peter d
Senior Member
- Location
- New England
iwire said:I will not have the 2008 till Jan when the MA amendment version hits the streets.
"Hey, I'm looking for a 2008 MA NEC. Ya got one?"
iwire said:I will not have the 2008 till Jan when the MA amendment version hits the streets.
peter d said:"Hey, I'm looking for a 2008 MA NEC. Ya got one?"
iwire said:Yes, that pretty much shuts me up. :grin:
lordofpi said:One final question, though, SE is or is not permitted in raceway aboveground and indoors? This kind of became part of the debate before...
Dennis Alwon said:In my opinion if the fill capacity of the conduit is observed there should be no issue, however, I cannot imagine why someone would spend extra money to do this. If it is a sleeve to protect the wire I can understand but an entire run with se cable in it seems absurd.
lordofpi said:Well, I think it always came down to the fact that you could not secure the cable in accordance with its respective NEC article if you ran in raceway.
Securing and supporting Non-metallic sheathed cable.... Sections of cable protected from physical damage by raceway shall not be required to be secured within the raceway.
lordofpi said:Under the section pertaining to Type SE and Type USE cable assemblies, I really don't see any requirement for securing or support at all, so there goes that one. Are we there yet?![]()
lordofpi said:Hehe, I know I'm driving it home, but I just want it so that we never have to have this discussion again.
(that theory never does seem to stand the test of time, though).
Anyhow, yes, the securing argument is weak, but it exists nonetheless.
Under the section pertaining to Type SE and Type USE cable assemblies, I really don't see any requirement for securing or support at all,
Dennis Alwon said:It is there-- read art. 338.10(B)(4)(a)