ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Do we need grounding?
by gfretwell - 04/06/24 08:32 PM
UL 508A SPACING
by tortuga - 03/30/24 07:39 PM
Increasing demand factors in residential
by tortuga - 03/28/24 05:57 PM
Portable generator question
by Steve Miller - 03/19/24 08:50 PM
240V only in a home and NEC?
by dsk - 03/19/24 06:33 AM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
1 members (gfretwell), 139 guests, and 9 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
#98647 02/12/05 11:08 AM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Member
Quote
330.30(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 a luminaries (lighting fixture) or other piece of 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.

Some interpret the last sentence as allowing the support up to 6 feet from each fitting to permit 11 feet, 6 inches of cable from a box to a luminaries without support.


Opinions?


Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
Stay up to Code with the Latest NEC:


>> 2023 NEC & Related Reference & Exam Prep
2023 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides

Pass Your Exam the FIRST TIME with the Latest NEC & Exam Prep

>> 2020 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides
 

#98648 02/12/05 12:13 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 265
D
Member
They are stretching a clarification at the end to defeat what the previous paragraph clearly states.

All it is saying that if you are going to a fixture or piece of equipment, the last 6' doesn't need to follow the normal support rules.

#98649 02/13/05 10:53 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 681
P
Member
Art 320 has the same wording, but Art 334 has left out the last sentence from similar wording. Does this mean the NM fitting is does not follow the same requirements?

Pierre


Pierre Belarge

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5