ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Potseal 11
Recent Posts
Electrode boilers question
by annemarie1. 04/27/17 01:40 PM
Why cables look like they do
by LongRunner. 04/26/17 09:36 AM
Dimmable LED 2x4 lay in fixtures
by HotLine1. 04/24/17 05:43 PM
Old decora style outlets
by Lostazhell. 04/22/17 07:59 PM
Permit Snafus...AHJs and Contractors Jump in
by gfretwell. 04/22/17 01:11 PM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
234,854 Are you busy
169,644 Re: Forum
162,889 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 49 guests, and 11 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
#79199 - 12/03/01 04:49 PM 300-5d  
Scott Yeazell  Offline
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

#79200 - 12/03/01 05:06 PM Re: 300-5d  
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)

#79201 - 12/04/01 09:12 PM Re: 300-5d  
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)

#79202 - 12/06/01 09:14 PM Re: 300-5d  
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.



Member Spotlight
Admin
Admin
NY, USA
Posts: 3,439
Joined: October 2000
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.009s Queries: 14 (0.002s) Memory: 0.7597 MB (Peak: 0.8918 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-04-28 06:26:49 UTC