# No Romex underground ...



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

... because of the bare ground wire.

OK, I know that it's a violation of code to run Romex underground in conduit, but I don't understand the why. Apparently it's because of the uninsulated ground wire because Romex is made of THHN wire. The only exception is that in Romex, the ground wire is bare, and apparently could get wet. So, my question is, So What?

What's the safety concern with the bare wire getting wet? Our ground rods are driven in the wet ground, and the bare wire from the Service Panel goes to this rod, and it rains, and there's never any harm.

Please explain this to an apparent dummy DIYer.

Thanks.


----------



## kbsparky (Sep 11, 2008)

It has nothing to do with the bare wire getting wet.

THHN is only rated for dry conditions.

Type NM cable is only rated and approved for installation in dry areas. The inside of any conduit that is buried is considered a wet location.


----------



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

kb, I found the following which further confuses me. From WesBell Electronics, at http://electricalwire.biz/Romex/MC_Cable_VS_Romex_Electrical_Wire_Bare_Copper_Ground.html:



> Romex wire is used as an indoor only cable because of the bare copper ground wire. All of our Romex is made with THHN THWN wire (Thermoplastic High heat and Water resistant Nylon coated) which can be used outdoors. However *the thin Romex jacket can not stop water or **moisture from penetrating and coming in contact with the uninsulated ground wire*. As a result Romex can only be used indoors.




So, I'm confused now that you say it has nothing to do with the bare wire getting wet.


----------



## frenchelectrican (Apr 12, 2006)

sirsparksalot said:


> ... because of the bare ground wire.


Yes and No depending on which way it will feed to so with UF cable I know it have bare conductor but it good for anything as long it is *NOT TO* spa or pool that have it own set of codes. { We will discuss that on other topic }



> OK, I know that it's a violation of code to run Romex underground in conduit, but I don't understand the why. Apparently it's because of the uninsulated ground wire because Romex is made of THHN wire. The only exception is that in Romex, the ground wire is bare, and apparently could get wet. So, my question is, So What?


* Et alors ???* I will tell ya the answer the Romex is allready tested at the UL /CSA testing centre and they know what is work and what not and to make it worst the conductor itself is not always be marked as you expected so it is part of cable and the ground wire itself is not THHN/THWN insuating materal at all it is a straght copper conductor.

One of the guys in here which they have direct access to the NEC code book they can quote the numbers in here and you can look it up.





> What's the safety concern with the bare wire getting wet? Our ground rods are driven in the wet ground, and the bare wire from the Service Panel goes to this rod, and it rains, and there's never any harm.
> 
> Please explain this to an apparent dummy DIYer.
> 
> Thanks.


Ground rods are listed to handle wet situation no issue per UL testing.,,

Grounding electrode conductor is bare so that is not a issue as long it have proper size.

Now you have to understand that all the underground conduits are treated as wet location even *INSIDE*the house if you have slab which you bring the conduit under the slab that is wet location as well.,, 

I am sure other members will be more than happy to explain this to you but in their word but once you read thier word it will end up just about the same as I spoke.

Merci.
Marc


----------



## frenchelectrican (Apr 12, 2006)

> Quote:
> Romex wire is used as an indoor only cable because of the bare copper ground wire. All of our Romex is made with THHN THWN wire (Thermoplastic High heat and Water resistant Nylon coated) which can be used outdoors. However the thin Romex jacket can not stop water or moisture from penetrating and coming in contact with the uninsulated ground wire.
> 
> As a result Romex can only be used indoors.
> ...


I wrote underline that is the key answer why it can NOT use outdoor useage.

Merci.
Marc


----------



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

Marc,

I appreciate your time, truely, in answering. I'm just attempting to understand the consequences. Of course end the end, I always go by the code, but I have several properties and it's a continuing interest to me to understand the theory behind the rules.


----------



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

frenchelectrican said:


> I wrote underline that is the key answer why it can NOT use outdoor useage.
> 
> Merci.
> Marc


That simply tells me the rule. It doesn't tell me why it would be a bad thing for the bare copper wire to get wet.


----------



## frenchelectrican (Apr 12, 2006)

sirsparksalot said:


> Marc,
> 
> I appreciate your time, truely, in answering. I'm just attempting to understand the consequences. Of course end the end, I always go by the code, but I have several properties and it's a continuing interest to me to understand the theory behind the rules.


Ahh ok no problem at all .,

Ok I will tell you couple example which I have ran into allready couple time and it pretty much the same with other Electricians in this forum ran into espcally with conduit.

The last time I pull one out it was pretty much black with the insluating materal is comming apart and it was start to make a high impelanice short circuit there { not high enough to trip the breaker } but it keep the meter running in overdrive mode until I pull that cable out due it was breaking down due the conduit have full of water in there and the water itself is not really clear and I know some case some plastic or rubber can come apart with wet rotting so that why it is not listed to use with underground conduit runs at all.

Merci.
Marc


----------



## Speedy Petey (Feb 1, 2004)

sirsparksalot said:


> That simply tells me the rule. It doesn't tell me why it would be a bad thing for the bare copper wire to get wet.


It is NOT a bad thing. 

I hate to be rude, but that site you quoted is crap! They have no clue what they are talking about. 
There is NO problem with a bare copper wire getting wet. We can run a bare copper grounding electrode conductor outside to a buried ground rod. I think that has a slight chance of getting wet, don't you?


----------



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

Speedy Petey said:


> It is NOT a bad thing.
> 
> I hate to be rude, but that site you quoted is crap! They have no clue what they are talking about.
> There is NO problem with a bare copper wire getting wet. We can run a bare copper grounding electrode conductor outside to a buried ground rod. I think that has a slight chance of getting wet, don't you?


Speedy, that is at the crux of my confusion. YES, ABSOLUTELY, I would give the EGC a slightly higher chance of getting wet during rain. :yes: And I'm not finding your comments rude, as those quoted aren't my words. However, that's just one of several sites I've found that explains why Romex can't be used outdoors, and they all claim that it's because of the bare copper grounding wire.

Now that that's settled, what is the theory behind NM not being rated for wet conditions? Obviously, there's a good reason, based on safety, why the NEC prohibits underground running of Romex. If the problem is with the outer sheath deteriorating and causing some sort of problem, why can't we simply peel off the outer sheath, run them as individual THHN/THWN, and run them underground, in conduit?

Please don't tell me that it's because the UL and Code says so. Please help me understand WHY the UL and code says so.


----------



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

sirsparksalot said:


> .... Our ground rods are driven in the wet ground, and the bare wire from the Service Panel goes to this rod, and it rains, and there's never any harm.


Quoted for Speedy :thumbup:


----------



## Jim Port (Sep 21, 2007)

sirsparksalot said:


> Please don't tell me that it's because the UL and Code says so. Please help me understand WHY the UL and code says so.


The manufacturers did not pay UL to list their product for use outdoors. The code requires that products be installed according to the listing. There really is no need to have another product that can be used outdoors when there are options like UF or conductors in conduit. The additional listing would also add cost to the product that no one wants to pay.

The jacket is not UV rated and breaks down. The conductors inside the sheath are not labeled as to actual type regardless of the one quote above. NM is a cable assembly and is not meant to be stripped out of the sheath.


----------



## McSteve (Dec 8, 2009)

The paper wrapping in NM-B is a factor too, as it can wick water along inside the jacket.


----------



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

McSteve said:


> The paper wrapping in NM-B is a factor too, _as it can wick water along inside the jacket._


And again, this is bad because ......?


----------



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

OK, let me restate this question. What would happen if we ran 3 individual THHN/THWN and a Bare Ground wire underground in conduit? What are the consequences of allowing the ground wire to get wet?


----------



## McSteve (Dec 8, 2009)

Think about it; any water that gets into the cable is going to travel along its length until it reaches the end. Then you've got water getting in somewhere that you really don't want it, like a junction box or breaker panel...


----------



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

McSteve said:


> Think about it; any water that gets into the cable is going to travel along its length until it reaches the end. Then you've got water getting in somewhere that you really don't want it, like a junction box or breaker panel...


Believe me, I've thought about it. I'm still not getting it because I don't understand the consequences of stripping NM Cable, running it underground in conduit along with the bare ground wire. YES, I know that the NM Cable is not rated for underground. YES, I understand that Cable isn't designed to be stripped. But NO, I do not understand the consequences of doing so.

To your quote above, if I ran individual wires in conduit underground and those wires got wet (which they would, I know), what would be the danger?


----------



## oleguy74 (Aug 23, 2010)

even if the wire in romex was thhn/thwn still would not be legal beacause it is not labeled as thhn/thwn or anything else.code says wire must be clearly marked for use.look at spools of wire(single conductor)you will see the type and gauge clearly printed on wire at presribed intervals along the wire.the individual wires in romex are not labeled...as for the ground,no one cares if a bare ground gets wet...if you are going to the trouble to run conduit,just do it right.buy the proper wire an be done with it.you are making issues that don't need to be made...


----------



## secutanudu (Mar 15, 2009)

sirsparksalot said:


> To your quote above, if I ran individual wires in conduit underground and those wires got wet (which they would, I know), what would be the danger?


The danger is if they are NOT rated for THWN, the insulation would not be able to withstand the water. 

Since the individual conductors in romex are NOT listed as THWN, there is no reason to assume that they are safe in a wet location.

Maybe they would be, maybe they wouldn't be - but you don't know.


----------



## jbfan (Jul 1, 2004)

sirsparksalot said:


> OK, let me restate this question. What would happen if we ran 3 individual THHN/THWN and a Bare Ground wire underground in conduit? What are the consequences of allowing the ground wire to get wet?


Nothing at all!


----------



## nap (Dec 4, 2007)

tape wouldn't stick to it very well.


----------



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

jbfan said:


> Nothing at all!





oleguy74 said:


> ... you are making issues that don't need to be made...





nap said:


> tape wouldn't stick to it very well.


OK, we're all in the same boat, then. Nobody knows _why_!

On the sad side of this story is the buddy of mine who wants to know why it's illegal, and all I'm able to tell him is: "it's illegal", "it's not code", "it's not UL listed for wet locations". Well, guess what, he doesn't give a damn because he's done it before with his house, and the house hasn't burned down yet, so "code be damned" he's going to do it again. He doesn't care that it may take 10 years; he'll tackle the problem when it happens. Hopefully, he and his family are still around when it does.

You see, since he's doing this job himself, in a County for which it's illegal to do one's own work without first taking a test (which he'd never pass), there will be no permit, no inspector, and no inspection. So, since he is already out the money he spent on the wrong wire (which ain't cheap considering it's 25' of 8/3 g, he is NOT going to spend more money to get the right wire.

Explaining to him that there's no lettering on the wire inside the Romex cable stating that it's properly rated doesn't phase him one bit. "What?", asks he, "you mean to tell me that if there's no lettering on the insulation it's going to cause the house to burn down?". "Ah, shucks", he continues, the worst that can happen is the breaker will blow", to which I have no answer. In the meantime, all I can do is hope and pray that nothing bad comes to this longtime friend of mine, which friendship has already been shaken since I'v refuse to give him any more advice, or to help him because he doesn't understand, and apparently, I don't know either.

No, I don't think I'm bringing up a frivolous, unimportant issue.


----------



## oleguy74 (Aug 23, 2010)

because of certain conditions,where wire will be used,insulation becomes a factor.it would be great if all wire /insulation would work every where and every condition but it doesn't.example:romex can't be used in industrial places.wire has to be in conduit.some aeras will use wire/insulation rated mtw or machine tool because of possible contact with oil,solvents,gasoline which romex wont do.the solvents will eat the insulation.by your statement,your friend's ins won't be any good if something happens like fire.you need to stop being such a jerk and listen.if you and your frind were so woried,why did you not come here first?


----------



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

oleguy74 said:


> because of certain conditions,where wire will be used,insulation becomes a factor.it would be great if all wire /insulation would work every where and every condition but it doesn't.example:romex can't be used in industrial places.wire has to be in conduit.some aeras will use wire/insulation rated mtw or machine tool because of possible contact with oil,solvents,gasoline which romex wont do.the solvents will eat the insulation.by your statement,your friend's ins won't be any good if something happens like fire.you need to stop being such a jerk and listen.if you and your frind were so woried,why did you not come here first?


Look, dude, I'm not being a jerk, and I AM listening. You aren't saying anything.


----------



## oleguy74 (Aug 23, 2010)

ok,get a code book.look a article 334:non metalic sheathed cable.art 334.12(A)10 d can't be used where exposed or subject toexcessive moisture or dampness.conduit is considered wet/damp.so is direct bury.also 310.11(A)(B).look these up in the code.


----------



## nap (Dec 4, 2007)

I've really lost what you are even looking for. Most of the answers you are going to get are "because it is not to code requirements". Now, the people that make the code have access to a lot of information. While some of the reasons the code requires something is evident, in many cases, it involves engineering the typical electrician may or may not understand.

So, when we say; because it does not comply with the code, it could be because some salesman from some company sold the code making panel on an idea or it could be because not doing it will cause your death.

It makes no sense to try to dissect every rule in the code and try to justify it to you. It sounds like your friend is going to do whatever he wants anyway so my suggestion would be to grab a bunch of coat hangers, twist them together end to end and wrap it up with electrical tape. It makes as much sense as his reasoning for his actions.

and to his question/statement of:



> "you mean to tell me that if there's no lettering on the insulation it's going to cause the house to burn down?".


the true, no BS answer actually is:

it might, yes, it might.

without the lettering stating what type of wire that is, there is no way to dependably determine how that wire can be used. If you use it in a manner that degrades the insulation and you end up with a high resistance short somewhere, yes, it may cause a fire and burn the house down.

The perfect example is aluminum wiring that used to be used in homes. That wire, due to it's thermal properties, would result in a high resistance circuit that essentially became overloaded. Yes, a lot of houses burned down because of it and that is why it is not allowed to be used today.


----------



## williswires (Jul 21, 2008)

sirsparksalot said:


> YES, I understand that Cable isn't designed to be stripped. But NO, I do not understand the consequences of doing so.
> 
> To your quote above, if I ran individual wires in conduit underground and those wires got wet (which they would, I know), what would be the danger?


2 answers for you:

1) the consequences of stripping the Romex cable is that there would be no identification of the physical properties of the conductor -- the most important being AWG, temperature rating of insulation, voltage rating of insulation, water resistance, resistance to mechanical abrasion, and flexibility (solid or stranded), etc.

Your friend isn't going to be the last person living in his house...(EDIT: ...though he might be the last person _alive_ in his house)

2) The wicking properties of the paper wrap in the Romex is one concern in a wet area. As someone already mentioned, the paper wicks moisture throughout the cable, which means it will eventually get to the end connections and support a high humidity or wet environment there. 

Individual wet-rated conductors, bare ground wires, and UF cable don't do that.

Also, a manufacturer can use a lower quality cable jacket, knowing it is not expected to be exposed to continuous water contact - and thus save you money.


----------



## jbfan (Jul 1, 2004)

Like Nap said, its not that we don't know, but most don't care to argue the fact is not code to us the wire underground.
The fact that is against code is good enough for most electricians!


----------



## sirsparksalot (Oct 16, 2010)

Well, thanks for putting up with me. I do have to say that I give you all credit for taking the time away from other's projects to read this thread, and try to convince me, and for that I apologize to the other DIYers, and thank all the pros for their dedication.

Some of the latest posts seem interesting, but I'll have to digest them a bit more to get the understanding.

Please don't neglect the other DIYers to reply anymore to this thread, but if you do think of something that would help my understanding a bit more, I'd sure appreciate it, because I do have several properties that I maintain, and pull permits for, and I'd like to know as much as possible to help others (and myself) to do a safe, accurate and code-compliant job.

One poster said that they know the answer, but they don't care to argue it. I really didn't intend to debate it; I simply was trying to learn.

Thanks to all, and still watching


----------



## Speedy Petey (Feb 1, 2004)

jbfan said:


> Like Nap said, its not that we don't know, but most don't care to argue the fact is not code to us the wire underground.
> The fact that is against code is good enough for most electricians!


I completely agree. 

There are far too many idiots like your friend who, unless they can get detailed explanations of rules and codes, do not think those codes are justifiable.

If I hear_ "he's <I've> done it before with his house, and the house hasn't burned down yet"_ one more time I think I am going to scream.
These are the words of a *fool*. Plain and simple.


----------



## Scuba_Dave (Jan 16, 2009)

As I understand from another thread...
The sheathing on the romex can deteriorate underground
It can do this without causing the breaker to kick off
Then you possibly have voltage leaking to ground
So he could be paying for power he isn't using
If its GFCI protected then the GFCI should kick off
Reg romex underground is one case where there is enough common sense reasons to not use it underground

I like to understand the Why too
But again the fact that the sheathing can fall apart is all you need to really know


----------



## oleguy74 (Aug 23, 2010)

sirsparksalot said:


> Well, thanks for putting up with me. I do have to say that I give you all credit for taking the time away from other's projects to read this thread, and try to convince me, and for that I apologize to the other DIYers, and thank all the pros for their dedication.
> 
> Some of the latest posts seem interesting, but I'll have to digest them a bit more to get the understanding.
> 
> ...


 I previosly posted that you should read some code articles.still a good thing to do.I would recomend you getting a copy of the 2011 code.not cheap but like you said you maintain several properties and this will make it eaiser.also if you go to lowes,home depot,do get a copy of the UGLY'S ELECTRICAL REFERENCES.based on 2008 code unless new ones are out.it has wire tables conduit fill,and how to calculate the fill.it will help enormusly...we are here to help..


----------



## Red Squirrel (Jun 29, 2009)

Scuba_Dave said:


> As I understand from another thread...
> The sheathing on the romex can deteriorate underground
> It can do this without causing the breaker to kick off
> Then you possibly have voltage leaking to ground
> ...


Good idea to add a cleanout at both ends of conduit, every now and then you can open it up to see if any electricity is leaking. :wink:


----------



## nap (Dec 4, 2007)

Red Squirrel said:


> Good idea to add a cleanout at both ends of conduit, every now and then you can open it up to see if any electricity is leaking. :wink:


as long as the ends are higher than the rest of it, no electrons will leak out. They may leak into the conduit and if you are really good, you can collect them and put them back into the wire. I have saved a ton of money on my electric bills by reusing free electrons.:whistling2:


----------



## frenchelectrican (Apr 12, 2006)

Speedy Petey said:


> I completely agree.
> 
> There are far too many idiots like your friend who, unless they can get detailed explanations of rules and codes, do not think those codes are justifiable.
> 
> ...




That is the about the excat the same thing with one guy I have see it in his house I try to expain the rules and some of them just cuss at me they think I rip them off with extra cost and I say no.,, I say due I go thru the license , have to know the code , how to do this in proper way etc etc and if they don't like it well,. I told them I just follow the code nothing else.

And yes I heard some dolt done like that before they claim it work fine in that situation but no it don't and yesterday service call I got someone did use white plumming pipe to run underground conduit and yes that person did use the white plumming elbow and try pull the cable out .,, forget it I just cut the concrete and ran new pipe in { All was under the slab } 

And did show him the failure finally they woke up why.

Merci.
Marc


----------



## Jim Port (Sep 21, 2007)

There is nothing to stop someone from trying to perform brain surgery on themselves either, even tho the doctor said it should not be tried. Sometimes it is enough just to listen to the experts.


----------



## Kryspyx (Oct 6, 2014)

*Behind you all the way, except...*

Sirsparksalot...

I COMPLETELY agree with you that the statement itself does not make sense. I believe, after pondering the question for a time, the reason is as follows. Because the romex's sheathing is not "waterPROOF", the sheathing would eventually break down, exposing the contents to the water/elements. Being that the ground in the romex is not plastic coated, but merely wrapped in paper...the ground wire could then be in direct contact with water. Being very thin...either 12 or 14 gauge wire, it wouldn't take much time for the wire to corrode completely through, in-effect neutralizing the ground at the receiving end. Copper corrodes extremely fast...how long it would take to break the wire I do not know. I believe it is a safety concern that if the romex's sheathing somehow deteriorated or got broken somehow, and the romex did get wet somehow, and the ground wire completely broke due to corrosion, AND you had a surge or spike from an electronic device connected to the receiving end...it COULD cause a fire in the structure the device was in. 

I think to have all of those conditions met would be hard to do, unless the romex was broken(not completely in-tact)...but UL is probably looking at it from a corporate liability standpoint. Here's a scenario....you install romex from your breaker box in your home, run it outside 35 feet (above/under) ground to a junction box in your shed to provide power for a light and a couple of outlets. A groundhog comes along and is foraging for food or digging a hole in the ground. The groundhog comes in contact with the romex and nicks it with its teeth,exposing the contents to the outside elements...including moisture/water. Eventually the ground wire could break from the corrosion, putting your shed at risk for fire. Now, I know this sounds FAR-fetched...but when it comes to corporate liability...most corporations would not want to risk the potential litigation. 

On top of UL's liability, there is also the potential risk it poses to you. If all those conditions were met and it caused a fire...your insurance could deny your claim because the cause of the fire was due to lack of proper insulation of the power line...in-effect rendering you completely responsible to pay for the damages yourself. I'm not 100% sure about this, but I know insurance companies will deny claims for far less risky reasons. 

Those are my thoughts...be they wrong or right. I just thought I'd throw in my $.02. I would think my theory is plausible...but who knows. 
Let me know if it makes sense (not the likely hood it would/wouldn't happen). I would like to know the answer myself. 

Good luck!


----------



## Jim Port (Sep 21, 2007)

I hope something was resolved 4 years ago when this thread was active.


----------



## Jake. (Sep 29, 2014)

It was too hard for me to read the whole thing so I'm not sure they ended up with a resolution. Hey Kryspyx fyi: this post is 4 years old. 

But because you're interested: The short answer is; NM cable insulation is NOT rated THHW or it would be allowed in wet locations. Bare copper is code compliant as an equipment grounding conductor and there's nothing wrong with it getting wet.


----------



## petey_c (Jul 25, 2008)

Jake. said:


> It was too hard for me to read the whole thing so I'm not sure they ended up with a resolution. Hey Kryspyx fyi: this post is 4 years old.


Jim and Jake, thanks for your last posts. I was getting ready to comment when I read them. I thought I hadn't heard from frenchelectrician in a long time.


----------



## concrete_joe (Oct 6, 2014)

this is why wire coatings should be marked on the wire as to what they actually are and not multi-labeled. as example, i am doing underground raceways, all PVC stuff, the wire is rated THHN/THWN-2, its PVC insulated with nylon coating. so obviously THWN-2 is a use specification that kinda trumps THHN. if the wire just said THWN-2 it would suffice for use as THHN.

anyways, bare copper in wet areas can lead to copper corrosion which can lead to other things such as a corrosive wet solution impacting the insulation of the other conductors. if you wanted romex in underground conduit then perhaps choose romex ufb, but at that price just but THWN-2.


----------



## Jake. (Sep 29, 2014)

petey_c said:


> Jim and Jake, thanks for your last posts. I was getting ready to comment when I read them. I thought I hadn't heard from frenchelectrician in a long time.


I just looked at the frenchman's profile and saw that he hasn't been logged in for a year now. Odd, he seemed quite the prolific poster 'til then.


----------



## jbfan (Jul 1, 2004)

Jake. said:


> I just looked at the frenchman's profile and saw that he hasn't been logged in for a year now. Odd, he seemed quite the prolific poster 'til then.


He got married and then had a workplace accident.

Haven't seen him once or twice since then, and I think it was his wife posting on some of them.


----------



## Kryspyx (Oct 6, 2014)

Thanks for the replies guys. Sorry for rehashing something so old...yet it comes up in the top ten when googling "can romex be used outdoors". While there were other results above it, most were to sites I would never look at for 'technical' advice...(ask.com yahoo.com etc). 

I felt for the OP simply because the first dozen or so responders didn't quite answer the question in the original post, but merely repeated the uses for the materials and 'just because they say so' answers. 

I did not notice the age of the post until the next response after mine. I got tired of reading responses that didn't answer the OP's question and got lazy...my bad. On the other hand...it would behoove the site to restrict responding to a post that was so old. Instead of picking at me for responding...maybe ask the site to update their code? Just an idea. 

Thanks, all the same!


----------



## Jake. (Sep 29, 2014)

I am sorry if you felt picked at, it wasn't my intention. It is sometimes the nature of written communication that things come across sideways.

My intention was call the fact to your attention so you didn't expect the op to reply as it was so old of a post. Also, I tried to provide as succinct an answer as possible from my experience and knowledge as a licensed electrician as it seemed to me that you were interested.

I too am new here to this forum. So from one noob to another: Welcome to the forum! :thumbup:


----------



## Kryspyx (Oct 6, 2014)

Jake...

No worries...and thanks for the welcome! Right back @ ya!

Peace!


----------



## beenthere (Oct 11, 2008)

jbfan said:


> He got married and then had a workplace accident.
> 
> Haven't seen him once or twice since then, and I think it was his wife posting on some of them.



I think he got injured, and then got married. So the injury may have either knocked sense into him, or out of him. LOL


----------

