# NEC Amendments in the USA



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

Do you think that these rules should be added to the NEC? 

*110.12 Mechanical Execution of Work.*

Add new Subsections (C) and (D) to 110.12, as follows: 

*(C) Abandoned Conductors and Cables.* No electrical conductors or cables shall be abandoned in place. Such conductors or cables shall be removed from the building or structure back to the switchboard and panelboard unless otherwise approved based upon consideration of safety and combustibility. 

*(D) Used Materials and Equipment.* Used materials that meet the requirements of this code for new materials shall be permitted. Used equipment and devices shall not be reused unless approved.

A similar rule was found in amendments to the NEC in South Las Vegas, NV


----------



## Shockdoc (Mar 4, 2010)

110.12 (c) where practical.......open or accesible spaces only. There is an incentive these days to remove old wiring, the scrap value.
110.12(D) that is redicoulous, and sounds like a revenue generating code once again. Again the wording is vague but for instance if i remove a two year old panel and decide to reuse it on a cheap bid job, does that count?


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

I vote NO

Why should abandoned wires be completly removed? If they are safe couldn't they be boxed off and possibly re used later?

I think that would be a judgement call by the electrician on site

Same thing goes for used equipment.

Why should I have to get something "approved" if I test it out and make sure it is safe?

Sounds like a bunch of BS to me. There is such a thing as too many rules.


----------



## CTshockhazard (Aug 28, 2009)

I don't see any safety benefit to (C) whatsoever, it's just 'stuff' in the wall, ceiling, etc.

(D) is asking way too much of the AHJ.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

See the 2011 NEC Index: Cables
Abandoned
Coaxial 820.25
Definition 820.2
Communications 800.25
Definition 800.2
Fire alarm 760.25
Definition 760.2
Interconnecting
Definition 645.2
Network-powered broadband
communications 830.25
Definition 830.2
Optical fiber 770.25
Definition 770.2
Premises-powered broadband
communication 840.25
Remote-control, signaling,
and power-limited circuits
725.25
Definition 725.2


----------



## CTshockhazard (Aug 28, 2009)

Joe Tedesco said:


> See the 2011 NEC Index: Cables
> Abandoned
> Coaxial 820.25
> Definition 820.2
> ...


Removal is _not_ required, therefore; I contend, that there is no safety benefit.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Since those rules don't specify in what situations the rule should be applied, I would say no. Can you imagine a residential job where old cables have to be removed that pass thru walls etc? No thanks- I remove when I can but it is not always possible without destruction to walls and ceilings.


----------



## RobTownfold64 (Mar 17, 2011)

That would be a SICK amount of work to remove old wiring and it would end up being yet another thing that pushed customers into using Craigslist workers because they don't have to follow code like a licensed EC would.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

These words are typical for the systems identified for the sections identified above in the NEC Index and for each read as follows:

*Abandoned Cables.* The accessible portion of abandoned cables shall be removed.

or: "Where cables are identified for future use with a tag, the tag shall be of sufficient durability to withstand the environment involved."

These rules were added to help to reduce the "fire load" in a building.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Joe Tedesco said:


> These words are typical for the systems identified for the sections identified above in the NEC Index and for each read as follows:
> 
> *Abandoned Cables.* The accessible portion of abandoned cables shall be removed.
> 
> ...


Those rules don't apply to nm cable and circuit conductors or feeders.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

TRUE: 

Again see the following sections and you will see the requirements.
See the 2011 NEC Index: Cables

*Abandoned*
Coaxial 820.25
Definition 820.2
Communications 800.25
Definition 800.2
Fire alarm 760.25
Definition 760.2
Interconnecting
Definition 645.2
Network-powered broadband
communications 830.25
Definition 830.2
Optical fiber 770.25
Definition 770.2
Premises-powered broadband
communication 840.25
Remote-control, signaling,
and power-limited circuits
725.25
Definition 725.2


----------



## Rockyd (Apr 22, 2007)

Joe Tedesco said:


> These words are typical for the systems identified for the sections identified above in the NEC Index and for each read as follows:
> 
> *Abandoned Cables.* The accessible portion of abandoned cables shall be removed.
> 
> ...


Well intentioned, but a financial crusher fro all doing business. The additional cost burden to the client will help in driving work "underground"

Busybodies need to read 90.1 (C). All i can say, without being political...


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

Rockyd said:


> Well intentioned, but a financial crusher fro all doing business. The additional cost burden to the client will help in driving work "underground"
> 
> Busybodies need to read 90.1 (C). All i can say, without being political...


Again, see the rules for 110.12 South Nevada

PS: You highlighted the words in red for "fire load" in your reply quoting my message where I did not! 

Please do not change the words of the original submitter! I think that's not allowed here!

Moderators? :whistling2:


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Joe Tedesco said:


> Again, see the rules for 110.12 South Nevada
> 
> PS: You highlighted the words in red for "fire load" in your reply quoting my message where I did not!
> 
> ...


 
You have *WAY *too much free time on your hands.

Go get a hobby


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

*http://www.archive.org*

Here's something for you to do. :thumbup:


----------



## RobTownfold64 (Mar 17, 2011)

Joe Tedesco said:


> Again, see the rules for 110.12 South Nevada
> 
> PS: You highlighted the words in red for "fire load" in your reply quoting my message where I did not!
> 
> ...


It's common on all forums to highlight a bit of text in a quote to show what you are replying too. Highlighting does not equal "changing words".


----------



## Rockyd (Apr 22, 2007)

Joe Tedesco said:


> Again, see the rules for 110.12 South Nevada
> 
> PS: You highlighted the words in red for "fire load" in your reply quoting my message where I did not!
> 
> ...


No disrespect meant, I was drawing attention to the verbiage of what is being presented.

Funny you mention Southern Nevada...I've worked Vegas quite a bit in the past. They have some inspectors, and then some not so good (normally perceived as another discipline for their major - such as civil)...right now, the place is a ghost town, and will remain that way till America has money to go play with. The gold mining district will continue to do good.

One of the best things that the state of Nevada could do, is institute a state license ( yesterday i couldn't spell the word lectrican - today I R one) :no: ! 980 hours of school, and 8000 hours to a license helps stop stupid.:thumbsup:


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Joe Tedesco said:


> Here's something for you to do. :thumbup:


I don't have enough free time. I hit up this forum to take a breather from paperwork.

If I did have free I would be out doing stuff with the family,enjoying the spring weather, Etc ETC

I sure as hell wouldn't be camped out on here all day in a frett about abandoned cables and how guys highlighted my posts.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

I don't have a problem with abandoned cable in and off themselves. Where they do become an issue is above drop ceilings and under raised floors where layers of cabling are often run like spaghetti.

That said, a lot of that work isn't code compliant to begin with because of a lack of securing and supporting, so I'm not sure adding additional code articles is really the solution. Though in spirit, I might agree with one for removing abandoned cabling run in those locations.

-John


----------



## Salvatoreg02 (Feb 26, 2011)

robnj772 said:


> I vote NO
> 
> Why should abandoned wires be completly removed? If they are safe couldn't they be boxed off and possibly re used later?
> 
> ...


The whole idea of this is great $$ for us. It's more work for you to do when you are demo a large commercial office space or or other. The customer is now faced with more expenses. Now all the abandoned cables and equipment most be removed from the structure. So, look at it as if more Money to your bid and work.


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

Salvatoreg02 said:


> The whole idea of this is great $$ for us. It's more work for you to do when you are demo a large commercial office space or or other. The customer is now faced with more expenses. Now all the abandoned cables and equipment most be removed from the structure. So, look at it as if more Money to your bid and work.


Yeah, good idea, make what little work there is cost even more!!! That'll get people doing stuff! :no:

Joe, I think you've run out of things to think about. :laughing:


----------



## Salvatoreg02 (Feb 26, 2011)

electricmanscott said:


> Yeah, good idea, make what little work there is cost even more!!! That'll get people doing stuff! :no:
> 
> Joe, I think you've run out of things to think about. :laughing:


I really think the implementation of this section more likey was bought up because tons of commercials spaces have so many abandoned cables within the building not being used. if you look up into the drop ceiling you will notice tons of cables not being used and just sitting on top of the ceiling. This enforces us to remove all the garbage that shouldn't be there in the first place. I


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Salvatoreg02 said:


> The whole idea of this is great $$ for us. It's more work for you to do when you are demo a large commercial office space or or other. The customer is now faced with more expenses. Now all the abandoned cables and equipment most be removed from the structure. So, look at it as if more Money to your bid and work.


You need to look at the big picture

All my customers remain my customers because I don't do stupid crap like this just to charge them more.

"The customer is now faced with more expenses" which means they are more likely to

- Not do the project at all
-Hire a trunk slammer that doesn't follow code
-Not have enough money left in the budget to do things necessary for their business to operate
-Possibly run out of money and never finish the project

Doing this especially in large jobs will just lead to more companies and jobs going overseas,going bankrupt and furthering our country into recession.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

Salvatoreg02 said:


> I really think the implementation of this section more likey was bought up because tons of commercials spaces have so many abandoned cables within the building not being used. if you look up into the drop ceiling you will notice tons of cables not being used and just sitting on top of the ceiling. This enforces us to remove all the garbage that shouldn't be there in the first place. I


They wouldn't be sitting on top of the ceiling if they we installed properly in the first place so what makes you think this rule would be followed either?


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

Look here for some amendments to your codes and the codes themselves.

http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=electrical code

Many amendments are based upon local conditions and Yes, political influence.


----------



## frankbiggs (Mar 20, 2011)

Not everybody has integrity. It doesnt bother me to have another workmanship check in the NEC. I know that I am not alone when I say that I have found unprotected, energized conductors that have been abandoned. The scrap value is an excellent point to help ease the customers pain. Only those portions that are accessable, that's key. It is removed much quicker then it goes in. 
I'm on the fence with used materials. Not a popular statement to make but, I would be more comfortable with accepting used materials if the regulations were strict.


----------



## RobTownfold64 (Mar 17, 2011)

Salvatoreg02 said:


> The whole idea of this is great $$ for us. It's more work for you to do when you are demo a large commercial office space or or other. The customer is now faced with more expenses. Now all the abandoned cables and equipment most be removed from the structure. So, look at it as if more Money to your bid and work.


Go ask a Home Improvement Contractor/Carpenter how he like's the new EPA laws on lead. Of course it sounds like it will be "great $$ for them" because it adds 30-50% more work that they need to charge for. But in the long run, all it will do is drive customers into using people who won't follow the rules. That is never good for business, not for anyone.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

RobTownfold64 said:


> Go ask a Home Improvement Contractor/Carpenter how he like's the new EPA laws on lead. Of course it sounds like it will be "great $$ for them" because it adds 30-50% more work that they need to charge for. But in the long run, all it will do is drive customers into using people who won't follow the rules. That is never good for business, not for anyone.


 It's allready happening everyone is ignoring the EPA law...:thumbup:


----------



## RobTownfold64 (Mar 17, 2011)

frankbiggs said:


> Not everybody has integrity. It doesnt bother me to have another workmanship check in the NEC. I know that I am not alone when I say that I have found unprotected, energized conductors that have been abandoned. The scrap value is an excellent point to help ease the customers pain. Only those portions that are accessable, that's key. It is removed much quicker then it goes in.
> I'm on the fence with used materials. Not a popular statement to make but, I would be more comfortable with accepting used materials if the regulations were strict.


That is NOT what was proposed in the OP. I'd think any electrician is already doing that anyway. 

Go read *(C)* in the OP, you'll see how much it differs than what you said.


----------



## RobTownfold64 (Mar 17, 2011)

HARRY304E said:


> It's allready happening everyone is ignoring the EPA law...:thumbup:


Wait until they spend millions or even billions to pay for an infrastructure to enforce the law.


----------



## Joe Tedesco (Mar 25, 2007)

frankbiggs said:


> Not everybody has integrity. It doesnt bother me to have another workmanship check in the NEC. I know that I am not alone when I say that I have found unprotected, energized conductors that have been abandoned. The scrap value is an excellent point to help ease the customers pain. Only those portions that are accessable, that's key. It is removed much quicker then it goes in.
> I'm on the fence with used materials. Not a popular statement to make but, I would be more comfortable with accepting used materials if the regulations were strict.


Hello Frank, I am happy to see you here! :thumbup:


----------

