# 6 ground wire has to be green, not taped.

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Easy Money

Member
Pulled conductors in thru pvc pipe underground, from the main panel to a sub panel. Pulled in a # 6 cu for the ground and taped it green. Was surprised when the inspector said the # 6 ground wire has to be green and could not be identified using green tape.
Took me awhile to find it but section 250.119 (A) does cover it. Has to be larger than # 6 to be able to identify the ground wire using green tape.
What a surprise! I use # 10 green wire but always taped the black # 8 and/ or # 6 with green tape to identify it as a ground wire.
What's the reason or logic for having to use green wire as the ground, when using wire smaller than # 4. The code allows you to use tape to identify the phase legs when using #8 or #6 wire but you can't use tape on the same size ground wire! I appreciate your thoughts and ideas.
 
I can't think of any real good reason for the requirement except, that if there wasn't a cut off point, we would see conductors as small as 14 being marked with green tape.

Why not just strip your # 6 EGC bare, this is also legal in most situations.

Roger
 
roger said:
I can't think of any real good reason for the requirement except, that if there wasn't a cut off point, we would see conductors as small as 14 being marked with green tape.

Why not just strip your # 6 EGC bare, this is also legal in most situations.

Roger
Click to expand...

And just what safety or hazard would that cause.I think NEC is helping some friends in wire buisness.
 
Jim W in Tampa said:
And just what safety or hazard would that cause.I think NEC is helping some friends in wire buisness.
Click to expand...


Jim, Jim, Jim, if the requirment were not there, someone would accuse the NFPA of "helping some freinds" in the " marking tape business" :roll: :wink:


Roger
 
And just what safety or hazard would that cause.I think NEC is helping some friends in wire buisness.
Click to expand...
I agree that there is no real saftey reason not to tape, but I don't see any additional wire sales or costs for this rule. Green wire does not cost more than black. Yes I may not use all of the green on one job but it will keep for the next one.
Donhttp://forums.mikeholt.com/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=797833
 
I think availability is an issue, too. I don't think the larger sizes are readily available at supply houses around here, but I haven't really paid much attention to this.
 
I don't think the larger sizes are readily available at supply houses around here, but I haven't really paid much attention to this.
Click to expand...
They would be if the inspectors were enforcing the code rules:D
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
They would be if the inspectors were enforcing the code rules:D
Click to expand...
Probably true. Here we are allowed to tape No. 6. Go to the supply house and ask for 6 green. The response will be something like, "we dont stock it":wink:
 
This forces a guy doing a small job to buy all the colors.Results in higher cost.

NFPA is not doing anyone other than wire makers a favor here (wonder why ?)

This is the result of privately run buisness having monopoly.NFPA is running on a fine line of being illegal in my opinion.
 
I wouldn'e mind seeing the rule changed to greater than #10 AWG.

I have been enforcing 250.119, 200.6, and 200.7 as long as I have been inspecting. It is by far the most argued violation.

I don't blame contractors for being frustrated by the rule, especially when they do a good job reidentifying #8 and #6 awg conductors. It's hard to turn down when there is nothing else to cite.
 
roger said:
I can't think of any real good reason for the requirement except, that if there wasn't a cut off point, we would see conductors as small as 14 being marked with green tape.

Roger
Click to expand...

Roger I agree that it is a cut off point. I enforce this everyday and for some reason the EC's in DC simply have never heard of this requirement.....probably mis interp or lack of crackin the book. I usually just warn them on the first time and guide them to 250.119.
 
bphgravity said:
I wouldn'e mind seeing the rule changed to greater than #10 AWG.

I have been enforcing 250.119, 200.6, and 200.7 as long as I have been inspecting. It is by far the most argued violation.

I don't blame contractors for being frustrated by the rule, especially when they do a good job reidentifying #8 and #6 awg conductors. It's hard to turn down when there is nothing else to cite.
Click to expand...

Bryan,

Same here and 100% agree with your comments in your post.
 
bphgravity said:
I wouldn'e mind seeing the rule changed to greater than #10 AWG.

I have been enforcing 250.119, 200.6, and 200.7 as long as I have been inspecting. It is by far the most argued violation.

I don't blame contractors for being frustrated by the rule, especially when they do a good job reidentifying #8 and #6 awg conductors. It's hard to turn down when there is nothing else to cite.
Click to expand...

I could deal with #10.That does not take up much space in truck or add greatly to cost.But this rule shows no reason to be there.If i am doing some RTU's and run out of green it forces me to go to supply house or stop and order it.This might be my last unit on job that needs #10 green.What do you think most guys will do? Often i have a gang box full of other colors but no green.

Perhaps someone could make a fast legal machine to color white wire as needed.
 
Bryan,
I wouldn'e mind seeing the rule changed to greater than #10 AWG.
Click to expand...
There have been a number of proposals to make a change in the minimum size that can be re-identified, but they have all been rejected.
Don
 
Greg,
Just for my education what is the intent of the minimum size?
Click to expand...
I really have no idea. In my opinion a qualified person does not need the color green to tell him that the conductor is an EGC. If he can't tell by the termination point, he has no business working on electrical systems.
Don
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top