Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 65 of 65

Thread: Grounding electrode 250.64(D)

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    21,259
    Quote Originally Posted by al hildenbrand View Post
    Your opinion of the AHJs that you know has no meaning when compared to the enforceable written text of the NEC.
    I say it does have to do with the enforcing. Please let us know the interpretation of your AHJ representatives.
    I will have achieved my life's goal if I die with a smile on my face.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    6,512
    Quote Originally Posted by Smart $ View Post
    I say it does have to do with the enforcing. Please let us know the interpretation of your AHJ representatives.
    You are deflecting away from the text of the NEC. That's a diversionary tactic from actually looking at the enforceable words of the NEC.
    Another Al in Minnesota

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    21,259
    Quote Originally Posted by al hildenbrand View Post
    You are deflecting away from the text of the NEC. That's a diversionary tactic from actually looking at the enforceable words of the NEC.
    To enforce depends on interpretation. Interpretation does not always align with the literal context. In many cases, convention weighs more than what seems to be explicit wording.
    I will have achieved my life's goal if I die with a smile on my face.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX, USA
    Posts
    8,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Smart $ View Post
    To enforce depends on interpretation. Interpretation does not always align with the literal context. In many cases, convention weighs more than what seems to be explicit wording.
    Yes. It is not that unusual for two AHJ's (San Antonio and Austin, for example) to read the same text from the NEC and come up with two very different interpretations.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    303
    Quote Originally Posted by al hildenbrand View Post
    There is an argument that the real benefit of a supplemental ground is that it can best handle energy surges (transients) with very fast rise times, and that the more direct the path to earth the better. The fewer bends, and the shorter the distance, to the supplemental ground, the better. Something like a lightning induced surge is handled better.

    But the Grounding Electrode Conductor might be another story, in the minds of your local power company, as it is more likely (although there are exceptions to this generalization) to be a significant part of the occupancy overcurrent protective device's effective fault clearing current path. Whether your local power company will allow access, for servicing, to the inside of their "cash register" meter socket for the GEC may well be thought of differently than a high voltage transient capable supplemental ground.

    None of my opinion, above, is handled directly in the Code.
    The POCO may effectively own the meter and the meter enclosure but the don't own the customer side of the drip loops or the common portion of the Service lateral prior to the taps for the individual meters. The NEC specifically allows the Grounding Electrode Conductor (GEC) to be connected anywhere between the demarcation point and the Main Disconnecting Means. In rural electrification practice and to this day in many of the Coops that were founded by the Rural Electrification Administration (REA) it is required to connect the GEC to the neutral conductor at the top of the Service Entry Raceway or Cable.
    Tom Horne

    "This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous for general use." Thomas Alva Edison

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •