ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues Transition from EMT to.......

You guys made me do my homework on this one.
Let me start by saying I would approve the installation as described.
Now the reasons why.
Section 300.15 was completely re-written for the 1999 Code "for clarity".
300.15(F) used to be 300.15 (b) in the 1996 Code and was definately refering to a transition of raceway to cable. That is why the Handbook makes that point.
If you have an older Code book you can look it up. 300.15 used to have many exceptions.

If you have the references you can check the 1998 NEC ROP item 3-106 (Log # 704)

I believe that this does need a proposal to clarify that 300.15(F) applies only to cable fittings.

You made me work to earn a beer on this one.
(Don't throw away those old ROPs & ROCs they sometimes wxplain what the CMP was trying to do when they changed the Code.
Alan--

Now that computers are taking over the code book, I think it would be good if you could buy a CD/DVD with footnotes that reference the ROP/ROC language that resulted in the code we use. It would be hard to do, going backward but trivial going forward.

Get a copy of the "preprint" or draft of the code. All of the changes have the proposal number listed so you can read the ROP info. The draft is free and you can download it from the NFPA or call 800-344-3555 and request that they send you a hard copy. Here is an example from the 2008 preprint:
Don

SandSnow, UL simply stated that:

" EMT connectors had straight threads, locknuts, and were evaluated attached through holes.

All hubs had tapered threads, and were evalusted using tapered fittings."

Not an exact quote... but close enough (I believe).

In other words, UL was saying "We don't know- because we don't test things that way."

In a similar discussion, one person averred that 'if a listed connector existed in a catalog, he would reject the use of any field assembly to do the same job.' I don't believe that the code supports that position.

Why? Because existance in a catalog does not always mean the item is readily available. Heck, I can't even get #2 white wire from the "worlds largest distributor-" unless I want to order 3000 ft, and wait indefinitely for a special production run!
(Yet I've run into 'inspectors' who said code did not allow the use of tape for marking, as it was not sufficiently permanent!)

My personal view... with the exception of 'running thread,' (which code specifically prohibits using with couplings), I hold that any connector with pipe threads is allowed to be used with any threaded opening. So 'field engineer' to your heats' content!