On June 29, 2014 at 20:45, iimig said...
Thanks for pointing that out. For my own sanity, I'm going to think this out and pull an Ernie.
Wow, what a compliment. I can feel you pulling right now!
The wire in question is actually CL2 (not CM), which does not have the same exclusion. However, anybody versed in the code knows that CL2 and CL3 wiring can easily be substituted with CM wire of the same type, or can also take the role of CM wire when installed with CM wire. But CM wire cannot be substituted with CL2/3. And the code applies to CM. But the wire is CL2. So my literal interpretation is that CL2 wiring has not been excluded from the "wet location" requirements of 310.10 and the code I originally mentioned.
First, this is not thought, it is circular listing of stuff. You start by saying that CL2 does not have the same exclusion, and after a bit of a run you say that your interpretation is that CL2 has not been excluded. If the first part of that is true, the middle part is mildly interesting and the end is true.
Second, it's not clear to me whether "substituting a with b" means you've got a and you're going to put in b, or you've got b and you're going to put in a. Please rewrite this if you want comments.
But the practical side of me knows that the AHJ will not care or look. That being said, if the conduit is outside in any way, shape, or form, it will have water in it, and I have seen your everyday general purpose wire deteriorate in these conditions, particularly CAT5E.
So the answer is to get direct burial cable and put it in the conduit. Then if something happens, you can at least empty the conduit, blow it out, and replace the cable; but since it will be direct burial there should not be water ingress.
