Junction/pull box required to be bonded?

[lakee911]

cause NEC says too

That is what I thought too... interesting discussion though...

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

That is what I thought too... interesting discussion though...

And if you don't like that answer
"cause thats how i want it in my town"

 

[Smart $]

After reading the thread to this point in time, I'm not sure who's agreeing with who.

While 250.148 seems to say the EGC's must also be bonded to the box... but in order to get to (C), we have to consider the general provision first. It says where circuit conductors are spliced within a box, or terminated on equipment...

The circuit conductors, one hot and one grounded, are not spliced or terminated on equipment within the box, so even though the EGC's are spliced, there is no requirement under 250.148 to jumper or otherwise bond the EGC's to the box.

If this were a disconnect, it is considered equipment and the outer shell is considered its enclosure. I don't believe 250.148 would apply to it.

 

[LarryFine]

What is a circuit conductor?

I know of ungrounded, grounded, and grounding conductors?

The first two are.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

The first two are.

My opinion says a grounding wire is part of the circuit. May never be used but when it is it sure better be a conductor. It did not say all of the conductors had to be spliced and often they are not. Soon as 1 is cut and spliced we now fall under the requirement to bond the box.

 

[LarryFine]

My opinion says a grounding wire is part of the circuit. May never be used but when it is it sure better be a conductor.

We nay-sayers believe that an EGC would have to carry normal circuit current, which it's not permitted to do, to be a circuit conductor.

It did not say all of the conductors had to be spliced and often they are not. Soon as 1 is cut and spliced we now fall under the requirement to bond the box.

Agreed, and a jumper would have to be added. Fortunately, that does not apply when only the EGC is spliced.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

We nay-sayers believe that an EGC would have to carry normal circuit current, which it's not permitted to do, to be a circuit conductor.

Agreed, and a jumper would have to be added. Fortunately, that does not apply when only the EGC is spliced.

I believe you believe that. Now point me to where NEC supports your belief. You may be correct but i need to see NEC back it up.

 

[LarryFine]

Okay, Jim. Code backup:

250.148 Continuity and Attachment of Equipment Grounding Conductors to Boxes.
Where circuit conductors are spliced within a box ... any equipment grounding conductor(s) associated with those circuit conductors ...

250.118 Types of Equipment Grounding Conductors.
The equipment grounding conductor run with ... the circuit conductors ...

110.10 Circuit Impedance and Other Characteristics.
... between any circuit conductor and the grounding conductor ...

The bold sections taken from the respective posts certainly suggest that EGC's are not included in "circuit conductors."

 

[infinity]

IMO it the EGC is never an 'NEC circuit conductor' under any condition.





As an EGC not a circuit conductor.

The circuit conductors, one hot and one grounded, are not spliced or terminated on equipment within the box, so even though the EGC's are spliced, there is no requirement under 250.148 to jumper or otherwise bond the EGC's to the box.

I agree.

Look at that myself, Smart and Bob agreeing on something.

 

[iwire]

Look at that myself, Smart and Bob agreeing on something.

Well my Saturday is shot.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

The first part of this article makes no sense. If the conduit is good enough to be considered an egc then why would you need to bond the box again simply because circuit conductors are spliced. Don't pull a ground wire and you don't have to do anything other than splice the circuit conductors.

Does anyone know the logic to this?

 

[iwire]

The first part of this article makes no sense. If the conduit is good enough to be considered an egc then why would you need to bond the box again simply because circuit conductors are spliced. Don't pull a ground wire and you don't have to do anything other than splice the circuit conductors.

Does anyone know the logic to this?

I have no problem with it, if you run an EGC they want you to use it.

I see no hardship or any reason to worry about it.

 

[Cavie]

Definitions from 2008

Grounded Conductor--A system or Circuit conductor that is intentionally grounded

Grounding conductor--A conductor used to connect equipment to the grounded circuit of a wireing system to a grounding electrode or electrodes.

The words Circuit conductor are not used in the deffinition of Grounding conductor your honor. I rest my case.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I have no problem with it, if you run an EGC they want you to use it.

I see no hardship or any reason to worry about it.

Trust me I don't loose sleep over it but it would be good to know the thinking behind it.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Definitions from 2008

Grounded Conductor--A system or Circuit conductor that is intentionally grounded

Grounding conductor--A conductor used to connect equipment to the grounded circuit of a wireing system to a grounding electrode or electrodes.

The words Circuit conductor are not used in the deffinition of Grounding conductor your honor. I rest my case.

I think most of us are in agreement with you Cavie.

 

[roger]

I think most of us are in agreement with you Cavie.

I am.

Roger

 

[jumper]

Definitions from 2008

Grounded Conductor--A system or Circuit conductor that is intentionally grounded

Grounding conductor--A conductor used to connect equipment to the grounded circuit of a wireing system to a grounding electrode or electrodes.

The words Circuit conductor are not used in the deffinition of Grounding conductor your honor. I rest my case.

Good call also. Thanx. I have learned the error of thinking.

 

[danger30]

Interesting discussion. I always thought the likelihood of a fault would be increased because of the added termination or splice, or possible failure point. Therefore you would need additional bonding for reassurance.

 

[jetlag]

Interesting discussion. I always thought the likelihood of a fault would be increased because of the added termination or splice, or possible failure point. Therefore you would need additional bonding for reassurance.

I believe that was the intent of the NEC. circuit cunductors passing through not cut or spliced are very unlikely to cause a fault. In that case I dont believe the code requires to bond the EGC to the box , but since the EGC is allready cut I would bond it any way , but I would not cut the EGC to bond it if the circuit conductors only passed through.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

I am having dificulties trying to figure out a reason for the bond if the wires are cut but just wired together without tap. What is logic