charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
I agree. :smile:
Question from the NC Meeting
- Thread starter Dennis Alwon
- Start date
- Status
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
If under a building, it is under a building.
There is no where in the NEC the separates under a building into different areas such as parking areas or garages! table 300.5 is very clear to that
There is no where in the NEC the separates under a building into different areas such as parking areas or garages! table 300.5 is very clear to that
e57
Senior Member
- Location
- San Francisco, CA
If it were a driveway - how much concrete would you encase it in?
According to 2008 NEC, the entire building is a major repair garage under 511.2. Area classification is therefore under 511.3(C)(1) Floor Areas (a) Ventilation provided, and (b) Ventilation not provided. These basically say if ventilated per requirements, the floor area is unclassified, and if not ventilated it is a C1D2 area up to 18" above floor.
So if ventilated the underfloor PVC runs falls back to Table 300.5, and "Under a building" IMO.
But if not ventilated, this takes us to 501.10(A)(1)(a) Exception by way of 501.10(B)(1)(1) C1D2 General "All wiring methods permitted in 501.10(A)":
This requirement extends into non-service areas of the building unless separated, essentially, by a wall with no openings between areas.
So if ventilated the underfloor PVC runs falls back to Table 300.5, and "Under a building" IMO.
But if not ventilated, this takes us to 501.10(A)(1)(a) Exception by way of 501.10(B)(1)(1) C1D2 General "All wiring methods permitted in 501.10(A)":
SMITHGILLIS
Member
- Location
- Brooksville, FL.
I am not an electrician but my opinion is never expect any one to do what they should do! That type of gambling never pays off. I tell my techs the code is just the minimum. My goal for them is to find ways of superseding code. You see everyday that things that didn't use to be code are now. So do every thing you can to be the best and reap plenty later. We have had inspectors call us and say your name is on the permit but this is defiantly not your work. You be surprised how easy it is to work with inspectors when they see you do over and beyond almost every time.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
This question was answered without hesitation by Mark Early and not argued by any other of the 7 panelist. Keep in mind they all could have missed sections of the code that would have changed this response.
The response was T. 300.5- zero clearance under the building. He went on to explain that the reasons for the extra depths outside was the heavy vehicular traffic as well as the weather creating movement in the soil- like frost, etc.
The response was T. 300.5- zero clearance under the building. He went on to explain that the reasons for the extra depths outside was the heavy vehicular traffic as well as the weather creating movement in the soil- like frost, etc.
charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
This is not an official interpretation of Code Making Panel 3 so it is not really an official ruling and carries no weight. However, I agree with Mark and the rest of the panel. Mark is the Electrical Engineering Division Manager, runs the staff at the Code Panel Meetings, and is the Secretary of the Technical Correlating Committee meetings. Additionally, I believe Mark is a EE and PE but I am not sure of either one of those guesses.
hardworkingstiff
Senior Member
- Location
- Wilmington, NC
I can understand that opinion and think it can be justified. I will also say I never understood the 2' cover rule for conduits under a concrete driveway.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
This is not an official interpretation of Code Making Panel 3 so it is not really an official ruling and carries no weight.
I realize that hence I stated "ruling from the meeting", not from God.
Most of these question can never get an official ruling because they are very much open to interpretation.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
- Occupation
- Retired Electrical Contractor
I suppose with the heavy weight of tractor trailers and the heaving of the soil from frost etc. the conduits are safer down at 2'. Pot holes can get big at times and then there is Florida --- well you know the rest of the story.
Well, regardless of Mark's credentials, I'm going to have to disagree with his interpretation :grin:This is not an official interpretation of Code Making Panel 3 so it is not really an official ruling and carries no weight. However, I agree with Mark and the rest of the panel. Mark is the Electrical Engineering Division Manager, runs the staff at the Code Panel Meetings, and is the Secretary of the Technical Correlating Committee meetings. Additionally, I believe Mark is a EE and PE but I am not sure of either one of those guesses.
...unless, of course, the building did have the required ventilation for the floor areas to be unclassified
hardworkingstiff
Senior Member
- Location
- Wilmington, NC
I suppose with the heavy weight of tractor trailers and the heaving of the soil from frost etc. the conduits are safer down at 2'. Pot holes can get big at times and then there is Florida --- well you know the rest of the story.
If you cross under an airport runway your cover requirement is less. Interesting.
ItsHot
Senior Member
- Location
- A little piece of heaven!
I wonder why someone would be building a "new" car dealership? Must be a foriegn car brand!:smile:
LarryFine
Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
- Location
- Henrico County, VA
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor
I've got it! Have the architect re-designate the area as a runway!
- Status