Large Wire Pull Problems

[Jon456]

So Bob, are you saying that for every electrical job, the contract must spell out in granular detail, not only what tasks are to be performed, but also exactly how the work is to be performed in order to assure that industry standards are met? And in the absence of such specific instructions in the contract, then the contractor is free to use any hack method he chooses in order to save time and cut costs?

How will meggering conductors that are in a PVC conduit do any good?

If the conduit is filled with air, and there are no places where one exposed conductor is in contact with another exposed conductor, then meggering will serve no purpose. However, our five "old work" conduits are all filled with brackish water (they open into a Christy box below the level of our Winter ground water table). I would expect damaged insulation would be detectable with a megger test in these conduits.

In any case, why would it need to be done by a 3rd party? Why don't you do it if you think it needs doing?

So that the tests are performed independently. The contractor we are working with has lied and obfuscated on a number of issues. I'd do it myself but I don't have the equipment.

 

[petersonra]

So Bob, are you saying that for every electrical job, the contract must spell out in granular detail, not only what tasks are to be performed, but also exactly how the work is to be performed in order to assure that industry standards are met? And in the absence of such specific instructions in the contract, then the contractor is free to use any hack method he chooses in order to save time and cut costs?

I am saying that the time to determine just how the contract is to be executed is prior to the contract being signed, not after the work is complete. i keep asking what the contract syas, and given the deafening silence I am guessing whoever made the contract did not include any of the things you now beleive should ave been included.

If the conduit is filled with air, and there are no places where one exposed conductor is in contact with another exposed conductor, then meggering will serve no purpose. However, our five "old work" conduits are all filled with brackish water (they open into a Christy box below the level of our Winter ground water table). I would expect damaged insulation would be detectable with a megger test in these conduits.

So that the tests are performed independently. The contractor we are working with has lied and obfuscated on a number of issues. I'd do it myself but I don't have the equipment.

Now you are claiming the contractor lied. What did he lie about? Who did he lie to? Just how is that relavent to whether the work was done according to the contract.

I am curious what your role in this might be. Are you responsible for ensuring contract compliance? Compliance with company standards that may or may not have been met?

 

[petersonra]

If the conduit is filled with air, and there are no places where one exposed conductor is in contact with another exposed conductor, then meggering will serve no purpose. However, our five "old work" conduits are all filled with brackish water (they open into a Christy box below the level of our Winter ground water table). I would expect damaged insulation would be detectable with a megger test in these conduits.

Are you planning to put one megger lead on the cable and the other on the PVC conduit?

I suppose you could run some kind of bare electrode down into the conduit until it is below the water level for the second electrode if you were able to thread it down that far without damaging the conductors that are already there.

 

[Jon456]

I am saying that the time to determine just how the contract is to be executed is prior to the contract being signed, not after the work is complete.

The work is not complete; it is in progress. And I continue to witness problems and issues that, IMO, are violations of proper industry practices. For example, as I type this he has his crew pulling conductors through our 480V, 3-phase, 1,000A electrical distribution panel while the panel is ENERGIZED (the exposed hot lugs are less than 12" above the wire pull). I insisted that he de-energize the panel before making the pull, but the contractor managed to convince the facility owner that there was zero chance of anyone getting electrocuted. :happysad:

My point is that we, the customer, should not have to anticipate every possible right/wrong way of doing this job and spell that out in the contract. Since the owner, who negotiated the contract, is not an engineer nor an electrician, it would be impossible for him to do that. Even if we could do that, the contract would become a phone-book-sized document. At some point, one must expect that a professional contractor is going to do his job professionally and adhere to the accepted and recommended standards and industry best practices. If not, then why hire licensed professionals in the first place? I mean, if the contract is going to include detailed instructions for performing every step of every task involved in the job, then why not hire a handyman to follow those instructions?

Now you are claiming the contractor lied. What did he lie about? Who did he lie to? Just how is that relavent to whether the work was done according to the contract.

I am not "claiming" he lied. He has lied (statement of fact), to me and to the owner on a number of issues; I do not need to discuss the details here. It is only relevant because it demonstrates a lack of responsibility and professionalism on his part, and a lack of trust on our part. You asked why we would want an independent third-party electrician to megger the conductors. This is the reason.

 

[Jon456]

I suppose you could run some kind of bare electrode down into the conduit until it is below the water level for the second electrode if you were able to thread it down that far without damaging the conductors that are already there.

^^^ That one.

The way the conduits are buried, when they are filled with water, the water will just be overflowing into the concrete-cast bottom of the Christy box while at the same time the water level will be just below the top of the conduit stub-ups inside our distribution panel. We could easily insert a bare electrode several inches into the conduit at either end and make contact with the water without any risk of damaging our conductors.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

...My point is that we, the customer, should not have to anticipate every possible right/wrong way of doing this job and spell that out in the contract. Since the owner, who negotiated the contract, is not an engineer nor an electrician, it would be impossible for him to do that. Even if we could do that, the contract would become a phone-book-sized document. At some point, one must expect that a professional contractor is going to do his job professionally and adhere to the accepted and recommended standards and industry best practices. If not, then why hire licensed professionals in the first place? I mean, if the contract is going to include detailed instructions for performing every step of every task involved in the job, then why not hire a handyman to follow those instructions? ...

If you want the work to be per "standard industry practices", (what ever they are) then you need to say that in the contract. You don't need the details, but you need to specify things like compliance with OSHA and other safety rules, the NEC, and standard practices such as those published by NECA or others. If you don't specify those types of things, then the contractor can do what ever he thinks is necessary to get the job done.

 

[petersonra]

It appears to me that the owner trusts the contractor more then he values your opinion.

I would not get too worked up about it. It will not be the last time something is done that you do not like.

BTW, there are standards and practices for installing this kind of thing that can be referenced in a contract without making the contract 6" thick.

I would also point out that the work practices you think are "industry standard" and/or "best practice" might turn out to just be what you are used to.

 

[Jon456]

If you want the work to be per "standard industry practices", (what ever they are) then you need to say that in the contract. You don't need the details, but you need to specify things like compliance with OSHA and other safety rules, the NEC, and standard practices such as those published by NECA or others. If you don't specify those types of things, then the contractor can do what ever he thinks is necessary to get the job done.

Really? So if the contract does not specify compliance with NEC, then the contractor is allowed to violate the NEC? I find that hard to believe. If nothing else, it seems that would be contrary to the state's licencing regulations.

In any case, the owner has not provided me with a copy of the contract, so I don't know how much detail is covered, nor what standards are specified. There is a third-party company that assisted in developing the contract and is managing the overall progress of the project; these types of projects are all that this company does. Therefore, I'm going to assume the proper verbiage was put into the contract. So based on that assumption, let's get back to my original question: do we have legitimate concerns (from an industry best-practices standpoint) with the way the wire pulls are being conducted?

 

[petersonra]

Really? So if the contract does not specify compliance with NEC, then the contractor is allowed to violate the NEC? I find that hard to believe. If nothing else, it seems that would be contrary to the state's licencing regulations.

In any case, the owner has not provided me with a copy of the contract, so I don't know how much detail is covered, nor what standards are specified. There is a third-party company that assisted in developing the contract and is managing the overall progress of the project; these types of projects are all that this company does. Therefore, I'm going to assume the proper verbiage was put into the contract. So based on that assumption, let's get back to my original question: do we have legitimate concerns (from an industry best-practices standpoint) with the way the wire pulls are being conducted?

There is a hierarchy here that you seem to be forgetting.

State law (or maybe local ordinances) would be in place that would require compliance with whatever codes that would apply that have been adopted in the jurisdiction where the work is being done. Presumably the jurisdiction where the work is being done requires compliance with the NEC. So that part is likely covered regardless of what is in the contract as a private contract cannot contrvene laws and/or ordinances.

Who is we? It seems like the owner has hired someone to manage the project. it seems like it is their problem to assess whether the project is being handled appropriately. It seems like you are not involved in the project. I am not sure why it is you are so worked up about it.

 

[cowboyjwc]

Have you talked to your inspector about any of your concerns?

 

[Jon456]

It appears to me that the owner trusts the contractor more then he values your opinion.

No, that's not the case (although I can see how you would assume that based on the limited information in this thread). He's busy with the overall business end of this project, including dealing with a lot of other issues that the contractor has dropped the ball on. Additionally, the project is way behind schedule, so there's some desire on the owner's part to just get the job completed. The owner acknowledges the problems I've raised, and he concurs. The reason I posted this thread is because the owner asked me to research industry standards to back up our position that the wire pull was done poorly: he need's "ammo" to justify charging the contractor for testing the conductors for damaged insulation.

Regarding the pull through the energized panel, the owner did hear my concerns. He went back and forth with the contractor about the issue. But when the contractor came back and said, "zero percent chance of accident", the owner basically threw up his hands and allowed work to proceed; it was a battle he didn't want to continue to fight (considering the many issues we are dealing with at this point).

There is a hierarchy here that you seem to be forgetting. State law (or maybe local ordinances) would be in place that would require compliance with whatever codes that would apply that have been adopted in the jurisdiction where the work is being done. Presumably the jurisdiction where the work is being done requires compliance with the NEC. So that part is likely covered regardless of what is in the contract as a private contract cannot contrvene laws and/or ordinances.

I'm not the one forgetting that: that's basically been my argument all along. It's others in this thread who have stated or implied that compliance with codes and regulations must be stipulated in the contract for us to hold the contractor accountable to those codes and regulations.

Who is we? It seems like the owner has hired someone to manage the project. it seems like it is their problem to assess whether the project is being handled appropriately. It seems like you are not involved in the project. I am not sure why it is you are so worked up about it.

We are the company, primarily the owner and myself. When I stated earlier that a third-party company was hired to assist in managing the project, that is strictly administrative/business support. They do not provide any on-site job supervision. I am the on-site project manager and the company's representative involved in the day-to-day operations of this project.

 

[petersonra]

I'm not the one forgetting that: that's basically been my argument all along. It's others in this thread who have stated or implied that compliance with codes and regulations must be stipulated in the contract for us to hold the contractor accountable to those codes and regulations.

no one here has even suggested that actual codes or regulations don't have to be abided by because they are not referenced in the contract. You never said anything about them violating any code. The only thing you have brought up that is just "wrong" is working inside the energized box. Everything else is just things you don't like but that may or may not be code. then you claim the contractor is lying and not adhering to standards that you cannot say are even required by the contract.

Most companies have rules about compliance with OSHA and other safety requirements that their contractors are required to follow as a matter of the contract.

If you believe they are this blatantly involved in an OSHA violation, drop a dime on them.

We are the company, primarily the owner and myself. When I stated earlier that a third-party company was hired to assist in managing the project, that is strictly administrative/business support. They do not provide any on-site job supervision. I am the on-site project manager and the company's representative involved in the day-to-day operations of this project.

About Jon456
Occupation Electrician Trainee
How are you related to the electrical industry? I'm a nephew

I wonder why your uncle did not provide a copy of the contract to the "on-site project manager and the company's representative".

 

[PetrosA]

...I am the on-site project manager and the company's representative involved in the day-to-day operations of this project.

That being said, I'm surprised you didn't demand a copy of the contract with the EC.

There are two slippery words you've used a number of times: "Hack" and "Professional." They can both be used, in my experience, abou any electrician or installer, depending on the job and the circumstances. I've been called both at various times, although the guy who called me a hack happens to be a blood relative who feels a ridiculous need to compete with me .

I know guys who will spend hours on something to make it perfect - leveling a box to within a fraction of a degree, at least on one side...; making sure no piece of romex is twisted before stapling; trimming each wire in a wallcase to within a fraction of an inch; futzing with solar racks till they're level within 1/8" over a 60' span. Yes, their jobs look good, but many of the aspects will go unnoticed and will have no effect on performance whatsoever. Calling an installer with lower standards a hack would be wrong.

What you mention that would concern me are what I'd call negligent safety practices - pulling wires with earth moving equipment with guys handling those wires at the other end; pulling in live panels. etc.

Regarding your concerns over the pulled wires, I would look into what your options are from the contractor as far as warranty or liability if those wires fail in a given amount of time, and I would contact the manufacturer to ask whether the pulling technique voids their installation/handling instructions. It may be a simple violation of their instructions that works to your advantage, just as installing Romex in extreme cold would.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Really? So if the contract does not specify compliance with NEC, then the contractor is allowed to violate the NEC? I find that hard to believe. If nothing else, it seems that would be contrary to the state's licencing regulations. ...

I have never seen an electrical contract that did not specify compliance with the NEC. In areas with permits and inspections, code compliance may be accomplished by the inspection...in areas without inspection it is buyer beware.

 

[mkgrady]

I have never seen an electrical contract that did not specify compliance with the NEC. In areas with permits and inspections, code compliance may be accomplished by the inspection...in areas without inspection it is buyer beware.

I suspect the contract says next to nothing that would help with the OP's concerns. People that do not understand the business of electrical construction run a risk when they write a contract to perform electrical work. The OP should get a copy of what the contract says. Without that there isn't anything left to say

 

[Jon456]

You never said anything about them violating any code. The only thing you have brought up that is just "wrong" is working inside the energized box. Everything else is just things you don't like but that may or may not be code.

You're correct: I never claimed in my original post that he violated code. (He did violate code in one of the feeder pulls as I alluded to in post #17, but that's to be the topic of another thread.)

Unfortunately, this thread got sidetracked on the issue of contracts and codes which was not my intent. I simply wanted to know if the issues I observed and outlined above are accepted industry practices or if they violated accepted industry practices (whether or not such practices are or are not detailed in the contract). If the consensus among professionals here is that what the contractor is doing is A-OK, then I will report that to the owner. However, I have already received some replies here that agree with my concerns.

then you claim the contractor is lying

Here you go again. It was not a "claim", it was a statement of fact. Why are you advocating on his behalf when you have no first-hand knowledge of the situation? Do you know him personally? If not, then why are you unwilling to accept that I am telling you the truth? The reality is that he has lied and obfuscated about a number of issues regarding this project: to me, to the owner, to the rep from the third-party company assisting with the administrative management of this project. It doesn't matter if you believe it or not; your unwillingness to accept that doesn't change the fact that it happened. And the ONLY reason I even mentioned it was because you questioned why we wanted a third-party to verify the integrity of our conductors, rather than trust the contractor to police himself.

I know that I hold myself to a high standard of work (and my boss knows that about me also). I am willing to accept that not everyone else will at that level. And it's a whole different ball game when you're running a crew of workers: obviously the contractor cannot hover over everyone on the job. But his leadership on this job has been practically non-existent. And I think he has crossed the line numerous times between doing the job expeditiously and doing a "hack" job.

Perhaps my biggest complaint about him is that he will not take responsibility for his problems and failures on this job: he constantly tries to make excuses, blame others, obfuscate, and lie. That is a character flaw that I refuse to accept. If that's the kind of man you'd like to work with, I'll be happy to refer him to you.

If you believe they are this blatantly involved in an OSHA violation, drop a dime on them.

Are you serious?

I wonder why your uncle did not provide a copy of the contract to the "on-site project manager and the company's representative".

That "nephew" comment was a tongue-in-cheek response I made years ago to the question about being related to the electrical industry. Sheesh, some people just can't take a joke. For the record, I am in no way related to the owner or anyone else involved in this project.

(Also FTR, the moderators here already slapped me on the wrist for that silly comment back when I first joined. I thought it was deleted a long time ago.)

 

[johnmccoll]

I understand your concerns and the concerns of the owner, you pay good money for a job and expect that job to be fine correctly. With that being said, let me avoid the argument and address your concerns with my very humble opinion.
1. I do not foresee a big problem with stringing the wire out this way. Walking on it is really not a good idea and basic customer service dictates they should have stopped after you requested them to do so. With that being said, I think most of us that have pulled wire (especially large wire) in an imperfect world have done his and I suspect that no damage was done to the conductors.
2. While I would have probably swabbed each conduit with a rag before the pull, I again doubt that the lack of doing so will cause problems. Had it not been in the specs/contract, I would not go to the expense of using a mandrel or duct swab.
3. I have used allot of things to pull big wire. Backhoe, pickups, skid steers, line trucks, etc. I have never had the luxury of a tugger as you described. Your dealing with large wire, and in my opinion, he would have damaged his pulling sock or whatever head he tied long before he damaged the wire. Also, you stated that they used a rope to pull the conductors, which is what I would expect, I don't know of a pull rope that will fit in 4" conduit that will withstand enough tension to damage these conductors.
4. The conductors you mentioned are rated for wet location. I highly doubt that they were damaged in any why by being pulled through a little water.
I know that these are probably not the responses that you were looking for, however they are only my opinion. I really see nothing too alarming with what you described. I have not seen anything and an forming an opinion based solely on what I read. If you feel that strongly, perhaps you should contact your local inspector and visit with him. Remember however that no matter what job your doing, the person looking over your shoulder often thinks your doing it wrong. Pulling 350 and 500 kcmil wire looks and sounds easy until you start to wrestle it, and then it becomes work! This EC should be more than happy to meg the wire to put your mind at ease and I suspect that doing so will demonstrate that although it may not have looked pretty, no damage was done by this installation.

 

[Jon456]

I know that these are probably not the responses that you were looking for

Actually, I was looking for honest opinions about the concerns we've been having with the wire pulls. You gave me your honest opinion, so it was EXACTLY the response I was looking for. Thanks -- to you and to the others who actually addressed my concerns in this thread.

Regarding pulling the XHHW jacketed wire through water, my issue was not with the insulation (which is rated for wet locations), but rather the exposed ends of the wires which were not sealed. My concern was that the brackish water (i.e., salt water/fresh water mix) would enter between the strands at the open ends of the wires, possibly causing corrosion of the wire strands. My particular concern was with our existing aluminum feeders which were pulled out and pulled back in with the stripped lug ends exposed.

As for the tension and methodology of the pulls, my concern was not so much about the metal wire, but rather the risk of damage to the insulation jacket (like the damage we discovered on one of our 500 mcm aluminum feeders when we pulled it out of the conduit).

 

[petersonra]

It appears to me that the OP has some kind of personal grudge against the EC in this case and there is nothing anyone here can say that will change that any.

I don't have any first hand information about what is going on here but the way you dribble out bits and pieces of information over days and many posts is suspicious in and of itself. I can understand why you might want to be circumspect about certain things, but really nothing that you have brought up is something that is a for sure NEC violation. If you are trying to get people to tell you there are for certain violations it is not likely to happen.

And yes - I was serious that if you thought the contractor's actions were a serious safety hazard and you were unable to get him to change a risky practice when it was brought up to him your only option would appear to be to report it to OSHA. You obviously don't want to do that for whatever reasons so obviously it does not seem important enough to you to take it any farther.

The problem with second and third hand information is one almost never gets the whole story. I suspect there is a much larger back story being untold here that may well have a lot of bearing on the situation. Since you seem unwilling to let us in on the full story, you are not likely to get a whole lot of support for your contention that this EC is in the wrong.

All of us have dealt with customers that cannot be satisfied no matter what we do.

 

[Jon456]

It appears to me that the OP has some kind of personal grudge against the EC in this case and there is nothing anyone here can say that will change that any.

Please carefully read the above two posts (#37 & #38) and then tell me again how I'm not being fair-minded. My problem with this contractor is solely with the way he is performing our work, and the way he is (mis)managing our project. It's not personal, it's professional. (And I am in the trade, so this is not just the opinion of an uninformed layperson.)

If someone were to go to a doctor for an operation, and the doctor made some mistakes in the surgery, would you consider the patient's dissatisfaction to be merely the result of a "personal grudge"?

And yes - I was serious that if you thought the contractor's actions were a serious safety hazard and you were unable to get him to change a risky practice when it was brought up to him your only option would appear to be to report it to OSHA. You obviously don't want to do that for whatever reasons so obviously it does not seem important enough to you to take it any farther.

This is a job at our facility. I am not the owner of the facility. My job is to manage the project, represent the interests of our company, and report to my boss (the owner). The contractor saw fit to pull through an energized panel (for unexplained reasons, since we were willing to shut-down power at our facility); this despite my strong objections, and despite the concerns of my boss. As I stated earlier, my boss (who is a businessman; not an electrician), after going round-and-round on this issue with the contractor, decided to give-up on this one battle and let the contractor exercise his own judgement with regards to working in the live panel. Calling OSHA and/or an inspector would not just bring down hell on the contractor, but also on our company since this is ultimately our project on our property. And you wonder why I'm not going to "drop the dime"?

All I can do is give my boss my professional opinion and best advice, using all available resources at my disposal. That is why I read the NEC and why I'm here in this forum. It's up to him to decide how to deal with the contractor.

the way you dribble out bits and pieces of information over days and many posts is suspicious in and of itself.

I thought that my initial post was quite clear. I described what I thought were technical problems regarding the wire pull and I solicited the input of other trade professionals to get their expert opinions on the TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE PULL. I never intended to make this thread about the contractor, but that's where you kept wanting to take it. My fault was that I responded to your posts with additional information (like why we wanted to hire a third-party electrician to test the conductors, rather than trust the contractor to test them himself).

but really nothing that you have brought up is something that is a for sure NEC violation. If you are trying to get people to tell you there are for certain violations it is not likely to happen.

Please re-read my original post and show me where I stated -- or even suspected -- that the pull violated NEC. Go on, I'll wait. I asked about industry standards and best-practices. Only in one later post did I allude to the contractor committing an NEC violation; I specifically did not discuss that in detail because this thread was not about that issue.

The problem with second and third hand information is one almost never gets the whole story. I suspect there is a much larger back story being untold here that may well have a lot of bearing on the situation. Since you seem unwilling to let us in on the full story, you are not likely to get a whole lot of support for your contention that this EC is in the wrong.

Obviously, it would not be appropriate nor practical for me to list and discuss ALL the problems we've had with this contractor over the course of this project. This is not a court of law, and I did not come here to air grievances or to seek condemnation of the contractor. I ONLY wanted opinions as to whether the wire pulls, as described, were performed professionally and in accordance with industry standards and best practices.