- Location
- Massachusetts
This was posted in a long running thread detached garage
and I think it deserves it's own thread.
Mike do you not see this as a straight forward issue?
As in 300.5(B)?
Listed for wet locations?
What am I missing here....anyone?
and I think it deserves it's own thread.
jwelectric said:I have said for many years, yes I have been told that I am stupid, that TW conductors installed in conduit underground is a violation of the NEC unless the conductors have the letter ?U? stamped on them.
Although underground is a wet location in is also underground. A dip tank is a wet location but it is also a hazardous location.
The one thing that I get a lot of argument about is that the ?U? means ?direct burial? but I cannot find anything to back this. In Table 310.13 The only words used is ?underground? in 338.2 the only words used is ?underground? and in 338.10(B)(4)(b) the only word used is ?underground? in 340.2 is the first time we see the words ?direct burial?
In 340.10(1) it clearly states, ?For use underground, including direct burial in the earth.?
Here there is a distinction between ?underground and ?direct burial.? 338.10(B)(4)(b) tells us that USE can be installed in accordance of 340 thus giving us permission to install it as ?direct burial.?
In Article 310 at Table 310.13 we will find only three conductors that are listed for underground installations, ?UF?, ?USE? and ?PFA? 85 degree.
In my opinion any other conductor installed underground is in violation of the NEC whether in conduit or not.
Mike do you not see this as a straight forward issue?
As in 300.5(B)?
Listed for wet locations?
What am I missing here....anyone?