Underground conduit: NM vs. THWN

Status
Not open for further replies.

pdel

New member
What is the section, if any, of 2004 California/2002 NEC that prohibits NM cable in underground rigid conduit (P40 PVC) and/or requires individual THWN?
 
Look at the sections that they referenced. You also need to keep in mind that an underground conduit of any type is considered a wet location. Is NM suitable for a wet location?
 
Just a few side bar questions while we're on this subject :

Is it acceptable to strip off the jacket of the NMC and paper wrapping around the EGC and use these conductors for something like an AC fixture whip ? I believe the insulated conductors in NMC are THHN. Am I wrong ?

Is it required for the EGC inside PVC to be insulated ?

The whip obviously isn't buried so, is the inside of the whip considered a wet or damp location ?
 
Is it acceptable to strip off the jacket of the NMC and paper wrapping around the EGC and use these conductors for something like an AC fixture whip ? I believe the insulated conductors in NMC are THHN. Am I wrong ?

This is a violation of 310.11, which requires that conductors be marked.

Is it required for the EGC inside PVC to be insulated ?

No.

The whip obviously isn't buried so, is the inside of the whip considered a wet or damp location ?

The inside of a conduit in not a seperate location. The area where the conduit is located is the determining factor. So if the whip is in a wet location the inside of the whip is also in a wet location.

Chris
 
goldstar said:
Just a few side bar questions while we're on this subject :

Is it acceptable to strip off the jacket of the NMC and paper wrapping around the EGC and use these conductors for something like an AC fixture whip ? I believe the insulated conductors in NMC are THHN. Am I wrong ?

They may have THHN insulation but are not marked AFAIK.

Any reason you can't just run the NM as is in the whip?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top