Can you tell me what the code is around electrical boxes in homes with a basement?

Question

I am trying to sell my house and the following item was called out as a Safety Hazard that I must correct to sell.

I live in Indiana, can someone explain the code, what is wrong here and what a mediation look like?

Answer 1

This is an easy one, code requires the wiring to be protected below 8’ it can be in conduit (not a cost effective option here).

It can be protected by 1/2” plywood or Sheetrock ! Here is the East way to go.

I would attach some 2x4’s on either side of the box to the floor Joist , then a simple piece of Sheetrock or plywood ~16” wide would meet code. The wiring run through the holes in the joist should be fine. But below 8’ on the walls they need to be protected.

An easy hint a 8’ 2x 4 cut in 4 pieces one laid flat on each sid of the box with 2 tap con screws to hold it in place then nail or screw the other 2 pieces on top of the 2 that are screwed to the wall next the piece of Sheetrock or ply wood to cover it all. A couple dollars for the 2x 4 tap con screws are a bit more expensive some come with the drill bit. 4 screws to hold the 2x4 to the 2x4’s and then 4 more screws to hold the Sheetrock to the 2x4’s,

It could be done with construction adhesive instead of screws but I don’t recommend this but it could be done , I lived in Dayton and did enclose my panel (using construction adhesive in my youth) I had gone through apprenticeship prior to that time and it passed. Today I try to make it serviceable where construction adhesive really requires it to be torn out to pull new circuits.

Added code references: 334.10 must be permitted by to be used except where prohibited by 334.12

334.15 .B exposed work. Protected from damage Cable shall be be protected where necessary

334.15.C installed on the wall of a basement shall be allowed to be installed in conduit or tubing or protected in accordance with 300.4

So yes nm cables on a basement wall require protection. In this case the easiest way is to “finish that section” and box it in.

Answer 2

can't tell from resolution of pic but if there is THHN wire there then that would need to be conduited leaving the box and the finding would be correct. But if it is all NM-B wiring leaving the load center then NM-B is "protected wiring".

my load center looks nearly the same as yours, after having upgraded to 200 amp service, permit pulled, and inspected. My basement is partially finished, it is not a "living space".

If your location is fully finished and it's made out like someone is living/sleeping in that room then that could be rationale for unprotected wiring. But it is a gray area.. technically speaking if I staple NM-B on my bedroom 12' ceiling (which is not easily contacted by persons) above my bed every 6" or whatever that is not "against code". It is not good practice and it comes down to argument.

If it was a bldg inspector making the finding, then that's the reason... finding based on emotion not intelligence.

I live in Indiana, can someone explain the code, what is wrong here and what a mediation look like?

step one, whoever wrote the finding needs to cite what specific code is violated. Unprotected wiring observed over the main panel is too vague. Unless your location has some requirement that specifically states wiring leaving the main panel in a basement cannot be exposed then the finding is wrong.

The easiest remediation if it comes down to argument, if it is all NM-B wiring, may be to construct a closet around the load center box keeping the ugliness of wiring out the top of load center out of view and that will appease an emotionally driven inspector... but a closet also then prevents access to the box so then argument can go the other way because there is specific NEC code that calls out restriction of access to stuff like this.

supplement edit:

• mike holt yuotube video sums this up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhpoUdnh86E only need to watch first 5 minutes
• 90.4 the AHJ (authority having jurisdiction) is responsible for interpretting the NEC but the decision must be based on a specific NEC requirement
• @ 1:30 to 4:00 min, someone has to make the call & AHJ being a jerk
• @ 4:44 the NEC does not need to say explicitly you can do something; if it doesn't specifically prohibit something and if other aspects of the NEC are followed for being a safe installation then it is compliant.
• the subject of this should be code around **Electrical Panel** in homes with a basement
• other aspects of the code that is relevant here, and i'm not going to explain each, is
  • 110.26 working space, and exception of 6.5ft headroom for service less than 200 amp (coincidence all home service is 200 amp or less?)
  • 110.27 guarding of live parts {and your NM-B is not a live part}
  • 300.4 protection against physical damage where likely
  • Article 334 which is entirely NM cable
  • 334.10 uses permitted = (1) 1&2 family dwellings; (2) multifamily except as prohibited in 334.12; (3) other structures and cables shall be concealed so that a 15 minute thermal barrier is provided by a listed assembly. this does not apply to a typical home.
  • 334.10(A)(1) uses permitted as follows- for both exposed & concealed work in normally dry locations except as prohibited in
  • 334.12 uses not permitted: theatres, hazardous locations, and open runs in suspended ceilings but only in places that are NOT 1/2/multifamily dwellings.
  • 334.15 exposed work shall be installed... to follow surface, be protected from physical damage
  • 334.15(C) in unfinished basements
  • 334.30 securing & supportings... at least every 4.5 feet.

like i was saying:

• if your location is such that this is a kid's room, or a mental institution where someone will scale the wall to the ceiling, then damage is likely and the wiring should be protected. So in this case there is rationale.
• if this is an unfinished basement that is not going to see living room human traffic, then the height of the visible NM wiring above the panel is reasonably out of reach where accidental contact is not likely and therefore there is little justification to classify it as exposed which implies likely to be damaged.
• and if it comes down to debate it might be easiest to construct (not even a closet around the entire area) but just a square 3 sided box simply to obstruct the NM above the panel from view... although you will see all that NM wire anyway in the exposed ceiling of your unfinished basement just 1 foot away from the panel. And which is perfectly acceptable? so why then is the NM just above the panel not ok but all the exposed NM everywhere else in the ceiling ok? If the the panel is set low to the ground where the NM out of the top of it is at chest level then it maybe can be considered in a location likely to be damaged and could warrant some protection. But your pic seems to be of you pointing upwards and unless your really short so...
• if it was a real estate home inspector claiming this Safety Hazard then tell them to f.o. In this instance if it comes down to an AHJ from your town making the call, then it has to be based on their specific interpretation of the NEC. You can't just say "safety hazard"
• and it doesn't pay to be argumentative, start off with a what's the overall goal here... safe installation... why is it not safe? ... what is a reasonable solution? Don't just leave me with unsafe, what do you want to see then?
• read the NEC yourself: https://www.nfpa.org/NEC/About-the-NEC/Free-online-access-to-the-NEC-and-other-electrical-standards

Answer 3

I would challenge the inspector. Have them state exactly what section of the code is in question. You could also ask what specifically needs to be done. This is probably just the opinion of a home inspector that couldn't find anything else. If the installation meets the electrical code you have a right NOT to be called on it. Squido