neon secondary conductors inside wall?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

btharmy

Senior Member
Location
Indiana
Hi all. Had a customer fail their annual fire inspection for a dozen or so neon signs installed (8 years ago) with the secondary conductors inside the wall between the xfmr and the tubes. The wires are however run inside steel flexible metal conduit inside the wall. The wire enters the wall through a round metal plate attached to the drywall with a 1/2" threaded hole in the middle. There is a 1/2" flex connector installed from the back side with a continuous run of 1/2" flex up the wall cavity (approx. 4') and out near the top of the wall, terminating in a 1/2" connector in the xfmr junction box. So, the secondary wires are encased in the flex from the xfmr j-box until they emerge from the wall at the sign location. I can't find anything in article 600 that would indicate this an improper install. The fire marshal (we have been e-mailing back and forth about this issue) is referencing that nfpa70 does not allow neon secondary conductors to be run inside walls. I don't have nfpa70 (yet), only the '08 NEC. So, what do you guys think? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
He just refuses to call it the NEC then. Every time I refer to the NEC he comes back with "NFPA70 doesn't say that", or "NFPA70 says this" implying it is a totally separate publication. Even though mine says nfpa70 on the bottom of the cover? I, nor many other electricians I work with are accustomed to calling it that nfpa70. Maybe the same way fire marshals are not accustomed to calling it the NEC. Not a big deal.
 
of course it's the same old game. He hasn't provided me with any specific artile to prove it is a violation, but wants me to provide a specific article to show that it is not a violation.
 
600.31(A) says it must be an approved wiring method of chapter 3 on the secondaries.

600.31 Neon Secondary-Circuit Wiring, 1000 Volts or Less, Nominal.
(A) Wiring Method. Conductors shall be installed using any wiring method included in Chapter 3 suitable for the conditions.
(B) Insulation and Size. Conductors shall be listed, insulated, and not smaller than 18 AWG.
(C) Number of Conductors in Raceway. The number of conductors in a raceway shall be in accordance with Table 1 of Chapter 9.
(D) Installation. Conductors shall be installed so they are not subject to physical damage.
(E) Protection of Leads. Bushings shall be used to protect wires passing through an opening in metal.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the install is good. Ask him for an article that doesn't allow this.
 
My next step is meeting him on site to go over the inistallation, hopefully before the end of the week. Until then I'm trying to find the article he says states that secondary conductors can't be run inside of a wall.
 
btharmy said:
of course it's the same old game. He hasn't provided me with any specific artile to prove it is a violation, but wants me to provide a specific article to show that it is not a violation.
Click to expand...


600.32(A)(1) bla bla flexible metal conduit, bla bla bla installed per chapter 3 requirements.
 
He probably didn't provide the article because it doesn't exist. Wouldn't be the first time........ Won't be the last.
 
Thanks for the replies. I was beginning to think I was missing something. Guess I'm on the right track after all. Hopefully he'll see it that way as well.
 
It is his job to site the number he thinks you violated. It is not your job to educate him. Problem is your customer will end up with him as a problem if you handle it wrong.
 
Of course, everything has been handled in a very civil manner. I am trying to save the customer the cost of re-wiring a dozen or so neon signs. By the way, how would you guys charge for time to do extra homework and correspond with the inspector. Just curious.
 
btharmy said:
Of course, everything has been handled in a very civil manner. I am trying to save the customer the cost of re-wiring a dozen or so neon signs. By the way, how would you guys charge for time to do extra homework and correspond with the inspector. Just curious.
Click to expand...

That would depend on the customer. If he is a regular customer and your not paying an employee i would just eat it. It is him that wants you there to deal with the inspector so it is work and should be charged. If it is a special trip just to handle this and nothing else then use your own judgement as to charge or not. You need to have all the right answers and so far your getting them. I would go with NEC book in hand high lighted. That way he can not say much unless he can find a number to support his thinking. If your prepaired for the battle he will likely back down. Hopefully it can stay friendly.
 
From our correspondence I get the impression that he may be new. I dont want to offend by asking. I guess I'll find out if we actually meet. I shot him another email with a little more detail, including a diagram of the installation. If that works this might all be over. He told me all I have to do is provide documentation showing that the install is code compliant and the violation goes away. He has been nothing but friendly and I am following suit. I'm sure we'll stay cordial since I have worked in the same commercial/industrial park for 10+ years and will probably be bumping into him for years to come. Whether or not my customer will be shelling out $$$ is another story.
 
what about 10,000 to 15,000 volts secondarys??

what about 10,000 to 15,000 volts secondarys??

1000 VOLTS I thought neon (luminous tube transformers) secondarys run between 10,000 and 15,000 volts ????

BUT-- overall. From the description the Install is better than most.





Dennis Alwon said:
600.31(A) says it must be an approved wiring method of chapter 3 on the secondaries.



Sounds like the install is good. Ask him for an article that doesn't allow this.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top