# Secured within 12" for MC cable  NEC 330.30(B)



## jar546 (Sep 8, 2018)

So, although this job is not ready for inspection, the potential issue here with this MC installation is that on the right side, the MC clamp is 16" away from the box/fitting.  

Who out there would fail this installation for having 1 strap more than 12" away?


----------



## north star (Sep 9, 2018)

*@ ~ @*

By not enforcing the adopted requirement of the NEC, and specifically
Article 330.30(B), ...then a precedent would then be set........What
about the next time, and THERE WILL BE a next time, ...when the distance
is a little bit farther, and the next time when the distance is still even
farther away ?.......How many of us have heard the statement *"Well you*
*didn't make me do it on the last job, why are you making me do it now" ?*

Anyone who is a regular visitor or member on this Forum sees the direct
results of what happens when the various adopted Codes & Standards
are not enforced [  i.e. - please refer to the various pictures and
applications that ***ICE*** has  ].

IMO, ...as an Inspector the non-compliant condition must be enforced to
the Code [ read Article ] as adopted by the jurisdiction.

*@ ~ @*


----------



## jar546 (Sep 9, 2018)

north star said:


> *@ ~ @*
> 
> By not enforcing the adopted requirement of the NEC, and specifically
> Article 330.30(B), ...then a precedent would then be set........What
> ...


The alternative to this would be taking the MC cable on the right, bringing it back to the left side just to secure it then looping it back causing undue stress  on the connection point and wasting cable.  The cable tie in the middle is acting as a support.  

What if I told you this installation was under the 2017 NEC and that the cable ties were UL Type 21S?  Would that change your opinion?


----------



## ICE (Sep 9, 2018)

Will the ceiling be accessible?

330.30(D)(2)


----------



## RJJ (Sep 9, 2018)

My response to both OP post would be that one the tie secures them both. It appears to be about 6" out of the box. Therefore, the right side would be ok. On this install I would use a little "common sense" and not fail it. Seeing this I would look closely at the other devises, to make sure they are done correctly. It appears to be on 24" centers and some time the can does not line up with the desired center wanted from below.
Also keep in section 330.24 not to create stress on the bend. I believe the installer has meet the burden of the code.


----------



## jar546 (Sep 9, 2018)

ICE said:


> Will the ceiling be accessible?
> 
> 330.30(D)(2)


Yes


----------



## ICE (Sep 9, 2018)

330.30 Securing and Supporting.

(D) Unsupported Cables. Type MC cable shall be permitted to be unsupported where the cable:

(2) Is not more than 1.8 m (6 ft) in length from the last point of cable support to the point of connection to luminaires or other electrical equipment and the cable and point of connection are within an accessible ceiling. For the purpose of this section, Type MC cable fittings shall be permitted as a means of cable support.


----------



## fatboy (Sep 9, 2018)

My reaction was that with the cables being attached to one another, appears to immobilize them within the 12". JMHO


----------



## ICE (Sep 9, 2018)

https://www.nema.org/Products/Documents/Cable tie type classifications 2015-12-04.pdf

I have never been a fan of cable ties for much of anything in the construction industry.  

They are used extensively on PV arrays and are Listed as UV resistant so I am forced to accept them.  I placed a few on the handle of a hose reel at my home.  A year later they crumbled at the touch.


----------



## ICE (Sep 9, 2018)

fatboy said:


> My reaction was that with the cables being attached to one another, appears to immobilize them within the 12". JMHO


Is it 12" as the pig flies or is it 12" of actual MC cable.  Neither cable is 12" or less in actual cable and if it is as the pig flies then the cables could be infinitely long.  So one cable is attached to another, however, the point is moot given the Code.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Sep 10, 2018)

I don't see a problem with this install, help me understand what the code is trying to achieve. 

If the light fixture was to drop during a fire or a shake, would it drop too far or would this install still provide the safety needed? 

As far as 330.24 bending radius, it appears to be in compliance.

Would you measure the 12-inches of material or from the distance from the wood framing fastener to the light fixture box?


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Sep 10, 2018)

jar546 said:


> What if I told you this installation was under the 2017 NEC and that the cable ties were UL *Type 21S*? Would that change your opinion?



Wouldn't the MC require the metallic type approved 21's ties?

Have to be a wrapper laying on the floor for verification, cuz I can't tell one tie from another.


----------



## RJJ (Sep 10, 2018)

PCinspector1: The OP was dealing with the 12" rule for fasting. The install meets the NEC requirements. By use of the tie the installer has meet the requirement.


----------



## jar546 (Sep 10, 2018)

Pcinspector1 said:


> Wouldn't the MC require the metallic type approved 21's ties?
> 
> Have to be a wrapper laying on the floor for verification, cuz I can't tell one tie from another.



Basically this is an accessible attic space and these are luminaires so I could put a 6'  fixture whip on this unsecure and it meets the code.  The 12" rule does not even apply for this application.  I was trying to see what some of the opinions were out there to drum up some conversation.


----------



## RJJ (Sep 11, 2018)

Well I 'll be: Never gave it a though in regards to the 6' rule for a whip. I see hundreds of these installations every week with the 6' or less whip being used. A very good and tricky question!!!


----------



## fatboy (Sep 11, 2018)

Yup...messing with us, made us over-think it.


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 11, 2018)

jar546 said:


> The alternative to this would be taking the MC cable on the right, bringing it back to the left side just to secure it then looping it back causing undue stress  on the connection point and wasting cable.  The cable tie in the middle is acting as a support.
> 
> What if I told you this installation was under the 2017 NEC and that the cable ties were UL Type 21S?  Would that change your opinion?



I don't think a wire tie from a MC cable to another MC cable can be used for supporting:

*300.11 (C) Cables not used as a means of support. *Cable wiring methods shall not be used as a means of support for other cables, raceways, or non electrical equipment.

But if this is a whip it's ok for the first 6'.but not elsewhere.


----------



## RJJ (Sep 11, 2018)

Rick: Very good point. Installers like using wire ties. So would that use of a tie even to create a nice entrance be a violation. On the surface I think it would be or could be! ????


----------



## jar546 (Sep 11, 2018)

Rick18071 said:


> I don't think a wire tie from a MC cable to another MC cable can be used for supporting:
> 
> *300.11 (C) Cables not used as a means of support. *Cable wiring methods shall not be used as a means of support for other cables, raceways, or non electrical equipment.
> 
> But if this is a whip it's ok for the first 6'.but not elsewhere.



Yes, "cable wiring methods" not "cable wiring"


----------



## ICE (Sep 11, 2018)

It is difficult to say for sure but the way the trusses are bearing seems odd.


----------

