ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Shout Box
Recent Posts
sec cable code conflict
by jake2018. 11/17/18 11:19 PM
This anti-theist is priceless!!!
by Texas_Ranger. 11/17/18 02:15 PM
High current GFI vs regular GFCI
by Texas_Ranger. 11/17/18 02:07 PM
Single phase and what you call it.
by dsk. 11/12/18 11:10 AM
New in the Gallery:
What is this for?
Plug terminals
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (jake2018), 19 guests, and 18 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
300-5d #79199
12/03/01 03:49 PM
12/03/01 03:49 PM
S
Scott Yeazell  Offline OP
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4
Springfield, OH, USA
Do underground service entrance conductors installed by directional boring method rather than trenching require a warning ribbon?

2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
Re: 300-5d #79200
12/03/01 04:06 PM
12/03/01 04:06 PM
R
resqcapt19  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
IL
Yes. There were proposals made to provide such an exemption, but they were rejected. The chances of damage from future excavation do not change just because you used a closed rather than open excavation method for the installation. If you want to bore you will have to do it twice, one for the cable and one for the ribbon.
Don(resqcapt19)


Don(resqcapt19)
Re: 300-5d #79201
12/04/01 08:12 PM
12/04/01 08:12 PM
R
resqcapt19  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
IL
As the result of a follow up question to me from Scott on this subject via e-mail I did some additional research. My original post is not entirely correct.
A proposal was submitted to the NFPA for a change in 300-5(d) for the 2002 code. This was proposal 3-43. The proposal asked that the following wording be added to 300-5(d): "Horizontally bored service laterals shall be exempt from this requirement." Code Making Panel 3 rejected the proposal with the statement that; "Present language only addresses trenching, not boring, thus boring is already excluded from the ribbon requirement".
This indicates to me that the panel did not intend to require a ribbon above cables that were installed by boring. It aprears to me, that based on the panel comment, if you are operating under the 99 code, a ribbon would not be required for conductors installed by boring. Also note the new wording applies to all underground service conductors, not just service laterals as in the 99 code.
Don(resqcapt19)

[This message has been edited by resqcapt19 (edited 12-05-2001).]


Don(resqcapt19)
Re: 300-5d #79202
12/06/01 08:14 PM
12/06/01 08:14 PM
N
Nick  Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 599
Riverside, CA
Quote
The chances of damage from future excavation do not change just because you used a closed rather than open excavation method for the installation.

I agree with this statement more than the panels findings.


Featured:

2017 Master Electrician Exam Preparation Combos
2017 NEC Electrician
Exam Prep Combos:
Master / Journeyman

 

Member Spotlight
Alan Belson
Alan Belson
Mayenne N. France
Posts: 1,803
Joined: March 2005
Show All Member Profiles 
Top Posters(30 Days)
Admin 7
Popular Topics(Views)
251,556 Are you busy
188,715 Re: Forum
178,427 Need opinion
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1
(Release build 20180101)
Page Time: 0.029s Queries: 14 (0.013s) Memory: 0.9596 MB (Peak: 1.0922 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2018-11-18 05:55:21 UTC