One of the thingd I 'love' about new code editions is all the little surprises that seem to get implemented without anyone being aware of them .... until the new code comes out, and the 'seminar riders' suddenly start off on a new crusade.
In the 08 cycle, this ban on NM in 'damp' locations was one such surprise. Romex in the crawl space? Violation! Romex through the wall into the back of an outdoor weather-tight box? Violation.
Hell, I had one clown assert that ordinary switches, place conventionally in a bathroom, were a violation, as was NM in the walls, because condensation made the area 'damp.'
I'm just as sore at the NM makers. There is absolutely no reason for conventional NM to not be rated / listed / approved for the wettest applications - even under water. Just my opinion - but I suspect that they either haven't even tried, or that there was a management decision to avoid the application.
