Mike Dolt Enterprises
Mike Dolt Enterprises
User: wwhitney, Location: Berkeley, CA
Asked on: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 at 8:00 pm EST
Answered on: Thursday, March 6, 2025 at 8:35 am EST
Question: 110.14(C) is confusing in that it uses the phrase "termination provisions" (which is not a defined term and not used anywhere in the NEC other than in reference to 110.14(C)) in two different ways. I believe this was an oversight unintentionally introduced in the 2002 NEC when the reference to Table 310.16 was added. The light edits below regularize the use the term and makes the intent clearer.Cheers, Wayne110.14 (C) Temperature LimitationsThe temperature rating associated with the ampacity of a conductor shall be selected and coordinated so as not to exceed the lowest temperature rating of any connected termination, conductor, or device. Conductors with temperature ratings higher than specified for terminations shall be permitted to be used for ampacity adjustment, correction, or both.(1) Equipment ProvisionsThe determination use of termination provisions of equipment shall be based on 110.14(C)(1)(a) or (C)(1)(b). Unless the equipment is listed and marked otherwise, conductor ampacities used in determining with equipment termination provisions shall be based on Table 310.16 as appropriately modified by 310.12.. . .StatementIn the UL guide info for AALZ that 110.14(C) partially incorporates into the NEC, and in the rest of 110.14(C), the term "termination provisions" is used to mean terminals or other provisions for the connection of field installed conductors.However, the use of the words "determination" and "determining" with that meaning could lead to the conclusion that 110.14(C)(1) first paragraph is talking about how to select such terminals when constructing such equipment, rather than about how the terminals of equipment are to be used with conductors, and the resulting limitations imposed on those conductors. The light edits suggested bring the use of the term "termination provisions" in this paragraph in line with its use elsewhere, as described above.
You've identified a real point of confusion and proposed a reasonable clarification. Let's break down the issue, your proposed solution, and why it makes sense.
The Problem
Ambiguous "Termination Provisions"
The term "termination provisions" in 110.14(C) seems to have two subtly different meanings:
Terminals/Connection Points
This is how it's generally understood within the UL context and in the rest of 110.14(C). It refers to the physical places where you connect wires.
Ampacity Limits Imposed by Terminals
In the paragraph you highlight, it could be misinterpreted as referring to the determination of these connection points themselves, and not how they relate to conductor ampacity.
Misinterpretation Risk
As you point out, the words "determination" and "determining" could mislead readers into thinking the paragraph is about designing the equipment's terminations rather than applying their limitations in the field.
Your Proposed Solution
You suggest changing:>The determination use of termination provisions of equipment shall be based on 110.14(C)(1)(a) or (C)(1)(b). Unless the equipment is listed and marked otherwise, conductor ampacities used in determining with equipment termination provisions shall be based on Table 310.16 as appropriately modified by 310.
12.To:>The use of termination provisions of equipment shall be based on 110.14(C)(1)(a) or (C)(1)(b). Unless the equipment is listed and marked otherwise, conductor ampacities used in determining with equipment termination provisions shall be based on Table 310.16 as appropriately modified by 310.
12.
Why Your Solution Works
Removes Ambiguity
By removing "The determination" and "determining with," you directly clarify that the focus is on using the existing termination provisions (i.e., the terminals), not on deciding what they should be.
Consistent Terminology
It aligns the language with the rest of 110.14(C) and the UL guide info, where "termination provisions" clearly refer to the physical connections for field wiring.*
Clarifies Intent
It reinforces the core message: When connecting conductors to equipment, you must consider the temperature limitations of the equipment's terminals as specified in (a) or (b). If the equipment isn't marked, you fall back on the default ampacities in Table 310.16.
In summary, your suggested edit is a significant improvement. It addresses a legitimate point of confusion, promotes a more consistent understanding of the terminology, and ultimately makes the code easier to apply correctly. It focuses the reader on the correct application of existing terminations, not on how to design them.This is exactly the kind of subtle yet important change that can improve the clarity and usability of the NEC. Your analysis and proposed revision are excellent. Flag for review