Paint a picture of either Pandora's Box or Peeling an onion, each layer giving us more tears.
A BUILDING INSPECTOR OR A FIRE MARSHAL STARTS LOOKING AT YOUR INSTALLED CABLING - FIRST THEY FIND ONE PROBLEM… THEN ANOTHER.. AND ANOTHER.. AND ANOTHER...
Removal of abandoned cable is focused primarily on Plenum cable (CMP). Prior to the code approval of the use of low smoke and low flame spread cable in the return-air-plenum spaces, all cables had to be placed in metal conduit. The architects of the NEC (National Electric Code) did not include any provision dealing with the allowable volume of cable in the return-air plenum. Theoretically, you could fill the entire return-air plenum space with cable and still be code compliant. Clearly, the latest version of the National Electric Code (NEC 2002) is not perfect.
First, we find that much of the abandoned cable was not installed by the current tenant.
Now, you find out that there are significant quantities of cable in the return-air-plenum space that is NOT CMP (Code Approved and UL tested for use in return-air-plenum space). A typical scenario may be cable installed through multiple plenums in which some are return-air.
Note: each cable jacket is marked * on a regular basis (usually every 2 feet) with information about the cable type, manufacturer, product name and part number, UL rating (sometimes patent numbers and footage). With the information on the cable, you can usually backtrack, with a distributor or the manufacturer, when the cable was available in the market. These markings are the fingerprints of the cable world.
* In recent months, the marketplace has seen the emergence of bootleg cable products that are counterfeit. Often these cables are substandard and do not meet the code or standards requirements. We have heard of cases where CAT 5E CMP (plenum rated) cables were found to be not manufactured by the listed manufacturer - not plenum rated - and not up to CAT 5E performance standards. … but it was a real bargain! This information did not surface immediately because most cable is underutilized in terms of performance requirements and we do not have a field usable test system to verify the fire rating (plenum).
Then, you discover that the cabling penetrations of the various firewalls have not been properly fire stopped. This practice may have left the approved firewall condition looking more like Swiss cheese than code compliant.
Now lets peel back a couple more layers…..and we get more tears.
In the process of inspecting the spaces where the cable is installed, we might discover ASBESTOS insulation. This brings up an entirely unexpected set of risks and expenses. The risks involve disturbing the ASBESTOS and affecting the health and safety of the occupants and the cabling technicians. Picture the technicians in "space suits". That is a very scary picture for the tenants.
For more than two decades, the cabling manufacturers have used PVC jackets on cables for both plenum and non-plenum rated applications. In making the cable, they add compounds with plasticizers and stabilizers. The plasticizers help make the PVC flexible. The stabilizers helped maintain the compounds so the material stays pliable for a longer period of time. PVC in its normal state is rigid (like a PVC pipe). Here is the clincher: the stabilizer almost always contained LEAD. Usually 5-10% by weight. The LEAD also acted as a lubricant during the extrusion process of making the cable. One manufacture told us they got a 7 - 10% increase in production per machine using LEADED stabilizer compounds. About 2 ˝ years ago, the PVC compound manufacturers developed a non-leaded stabilizer, which was made available at no increase in costs. Mohawk/CDT was the first cable manufacturer to go LEAD-FREE (August 2001). Subsequently, Krone added LEAD-FREE cables to their regular product line. The other cable manufacturers seem to be dragging their feet, until users demands the safer product.
PVC breaks down over time and the decomposition is accelerated by increased temperature or humidity, even with stabilizers. The chalking on the surface of the cable jacket contains high levels of LEAD. This poses an exposure danger to the cabling technicians and the building occupants. Some experts predict the LEAD-DUST from cabling decomposition could create another type of "sick building syndrome". The clean up associated with LEAD-DUST may be an entirely new chapter in maintaining Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)) and Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ).
In the future, the costs for removal and disposal of abandoned cable containing LEAD may increase significantly. At this time, there is no cost effective method for recycling PVC containing LEAD. The best way to get the LEAD out is not to put it in. Studies have revealed that LEAD can leach into groundwater when disposed of in an unlined landfill. Remember: there is an estimated 8 ˝ million miles of abandoned communications cable in the USA. This volume of cable will be entering the waste stream.
HOPEFULLY YOU ARE GETTING A VISION OF THE POTENTIAL COMPLEXITY ASSOCIATED WITH THE ABANDONED CABLE REMOVAL REQUIREMENT
This new Code may well trigger several other areas of concern for the building owner.
The light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming train….. Generally, building owners have played little or no role in supervising the installation and/or removal of cabling infrastructure in their buildings, primarily because they didn’t have to. Now, that may be changing.
There was no way to know in advance whether the rules (Health & Safety Codes) would increase safety, or make things worse. The imposition of the new fire codes related to cabling was simply a calculated risk on the part of the NFPA code makers (National Fire Protection Association).
The fact that the building structure may respond unpredictably to our actions, is not an argument for inaction. It is, however, a powerful argument for caution, and for adopting a tentative attitude toward all we believe, and all we do. Unfortunately, the cabling industry has demonstrated a striking lack of caution in the past. It is hard to imagine that they will behave differently in the future. Instead, each new cycle of code-making writes off earlier errors as the result of bad thinking by less able minds - and then confidently embarks on fresh errors.
Sometime in the 21st century, our self-deluded recklessness will collide with our growing technological power. Today, the testing methods for the fire rating of communications cable, which is often installed in concealed return-air plenum spaces, does not measure toxicity or incapacitation factor, and there is no follow-up program to ensure the sustainability of the fire safety performance. Safe today… Useless tomorrow.
In the long and difficult journey to make our structures safer, we have discovered that long-standing beliefs about the fundamental safety views of communications cabling, promoted by the great majority of code developers, now appear less secure. New findings have caused many to rethink old assumptions. Clearly, we will not be as casual about cabling technology and safety in the future as we have been in the past.
But that's just my opinion...
Frank Bisbee
frank@wireville.com
(904) 645-9077
Questions may be directed to: audiosemianrs@boma.org
 Back | More Stories like this 
|
