we'd see 12/2 required for ceiling 
lights etc in IC's. 
P&L


----------



## PlugsAndLights

99cents said:


> Octagon boxes are for lights. 4 X 4 deeps are for JB's.


Right. Code Ref 13-1300(13). 
P&L


----------



## ElectricMetalTuba

PlugsAndLights said:


> Right. Code Ref 13-1300(13).
> P&L


That's the subrule for Open Splice Octagon Boxes. :vs_lol:


----------



## 99cents

PlugsAndLights said:


> Right. Code Ref 13-1300(13).
> P&L


Nope, that's my rule.


----------



## RePhase277

Man, this mysterious Section 13 contains some odd and varied rules...


----------



## pjholguin

I am south of the 49th...I thought that derating only applied if the wiring was covered by insulation. I believe that is a NEC stipulation, what does the CEC say? 



PlugsAndLights said:


> OK, couple things here, and I like lists :
> 1) Want to make sure that's code compliant, all you have to do is move
> the wire from bottom of ridge beam and loop up onto the side in each
> space. Keep it towards the bottom. Personally though, I'd put it where
> they did. YMMV
> 2) No need for staples anywhere wires run on top of joists etc. Code says
> supported, not stapled.
> 3) I can see the case for derating wire in attics, but it's done (without
> derating) every day and and I've never heard of a defect resulting. If the
> ESA etc thought this was problem, we'd see 12/2 required for ceiling
> lights etc in IC's.
> P&L


----------



## 99cents

RePhase277 said:


> Man, this mysterious Section 13 contains some odd and varied rules...


Like the one about conduit fill - tie the pull rope to the back of the truck and, if the rope breaks, you have too many.


----------



## emtnut

99cents said:


> Like the one about conduit fill - tie the pull rope to the back of the truck and, if the rope breaks, you have too many.


Just need more yellow 77 :whistling2:

Then when the conduit splits ... you have to many


----------



## Maple_Syrup25

Looks pretty good! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## eddy current

1. Is the wiring done by code? No. 12-514 
But, as others have said, an inspector would probably pass it. It's neat, out of the way and some what supported.

2. As for the J-box, looks like 6 wires terminate in there, plus marrettes? Table 23 says 10 x 14 awg max. J-box also does not meet code.

3. Wiring used for lighting in an attic must be rated for 90 degrees, but be limited to the ampacity of 60 degree wire. 30-408(1)(2)


----------



## PlugsAndLights

eddy current said:


> 1. Is the wiring done by code? No. 12-514
> But, as others have said, an inspector would probably pass it. It's neat, out of the way and some what supported.


And also, in the real world, inspectors don't climb ladders and look in attics.
You can do anything you want up there. 



eddy current said:


> 3. Wiring used for lighting in an attic must be rated for 90 degrees, but be limited to the ampacity of 60 degree wire. 30-408(1)(2)


Good code ref.. Fortunately #14 is good for 15A using the 60deg column. 
P&L


----------



## Switched

PlugsAndLights said:


> *And also, in the real world, inspectors don't climb ladders and look in attics.
> You can do anything you want up there.*
> 
> 
> 
> Good code ref.. Fortunately #14 is good for 15A using the 60deg column.
> P&L


LOL... in 22 years I had never seen an inspector go into a crawlspace..... Until the roundest guy I had ever seen decided to! He asked where the crawl space was, suited up in a Tyvek suit and a mask and actually crawled!

I was like WTF? (.... Hey... You stapled the wiring right.... LOL)

He said he does it at jobs where he hasn't met the EC yet. Once he gets a feel for the quality of what you do, then he just does it randomly.


----------



## sbrn33

NDC said:


> If this meets code then I will be running attic wiring in this manner from now on. Whenever I do attic wiring I remove the insulation and staple it to the ceiling joist. I was also under the impression that if wiring is in an attic space that it may need to be derated because it can get very hot up there.
> I saw a picture of it once but can't find it now.


This cracks me up. Hot in a Ontario attic?


----------



## emtnut

sbrn33 said:


> This cracks me up. Hot in a Ontario attic?


I know you're kidding... But in the 2 weeks that we actually get summer, we get 23 hrs of sunlight . So the heat really builds up


----------



## Navyguy

eddy current said:


> 1. Is the wiring done by code? No. 12-514
> But, as others have said, an inspector would probably pass it. It's neat, out of the way and some what supported.
> 
> 2. As for the J-box, looks like 6 wires terminate in there, plus marrettes? Table 23 says 10 x 14 awg max. J-box also does not meet code.
> 
> 3. Wiring used for lighting in an attic must be rated for 90 degrees, but be limited to the ampacity of 60 degree wire. 30-408(1)(2)


This is the great thing about the code, there are so many interpretations, but it is the inspector’s that counts I suspect... and I suspect there is a bit of picking fly sh*t out of the pepper here...


> *12-514 Protection on joists and rafters *(see Appendix G)
> Cables shall not be run on or across
> (a) the upper faces of ceiling joists or the lower faces of rafters in attic or roof spaces, where the vertical distance between the joists and the rafters exceeds 1 m; or
> (b) the lower faces of basement joists, unless suitably protected from mechanical damage.


I might argue that the cable is not run on the upper faces of the joists or the lower faces of the rafters. They are run on the vertical supports of the truss (queen post?)

I think we all agree on Table 23...


For rule 30-408 I think you might be making an assumption, perhaps correct, but none the less an assumption.



> *30-408 Wiring of ceiling outlet boxes*
> (1) Branch circuit conductors having insulation suitable for 90 °C shall be used for wiring of ceiling outlet boxes on which a luminaire is mounted, except for boxes in wet locations where Type NMW or NMWU cables are used.
> (2) For the purposes of compliance with this Rule, the ampacity of 90 °C wire shall be limited to the ampacity of 60 °C wire.


Kind of reminds me of the refrigerator circuit / AFCI thread, the code says that on one rule that you "must" put a fridge circuit in the kitchen. Then in another rule it states that the refrigerator circuit is AFCI exempt. It does not state that you cannot put another (one or more) fridge circuits somewhere in the dwelling or if you do it must be AFCI protected. The code deals with minimum code application for the most part. It is not good at defining the requirements for "over and above".

Cheers

John


----------



## bartstop

That's nice and pretty compared to the crap I see in most attics. I had one last week where they twisted the wires together and wrapped with electrical tape. I guess they must have been worried about a fire so they trimmed the bottom of an empty milk jug to fit over all three cables nice and neat.


----------

