Marina power pedastals..

[chevyx92]

I was told that UF cable is not allowed to wire marina's or boat lifts. I looked at 555.13 and don't see where its says that. I believe I was told wrong. Did I miss something?

 

[chevyx92]

I was told that UF cable is not allowed to wire marina's or boat lifts. I looked at 555.13 and don't see where its says that. I believe I was told wrong. Did I miss something?

Wow all this experience on here and very little experience on this topic. Losing faith here.

 

[SG-1]

555.15(b)

555.15(b)

I think 555.15(B) rules out UF.

 

[Smart $]

Wow all this experience on here and very little experience on this topic. Losing faith here.

Well I admit I don't have any experience on this topic...

In general, I believe you were told wrong, too. However, there may be certain specifics to some situations that made a UF install noncompliant... and what you were told is analogous to the one bad apple clich?.

 

[Smart $]

I think 555.15(B) rules out UF.

If you are referring to the lack of outer finish of continuous green or green with yellow stripes, please read the last sentence...

...For conductors larger than 6 AWG, or where multiconductor cables are used, re-identification of conductors as allowed in 250.119(A)(2)(b) and (A)(2)(c) or 250.119(B)(2) and (B)(3) shall be permitted.

 

[iwire]

555.13(A) seems pretty clear.

 

[SG-1]

If you are referring to the lack of outer finish of continuous green or green with yellow stripes, please read the last sentence...

Thanks, I missed the multiconductor cable part, obviously my blondness asserting itself.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I agree that 555.15(B) prohibits the use of UF as UF does not have the insulated EGC that is required by the code section.

(B) Type of Equipment Grounding Conductor. The equipment grounding conductor shall be an insulated copper conductor with a continuous outer finish that is either green or green with one or more yellow stripes. The equipment grounding conductor of Type MI cable shall be permitted to be identified at terminations. For conductors larger than 6 AWG, or where multiconductor cables are used, re-identification of conductors as allowed in 250.119(A)(2)(b) and (A)(2)(c) or 250.119(B)(2) and (B)(3) shall be permitted.

The EGC in UF is "covered", not insulated.

 

[chevyx92]

555.13(A) seems pretty clear.

Thats what I was thinking. Especially 555.13(A)(1).

 

[chevyx92]

I agree that 555.15(B) prohibits the use of UF as UF does not have the insulated EGC that is required by the code section.

The EGC in UF is "covered", not insulated.

And I guess that is what I was missing. That there is the only reason that UF can't be used then, cause it doesnt have an "Insulated" ground.

 

[hardworkingstiff]

Depending on what the ownership of the property is, 555 may not apply at all. If the boat lift is at a single family residence and is a private noncommercial then 555.1 says 555 does not apply.

From the controller to the boat lift motor you will need 4 conductors if it's wired 240 and 5 conductors if it's wired 120. So UF will not be pratical there.

 

[chevyx92]

Depending on what the ownership of the property is, 555 may not apply at all. If the boat lift is at a single family residence and is a private noncommercial then 555.1 says 555 does not apply.

From the controller to the boat lift motor you will need 4 conductors if it's wired 240 and 5 conductors if it's wired 120. So UF will not be pratical there.

Excellent point.

 

[kbsparky]

The use of type UF cable is not prohibited. You can, in fact, special order UF cable with an insulated green EGC. It ain't cheap, however.

 

[augie47]

The use of type UF cable is not prohibited. You can, in fact, special order UF cable with an insulated green EGC. It ain't cheap, however.

or :grin::grin: use a 3 wire UF and reidentify one of the insulated conductors as allowed in 555.15(B) ref 250.119(B)(2)-(3)

 

[Smart $]

I agree that 555.15(B) prohibits the use of UF as UF does not have the insulated EGC that is required by the code section.

The EGC in UF is "covered", not insulated.

Playing the devil's advocate, per se, there are three points in the code which say that is not ultimately true, perhaps not true at all...

III. Construction Specifications
...
340.108 Equipment Grounding Conductor. In addition
to the insulated conductors, the cable shall be permitted to
have an insulated or bare equipment grounding conductor.

Then we go to ['08] Table 310.1413(A) for Type UF cable single conductor indicates in the two rightmost columns that the jacket is integral with the insulation and vice-versa... but even more forebearing is that the insulation thickness includes the jacket... meaning the NEC recognizes the jacket material as insulation.

Now we go to the definition...

Conductor, Insulated. A conductor encased within material
of composition and thickness that is recognized by this
Code as electrical insulation.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

...
Then we go to ['08] Table 310.1413(A) for Type UF cable single conductor indicates in the two rightmost columns that the jacket is integral with the insulation and vice-versa... but even more forebearing is that the insulation thickness includes the jacket... meaning the NEC recognizes the jacket material as insulation. ...

The information in table 310.13(A) for UF only applies to a single conductor type of UL(see the left column information). I do agree that there is multiconductor UF with an insulated EGC, but that is not a common product, at least around here.

 

[Smart $]

...
Then we go to ['08] Table 310.1413(A) for Type UF cable single conductor indicates in the two rightmost columns that the jacket is integral with the insulation and vice-versa... but even more forebearing is that the insulation thickness includes the jacket... meaning the NEC recognizes the jacket material as insulation. ...

The information in table 310.13(A) for UF only applies to a single conductor type of UL(see the left column information). ...

As highlighting indicates, I included that in my comment... and applying to single conductor cable only is not the point. The point is the insulation and jacket are integral and the code recognizes the material: PVC.

Thickness is another matter since single conductor and multi-conductor differ... yet the thickness of the PVC jacket "encasing" the ground is thicker than the insulation PVC encasing the so-called insulated conductors. By defintion, this meets the criteria of an insulated conductor, even if it is not called an insulated conductor by trade... as the code definition does not make this distinction.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

As highlighting indicates, I included that in my comment... and applying to single conductor cable only is not the point. The point is the insulation and jacket are integral and the code recognizes the material: PVC.

It most certainly is the point. The information in that table that applies to a single conductor UF and does not tell me that the jacket and insulation of a multiconductor UF cable is integral. From looking at a number of manufacturer's sites, it is obvious that the conductor insulation and the outer jacket are not integral on multiconductor UF cable. Here is one example.

 

[Smart $]

It most certainly is the point. The information in that table that applies to a single conductor UF and does not tell me that the jacket and insulation of a multiconductor UF cable is integral. From looking at a number of manufacturer's sites, it is obvious that the conductor insulation and the outer jacket are not integral on multiconductor UF cable. Here is one example.

Your missing the point (I think).

I'm not saying the individually-insulated conductors' insulation and jacket are integral on multiconductor cable. I'm simply pointing out that the NEC recognizes Type UF jacket material as insulation by way of the single conductor type. The ground of Type UF multiconductor, which is not individually insulated or color coded, is still insulated in that it is encased with jacket material. Type UF cable is not a sheathed cable, but rather an encased cable, where the encasing material is considered its jacket [and an insulating jacket at that for the single conductor version].

340.2 Definition.
Underground Feeder and Branch-Circuit Cable, Type
UF. A factory assembly of one or more insulated conductors
with an integral or an overall covering of nonmetallic
material suitable for direct burial in the earth.

By the definition alone, can you say the ground does not have an integral covering?

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I will give you that the covering is integral to the cable assembly, but it is only a covering and it is not insulation. The manufacturers call it a jacket and a jacket is covering and not insulation. There are a number of different PVC compounds that are used in the construction of conductors and cables and not all of them are listed as suitable for use as insulation. The compound used for the single conductor UF is listed as suitable for use both as an insulator and a jacket. It remains my opinion that if the EGC is bare within the cable assembly it is only covered and not insulated. I can't find anything to say that the jacket material used is suitable for use as insulation and is intended to be used as insulation.