[gbadner]

Hello. First post here!

I'm renovating an old light industrial warehouse space to turn it into a photo studio. My electrician removed all of the *very* old electrical wiring and is running new. For the new wiring, he ran BX cable through holes he drilled in the exposed beams. The beams are 15" tall and about 3" thick. The holes are an inch in diameter and approx 2" from the bottom edge of the beam.

According to my electrician, and my understanding of the NEC section 300.4, this is an entirely approved way to run wire. However, my landlord is telling me to take it out!

Can anyone confirm that this method of running wire is ok? Any reason as to why this would be a problem?

Thanks!

 

[brric]

First of all there is no BX cabling available. Your electrician may have used MC or AC cable. Secondly, the landlord may be concerned about the location of the holes as to structural integrity of the beams although removing the cabling now will not change that now that the holes are drilled. Thirdly, MC or AC may not be an acceptable wiring method for building usage or there may be jurisdictional codes requiring a different wiring method.
Obviously the landlord should have been consulted beforehand.

 

[gbadner]

Sorry... yes. It's AC. I'm use to calling it BX.

Thnx.

 

[jreagan]

And the landlord might just not feel like allowing it. His property, his rules (unless the lease stated otherwise).

 

[Jim Port]

Those hoes should not have been drilled that low on the framing. The holes have weakened the members. They should have been drilled in the middle between top and bottom.

 

[Pharon]

Those hoes should not have been drilled that low on the framing. The holes have weakened the members. They should have been drilled in the middle between top and bottom.

Perhaps, but as long as the hole's edge is at least 1-1/4" from the edge of the joist, it meets Code per 300.4(A)(1).

 

[Jim Port]

My point was that the depth may have been needed to support the load and it has now been compromised. I agree it meets the NEC requirement , but there is more to it than that.

 

[Pharon]

The holes are only 1" in diameter - I doubt they're going to cause any long term structural damage. Thank god the plumber didn't get to them first lol

 

[Msradell]

Perhaps, but as long as the hole's edge is at least 1-1/4" from the edge of the joist, it meets Code per 300.4(A)(1).

That reference you posted is from the electrical code and is there to protect the wires from nails penetrating them. It has nothing to do with structural needs. Structurally all penetration through rafters should be in the middle 3rd of the rafter. Anywhere else could significantly affect the strength of the member, even a 1" hole could be significant depending on how the building was designed and the type of lumber involved.

 

[gbadner]

For what it's worth... the work I originally described was "approved" by the landlord's architect and GC. New regulations in the code here in NYC allow to have exposed BX/AC cable in the manner executed by my electrician.

 

[Msradell]

For what it's worth... the work I originally described was "approved" by the landlord's architect and GC. New regulations in the code here in NYC allow to have exposed BX/AC cable in the manner executed by my electrician.

Have you asked the landlord what his objection is in this case?