---
id: 2025-11-10T11:14:00
aliases: []
title: 2025-11-10 11:14:??
tags:
  - occupational/takeoff
  - original-format/digital-text
  - type/timestamped
dg-publish: true
---
# 2025-11-10 11:14:??

I was updating my notes,
filling in gaps in scripts based on Joel's,
when I noticed a strange paragraph:

> [!quote] `OneNote`/`Joel Take-off`/`Misc. Notes`
> Drop Down Ceilings vs. GWB (Gypsum Wall Boards)
>
> Drop down ceiling is technically "Exposed" (the real term should be accessable),
> so Romex and SER is not permited. Will need to use MC.
>
> > [!image]
> > ### 334.12 Uses Not Permitted.
> >
> > #### 334.12(A) Types NM and NMC.
> >
> > Types NM and NMC cables shall not be permitted as follows:
> >
> > 1. In any dwelling or structure not specifically
> > permitted in 334.10(1), (2), (3)
> > 
> > 2. ==Exposed in dropped or suspended ceilings==
> > in other than one- and two-family and multifamily dwellings

This analysis of 334.12(A)(2) is flawed.

Based on the [[nfpa-70_100_definitions|Article 100]] definitions
of [[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Exposed (as applied to wiring methods).|exposed]]
and [[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Dwelling, Multifamily.|dwelling]],
[[nfpa-70_334_nm-cable#334.12(A) Types NM and NMC.|334.12(A)(2)]]
can be paraphrased as follows:

> [!cite] NEC 334.12(A)(2), pp.
> Types NM and NMC cable are not permitted to be installed
> in accessible spaces above suspended ceilings,
> _except in buildings containing one or more dwelling units._

The prohibition of 334.12(A)(2) _never_ applies to apartments or condos,
And only applies to hotels and dormitories on a basis of AHJ interpretation
(See [[multi-family-dwellings#Are Hotels Multifamily Dwellings?]]).

It's unclear to me if this a genuine misunderstanding
or just a [[heuristics|rule of thumb]] to cover the case
that guestrooms are not interpreted to be dwelling units.
If it's the latter, I believe it's far too conservative
to be used whole-cloth on all estimates.
