Type uF wire

[Dennis Alwon]

So a wire that is rated for direct burial can't be in contact with earth? IMHO, a dirt crawlspace with 2' clearance between bottom of joist and dirt is not an environment where I would consider a UF subject to damage since there would have to be an extreme need to even venture into it. A 6" flex duct would make it completely impassable to any adult. Aside from the danger of encountering something nasty like a Fiddleback, poisonous snake or rabid rodent, stapling the UF or drilling the joists is going to be next to impossible in that space, and I would say that UF is just the thing for those conditions.

Did I say UF cannot be in contact with the earth? No I did not. If the wire is in a crawl space where it must be fished because of the lack or space then I think we have a different story then what the op has written. If you can crawl under there then it is subject to damage.

The 2008 NEC, in fact, requires that smaller wires than #8 cables must be run on running boards or drilled thru the joists. 334.15(C)

Twoskins-- I still think you are dead wrong. Sorry if you think that is too harsh but I don't see this as debateable. I have shown articles that will not allow this install now show me one that says you are allowed to lay uf on the ground in a crawl.

 

[bhsrnd]

I agree with Dennis in that UF is suitable for direct burial, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily acceptable to leave it laying on the top of the dirt or grass. That would imply that a person could wire receptacles in their backyard with UF laying all over the place, which isn't the case.

IMO "subject to physical damage" is a debatable topic in certain instances, because that phrase isn't defined in the NEC (at least not that I have seen). One could say that the OP's case is subject to physical damage. One could also say that every piece of NM under that house is "subject to physical damage" because, hypothetically speaking, a rat could chew through the wires. Does that make them right, probably not. It does leave it open for debate, though .

 

[mlp425]

It seems like 340.10 (4) would apply to this situation.

 

[Volta]

Seems simple. If a big guy had to fish it, he complied with 334.30(B), and it is unsupported (see 334.30).

If the audio guys actually fit in there to work, then suddenly it should be supported (see 334.30), but may have been correct previously.