Ground wire for old panel.

Status
Not open for further replies.

John1T

Member
Location
Santa Fe NM
We have a client that has an existing panel, with no ground. I believe that section 250.118 allows the pipe to be used as a ground, but the inspector is balking. Is there a section that allows a separate pipe to be run with just a ground? Thanks John
 

Smart $

Esteemed Member
Location
Ohio
No, if I understand what you're asking correctly. The circuit conductors must be inside the conduit to use the conduit as the ground. There are a few exceptions to a grounding wire being run with the circuit conductors... but they are so limited, it's best to stay away from considering them in response to such a general question.
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
If you do not think that the pipe containing the circuit conductors will be an adequate EGC for some reason, you cannot just add another EGC outside that same pipe.
 

petersonra

Senior Member
Location
Northern illinois
Occupation
engineer
If you do not think that the pipe containing the circuit conductors will be an adequate EGC for some reason, you cannot just add another EGC outside that same pipe.

it is a common practice to have external EGCs in addition to the code required ones. it serves no real purpose, but it is not prohibited by the code. think about all the skids in plants that have a 2/0 wire run between them to bond them together.
 

Smart $

Esteemed Member
Location
Ohio
The circuit conductors are inside the pipe. I was hoping to run a separate pipe with the ground wire.
The inspector cannot reject it, regardless how he feels... unless there is a local amendment to the NEC. He can balk all he wants.

Now if you want to appease the inspector, that's entirely up to you. Is there some reason you can't pull a grounding conductor in the existing conduit?
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
it is a common practice to have external EGCs in addition to the code required ones. it serves no real purpose, but it is not prohibited by the code. think about all the skids in plants that have a 2/0 wire run between them to bond them together.
I have no idea what those conductors are, but they are not EGCs.
 

John1T

Member
Location
Santa Fe NM
The inspector cannot reject it, regardless how he feels... unless there is a local amendment to the NEC. He can balk all he wants.

Now if you want to appease the inspector, that's entirely up to you. Is there some reason you can't pull a grounding conductor in the existing conduit?

The pipe has been there a long time, can't get a fish tape through it. The time it would take to try & pull it out & re pull new wire, might as well re feed it.
 

Smart $

Esteemed Member
Location
Ohio
The pipe has been there a long time, can't get a fish tape through it. The time it would take to try & pull it out & re pull new wire, might as well re feed it.
Well the ideal scenario (from your point of view) is to get the inspector to concede that under the NEC, the conduit is a compliant EGC. How far up the chain of authority you take that amounts to choosing your battles.

You are now aware of your other options.
 

ActionDave

Chief Moderator
Staff member
Location
Durango, CO, 10 h 20 min from the winged horses.
Occupation
Licensed Electrician
The inspector cannot reject it, regardless how he feels... unless there is a local amendment to the NEC. He can balk all he wants.

Now if you want to appease the inspector, that's entirely up to you......
I agree. He can't just rip a page out of the codebook and throw it away 'cause he doesn't like it. He is an electrical inspector, not Judge Roy Bean.
 

tortuga

Code Historian
Location
Oregon
Occupation
Electrical Design
We have a client that has an existing panel, with no ground. I believe that section 250.118 allows the pipe to be used as a ground, but the inspector is balking. Is there a section that allows a separate pipe to be run with just a ground? Thanks John

I fought this battle years ago with a long 2" EMT raceway when replacing a feeder panel at the end. I think a factor was the raceway was not visible the entire way.
Here in Oregon it is standard practice to add a bonding bushing at both ends of older EMT on a panel change.
They cite code section 250.96:
250.96 said:
250.96 Bonding Other Enclosures.
(A) General. Metal raceways, cable trays, cable armor,
cable sheath, enclosures, frames, fittings, and other metal
non?current-carrying parts that are to serve as equipment
grounding conductors, with or without the use of supple-
mentary equipment grounding conductors, shall be bonded
where necessary to ensure electrical continuity and the ca-
pacity to conduct safely any fault current likely to be im-
posed on them
. Any nonconductive paint, enamel, or simi-
lar coating shall be removed at threads, contact points, and
contact surfaces or be connected by means of fittings de-
signed so as to make such removal unnecessary.
(emphasis added)
250.96 requires you to prove the raceway can safely conduct the available fault current.
They accepted bonding bushings at both ends.
 

Smart $

Esteemed Member
Location
Ohio
...
They cite code section 250.96:
...
250.96 requires you to prove the raceway can safely conduct the available fault current.
They accepted bonding bushings at both ends.
250.96 does not require anyone to physically prove the capacity to safely handle fault current. If so, please provide or cite a method of proof. The requirement hinges on the word "ensure". The only thing you're doing is satisfying the AHJ/inspector's paranoia and succumbing to them abusing their position (whether knowingly or not will likely remain indeterminate :happyyes:).
 

tortuga

Code Historian
Location
Oregon
Occupation
Electrical Design
250.96 does not require anyone to physically prove the capacity to safely handle fault current. If so, please provide or cite a method of proof. The requirement hinges on the word "ensure". The only thing you're doing is satisfying the AHJ/inspector's paranoia and succumbing to them abusing their position (whether knowingly or not will likely remain indeterminate :happyyes:).

I totally agree. I am just saying thats the argument given. I really fought hard on this, I downloaded data from the conduit manufacturers website showing 1/2 EMT can conduct something like 100 amps, i forget what 2" was.
I appealed they came back to the job with the head inspector and all 4 of the local electrical inspectors and had a meeting about it.
It was around 2006 so would have been the '05 code. I saved the paperwork.
In the end it was quicker to put on the bonding bushings.
(I have a reputation for not pulling in a redundant green wire in EMT unless its outdoor, a commercial kitchen, data room or some other spec like a hospital. I use steel fittings and pound the locknuts on hard.)
 
i always put in a ground thats a size larger than the largest ungrounded conductors in the hose say if the biggest vine in the pipe is a 12 the ground is a 10 thats in addition to the pounded on locknuts
 
you should have heard the job site roses coming from the last ec crew that tried to relocate some dedicated boxes i put in at a data center they finally gave up and cut the conduits off at the fitting and left the box there and put new ones in
yes i am a mean little wench i put those boxes on the concrete walls with a powder driven anchoring system designed to carry up to 2 tons per pin and i use all 4 holes. when a customer wants a system that is designed for reliability in destructive events i put that system in so that you practically have to destroy the buildings structure to disable it it even then there's no promises that it will be disabled. a few of my minions worked for axis communications doing the ip video instals for the Joplin school district before that 2 mile tornado shredded the schools. those axis ip video systems by themselves are built like tanks. add a crew thats used to building ci rated systems in dcops data centers and other facilities that require indestructibility and you get the idea..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top