Reusing conductors

[rlcguy]

Hello to All,

What is the code requirement( or state law in Washington ) regarding reinstalling a conductor? Or is there one even? A scenario might be that you remove some wires from a conduit so that more could be added because you couldn't push a fish tape through. I don't see why they couldn't be reinstalled. From time to time at the sawmill I used to work at we would have to pull wires back to a certain "ell" to pick up another conducter coming from another direction. We never pulled those conductors back to their point of origin and replaced them completely. Would like to know what others have done so I can share this with my cohorts.

Thanks

 

[petersonra]

I have seen this done many times. It never bothered me much in the past. However, these days I would want the wire looked at pretty closely before reinstalling it. Pulling it the first time seems to result in a significant number of damaged wires. now you are pulling it, pulling it out, and then re-pulling it, so your chance of damage is 3X.

For shorter wires, especially small gauge, it does not seem like it is worth the risk of reusing it. For more expensive runs, maybe it is. I would suggest maybe meggering it afterward just to make sure.

 

[rlcguy]

Thanks petersonra. Like I mentioned, we did it all of the time at the sawmill. But, we always checked the outer insulation for damage before reinstalling. Do you know if there are any NEC requirements regarding this topic? I am struggling to find one myself.

Thanks

 

[charlie b]

The NEC won't let you installed damaged conductors. But it has nothing to say about the installation practice you described. I think it is better to pull the wires out and reinstall them with the extra new wires, than to try to pull a new wire alongside existing wires, even if you could get the fish tape through. I think the danger of damaging wires when you pull one wire next to a stationary wire is greater than the danger of damaging a wire by pulling it out of the conduit and then back in again.

 

[rlcguy]

Thanks charlie. That answers my question. It's not a practice we liked, but management always wanted the newest whiz bang gizmo added to the mill. And it seemed we never had enough time to meg the wires like petersonra suggested. I think we were fortunate not to have had any conductor failures.

 

[jxofaltrds]

That is an AHJ call on "reusing".

 

[petersonra]

That is an AHJ call on "reusing".

where does it say that in the code?

unless the law enacting the AHJ in your state or other jurisdiction specifically gave the AHJ that power, they don't have it.

 

[jxofaltrds]

where does it say that in the code?

unless the law enacting the AHJ in your state or other jurisdiction specifically gave the AHJ that power, they don't have it.

Took this from the residential code because i do not want to find it under the building code.

115.6.2 Used materials and equipment.

The use of used materials which meet the requirements of this code for new materials is permitted. Used equipment, appliances and devices shall not be reused unless approved by the residential building official.

Now does it say wire, conductors, wirenuts??? No! Just decide what you think an AHJ would approve.

 

[Gregg Harris]

Took this from the residential code because i do not want to find it under the building code.

115.6.2 Used materials and equipment.

The use of used materials which meet the requirements of this code for new materials is permitted. Used equipment, appliances and devices shall not be reused unless approved by the residential building official.

Now does it say wire, conductors, wirenuts??? No! Just decide what you think an AHJ would approve.

IBC 104.9.1 same verbiage

 

[rlcguy]

Thanks for the replies. I will have to talk to my AHJ and see where they stand on this. Thanks for the info.

 

[petersonra]

Took this from the residential code because i do not want to find it under the building code.

115.6.2 Used materials and equipment.

The use of used materials which meet the requirements of this code for new materials is permitted. Used equipment, appliances and devices shall not be reused unless approved by the residential building official.

Now does it say wire, conductors, wirenuts??? No! Just decide what you think an AHJ would approve.

are not wire, conductors, or wirenuts material? they certainly are not equipment, appliances, or devices.

in any case, this is in the residential code. I doubt the OP was referring to a residence.

 

[rlcguy]

I probably should have included the scenario that brought this question to me to resolve in the first place.

I hold j-cards as an outside and inside wireman for an electric utility. We also have some water and wastewater systems that we do the electrical maintenance on. I removed some wire on a circuit and replaced it with longer conductors as we needed to move the equipment that the circuit fed. My foreman had me recycle the original conductors. My operations superintendant saw them in the recycle and brought them to the shop all excited about how much money we could save by reusing that wire somewhere else. Sometimes we do if there isn't any obvious nicking of iinsulation, or the pulling was easy. I let my foreman and the supt verbally duke it out over that one.
:rant:
The foreman talked to me later and stated he thought it was in the NEC somewhere describing not reusing conductor. I told him I couldn't remember seeing that article. I looked some more and gave up. That's when I remembered this forum and brought the question here.

So the statement about it not being residential is correct. But it is nice to know that there may be something there to watch out for, depending on AHJ interpretation. Professionally I don't like the idea of reusing conductors as there is to much left to chance by the time a conductor is pulled 3 times. I don't "expect" the NEC to spell out every instance that we might come up against out for us. I think we can determine neat and workmanlike for ourselves. I was just curious if there was a specific code reference in this area. It would make it easier to convince a completely non electrical superintendant about why "perfectly good looking" conductor ends up in the recycle occasionally. Particularly when it is on a critical system at a wastewater facility.

 

[cowboyjwc]

Well to be honest with you I thought there used to be a code against it too. I've never called it, but I thought it was there.:dunce:

 

[petersonra]

Well to be honest with you I thought there used to be a code against it too. I've never called it, but I thought it was there.:dunce:

there are a lot of common practices that people believe are code but never have been. one I see all the time is people that believe a lug used to bond to a piece of metal has to have the paint ground off under the lug. they just do not believe the threads of the screw holding the lug in place are adequate.

 

[rlcguy]

petersonra,

I have been red tagged because I didn't have enough paint scraped from the panel so the AHJ could see it scraped away on all sides of the lug.

 

[cowboyjwc]

there are a lot of common practices that people believe are code but never have been. one I see all the time is people that believe a lug used to bond to a piece of metal has to have the paint ground off under the lug. they just do not believe the threads of the screw holding the lug in place are adequate.

Well they think that, because that's what it says. "....shall be removed from threads and other contact surfaces......" To me other contact surfaces is where ever it touches. And I've never seen anyone ever run a tap through the hole to remove the paint from the threads.