Attic splice Snap connector

[Eric Delio]

No junction box in the attic.

Electrician called me and says molded connectors are fine and complies with NEC
Anyone seen these connectors?

The wires are still not completely covered by the connector.

Thanks!

[Gunnar Alquist]

Hi Eric,

I assume you are kidding, but since there is no smiley face, I will answer seriously.

The one in your pic is not acceptable.

Tyco Electronics does make a molded splice for this use. I would want to make sure that it is approved for use in your area.

1116377-1 Non-Metallic Cable Splices and Tap - TE (http://www.te.com/catalog/pn/en/1116377-1?RQPN=1116377-1)

[Jerry Peck]

Tyco Electronics does make a molded splice for this use. I would want to make sure that it is approved for use in your area.

1116377-1 Non-Metallic Cable Splices and Tap - TE (http://www.te.com/catalog/pn/en/1116377-1?RQPN=1116377-1)

Those are not for field installation in site built dwellings, those are for manufactured homes and possibly for modular homes.

(bold and underlining are mine)
"
- 3.3. Installation
- - A. Factory
- - - Type NM-1 and NM-2 devices must be factory installed on the free end of a nonmetallic sheathed cable. The Type NM-3 device is must be factory installed anywhere along a nonmetallic sheathed cable. The cable must be prepared (cut, stripped, and formed) to allow the device to be assembled in only one position (to maintain the integrity of the polarity arrangement). The conductors and stripped cable jacket are completely within the enclosure and strain-relief cover. When used to connect expandable or dual-unit mobile homes, the connector ends are to be located where they are protected from moisture and physical damage during transport to the mobile home lot.
- - B. Building Site and Dwelling Site
- - - The separate modules of a building or dwelling assembled on location are to be connected electrically by the simple plug-in connection (including a mechanical latch) of mating pairs thereby providing circuit continuity. The connected pairs may or may not be fastened in place. The connected pairs may or may not be concealed by the installation.
"

I also found this in there, but have not checked what the NEC states in the references sections - nonetheless, if the device is required to be "factory" installed, that definitely limits and restricts its use in the installations the section section below:
"
- 4. QUALIFICATIONS
- - The nonmetallic sheathed cable interconnection devices are Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (UL) Listed to U.S. and Canadian safety standards under UL File E57250 for use in manufactured buildings in accordance with 1999 National Electrical Code (NEC) Article 545-13 (Component Interconnections); mobile homes, manufactured homes, and mobile home parks NEC Article 550-10(k) (Wiring Methods and Materials and Component Interconnections); and recreational vehicles and recreational vehicle parks NEC Article 551-47(o) (Wiring Methods and Component Interconnections). The equivalent NEC Articles can be found in the Canadian Electrical Code, Part 1, Section 70, for use in factory built relocatable structures and non-relocatable structures.
- - The Type NM-1 splicing device is also used with the Type NM-3 T-Tap device (UL Listed in File E57250). This combination (NM-1 and NM-3) is suitable for surface mounting without an outlet box in exposed cable wiring and in existing buildings/dwellings where the cable is installed in accordance with and as permitted by Article 336-21 (Nonmetallic Sheathed Cable and Devices of Insulating Material-1999 National Electrical Code) and the Canadian Electrical Code, Part 1, Section 12-522.
"

[jack davenport]

These are approved to be field installed and are covered in the NEC section334.40(B)
Made by Tyco

From the 2014 NEC:
(B) Devices of Insulating Material. Se lf-contained switches,self-contained receptacles, and nonmetallic-sheathed cable interconnector devices of insulating material that are listed shall be
permitted to be used without boxes in exposed cable wiring and for repair wiring in existing buildings where the cable is concealed. Openings in such devices shall form a close fit around
the outer covering of the cable, and the device shall fully enclose the part of the cable from which any part of the covering has been removed. Where connections to conductors are by bindingscrew
terminals, there shall be available as many terminals as conductors
http://www.homedepot.com/catalog/productImages/400/eb/eb5c2c92-8cd2-4d0a-a4e9-334ed06d8df3_400.jpg

[Jerry Peck]

These are approved to be field installed and are covered in the NEC section334.40(B)
Made by Tyco

From the 2014 NEC:
(B) Devices of Insulating Material. Se lf-contained switches,self-contained receptacles, and nonmetallic-sheathed cable interconnector devices of insulating material that are listed shall be
permitted to be used without boxes in exposed cable wiring and for repair wiring in existing buildings where the cable is concealed. Openings in such devices shall form a close fit around
the outer covering of the cable, and the device shall fully enclose the part of the cable from which any part of the covering has been removed. Where connections to conductors are by bindingscrew
terminals, there shall be available as many terminals as conductors

Also from the 2014 NEC:
10.3 Examination, Identification, Installation, and Use of Equipment.
(B) Installation and Use. Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.


Those are not for field installation in site built dwellings, those are for manufactured homes and possibly for modular homes.

(bold and underlining are mine)
"
- 3.3. Installation
- - A. Factory
- - - Type NM-1 and NM-2 devices must be factory installed on the free end of a nonmetallic sheathed cable. The Type NM-3 device is must be factory installed anywhere along a nonmetallic sheathed cable. The cable must be prepared (cut, stripped, and formed) to allow the device to be assembled in only one position (to maintain the integrity of the polarity arrangement). The conductors and stripped cable jacket are completely within the enclosure and strain-relief cover. When used to connect expandable or dual-unit mobile homes, the connector ends are to be located where they are protected from moisture and physical damage during transport to the mobile home lot.
- - B. Building Site and Dwelling Site
- - - The separate modules of a building or dwelling assembled on location are to be connected electrically by the simple plug-in connection (including a mechanical latch) of mating pairs thereby providing circuit continuity. The connected pairs may or may not be fastened in place. The connected pairs may or may not be concealed by the installation.
"


Unless I missed something in the listing and labeling instructions (which includes the installation instructions), those "must be factory installed" - I may have missed another part permitting them to be other than factory installed ... would you show it to me? Or maybe I am just reading "must be factory installed" incorrectly? Thanks.

[Jim Port]

I seem to remember reading instructions that allowed them to be installed in the field. I don't use them so I never put any research into them.

[mary theresa craig]

i cant believe you guys are arguing about this. First of all, the wires in the pic are not connected using an approved device. There is no device. I see "3" nm-b cables joined together in a big "glob". As a matter of fact, its quite possible, the 3 wires in the pic are different gauges.

[Jerry Peck]

i cant believe you guys are arguing about this.

I can't believe you haven't been following the posts (otherwise you would not have made your post).

The discussion turned to approved connectors such as what Gunnar posted, you must have missed that connection and splice into and from this thread.

Than, once the discussion turned to other connections, such as the one Gunnar posted, the discussion is to whether those are allowed to be field installed (the installation instructions say the connectors Gunnar posted must be factory installed).

Now, "must be factory installed" refers to those connectors, and if a wiring harness (such as in a vehicle) were made in a factory with those connectors factory installed, the installation instructions do seem to allow those factory installed connectors on a factory-made wiring harness to be installed and used in an existing dwelling unit.

The key, it seems to me, is that those connectors (the ones Gunnar posted) are required to be factory installed on the cable, and then may be permitted (so it seems) to be used in an existing dwelling.

Otherwise, as stated in the installation instructions, those connectors are made for manufactured buildings, and apparently modular buildings based on being site assembled - referring to, as previously stated, the ones Gunnar posted ... not what is shown in the original posters photo

[mary theresa craig]

Well thanks for clearing that up for me Jerry. I thought i would include some useful information for the original subject. However...
Having used the devices in question for many years, let me say, I have never used them for anything but cross-over wires between units. These locations were always accessible. The devices in the pic appear to be improved to create a more secured connection but its hard to believe that these would be approved for use in concealed locations.

[mary theresa craig]

not sure what difference it would make, where they are installed. If the connector was factory installed and became damaged, why wouldn't you be able to install another in order to make the connection?

[Vern Heiler]

Well thanks for clearing that up for me Jerry. I thought i would include some useful information for the original subject. However...
Having used the devices in question for many years, let me say, I have never used them for anything but cross-over wires between units. These locations were always accessible. The devices in the pic appear to be improved to create a more secured connection but its hard to believe that these would be approved for use in concealed locations.
Having used the device, does the orange tape come packaged with the device? Kinda like the little pack of icing that comes with cinnamon buns. If the OP's electrician is so proud of this splice, I think the pic should be forwarded to the AHJ for review.

[Jim Port]

In the instructions for this splicer there is no mention of a requirement to be factory installed.

1116377-2 Non-Metallic Cable Splices and Tap - TE (http://www.te.com/catalog/pn/en/1116377-2).

There is a PDF for the instructions.

Also found this one.

http://www.contact.com.gr/catalog/manuals/NM_Connector_Presentation_Rev3_Web.pdf

[Jerry Peck]

In the instructions for this splicer there is no mention of a requirement to be factory installed.

1116377-2 Non-Metallic Cable Splices and Tap - TE (http://www.te.com/catalog/pn/en/1116377-2).

There is a PDF for the instructions.

Also found this one.

http://www.contact.com.gr/catalog/manuals/NM_Connector_Presentation_Rev3_Web.pdf

Guess you need to know when the NM cable was made for that one because it says not to use it on NM cable made before 1990.

[Jerry Peck]

In the instructions for this splicer there is no mention of a requirement to be factory installed.

1116377-2 Non-Metallic Cable Splices and Tap - TE (http://www.te.com/catalog/pn/en/1116377-2).

There is a PDF for the instructions.

Also found this one.

http://www.contact.com.gr/catalog/manuals/NM_Connector_Presentation_Rev3_Web.pdf

Revising my previous response (I was at the eye doctor waiting for my eyes to dilate when I responded previously, I should have waited until I could see better before replying).


In the instructions for this splicer there is no mention of a requirement to be factory installed.

1116377-2 Non-Metallic Cable Splices and Tap - TE (http://www.te.com/catalog/pn/en/1116377-2).

Actually, that one DOES address being factory installed here (same documents as the first link from Gunnar) - read 3.3 Installation: http://www.te.com/commerce/DocumentDelivery/DDEController?Action=showdoc&DocId=Specification+Or+Standard%7F114-10045%7FC%7Fpdf%7FEnglish%7FENG_SS_114-10045_C.pdf%7F1116377-2

The second reference you provided has several inconsistencies within the document (someone did not edit that document or missed things, and some may be misinterpretations - or I may be reading it incorrectly ... although I am reading the words as the words are written):

Also found this one.

http://www.contact.com.gr/catalog/manuals/NM_Connector_Presentation_Rev3_Web.pdf

Starts off saying "A Unique Product For Residential Wiring" then later says "Residential and Light Commercial".

This (bold and underlining are mine) "Re-wiring in existing buildings where cable is concealed and finished." should be this "Re-wiring in existing buildings where cable is concealed and fished".

Says approved for exposed work in new work:
- Exposed (as applied to wiring methods). On or attached to the surface or behind panels designed to allow access.

Being in an attic in not "Exposed (as applied to wiring methods).

Says "Re-wiring in existing buildings where cable is concealed and finished."
From Jack's post where he posted NEC 334.40(B) " ... and for repair wiring in existing buildings where the cable is concealed. "

I don't read that as the connector being permitted to be concealed, only where the cable is to be, the connector connection would need to be accessible, just like any other connection is required to be.

[Jim Port]

Using the picture from early in this post I would say it is hard not to say those cable are exposed. They are only behind a finish on one side. They are exposed on the top side of the ceiling.

[Jerry Peck]

Using the picture from early in this post I would say it is hard not to say those cable are exposed. They are only behind a finish on one side. They are exposed on the top side of the ceiling.


From the NEC:
- Exposed (as applied to wiring methods). On or attached to the surface or behind panels designed to allow access.

Being in an attic in not "Exposed (as applied to wiring methods).

Now, if you want to consider the attic access as a panel designed to allow access, then the attic would be an accessible access, in which case the NM cable installation would also need to meet 320.23 for the entire attic. Works for me if that is your call.

[jack davenport]

From Jack's post where he posted NEC 334.40(B) " ... and for repair wiring in existing buildings where the cable is concealed. "

I don't read that as the connector being permitted to be concealed, only where the cable is to be, the connector connection would need to be accessible, just like any other connection is required to be.

The 2014 NEC allows them to be concealed if they are listed and used to repair cable in existing buildings.
I read that ( as well as a number of leading code experts) that you can use them to repair damaged concealed NM cable. For example: One is cutting in a new door and cuts through a NM cable you can use these crappy things to repair that cable and bury it in the wall.
They can be used for new wiring but must be kept exposed.
Go figure that one out :confused:
The UL White book also lists them for concealed use

[Jerry Peck]

The 2014 NEC allows them to be concealed if they are listed and used to repair cable in existing buildings.

That is not what the code section you posted says, and being as you posted it I am presuming that is the code section you are referring to.


I read that ( as well as a number of leading code experts) that you can use them to repair damaged concealed NM cable.

That is what the information posted in this thread states, yes - for concealed NM cable, not that the connectors are permitted to be concealed.


For example: One is cutting in a new door and cuts through a NM cable you can use these crappy things to repair that cable and bury it in the wall.

You can conceal the NM cable in the wall, the connector is required to be accessible.


They can be used for new wiring but must be kept exposed.

That is also stated in the information from the connectors as posted previously in this thread.


The UL White book also lists them for concealed use

What number are you referring to in the 2014 UL White Book? I have not found one which states that (unless I missed it in the information in the White Book - PXJV?

[Gunnar Alquist]

Good to know the Tyco splices are not approved for residential construction. I have seen them a couple of times. Are there any that are approved?

[Jim Port]

The Tyco one says it is for residential usage.

[Gunnar Alquist]

The Tyco one says it is for residential usage.

Hi Jim,

Which one? I found a few Tyco devices, but am having trouble figuring out the allowed usage. One (as JP already stated) is for factory installation in manufactured homes. There was another that I looked up, but could not find approved uses.

(Added with edit)
Oh, you provided a link. Thanks!

[Jerry Peck]

Hi Jim,

Which one? I found a few Tyco devices, but am having trouble figuring out the allowed usage. One (as JP already stated) is for factory installation in manufactured homes. There was another that I looked up, but could not find approved uses.

(Added with edit)
Oh, you provided a link. Thanks!

Gunnar,

Read the Application Specifications first, then the installation instructions - the requirement for the connector to be factory installed is, as i recall, in the Application Specifications.

I read the factory installed as the connector is to be factory installed on the NM cable, not that the connector and cable assembly are required to be factory installed into a manufactured home or modular segment. However, if the connector is to b e factory installed on the NM cable, that means the connector would come with a NM pigtail, and that NM pigtail connection would need to be in a junction box - which leads to the question of 'what is gained?'.

[jack davenport]

Cut and pasted from the tyco page Jim Port posted:

4. Can the NM Connector be concealed?
YES, although it can only be concealed in re-work applications per NEC
Article 334-40(B). It can not be concealed in new work.


Page 5 shows them being installed behind the wall finish



When the code making panels referenced "where the cable is concealed" do you Seriously actually believe that you are supposed to bring the NM out of the wall, use the crappy connector , then have the NM go back into the wall?

They are referencing that the connectors can be used concealed just the NM itself.
The listing on them state they can be concealed and have been tested to for equivalency to type NM cable in insulation and temperature rise, and for capability to withstand fault current

[Jerry Peck]

Cut and pasted from the tyco page Jim Port posted:

4. Can the NM Connector be concealed?
YES, although it can only be concealed in re-work applications per NEC
Article 334-40(B). It can not be concealed in new work.


That's from a sales brochure, you aren't suggesting that you install things according to sales brochures, are you?

That also says this, also a copy and paste:
Permitted Uses:
• Where Type NM cable is permitted, and:
– Exposed cable wiring in new work and re-work applications.
– Re-wiring in existing buildings where cable is concealed and finished.

The above does not state that the connector may be concealed, only "Re-wiring in existing buildings where cable is concealed ...

Two different things: connector being concealed and cable being concealed.

That also says "concealed and finished" and the code reference that same sales brochure gives says this: (bold is mine)
2005 National Electrical Code:
334.40 Boxes and Fittings
(B) Devices of Insulating Material. Switch, outlet, and tap devices of insulating material shall be permitted to be used without boxes in exposed cable wiring and for rewiring in existing buildings where the cable is concealed and fished. Openings in such devices shall form a close fit around the outer covering of the cable and the device shall fully enclose the part of the cable from which any part of the coverings has been removed. Where connections to conductors are by binding screw terminals, there shall be available as many terminals as conductors.

The code that sales brochure references states 'concealed and FISHED', not 'finished' - guess you missed that in my previous post(s).


Page 5 shows them being installed behind the wall finish

Page 5 shows a drawing with a wall with the drawing showing the connected facing up through the top plate.

Jack, you said "The UL White book also lists them for concealed use" ... and we are still waiting for that information I asked about so I can confirm what you said - I asked "What number are you referring to in the 2014 UL White Book? I have not found one which states that (unless I missed it in the information in the White Book - PXJV?".

What reference in the 2014 UL White Book are you looking at, or is that no longer correct?


When the code making panels referenced "where the cable is concealed" do you Seriously actually believe that you are supposed to bring the NM out of the wall, use the crappy connector , then have the NM go back into the wall?

I believe that they are referencing cable installation where THE CABLE is concealed, and LIKE ALL JUNCTIONS the connection need to NOT BE CONCEALED, the connections need to be accessible.

Would you put a junction box up in an attic in the very back of the attic?

[Vern Heiler]

Jerry, what is your take on Q&A #93?

2007 Western Section Meeting
Code Panel Questions and Answers

http://iaei-western.org/Files/2007/2...ePanel_Q&A.doc (http://iaei-western.org/Files/2007/2007_CodePanel_Q&A.doc)

[Jerry Peck]

Jerry, what is your take on Q&A #93?

2007 Western Section Meeting
Code Panel Questions and Answers

http://iaei-western.org/Files/2007/2...ePanel_Q&A.doc (http://iaei-western.org/Files/2007/2007_CodePanel_Q&A.doc)

I'm typing on my phone so I'll keep it short and sweet: my take is to read the very top statement on the document ... and that the code does not state that the connection (those connectors) is permitted to be concealed.

The person answering that question only addressed the insulation equivalency, nothing regarding the connection itself was addressed.

All the information presented so far simply indicates that the connection device does not require a junction box - nothing has stated that the junction box (which is what that connector is) is permitted to be concealed. Thus, like any other junction, it needs to be accessible.

[Vern Heiler]

I'm typing on my phone so I'll keep it short and sweet: my take is to read the very top statement on the document ... and that the code does not state that the connection (those connectors) is permitted to be concealed.

The person answering that question only addressed the insulation equivalency, nothing regarding the connection itself was addressed.

All the information presented so far simply indicates that the connection device does not require a junction box - nothing has stated that the junction box (which is what that connector is) is permitted to be concealed. Thus, like any other junction, it needs to be accessible.

This statement at the end of the doc. seemed to bring the discussions to an abrupt end in several electrical forums I have read:
"These interconnecors are insulating devices equivalent to NM cable and can be installed in accordance with Section 334.40(B), so if is being used for rewiring in existing building, it can be concealed and fished."

[Jerry Peck]

This statement at the end of the doc. seemed to bring the discussions to an abrupt end in several electrical forums I have read:
"These interconnecors are insulating devices equivalent to NM cable and can be installed in accordance with Section 334.40(B), so if is being used for rewiring in existing building, it can be concealed and fished."

Did you read the statement at the top of the document?

That's the statement I pointed out to you and addresses the statement you are hanging your hat on.

[Vern Heiler]

Did you read the statement at the top of the document?

That's the statement I pointed out to you and addresses the statement you are hanging your hat on.
Yes I did. Who, other than each individual AHJ, should we use as a standard if we can't use IAEI?Be aware, I do not like the device and would not want it in my house, but that call is not for a HI to make.

[Vern Heiler]

If we take the two code sections referenced:

300.15 Where boxes or fittings are required, (H) Insulated Devices As permitted in 334.40(B), a box or conduit body shall not be required for insulated devices supplied by nonmetallic-sheathed cable.

334.40 (B) Devices of Insulating Material Switch, outlet, and tap devices of insulating material shall be permitted to be used without boxes in exposed cable wiring and for rewiring in existing buildings where the cable is concealed and fished. Openings in such devices shall form a close fit around the outer covering of the cable, and the device shall fully enclose the part of the cable from which any part of the covering has been removed.

And splice together the pertinent information, we get:

Where boxes or fittings are required, a box or conduit body shall not be required for insulated devices. Tap devices of insulating material shall be permitted to be used without boxes for rewiring in existing buildings where the cable is concealed and fished.

[Rick Cantrell]

I
300.15 Where boxes or fittings are required, (H) Insulated Devices As permitted in 334.40(B), a box or conduit body shall not be required for insulated devices supplied by nonmetallic-sheathed cable.

334.40 (B) ... shall be permitted to be used without boxes in exposed cable wiring and for rewiring in existing buildings where the cable is concealed and fished. ...

I agree with Jerry
The way I read it is:
The connector only permits a splice/tap without the use of a junction box.
It allows for the cable to be concealed, but it does not state the connector is allowed to be concealed.

[Vern Heiler]

I agree with Jerry
The way I read it is:
The connector only permits a splice/tap without the use of a junction box.
It allows for the cable to be concealed, but it does not state the connector is allowed to be concealed.
If a box is required to splice a cable in the middle of a wall (standard wiring), then a box or conduit body shall not be required for insulated devices supplied by nonmetallic-sheathed cable The splice is in the same location but the box disappears from requirement.

Let me ask you the same question. Who or what organization do we use to make the call? The IAEI made up primarily of electrical inspectors or the opinions of a bunch of HI's? The question was asked at a IAEI convention and answered by one of the many moderators. Do you believe the others on that board are such a passive bunch that they would let the wrong or questionable interpretation be published and not challenged?

[Jerry Peck]

From the 2014 NEC: (bold and underlining are mine)
- 300.15 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, or Fittings — Where Required.
... (not applicable to the discussion)
- - (E) Integral Enclosure. A wiring device with integral enclosure identified for the use, having brackets that securely fasten the device to walls or ceilings of conventional on-site frame construction, for use with nonmetallic-sheathed cable, shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body.
- - - Informational Note: See 334.30(C); 545.10; 550.15(I); 551.47(E), Exception No. 1; and 552.48(E), Exception No. 1.
- - (F) Fitting. A fitting identified for the use shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body where conductors are not spliced or terminated within the fitting. The fitting shall be accessible after installation.
... (not applicable to the discussion)

A "fitting", which DOES NOT have any spliced or terminated conductors within the fitting SHALL BE ACCESSIBLE AFTER INSTALLATION

And some think that an "Integral Enclosure" which DOES HAVE splices or taps within the enclosure does not need to be accessible after installation?

Really?

334.40 addresses the "insulation" of the "Devices of Insulating Material", it does not address the "location" of the device, and it does not state that the device may be concealed.

Also, those who are promoting 334.40, go back and read (C) - it directs you to 300.15(E) which I posted above.

To answer Vern's question, if the entire crowd is saying that there is no fire, yet you are looking at the flames, are you going to believe the crowd or are you going to think for yourself and act upon that thinking?

The actual code words DO NOT say that is permitted to be concealed.

And I am still waiting for Jack to provide the UL White Book information which he said says it can be concealed (I may be waiting a long time as it may not exist ... or maybe I just haven't found it yet?).

[Vern Heiler]

From the 2014 NEC: (bold and underlining are mine)
- 300.15 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, or Fittings — Where Required.
... (not applicable to the discussion)
- - (E) Integral Enclosure. A wiring device with integral enclosure identified for the use, having brackets that securely fasten the device to walls or ceilings of conventional on-site frame construction, for use with nonmetallic-sheathed cable, shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body.
- - - Informational Note: See 334.30(C); 545.10; 550.15(I); 551.47(E), Exception No. 1; and 552.48(E), Exception No. 1.
- - (F) Fitting. A fitting identified for the use shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body where conductors are not spliced or terminated within the fitting. The fitting shall be accessible after installation.
... (not applicable to the discussion)

A "fitting", which DOES NOT have any spliced or terminated conductors within the fitting SHALL BE ACCESSIBLE AFTER INSTALLATION

And some think that an "Integral Enclosure" which DOES HAVE splices or taps within the enclosure does not need to be accessible after installation?

Really?

334.40 addresses the "insulation" of the "Devices of Insulating Material", it does not address the "location" of the device, and it does not state that the device may be concealed.

Also, those who are promoting 334.40, go back and read (C) - it directs you to 300.15(E) which I posted above.

To answer Vern's question, if the entire crowd is saying that there is no fire, yet you are looking at the flames, are you going to believe the crowd or are you going to think for yourself and act upon that thinking?

The actual code words DO NOT say that is permitted to be concealed.

And I am still waiting for Jack to provide the UL White Book information which he said says it can be concealed (I may be waiting a long time as it may not exist ... or maybe I just haven't found it yet?).
Did the people at IAEI make up what I have high lighted in red: 300.15 Where boxes or fittings are required, (H) Insulated Devices As permitted in 334.40(B), a box or conduit body shall not be required for insulated devices supplied by nonmetallic-sheathed cable.
Or it just didn't fit your interpretation?

I've already stated I don't like it but as a HI I can't say it is not a legal splice. As far as concealed in a wall, I don't know how a HI would even know it was there, making that part of this discussion a moot point.

[Jerry Peck]

Did the people at IAEI make up what I have high lighted in red: 300.15 Where boxes or fittings are required, (H) Insulated Devices As permitted in 334.40(B), a box or conduit body shall not be required for insulated devices supplied by nonmetallic-sheathed cable.
Or it just didn't fit your interpretation?

Vern,

The problem seems to be in your tunnel vision scope - while that may allow you to see many things I can't see, such as into walls and such, but ... :p

NO ONE IS SAYING THAT "a box or conduit body" is required. You seem to so hooked on that part that you cannot get past it to the applicable part - that the device/fitting/junction/splice/tap needs to be accessible and not concealed as NOTHING provided so far (code, listing information, etc.) says that they are permitted to be concealed.

They are permitted to be used on NM wiring systems in which the NM wiring is concealed, but the connector itself is not permitted to be concealed.

Let's go back to 300.15(E) which is referenced in 334.40(C):
- From my previous post:
From the 2014 NEC: (bold and underlining are mine)
- 300.15 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, or Fittings — Where Required.
... (not applicable to the discussion)
- - (E) Integral Enclosure. A wiring device with integral enclosure identified for the use, having brackets that securely fasten the device to walls or ceilings of conventional on-site frame construction, for use with nonmetallic-sheathed cable, shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body.
- - - Informational Note: See 334.30(C); 545.10; 550.15(I); 551.47(E), Exception No. 1; and 552.48(E), Exception No. 1.
- - (F) Fitting. A fitting identified for the use shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body where conductors are not spliced or terminated within the fitting. The fitting shall be accessible after installation.
... (not applicable to the discussion)


Does that red wording above indicate that those devices are permitted to be concealed?

No. That wording states that those devices will have brackets that securely fasten the device to walls and ceilings ... that IS NOT "concealed".

[Vern Heiler]

Vern,

The problem seems to be in your tunnel vision scope - while that may allow you to see many things I can't see, such as into walls and such, but ... :p

NO ONE IS SAYING THAT "a box or conduit body" is required. You seem to so hooked on that part that you cannot get past it to the applicable part - that the device/fitting/junction/splice/tap needs to be accessible and not concealed as NOTHING provided so far (code, listing information, etc.) says that they are permitted to be concealed.

They are permitted to be used on NM wiring systems in which the NM wiring is concealed, but the connector itself is not permitted to be concealed.

Let's go back to 300.15(E) which is referenced in 334.40(C):
- From my previous post:
From the 2014 NEC: (bold and underlining are mine)
- 300.15 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, or Fittings — Where Required.
... (not applicable to the discussion)
- - (E) Integral Enclosure. A wiring device with integral enclosure identified for the use, having brackets that securely fasten the device to walls or ceilings of conventional on-site frame construction, for use with nonmetallic-sheathed cable, shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body.
- - - Informational Note: See 334.30(C); 545.10; 550.15(I); 551.47(E), Exception No. 1; and 552.48(E), Exception No. 1.
- - (F) Fitting. A fitting identified for the use shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body where conductors are not spliced or terminated within the fitting. The fitting shall be accessible after installation.
... (not applicable to the discussion)


Does that red wording above indicate that those devices are permitted to be concealed?

No. That wording states that those devices will have brackets that securely fasten the device to walls and ceilings ... that IS NOT "concealed".
(E) describes a different device than (H) or didn't you notice?

[Jerry Peck]

(E) describes a different device than (H) or didn't you notice?

Follow the links in the NEC through and you will not find any permitted concealment, not in 300.15(H) - which references 334.40(B) - and not in 334.40(B), and the device can be described as an integral enclosure as the enclosure is integral to the connection device, so continue on to 334.40(C), which takes you to 300.15(E).

NOT ONE THING in any of those says anything about permitting the connection device to be concealed ... ALL that is permitted is that an additional box or conduit body is not required.

You really need to get past your hangup with "box or conduit body" not being required is somehow in your mind coming out as "permitted to be concealed" ... NOTHING in any of those links or any of the listing information or instructions says anything about it being permitted to be concealed.

Heck, you are even ignoring the fact that the NEC REQUIRES a fitting (through which conductors pass but there is no splice, tap, or other connection) to be accessible after installation ... and there is nothing in that fitting which could come loose, create a bad connection or anything - just unbroken conductors passing through ... yet it is still required to be accessible after installation.

I'm beginning to feel like I am conversing with TM (Diamond Tony), HGW, JA, or now KW ... sheesh.

[jack davenport]

I have contacted the TYCO about this and they even say that the device is approved,listed for concealment in the walls as stated.
UL even states that in the listing for the connector that they are listed and approved for concealment.
The code says to install as per the listing and labeling...................

[Jerry Peck]

UL even states that in the listing for the connector that they are listed and approved for concealment.

Good - do you have a link to that information where UL states that?

The code does not state that, neither does Tyco's information, it just states that it can be used where NM cable is concealed, do you have a link to Tyco's information which states that it can be concealed?

Oh, I should also add, I am waiting to hear from ** NFPA ** as to whether these are permitted to be concealed - I will post the answer here. I hope to hear back within the next day or two (although sometimes inquires to them take longer as they sometimes have to do some research on the question).

** NFPA ** I originally said "UL" when I meant ** NFPA **
Sorry about the wrong source - One of the times I've asked them questions my question was sent around to several people, each of whom was on vacation, after a week I got back in touch with them and it was answered within a few days ... the people lost my inquiry. This is Friday, hopefully I will have an answer by Tuesday or Wednesday.

[jack davenport]

Jack, you said "The UL White book also lists them for concealed use" ... and we are still waiting for that information I asked about so I can confirm what you said - I asked "What number are you referring to in the 2014 UL White Book? I have not found one which states that (unless I missed it in the information in the White Book - PXJV?".

What reference in the 2014 UL White Book are you looking at, or is that no longer correct?





They are QAAV not PXJV --- (PXJV is NM cable)

[Jerry Peck]

They are QAAV not PXJV --- (PXJV is NM cable)

Only partially correct, Jack, PXJV are NM cable CONNECTORS --- NOT NM cable itself --- NM cable itself is PWVX.

QAAV are NM cable interconnectors.

Nothing in QAAV or even in the references AALZ, indicates any testing, listing, or labeling that those are listed, labeled, identified to be installed concealed.

[Vern Heiler]

Good - do you have a link to that information where UL states that?

The code does not state that, neither does Tyco's information, it just states that it can be used where NM cable is concealed, do you have a link to Tyco's information which states that it can be concealed?

Oh, I should also add, I am waiting to hear from ** NFPA ** as to whether these are permitted to be concealed - I will post the answer here. I hope to hear back within the next day or two (although sometimes inquires to them take longer as they sometimes have to do some research on the question).

** NFPA ** I originally said "UL" when I meant ** NFPA **
Sorry about the wrong source - One of the times I've asked them questions my question was sent around to several people, each of whom was on vacation, after a week I got back in touch with them and it was answered within a few days ... the people lost my inquiry. This is Friday, hopefully I will have an answer by Tuesday or Wednesday.
Jerry, thanks for going the extra mile on this one. I know it looks like I have been defending the concealed use of the device but that is not the case, (Devils advocate maybe). The reason for being so hard headed is that if a HI ever calls it out as needing to be corrected, chances are good that an electrician will say it is code compliant. If that happens someone is going to want the HI to pay for the electrician crawling in the attic. Right now the electrician has the IAEI report which may be wrong but it has stopped similar discussions in there tracks on several electrical forums, including Mike Holts. We need this nailed down and I thank you again for your effort.

[Jerry Peck]

We need this nailed down and I thank you again for your effort.

Vern,

I've been wrong before, will be wrong again, and will hopefully find out in a few days if this is one of the times I'm wrong.

Like you, I would like the most official answer I can get, so I always try to go to the horse's mouth (so to speak) for answers.

[Jerry Peck]

I also sent off an inquiry to UL today about the QAAV Nonmetallic-Sheathed cable interconnector about whether they are permitted to be installed concealed (the question here) and a couple of other questions based on the 2014 QAAV listing information (what is says and what it does not say).

I'll post that when I receive it too - hopefully, the responses from NFPA and UL will be consistent with each other. :)

And, even more hopefully, they will be consistent with what I am saying. :cool:

[Vern Heiler]

I also sent off an inquiry to UL today about the QAAV Nonmetallic-Sheathed cable interconnector about whether they are permitted to be installed concealed (the question here) and a couple of other questions based on the 2014 QAAV listing information (what is says and what it does not say).

I'll post that when I receive it too - hopefully, the responses from NFPA and UL will be consistent with each other. :)

And, even more hopefully, they will be consistent with what I am saying. :cool:
And, even more hopefully, I will never see one installed. :)

[Jim Port]

UL White Book QAAV seems to say that they can be used in concealed locations. "These interconnectors are intended for use in exposed or concealed locations in accordance with ..."

[Jerry Peck]

UL White Book QAAV seems to say that they can be used in concealed locations. "These interconnectors are intended for use in exposed or concealed locations in accordance with ..."

The part you left off at ... is the part which needs to be answered.

... in accordance with the following Articles of ANSI/NFPA 70, "National Electrical Code":
Article 545 Manufactured Buildings
Article 550 Mobile Homes, Manufactured Homes, Mobile Home Parks
Article 551 Recreational Vehicles and Recreational Vehicle Parks
Article 334 Nonmetallic-Sheathed Cable: Types NM, NMC, and NMS (for tap devices)

Articles 545, 550, and 551 are not applicable to our discussion of site-built dwellings, which leaves us with 334.

As worded, that implies that Article 334 is only for "(for tap devices)", not for interconnection without making a tap. I doubt you think that is intended to limit their use to "taps" ... but, if we go by wording, that is what it says. If those are approved for use, then I doubt that is limiting their use to being used as "(tap devices)" for taps only. I don't like to pick and choose the wording I like from the wording I don't like.

Thus I sent an inquiry to UL to clarify what they say, in addition to my inquiry to NFPA.

They may both say I am wrong, they may both say I am not wrong, one may say I am wrong and the other may say I am not wrong - I am looking for a definitive answer ... wherever the answer falls is what I will go with.

[Jim Port]

Those connectors do not have a means to splice the ends of two cables so their usage would always be a tap. They are just another way to add another run of cable off an existing run without using a junction box. The diagram in the Tyco instructions shows the designed usage vs adding two junction boxes to an existing run to give you the required 6" of free conductor in each box.

[Jerry Peck]

Those connectors do not have a means to splice the ends of two cables so their usage would always be a tap. They are just another way to add another run of cable off an existing run without using a junction box. The diagram in the Tyco instructions shows the designed usage vs adding two junction boxes to an existing run to give you the required 6" of free conductor in each box.

Those connectors do have a means of splicing two cables per their installation instructions. Two identical connectors are designed so that they connect to each other. One connector and one tap are used to make a tap from a cable.

[Jim Port]

I was referring to splicing two cables within one connector, not the mating of two connectors. Even then it could be said you are "tapping" the existing cable. Sorry for the confusion.

On further thought, there really should be no need for one of these to be installed on the end of a cable. The end of a cable should already be in an accessible junction box. and the splice would be made within. Now for a T tap they do make sense from a practical viewpoint.

[Jerry Peck]

I was referring to splicing two cables within one connector, not the mating of two connectors. Even then it could be said you are "tapping" the existing cable. Sorry for the confusion.[quote]

That would not be "tapping", that would be "splicing".

[quote]On further thought, there really should be no need for one of these to be installed on the end of a cable. The end of a cable should already be in an accessible junction box. and the splice would be made within.

On that I am in full agreement with you.


Now for a T tap they do make sense from a practical viewpoint.

Still no reason for a tap to be concealed. Every connection point should be accessible.

[Jim Port]

Does a splice not tap a source to extend the circuit?

[Jerry Peck]

Does a splice not tap a source to extend the circuit?

No, a splice splices to ends together, reestablishing a broken/cut/damaged connection.

A tap takes an existing source and takes it elsewhere too.

Neither "splice" nor "tap" is defined in the NEC, so think of it this way: A plumbing pipe is sticking out and is capped, you remove the cap, install a coupling, and continue that pipe farther; whereas if you have a plumbing pipe and you cut into it, install a tee, you have tapped that pipe and are now also running it somewhere else.

Now you could "splice" two cables to one cable, and one would be a "splice" of a new cable to extend the original cable, while the other new cable would be "tapped" off the original cable and go elsewhere.

Now, if you want to go by code ... :) ... it is not a "tap" unless it meets the tap rules. :p That means everything we are talking about are "splices". :D

[jack davenport]

in the electrical world and the NEC a tap is just that a TAP . As in the tap rules in article 240.

A splice is the joining of numerous conductors regardless if its 2,3,4 or however many.


Now plumbers use the term tap to extend a pipe over to another area as in using a "T" fitting, BUT we aint plumbers so we use the correct terms.:D

[Jerry Peck]

A splice is the joining of numerous conductors regardless if its 2,3,4 or however many.

Thus, as I said, those are splices, not taps. Glad you agree. :)

Now, if you could only get the manufacturer on the same page that those are not taps which are made with those devices when making taps off a NM cable circuit ... :p

[Jim Port]

Tap, a verb, does not need to mean the same as tap, a noun. The wires are tapped, (verb), to provide a source of power. Not everything needs to be defined using the NEC. Common English definitions are still needed. The correct context needs to be applied. I don't think anyone would say overcurrent protection is needed on a tapped hole simply because someone said to tap a bus bar.

[Jim Port]

I would also ask if the original cable is not cut but the connector is applied to allow the connection of a second cable in a T configuration is that a tap or a splice? There is no direct connection except through the connectors so there is no splice, therefore it is a tap.

[Jim Port]

Now plumbers use the term tap to extend a pipe over to another area as in using a "T" fitting, BUT we aint plumbers so we use the correct terms.:D

Don't we need to tap into a source of power like at a breaker? I would not consider that a splice and it does not have ocp at the far end so it can't be a tap. 😀

[Jerry Peck]

In the instructions for this splicer there is no mention of a requirement to be factory installed.

1116377-2 Non-Metallic Cable Splices and Tap - TE (http://www.te.com/catalog/pn/en/1116377-2).

There is a PDF for the instructions.

Also found this one.

http://www.contact.com.gr/catalog/manuals/NM_Connector_Presentation_Rev3_Web.pdf

Jim,

Did you review the information you posted?

- 1116377-2 Non-Metallic Cable Splices and Tap - TE (http://www.te.com/catalog/pn/en/1116377-2)
- - Look at Figure 1 on page 1 of 6
- - Then look at Figure 2 on page 3 of 6
- - And Figure 4 on page 5
- - etc.
(Oh, and also 3.3 on page 2 of 6, I referenced that in previous posts.)

[Jerry Peck]

We are both right ... we are also both wrong ... :)

I will post the reply I received from NFPA when I get back to my office.

[Dwight Doane]

Clearly this has turned into Manual warfare

and maybe a good one - I have not seen these used and I must admit I am now very confused (Shame on me for reading the entire thread) :). I also want to thank all of you for actually putting real effort into this discussion along with sending direct questions for clarification to UL , NFPA and I think a couple of others were listed (something tells me it is going to get even more messy).

Please make sure you post the responses you get from the submissions you have made - The world is changing and products like these may become more common place - (understanding them would be a good thing)


just a couple of questions

- is it safe to conceal ?:o
- to conceal or not to conceal ? :o

- - - Updated - - -

Clearly this has turned into Manual warfare

and maybe a good one - I have not seen these used and I must admit I am now very confused (Shame on me for reading the entire thread) :). I also want to thank all of you for actually putting real effort into this discussion along with sending direct questions for clarification to UL , NFPA and I think a couple of others were listed (something tells me it is going to get even more messy).

Please make sure you post the responses you get from the submissions you have made - The world is changing and products like these may become more common place - (understanding them would be a good thing)


just a couple of questions

- is it safe to conceal ?:o
- to conceal or not to conceal ? :o

[Jerry Peck]

[QUOTE=Dwight Doane;249075
just a couple of questions

- is it safe to conceal ?:o
- to conceal or not to conceal ? :o[/QUOTE]

Depends. :)

Applies to both questions. :)

Every time I get my computer on and ready to post the information I have to run out again ... As I am doing now. :(

[Jerry Peck]

This is what I sent them:

Create Date: 10/10/2014
Contact: JERRY PECK

Subject: TE (Tyco) 1116377-2 Non-Metallic Cable Splices and Tap

Question for NFPA: I cannot find anything in the NEC (in 334.40(B), (C), or 300.15(E), etc., which states that these connectors are permitted to be concealed.

In 300.15(F), even Fittings which do not contain any connections, splices, taps, etc. (the conductors pass through the fitting unbroken) the Fitting is required to be accessible after installation.

The manufacturer's information available on their website does not specifically state that they are permitted to be concealed.

In looking for these in the UL White Book, the closest items I can find do not state that these connectors are permitted to be concealed.

I have a contractor who wants to conceal these connectors in the walls. This dwelling unit is not a manufactured building, it is stick-built site-built.

Thank you,

Jerry Peck
Electrical Inspector

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is their reply:

Dear JERRY PECK,

Thank you for your email concerning the National Electrical Code® (NEC®).

The following reply is based upon the provisions of the NEC 2014.

As you have referenced 334.40(B) is the correct location for the answer. They may be used where exposed. They can only be used in a concealed location if used to repair not for initial installation.


If you have a follow-up question directly related to this inquiry, please reply to this email. If you have another question on either a separate topic or different document please return to the document information pages and submit your new question by clicking on the “Technical Questions” tab.

Christopher D. Coache
Senior Electrical Engineer
National Fire Protection Association

Need information on NFPA codes and standards? Visit our homepage at www.nfpa.org (https://na3.salesforce.com/p/email/template/EmailTemplateEditorUi/www.nfpa.org).

For NEC information visit www.nfpa.org (http://www.nfpa.org/70)/70.

Important Notice: Any opinion expressed in this correspondence is the personal opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the official position of the NFPA or its Technical Committees. In addition, this correspondence is neither intended, nor should it be relied upon, to provide professional consultation or services.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This part "They can only be used in a concealed location if used to repair not for initial installation." tells me that those connection devices may be concealed when used for a "repair", as in when there is a broken NM cable, a nail or screw through a NM cable, etc., and the connection device "repairs" the NM cable; however, it also is telling me that those connection devices may not be concealed where used for an "initial" installation, such as pulling in an NM cable to extend a circuit or to extend a NM cable as pulling in a new NM cable would be an "initial" installation.

Additionally, "They may be used where exposed." - but that has not been disputed or debated here, just whether they may be concealed or not, and that answer is "yes ... but" (meaning with restrictions and not concealed Cart Blanche).

That said, on of the manufacturer's information documents stated that those devices are NOT to be used on NM cable manufactured before 1990 - which means they are only approved for use in newer houses or older houses which have been re-wired since after 1990.

All the above tells me those have a very limited and restricted use when used outside their main market, i.e., when used in other than manufactured homes/mobile homes/mobile home parks, recreational vehicles/recreational vehicle parks, modular units assembled on site (not constructed on site, "assembled" on site).

Now I am waiting for the reply from UL for confirmation of confusion. :D

[Vern Heiler]

If we look at this from the "What does this mean to a HI" standpoint, here is a scenario: I see a splice peeking from the darkness, in an attic at the eave of a low slope roof. The splice is just barely visible but definitely not accessible. From the exterior I see there is a flood light at the location of the splice. What probably happened was the soffit rotted and during the repair it was decided that this would be a good time to install a flood light to light the deck and there was already a NM cable gong to the corner flood light. Very easy install, no wire length problem, no box. If anyone were to question it the answer would be that the cable was damaged during the soffit repair. So, do we report it as needing to be repaired by licensed electrician, who uses your answer form NFPA and the document from the IAEI to say it is ok? We could then be expected to pay for his time by either the seller or the buyer.

I still hope I never see one but this forum is like a crystal ball. It seems that as soon as something like this is discussed, I see it within a few weeks.:(

[Jerry Peck]

... no box.

The light still needs a box.

[Rick Cantrell]

Jerry
Thanks for the effort.

[Vern Heiler]

The light still needs a box.
True but that box is 12 -18" away from the splice/tap.

[Jerry Peck]

True but that box is 12 -18" away from the splice/tap.

Agreed.

[Steve Lottatore]

OK, while Jerry is waiting to post official 'UL' wording….

I just wanted to bring this back around full circle, and say that from Eric's post # 1 & photo, I agree with Gunnar (post #2) and Mary (post #6) that this is wrong/not acceptable. Those suspect 'blue connectors' look nothing like the 'supposedly approved' Tyco tap fitting illustrated in Jack's post # 4.
1. There are no 'integral metal brackets' to take 'most' of the strain off the NM cables and 'snap connections'
2. There are visible 'bare/unprotected conductors' outside of those blue connectors and NM insulation to the splice. That does NOT comply with the portion of the NEC 334.40(B) requirement: "Openings in such devices shall form a close fit around the outer covering of the cable and the device shall fully enclose the part of the cable from which any part of the coverings has been removed"

From Eric's photo, that would be an easy call to justify. I would be just as concerned as Vern and others with 'making the right call' for those issues discovered during an inspection, and trying to minimize any confusion for my Client or any other concerned parties of the transaction, for making those calls.

YMMV

Steve L.

[Mike Pagozalski]

I love this place.......I literally saw those for the first time 2 days ago at HD when I was picking up some wire nuts and picked it up, looked at, read the box and had a very, very dumbed down version of this thread in my head and wondered what the real answer was