GEC Protection

Status
Not open for further replies.

Little Bill

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee NEC:2017
Occupation
Semi-Retired Electrician
After crossing my eyes and reading 250.64(E) I suppose I will have to concede and say that as written, the EMT would require bonding. However, the last sentence sort of implies that if a raceway is just used for protection, that the only requirement is that it be installed according to directions for the type of raceway.

If a
raceway is used as protection for a grounding electrode conductor,
the installation shall comply with the requirements
of the appropriate raceway article.

That sentence and the countless hundreds of installs around here makes it hard for me to see why it's required.

Here's a couple of examples. I could spend about an hour and take several more just in my neighborhood.









All I am saying is if it's never been done or enforced here, I find it hard to comply!
 

texie

Senior Member
Location
Fort Collins, Colorado
Occupation
Electrician, Contractor, Inspector
After crossing my eyes and reading 250.64(E) I suppose I will have to concede and say that as written, the EMT would require bonding. However, the last sentence sort of implies that if a raceway is just used for protection, that the only requirement is that it be installed according to directions for the type of raceway.



That sentence and the countless hundreds of installs around here makes it hard for me to see why it's required.

Here's a couple of examples. I could spend about an hour and take several more just in my neighborhood.









All I am saying is if it's never been done or enforced here, I find it hard to comply!

Just to toy with the AHJ, why don't you change that EMT to a piece of AL conduit with no bonding on the ends. That would be compliant. Kidding aside, just use a piece of PVC and problem solved.
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
Just to toy with the AHJ, why don't you change that EMT to a piece of AL conduit with no bonding on the ends. That would be compliant. Kidding aside, just use a piece of PVC and problem solved.
Replacing and re-bonding the "continuous" GEC may be a little more work than just changing the sleeving around it. :)
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
250.64(E) directs you to 250.92(B) for this. 250.92(B) is very clear that "special" bonding is required.
I still don't read it that way. In my opinion, the bonding rule only applies when the ferrous raceway is not electrically continuous. If it is connected by standard methods to a metallic enclosure, it is electrically continuous.
 

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
I still don't read it that way. In my opinion, the bonding rule only applies when the ferrous raceway is not electrically continuous. If it is connected by standard methods to a metallic enclosure, it is electrically continuous.

My feeling as well but would a standard locknut suffice?

250.64(E) Bonding methods in compli-
ance with 250.92(B) for installations at service equipment lo-
cations and with 250.92(B)(2) through (B)(4) for other than
service equipment locations shall apply at each end and to all
intervening ferrous raceways, boxes, and enclosures between
the cabinets or equipment and the grounding electrode.

250.94(B) Method of Bonding at the Service. Bonding jumpers
meeting the requirements of this article shall be used
around impaired connections, such as reducing washers or
oversized, concentric, or eccentric knockouts. Standard
locknuts or bushings shall not be the only means for the bond-
ing required by this section
but shall be permitted to be in-
stalled to make a mechanical connection of the raceway(s).
Electrical continuity at service equipment, service race-
ways, and service conductor enclosures shall be ensured by
one of the following methods:
(1) Bonding equipment to the grounded service conductor
in a manner provided in 250.8
(2) Connections utilizing threaded couplings or threaded
hubs on enclosures if made up wrenchtight
(3) Threadless couplings and connectors if made up tight
for metal raceways and metal-clad cables
(4) Other listed devices, such as bonding-type locknuts, bush-
ings, or bushings with bonding jumpers
 

Little Bill

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee NEC:2017
Occupation
Semi-Retired Electrician
Just to toy with the AHJ, why don't you change that EMT to a piece of AL conduit with no bonding on the ends. That would be compliant. Kidding aside, just use a piece of PVC and problem solved.

Replacing and re-bonding the "continuous" GEC may be a little more work than just changing the sleeving around it. :)

Exactly! If I would go to the trouble to take the GEC loose to replace the conduit, I could just do it like the inspector wants!:roll::)

Again, my main concern/problem is I didn't install the original setup, nor am I changing anything on the outside. I was just going to add the bonding bridge.

Also, after talking to some other electricians, the bonding bridge isn't even required if doing just a panel swap and no changes are being made to the outside service.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
My feeling as well but would a standard locknut suffice?
In my opinion the bonding requirement in 250.64(E) only applies where the ferrous raceway is not continuous. If it is physically connected to a metallic enclosure it is continuous at that end of the raceway.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Exactly! If I would go to the trouble to take the GEC loose to replace the conduit, I could just do it like the inspector wants!:roll::)

Again, my main concern/problem is I didn't install the original setup, nor am I changing anything on the outside. I was just going to add the bonding bridge.

Also, after talking to some other electricians, the bonding bridge isn't even required if doing just a panel swap and no changes are being made to the outside service.
I see no reason that you should have to make the original installation compliant on your dime. It is not your problem unless there is specific language in your local electrical code making you bring the complete installation up to code.
 

Little Bill

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee NEC:2017
Occupation
Semi-Retired Electrician
I see no reason that you should have to make the original installation compliant on your dime. It is not your problem unless there is specific language in your local electrical code making you bring the complete installation up to code.

No local amendment on bringing anything to current code.

Well except having to install smokes, but we can use battery operated ones on an existing installation.:happyyes:
 

LEO2854

Esteemed Member
Location
Ma
That's how we do new installs or service changes with this particular POCO. The other POCO will not allow us to land the GEC in the meter socket.
Thing is, this is an existing install. All I'm doing is changing the panel inside, nothing outside except adding the required bonding bridge.

Here we can just come out of the meter socket.

You could come out of the panel and hit the bonding bridge that way right?

As I already stated, the GEC is attached to the grounded conductor at the weather head and run straight down to the rod or whatever electrode is in the ground. It is not connected to any cabinet. The EMT sleeve has been there since the original install.

That seems crazy having to do it that way , and it looks crappy too.:happyno:
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
Perhaps what's hanging people up are the words "ferrous enclosure". I'm thinking anything iron/steel that surrounds the GEC is an enclosure. It isn't a just a box or cabinet. The EMT completely encircles the GEC, so it encloses it. Ferrous enclosures that aren't connected to bonded cabinets/boxes at both ends require their own bonding jumper at each end.
I agree.

I will also add that a piece of EMT or any other piece of "raceway" that is not continuous from enclosure to enclosure is not being used as a raceway. See 300.12. One could have a similar piece of pipe or tubing that is not listed as a raceway and the rules don't change any.
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
I think this is key; technically, although the raceway bonding on both ends should be required, a raceway or a sleeve is not an enclosure. See definition of "enclosure" and informational note.

But raceway stock not used as a raceway isn't exactly a raceway either. :eek: To be used as a raceway it must follow the applicable chapter 3 article, and generally must be continuous from enclosure to enclosure.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Yes, the word enclosures is being used incorrectly in this code section. A case of the use of a generic meaning of the word as opposed to the code meaning as defined in Article 100. A good spot for a 2017 code proposal.
 

Dennis Alwon

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Chapel Hill, NC
Occupation
Retired Electrical Contractor
Bill just take out the emt and install a piece of pvc. Is it not worth making it right if you are not certain. I agree you shouldn't have to but why not. Explain to the home owner the situation
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top