# Running exposed romex along ceiling in garage



## Shrute (Feb 25, 2010)

I would like to add a generator inlet to my home. My electrical panel is in an outside wall near the back of my garage, I would like to add an inlet to the outside of the same wall, but about 20 foot away (closer to the front of the house). I will connect the inlet to a backfed breaker and use a Square D interlock kit to keep everything to code.

Instead of ripping sheetrock down, I was wondering if it would be ok to have the romex (8-3) come out of the top of the flush mounted panel inside the wall and travel up the wall to the top and then exist and run exposed along the ceiling for about 20 foot and then enter the wall again and go down to an inlet mounted on the outside of the wall?

Is that legal to have exposed romex along the ceiling? The ceiling is over 7' high.


----------



## dSilanskas (Mar 23, 2008)

You are allowed to surface mount romex as long as it is protected from damage. But as for back feeding the panel that isn't legal and very dangerous for someone who might be working out on the utility pole. You should get a manual transfer switch instead.


----------



## secutanudu (Mar 15, 2009)

He did say he was installing an interlok kit. That would prevent the main and the generator from being on at the same time, protecting utility workers, yes?


----------



## DangerMouse (Jul 17, 2008)

dSilanskas said:


> But as for back feeding the panel that isn't legal and very dangerous for someone who might be working out on the utility pole. You should get a manual transfer switch instead.


It's my understanding there's a $15,000 FINE if you get CAUGHT too!!!

My generator is going to be set up on a completely off-grid circuit. Separate outlets, normally dead, only on when power goes down and I need to run the generator.

DM


----------



## Scuba_Dave (Jan 16, 2009)

Interlock kit meets requirements for Gen connection to house panel
The Main breaker must be OFF to turn the Gen backfeed breaker on

Romex can be run along the ceiling, as stated it is OK exposed in areas where it is not subject to damage
This can be an opinion then by your local inspector
What they do not want is wire run across open joists such that the wire could be used like a clothesline

I don't see any issue with your plan


----------



## Shrute (Feb 25, 2010)

dSilanskas said:


> You are allowed to surface mount romex as long as it is protected from damage. But as for back feeding the panel that isn't legal and very dangerous for someone who might be working out on the utility pole. You should get a manual transfer switch instead.





Shrute said:


> I will connect the inlet to a backfed breaker *and use a Square D interlock kit to keep everything to code.*


 The SquareD Interlock kit turns my panel into a manual transfer switch. It's UL listed and the installation will be 100% code compliant. There will be a permit pulled and inspection.


----------



## Shrute (Feb 25, 2010)

Scuba_Dave said:


> I don't see any issue with your plan


Great, thanks!

I figure the worse thing that happens if the inspector doesn't like the romex up there is I put a piece of crown molding over it. I'll make my garage look classy :wink: :laughing:


----------



## HooKooDooKu (Jan 7, 2008)

Scuba_Dave said:


> What they do not want is wire run across open joists such that the wire could be used like a clothesline


But that applies to smaller cables like 14/2 to 10/3. When you get into cables of this size (8/3, 6/2, and larger), the NEC does allow NM cable to be secured to the bottom of floor joists in this "clothesline" fashion.


----------



## spark plug (May 5, 2009)

dSilanskas said:


> You are allowed to surface mount romex as long as it is protected from damage. But as for back feeding the panel that isn't legal and very dangerous for someone who might be working out on the utility pole. You should get a manual transfer switch instead.


You're right. If people would realize how (potentially) dangerous this is. ("Backfeeding") But the OP mentioned connecting all with "An Interlocking system. I personally never worked with this "interlock" system. so can't judge whether it is safe. My work involved Transfer switches. Whether Automatic (ATS) or manual. Though an ATS would cost around $2,000.00! Minus installation! Your advice about a Manual transfer Switch is right on target!:thumbsup:! Thanx!


----------



## Shrute (Feb 25, 2010)

spark plug said:


> You're right. If people would realize how (potentially) dangerous this is. ("Backfeeding") But the OP mentioned connecting all with "An Interlocking system. I personally never worked with this "interlock" system. so can't judge whether it is safe. My work involved Transfer switches. Whether Automatic (ATS) or manual. Though an ATS would cost around $2,000.00! Minus installation! Your advice about a Manual transfer Switch is right on target!:thumbsup:! Thanx!


An interlock kit basically turns the panel into a manual transfer switch. It makes it so that the main breaker and backfed breaker can NOT be on at the same time.

SquareD makes their own interlock kits for their panels for about $75. You can find universal interlock kits for any panel for about $150. But I am not sure about the UL listing on the universal kits.

Universale kit.

I find the interlock kit to be an EXCELLENT product because it allows me to use any circuit in my home. I don't have to run separate "Emergency circuits" out to all areas of my home nor am I limited to 6 or 8 circuits like the typical generator transfer panel has. 

There is a little due diligence necessary to figure out how large of a load you can put on your particular generator, since having the entire panel connected could lead to a very large load, but that is an easy to sort out before the storm comes :thumbsup:


----------



## DangerMouse (Jul 17, 2008)

Shrute said:


> The SquareD Interlock kit turns my panel into a manual transfer switch. It's UL listed and the installation will be 100% code compliant. There will be a permit pulled and inspection.


Good for you! 

DM


----------



## andrew79 (Mar 25, 2010)

The only problem i can see with an interlock kit is the poor fellow working on the pole getting whacked off the neutral. Prime reason i won't ever use one.


----------



## Shrute (Feb 25, 2010)

andrew79 said:


> The only problem i can see with an interlock kit is the poor fellow working on the pole getting whacked off the neutral. Prime reason i won't ever use one.


Most generator panels do not switch the neutral. In anything from the cheaper 6 circuit gen panels up to the expensive 200 amp ATS, I very rarely see a switched neutral. What mainstream residential system do you use that does switch the neutral?

I've never heard anything except speculation about a linemen getting shocked from a neutral from a generator, no real accounts of it happening. And when I hear the speculation, I've never heard of a good theory how a lineman would get shocked from a neutral.

I know it's common for people to say "The neutral could shock you and it hurts more!", but in reality, the only time I've ever seen a neutral shock someone is when they A) open it and B) get themselves between that open neutral and ground. Neither of those conditions come true when you have a generator running at your house and a lineman on the pole. The generator is a SDS and the lineman can't get himself inside that system from the pole.

This is all taking into consideration the fact that in these circumstances the neutral is bonded to ground at the house and has zero potential to ground along the line.


----------



## Scuba_Dave (Jan 16, 2009)

Only the hot is switched on my GenPac unit


----------



## Shrute (Feb 25, 2010)

Scuba_Dave said:


> Only the hot is switched on my GenPac unit


I've installed commercial generator switchgear that switches the neutral, but I've never seen it in residential. I'm sure it's out there, but it's not common and not a requirement. It's an easy thing to do, if there was any safety concern, they would require it I'm sure.


----------



## andrew79 (Mar 25, 2010)

it actually is a requirement in canada. Any gen panel you buy here has a switched neutral.
check this out
http://www.homedepot.ca/webapp/wcs/...ToIt&utm_medium=Affiliate&utm_campaign=941193
note the three pole mains.

I've seen lots of people get a whack off the neutral even if it not open. All you have to do is provide a better path to ground. The reasoning behind it is that current takes the path of least resistance. The wire going to the tranformer is larger than the wire comming from your gen so some of the current will backfeed the neutral of the transformer.


----------



## Jupe Blue (Nov 9, 2008)

Shrute said:


> Is that legal to have exposed romex along the ceiling? The ceiling is over 7' high.



Exposed Romex would not pass in my jurisdiction. Why not sleeve it in 3/4 EMT or PVC. That would physically protect it and make a better looking installation.


----------



## Shrute (Feb 25, 2010)

Jupe Blue said:


> Exposed Romex would not pass in my jurisdiction. *Why not sleeve it in 3/4 EMT or PVC*. That would physically protect it and make a better looking installation.



Looks mean absolutely nothing in this situation, this is a garage ceiling.


----------



## Jupe Blue (Nov 9, 2008)

Shrute said:


> Looks mean absolutely nothing in this situation, this is a garage ceiling.


I don't agree with that. A run of conduit across the ceiling would look way better than the squiggly, possibly droopy Romex. How many staples/straps would you have use to get a nice tight run? Versus a few one-hole straps holding up the conduit. 

Regardless, in my jurisdiction the exposed Romex would be subject to physical damage, thus being a code violation. You could use MC across the ceiling and be compliant with the code.


----------



## Shrute (Feb 25, 2010)

Jupe Blue said:


> I don't agree with that.


 That's fine, but it is my opinion that looks mean absolutely nothing on my garage ceiling. You only have reign over your own garage, not mine :thumbsup:



> How many staples/straps would you have use to get a nice tight run?


Every other stud (32") should be MORE than enough to keep 8-3 straight, it's already pretty stiff to begin with.

But tightness doesn't matter much, not in this case at least :thumbup:

As I said earlier, if there is any issue whatsoever, I'll throw a piece of crown molding over it.



> in my jurisdiction the exposed Romex would be subject to physical damage


 What about where the romex comes out of the wall and turns into the pipe that you propose? Wouldn't that bit be subject to physical damage too? Or are you suggesting I put a 90 with a kick on it on each end and bring the pipe into the wall? Why not just pipe it the whole way then? Or I could just strap the Romex up to the ceiling and have a legal, safe installation :yes:


----------



## spark plug (May 5, 2009)

Shrute said:


> Looks mean absolutely nothing in this situation, this is a garage ceiling.


As some other posters said (some downstream) in addition to the aesthetics, it's a question (perhaps the key question) of whether it is a legal installation in your jurisdiction and would pass inspection!:thumbsup:!


----------



## Shrute (Feb 25, 2010)

spark plug said:


> As some other posters said (some downstream) in addition to the aesthetics, it's a question (perhaps the key question) of whether it is a legal installation in your jurisdiction and would pass inspection!:thumbsup:!


My state follows the NEC with only a few amendments, none of which deal with heightened romex protection.


----------



## spark plug (May 5, 2009)

Shrute said:


> My state follows the NEC with only a few amendments, none of which deal with heightened romex protection.


the determining factor of whether Romex may or may not be run exposed, or the use of banned altogether is not determined by height. In NYC, for example, the use of Romex in wiring is prohibited, except in temporary wiring on construction sites. In most jurisdictions, however, it is permitted in residential structures, but not in public (access) buildings.:no:!


----------



## Shrute (Feb 25, 2010)

spark plug said:


> the determining factor of whether Romex may or may not be run exposed, or the use of banned altogether is not determined by height.


When I said "heightened romex protection" I also meant "strengthened romex protection". I wasn't talking about the height of the romex.


----------



## spark plug (May 5, 2009)

Shrute said:


> When I said "heightened romex protection" I also meant "strengthened romex protection". I wasn't talking about the height of the romex.


However, in post #1 you DO speak of the (relative) geographic position of the cable. ....It would run at the (7-foot high) ceiling. So I understood that you're taking the height of the cable (being out of the way) as an additional form of protection. Therefore, it should pass inspection.:thumbsup:!


----------

