# elec wire is too short



## gary h (Apr 20, 2010)

I cut a doorway opening into a room. There are 3- 14/2 romex cables going down to 2 outlets. The outlets must move about 3 ft. House is 2 story and this wall is in the middle. There is no way to pull new wire and the old is to short. Is there any legal way to extend these "without a j-box"?


----------



## acerunner (Dec 16, 2009)

unfortunately, no. all connections must be in a j-box that is accessible.


----------



## kbsparky (Sep 11, 2008)

Try this product. Box not required:


----------



## acerunner (Dec 16, 2009)

hmm, interesting. There are planty products that can connect two wires, but question is, is that approved by code to be used in-wall without accessibilty? Might have to check with local inspector. In my book, no connector is 100% fail-proof, so having it accessible would be a good idea even if approved.


----------



## bobelectric (Mar 3, 2007)

I know ksparty would not recommend a sham.


----------



## acerunner (Dec 16, 2009)

oh, i don't doubt his expertise. I'm just curious if its something thats acceptable by national code, or if its just something accepted by his local inspector. If it is accepted in NEC, i will have to keep this in mind for the future if i need to fix electricals.


----------



## Jim Port (Sep 21, 2007)

You could also add additional receptacles on each side of the door frame and use those boxes to make the cable extension. Are all these cables serving the room they are in or are they just running thru?


----------



## AllanJ (Nov 24, 2007)

A splice where the wires are twisted to not pull apart plus bonded with solder is the most reliable splice you can have.

But the only commonplace use of such a splice in home wiring goes back to the 1930's -- knob and tube wiring! (Not all K&T electricians soldered their connections.)

A cursory look at some of the accessories picture above suggests they are constructed similarly to backstabbed connections on receptacles and switches.

Not needing a j-box (as advertised for the above pictured accessories) does not equate to not needing accessibility.


----------



## HooKooDooKu (Jan 7, 2008)

AllanJ said:


> Not needing a j-box (as advertised for the above pictured accessories) does not equate to not needing accessibility.


I find it interesting that they claim "[these connectors] eliminate the need for junction boxes, covers, wire nuts, and box connectors", but the electrical codes they site is for things like manufactured homes and recreational vehicles. They make no mention about sections that indicate j-boexs are required.


----------



## secutanudu (Mar 15, 2009)

kbsparky said:


> Try this product. Box not required:


Wow, that may be a lifesaver for me. Cut wire by accident in the wall, see my other thread. 

Any idea where to get them, and if inspectors would normally accept it in an inaccessible location?

Edit: looks like the website has listings of where to buy it.


----------



## HooKooDooKu (Jan 7, 2008)

kbsparky said:


> Try this product. Box not required:


I did a little bit more digging, and from what I've seen, these don't sound like the "magic bullet" it sounds to be.

For one, this isn't a brand new type of device. So of the documentation on the products at the tyco site is dated 19-Oct-2000. So if this product was a "magic bullet" for all those times people have wanted a burried splice in electrical forums, I would have thought that we would have heard about them by now. But prior to today, the only place I've ever seen references to splices not requiring a box was buried (under ground) applications.

Second, the documentaion doesn't appear to indicate that this product is ment for use in single family dwellings. Here's a quote from the product documentation:

<Start Quote>

3.2 Applications
These 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) (Wireing Methods and Materials and Component Interconnections); and recreational vehicles and recreational vehicle parks NEC Article 551-47(o) (Wireing 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 E57250). This combination (NM-1 and NM-3) is suitable for surface mounting without an outlet boxin exposed cable wiring and in existing buildings/dwellings where the cable is installed in accordance with and as permitted by Article 336-21 (Nonmetalllic Sheathed Cable and Devices of Insulating Material - 1999 National Electrical Code) and the Canadian Electrical Code, Part 1, Section 12-522.

<End Quote>

Now I don't have access to 1999 NEC at the moment, but from everything I've read so far, it doesn't sound like these devices can be used for splices behind drywall in a single family (or similar) dwelling.

The only thing I can't look up at the moment is if 336-21 from NEC 1999 has anything applicable to indcate otherwise.


----------



## secutanudu (Mar 15, 2009)

I am going to call my inspector tonight to see if he would approve this in my house. I'll post back with his answer. Not that his answer would apply to everyone, but it's a start.


----------



## md2lgyk (Jan 6, 2009)

I looked into using these Tyco splices when I was wiring my house. I don't have the paperwork handy but they are certainly approved for single-family residential applications. I ended up not using them because they're insanely expensive.


----------



## secutanudu (Mar 15, 2009)

Yes, $8 each. Totally worth it for a one-time use, though you have to spend $35 from the website if you order online.


----------



## HooKooDooKu (Jan 7, 2008)

md2lgyk said:


> I ended up not using them because they're insanely expensive.


Based on the web site linked above, I randomly followed the links to purchase one of these items (don't recall which). They were about $8 a piece, but they had a $35 minimum. Then there was the shipping and handling. Couldn't find a link to indicate what the charges would be, but following the check-out process, they don't tell you until AFTER you submit CC#.

So I'm guessing that someone wanting to use these would be looking at around $50 minimum to place an order... unless there is somewhere else to buy.


----------



## kbsparky (Sep 11, 2008)

WE carry some of these on our service van, and have used them on occasion where it is impractical to use an accessible junction box. 

While the web site shows one used for a circuit tap, I personally don't use those. 

Many electrical suppliers carry these in stock, and don't have a minimum order if you buy them off the shelf.

Finally, yes they are approved for use in single family homes. The text of 1999 NEC Article 336-21 is the same as the 2008 NEC 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. Where connections to conductors are by binding screw terminals, there shall be available as many terminals as conductors.


----------



## secutanudu (Mar 15, 2009)

For what it's worth, I talked to my inspector last night. He said he would not approve anything other than an accessible j-box for any splice. 

I described the device we are discussing and he said it's a no-go. My suspicion is that he is unaware of these devices and their UL listing, but it means I will have to install a box.


----------



## HooKooDooKu (Jan 7, 2008)

secutanudu said:


> For what it's worth, I talked to my inspector last night. He said he would not approve anything other than an accessible j-box for any splice.


The more code I try to read on the subject, the more confused I become.

As an example, it seems like 334.40(B) seems to say it's ok to conceal a device, but it includes switches. Why would you EVER want to allow someone to conceal a switch?

Even if you pointed out 334.40(B), the inspector could still logically shoot it down because you are trying to make a "splice" and not a "switch", "outlet", or "tap" AND you are not fishing the wires (they are already in the wall presumably nailed to studs). Though why that would make a difference I can't say.


----------



## secutanudu (Mar 15, 2009)

The wires were fished, not attached to studs. I will nail it to the studs myself. I'm just going to install a box to make it easier.


----------



## AllanJ (Nov 24, 2007)

I don't think it says that the "device" may be buried, just that it does not need a box.

When the "device" is something like a switch, it is of course not buried.


----------



## HooKooDooKu (Jan 7, 2008)

AllanJ said:


> I don't think it says that the "device" may be buried, just that it does not need a box.
> 
> When the "device" is something like a switch, it is of course not buried.


See, this is where things start getting confusing...

The idea that the "device" doesn't need a box is simple to understand. 

But when you start talking about the "device" being used on a _cable [that] is concealed and fished_, how can the cable be concealed but the device not?


I can understand secutanudu's inspector turning down the device. I also get the feeling that 334.40(B) doesn't apply to his situation. But other than the word "splice", I can't come up with a valid argument as to why.


----------



## gary h (Apr 20, 2010)

I am checking with our local building official on Thursday. These are worth every penny if you don't want to see a couple of blank covers in the ceiling. 
Thanks KBsparky


----------



## Scuba_Dave (Jan 16, 2009)

For me I'd rather have a box
I don't like splices, can't imagine burying one in the wall


----------



## spark plug (May 5, 2009)

KB Sparky. They are very much in use in Europe. Thy're called "Chocolates" (Not the edible kind). What about accessibility???!:yes::no:! (The ultimate symbol of confusion)!


----------



## spark plug (May 5, 2009)

secutanudu said:


> For what it's worth, I talked to my inspector last night. He said he would not approve anything other than an accessible j-box for any splice.
> 
> I described the device we are discussing and he said it's a no-go. My suspicion is that he is unaware of these devices and their UL listing, but it means I will have to install a box.


The UL listing only affirms that the device is functioning as per the ratings. (i.e.; mechanical strength; good contact; electrical ratings: But as for the method of installation (accessibilty, etc.) the UL has nothing to say about. The NEC is the authority on that!:yes:!


----------

