On April 27, 2019 at 15:52, Mac Burks (39) said...
How about PLAN C? Junction box where the cable currently is and conduit to where they want to route it to.
1.3M doesn't get to make a huge scotchlok sale.
If, by "junction box," you mean multiple sets of 25 pairs of wire spliced together using scotchloks, you're out of your head.
The more I think about it, the worse an idea a 110 block is. Any wiring of this style (or era!) that uses 66 blocks is made thinking of the option of tapping into it or distribute it, whether with a test set or with another wire paralleled off to somewhere else. 110 blocks are made for a kind of wiring where you NEVER Y off in another direction.
On April 29, 2019 at 18:58, davidcasemore said...
The same article in the NEC also states that if the cables could POSSIBLY be used in the future they can stay - but each cable has to be labeled, at both ends, stating where the other end of the cable is.
The NEC reason for removing abandoned cables is to reduce the fire load.
This is what politicians call "unfunded mandates" -- it's something that the law calls upon people to do while completely sidestepping who pays for it. I've never seen anyone take on the costs and do it unless they were reducing the building to a shell. After all, it doesn't cost much to remove ALL THE WIRE. It costs money to determine which wires need to stay, and then remove the other wires.