Re-identification of White Conductor

Status
Not open for further replies.
infinity

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician (retired)
Spoke to a fellow electrician today. He told me that two different inspector's recently required him when re-identifying a white conductor that is within a panel that it must be taped for it's entire length. This is a white conductor from a cable assembly where the white is being re-identified and used an an ungrounded conductor. No code reference was given other than the comment that the NEC requires it to be re-identified where it's visible (meaning it's entire length). IMO this is completely incorrect and one ring of black tape on the white conductor adjacent to the CB would satisfy the requirement. Comments?
 
The article is 200.7(C)1.Sounds like the entire cable where visible needs to be reidentified.

(C) Circuits of 50 Volts or More. The use of insulation that is white or gray or that has three continuous white stripes for other than a grounded conductor for circuits of 50 volts or more shall be permitted only as in (1) through (3).
(1) If part of a cable assembly and where the insulation is permanently reidentified to indicate its use as an ungrounded conductor, by painting or other effective means at its termination, and at each location where the conductor is visible and accessible. Identification shall encircle the insulation and shall be a color other than white, gray, or green.
 
I don't agree with this because of 200.6 B 3. Now if it was the Equipment grounding conductor then I would agree because of 250.119 A 2 a.
 
by painting or other effective means at its termination, and at each location where the conductor is visible and accessible. Identification shall encircle the insulation
Click to expand...


It doesn't say the entire length. It says all the way aound it.
 
RUWired said:
The article is 200.7(C)1.Sounds like the entire cable where visible needs to be reidentified.

(C) Circuits of 50 Volts or More. The use of insulation that is white or gray or that has three continuous white stripes for other than a grounded conductor for circuits of 50 volts or more shall be permitted only as in (1) through (3).
(1) If part of a cable assembly and where the insulation is permanently reidentified to indicate its use as an ungrounded conductor, by painting or other effective means at its termination, and at each location where the conductor is visible and accessible. Identification shall encircle the insulation and shall be a color other than white, gray, or green.
Click to expand...


Dang... I disagree with my earlier statement. There is nothing I see in that language that causes me to think the entire wire has to be covered. In fact it's is the same language I see in reidentifying the larger wires.
 
I believe the book references identifying at accessible and visible locations with common sense in mind. If you can access and see it, then you would plainly see any re-identification. I could be all wet though. haha
 
In 200.7(C)(1) it even says ' at it's terminations ", I agree with the one wrap at c.b. is

code compliant, and any other splice point also.
 
I agree the wording of 210.7(A)(1) only requires that the marking encircle the conductor in one spot and this must happen in any place that the conductor is visible. So if this re-identified conductor were spliced in a few junction boxes at each location where it were visible it would require a marking that encircled the conductor. Sounds like these inspectors both got incorrect information from the same source. :rolleyes:

I just dug this up from Mike:

1099594542_2.jpg
 
I have always taped the entire length but the code does not require it. Ken needs to check earlier versions, perhaps it was stated in one of those earlier codes.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Ken needs to check earlier versions, perhaps it was stated in one of those earlier codes.
Click to expand...


Not as far back as 81 but, before the 99 cycle there was no 200-7(A),(B), and (C), there were only exceptions to 200-7 and in switch legs or travelers re-identification was not required at all.

I think there was some wording of just the "ends of the conductor" in the 47 edition.

Roger
 
Dennis Alwon said:
I have always taped the entire length but the code does not require it. Ken needs to check earlier versions, perhaps it was stated in one of those earlier codes.
Click to expand...

Actually, at one time it was not required. In fact, instead of the subject being ignored, it was specifically mentioned.

1975 to 1996 NEC 200.7 Exception #2: A cable containing an insualted conductior with a white or natural gray outer finish shall be permitted for single-pole, 3-way, or 4-way switch loops where the white or natural gray conductor is used for the supply to the switch, but not as a return conductor from the switch to the switched outlet. In these applications, re-identification of the white or natural gray conductor shall not be required.

The portion in blue was introducted in 1975. Prior to that, the exception was followed with: "This exception makes it unnecessary to paint the terminal of the identified conductor at the switch outlet."
 
Last edited:
Another interesting point is that before the 2002 edition, gray (not to be confused with natural gray) was just another color and could be used for any ungrounded conductor.

Roger
 
Identifying the conductor at its termination point is always tough for me, because most times I strip off all paint, tape, and insulation before I tighten the terminal. Makes for a low impedance termination.:D

If I have time and tape, I'll tape the length of the white from connector to breaker in the panel, especially if there is only one "re-identified conductor" offending the eyes. In a device box or j-box, one wrap is sufficient according to NEC, IMO.
 
roger said:
Not as far back as 81 but, before the 99 cycle there was no 200-7(A),(B), and (C), there were only exceptions to 200-7 and in switch legs or travelers re-identification was not required at all.

I think there was some wording of just the "ends of the conductor" in the 47 edition.

Roger
Click to expand...


The wording in my other post goes back to at least 1937. The numbering system changed twixt 35 and 37, so I haven't been able to see if it goes back further than 37.

roger said:
Another interesting point is that before the 2002 edition, gray (not to be confused with natural gray) was just another color and could be used for any ungrounded conductor.

Roger
Click to expand...


Click here.
 
IMO, re-identifying these conductors is unnecessary in the first place.

Roger
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top