Couple of quick ???'s

[Strahan]

We are currently going through an electrical audit at our plant. First we are being told that all our receptacles need a bonding strap from the recep to the box. I always thought the bonding took place when you fastened the recep to the box as long as you remove the plastic pieces.

Next we are being told we need ground wires run to these receps. The conduit runs are all RMC. I thought this was a suitable grounding method? Does it say anything in the new code about compound that needs applied to the threads in order for it to be a suitable ground in wet locations?

Finnally he also told us that tripping our GFCI's will shorten the life of our GFCI's. I might buy this to a point but he said that they are all made to only trip a certain amount of times then they will not reset anymore. What about OSHA'a requirements to test the GFCI's already in place in our facility? Will this essentially kill the GFCI and is this something we can plan on replacing every couple of years?

 

[Twoskinsoneman]

We are currently going through an electrical audit at our plant. First we are being told that all our receptacles need a bonding strap from the recep to the box. I always thought the bonding took place when you fastened the recep to the box as long as you remove the plastic pieces.

Next we are being told we need ground wires run to these receps. The conduit runs are all RMC. I thought this was a suitable grounding method? Does it say anything in the new code about compound that needs applied to the threads in order for it to be a suitable ground in wet locations?

Finnally he also told us that tripping our GFCI's will shorten the life of our GFCI's. I might buy this to a point but he said that they are all made to only trip a certain amount of times then they will not reset anymore. What about OSHA'a requirements to test the GFCI's already in place in our facility? Will this essentially kill the GFCI and is this something we can plan on replacing every couple of years?

1. 250.146(B) Those recepts have to be listed as self-grounding.

2. 250.118 RMC is listed as EGC.

3. From what I understand GFCIs are required to be tested using the equipment built-in test once a month so I suspect this is hog-wash.

 

[iMuse97]

Agree with oneman, and add that in plants where I work, we always run a ground in the RMC, FWIW.

 

[ptonsparky]

1. We used to be allowed direct box to yoke bonding for the the EG. Surface boxes only. I havent done it for so long I could not tell you when it changed or if it has.

2. RMC can be used as EG. We pull EGs about everywhere.

3. GFCIs are limited to 403 manual tests then you have to buy new ones. Mfgs agreed to this at a secret meeting on Feb 29th, 1973.:happysad:

 

[augie47]

1. In many instances, no bonding jumper is needed but it depends a lot on the type box, receptacle and cover. Take a look at 250.146 for details.

2. RMC is an accepted EGC in most cases.

3. Need to find a more knowledgeable auditor.

 

[infinity]

We are currently going through an electrical audit at our plant. First we are being told that all our receptacles need a bonding strap from the recep to the box. I always thought the bonding took place when you fastened the recep to the box as long as you remove the plastic pieces.

Removing at least one of those washers would apply to a surface mounted FS style box. As mentioned other box/cover/receptacle installations have different requirements. What kind of box/cover/receptacles are we taking about?

Next we are being told we need ground wires run to these receps. The conduit runs are all RMC. I thought this was a suitable grounding method? Does it say anything in the new code about compound that needs applied to the threads in order for it to be a suitable ground in wet locations?

Also as mentioned, RMC is a listed EGC in 250.118.

Finally he also told us that tripping our GFCI's will shorten the life of our GFCI's. I might buy this to a point but he said that they are all made to only trip a certain amount of times then they will not reset anymore. What about OSHA's requirements to test the GFCI's already in place in our facility? Will this essentially kill the GFCI and is this something we can plan on replacing every couple of years?

What do you mean by tripping the GFCI? Are you using the test button as an on/off switch or does it trip from normal use?

 

[growler]

We are currently going through an electrical audit at our plant.

3. Need to find a more knowledgeable auditor.

Who is performing the audit and for what purpose?

I ran into a company that does this sort of thing a few years ago and they didn't have an engineering license (PE) or an electrical license (EC) so the billed their company out as engineering "consultants". It appears that in some areas you can work as a consultant with very few actual qualifications. They put on a good show but I'm not sure they were qualified to give anything more than an opinion and everyone has one.

 

[PEDRO ESCOVILLA]

403 tests, interesting and valuable information. thanks

 

[cowboyjwc]

If it's a raised cover box, the NEC says that the box and cover must be listed together for grounding.

 

[raider1]

If it's a raised cover box, the NEC says that the box and cover must be listed together for grounding.

John are you talking about a surface box with a raised cover which the receptacle mounts to the cover?

If so the 2008 NEC has a change that permits a listed exposed work cover to be permitted to be the the grounding and bonding means without the box and cover being listed together if it meets a couple of requirements.

A listed exposed
work cover shall be permitted to be the grounding
and bonding means when (1) the device is attached to the
cover with at least two fasteners that are permanent (such
as a rivet) or have a thread locking or screw or nut locking
means and (2) when the cover mounting holes are located
on a flat non-raised portion of the cover.

Chris

 

[cowboyjwc]

John are you talking about a surface box with a raised cover which the receptacle mounts to the cover?

If so the 2008 NEC has a change that permits a listed exposed work cover to be permitted to be the the grounding and bonding means without the box and cover being listed together if it meets a couple of requirements.



Chris

Well that's true, but I've never seen anyone rivit a receptacle to the cover. Are you saying that the little screw and nut are sufficient? It says that it has to have a thread locking or screw locking means.

 

[raider1]

Well that's true, but I've never seen anyone rivit a receptacle to the cover. Are you saying that the little screw and nut are sufficient? It says that it has to have a thread locking or screw locking means.

I have used raised covers that use nuts with lockwashers built into them and would consider that a thread locking means.

Chris

 

[cowboyjwc]

I have used raised covers that use nuts with lockwashers built into them and would consider that a thread locking means.

Chris

OK I could go along with that, but the ones you get with the cover would probably not accomplish that.

 

[Strahan]

Here is another one for ya... He wants all of our unistrut (kindorf) bonded. I said isn't it already since it is straped to our RMC which is run into our box? I mean really now what do we need to run bonding wires to all of our unistrut? This is ridiculous.

 

[Strahan]

Removing at least one of those washers would apply to a surface mounted FS style box. As mentioned other box/cover/receptacle installations have different requirements. What kind of box/cover/receptacles are we taking about?



Also as mentioned, RMC is a listed EGC in 250.118.




What do you mean by tripping the GFCI? Are you using the test button as an on/off switch or does it trip from normal use?

Normal GFCI testing. I believe OSHA mandates testing GFCI's on a regular basis not sure of how often off the top of my head. Doing so by pressing the test button.

 

[hurk27]

Here is another one for ya... He wants all of our unistrut (kindorf) bonded. I said isn't it already since it is straped to our RMC which is run into our box? I mean really now what do we need to run bonding wires to all of our unistrut? This is ridiculous.

Is this person a home inspector, if not I have seen smarter statements out of HI's

Any metal likly to be energized is concidered bonded from metal to metal contact, the screws and bolts connecting the equipment together is all that is needed, maybe a little paint removal, but that is about it.

receptacles in raised covers (Garvin covers) are required to be connected to the cover with at least two screws and nuts with lock washers and I even install the center screw just to not have an open hole but not required, almost all Garvin covers I get today come with the nuts with the locking washer attached to the nut like a star washer, the raised cover is attached to the box with two #8 screws where the screw head tightened against flat metal, but no locking washers or nuts are required, where drywall rings are used if the box is surfaced mounted only one plastic screw retainer washer is required to be removed and there is no requirement to use nuts or lock washers how would you get the nut on the screw? the only time you need self grounding receptacles is when the receptacle is flush mounted and the surface would keep the yoke from making contact with the box or drywall ring other wise you would need the grounding pigtail between the box and receptacle, if you go back and research the ROP's over the years there were many proposals trying to get the code changed to require the grounding pigtails anytime a mud ring or raised cover was used, and even some test by UL was done to see if they were really needed, all were rejected except when the code was changed to require two or more means of attachment for receptacles to Garvin type covers that was pointed out that the use of the center screw was a high failure point as pressure plugging in to receptacles cause this screw to loosen up and some receptacles had nothing but a bent over strap as the cover attachment point and would bend very easily causing it to break off leaving the receptacle no longer attached to the cover.

As far as requiring an extra EGC wire in a conduit this is a design choice not a NEC requirement, 250.118 clearly allows many metal raceways and tubing to serve as the EGC and in most cases is a more effective fault current path when installed per code, if the raceway is coming apart then there is installation problems that wasn't addressed at the time of the installation.

I might be wrong but I know of no published cycle times for GFCI's as pointed out if this was so then GFCI's would have a expected life of 33 years at 403 cycles which would be even less with the amount of false trips cause by some motor or other inductive loads as was pointed out this would be a violation of OSHA and 110.3 because the instructions clearly require the GFCI to be tested monthly, I can remember when GFCI breakers had a maintenance chart sticker included with the breaker to put in the panel so the test could be recorded.

If I was over the maintenance at that plant that person would have been asked to provide quantifiable back up for those requirements or he would have been run out of the plant as he did not do the job that he was hired to do.

 

[renosteinke]

And to think I was recently chastised for mocking someone.

OK, I wasn't showing my best form ... but, gosh dern it, it's a lot easier to be critical than correct.

This thread is a symptom of our times, where it's no longer 'cool' to actually get your hands dirty building things, but it's considered absolutely proper to substitute your uneducated chairborne 'feelings' for actual training and experience. I bet that next week, when the Sports Illustrated "swimsuit" issue comes out, that someone will seriously ask if those bikinis are rated for wet locations!

Then there's the 'more is better' mindset. Conduit as EGC? Heck, let's run a green wire, just to be 'sure.' Next thing they'll be wanting scuba divers to carry parachutes.

These self-important nimrods are mocking us with their ignorance.

 

[dana1028]

I bet that next week, when the Sports Illustrated "swimsuit" issue comes out, that someone will seriously ask if those bikinis are rated for wet locations!

You may be closer to the truth than you think - PETA just filed a suit in federal court to 'emancipate' the orcas at SeaWorld and provide them with the same constitutional protections as humans.