RHH listing!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pierre C Belarge

Pierre C Belarge

Senior Member
Location
Westchester County, New York
Sorry if this topic has been discussed, I did not do a search...


I got a phone call today with the word that RHH/RHW has had it's listing pulled 2 days ago. Something to do with the reaction between the insulation and the zinc in the conduit. That is all I really know. I have reached out to some people who I know, that know more than me, but they are in the dark.
Is this a hoax or true?
If anyone knows, please let me know.

Thanks

and hello, I have not been here in a long time.
 
Pierre C Belarge said:
I got a phone call today with the word that RHH/RHW has had it's listing pulled 2 days ago.
Is this a hoax or true?
If anyone knows, please let me know.
Click to expand...
Don't know. My gut says hoax.

Thanks

and hello, I have not been here in a long time.
Click to expand...
No you have not, and have been missed. Good to see your name on some posts.
 
Most of the time if I am using a conductor with that insulation it is in PVC - no zinc coating to react with there.
 
I'm hoping it is a hoax. It is using that insulation which is dual listed with others, that I can specify DLO cable for tight spaces / battery racks.

I have not heard it, and folks like Southwire still have it on their website.
 
This is true, if you look at the UL link from the previous post it states:

"Furthermore, UL has removed from its certification directory all Electrical Circuit Protective Systems (FHIT) constructed with Fire Resistive Cable."

I believe that has eliminated the UL rating on RHH cable as well as RHW and MI, however MI still has the FM rating and therefore can still be used as a 2hr rated cable.

Inspectors have already gone to job sites looking into this.
 
bwyllie said:
This is true, if you look at the UL link from the previous post it states:

"Furthermore, UL has removed from its certification directory all Electrical Circuit Protective Systems (FHIT) constructed with Fire Resistive Cable."

I believe that has eliminated the UL rating on RHH cable as well as RHW and MI, however MI still has the FM rating and therefore can still be used as a 2hr rated cable.

Inspectors have already gone to job sites looking into this.
Click to expand...
Its not that RHH/RHW has had it's own listing revoked... just its use for fire-resistive certification
 
Smart $ said:
Its not that RHH/RHW has had it's own listing revoked... just its use for fire-resistive certification
Click to expand...

...because UL pulled its listing of RHH/RHW does this mean another listing company can not be used? If it has a dual listing with another co, it should not be an NEC issue ,if UL is only listing, than there is an NEC issue .
 
Last edited:
jusme123 said:
...because UL pulled its listing of RHH/RHW does this mean another listing company can not be used? If it has a dual listing with another co, it should not be an NEC issue ,if UL is only listing, than there is an NEC issue .
Click to expand...
I'm trying to point out what seems to be a misunderstanding.

AFAICT, UL did not pull its listing of RHH (or cousins)... i.e. THERMOSET-INSULATED WIRE (ZKST).

UL retracted its certification of ELECTRICAL CIRCUIT PROTECTIVE SYSTEMS (FHIT), which some (not all) incorporate RHH conductors into such systems.

...manufacturers are no longer authorized to place the UL mark or ULC mark on the following products:
  • UL Classified Fire Resistive Cable (FHJR)
  • ULC Listed Fire Resistant Cable (FHJRC)
  • UL Listed cable with "-CI" suffix (Circuit Integrity)
Furthermore, UL has removed from its certification directory all Electrical Circuit Protective Systems (FHIT) constructed with Fire Resistive Cable.
Click to expand...
 
Smart $ said:
I'm trying to point out what seems to be a misunderstanding.

AFAICT, UL did not pull its listing of RHH (or cousins)... i.e. THERMOSET-INSULATED WIRE (ZKST).

UL retracted its certification of ELECTRICAL CIRCUIT PROTECTIVE SYSTEMS (FHIT), which some (not all) incorporate RHH conductors into such systems.
Click to expand...

Wow. I've been specifying RHH type fire rated assemblies rather than MI cable or conduit built into a fire rated enclosure. I wonder what happened? May the Pyrotenanx guys got better lobbyists?
 
Smart $ said:
I'm trying to point out what seems to be a misunderstanding.

AFAICT, UL did not pull its listing of RHH (or cousins)... i.e. THERMOSET-INSULATED WIRE (ZKST).

UL retracted its certification of ELECTRICAL CIRCUIT PROTECTIVE SYSTEMS (FHIT), which some (not all) incorporate RHH conductors into such systems.
Click to expand...

thanks for clarifying smart$
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top