water pipe cut off

[don_resqcapt19]

The debate that Bob and Don are having with me is the term ?present at? and how this would mean outside the building.

What I have repeatedly pointed out is that in order to be a grounding electrode it must be in direct contact with earth.
This is not only the definition but the requirement of all the grounding electrodes except the building steed and a concrete encased electrode to wit the building steel if not in contact with earth must be connected to one of the electrodes that are in contact with earth and the concrete encased electrode which must be in the footer and the footer in contact with earth.

I now present the question of just how this can be accomplished and not be outside the building. How can an electrode be in contact with earth and be anywhere but outside the building. I patiently await an explanation on how the electrode can be anywhere but outside the building.

Yes, I am very aware that a grounding electrode has to be in contact with the earth. That fact really has nothing to do with my comments.

It remains my opinion that a metal underground water pipe that has at least 10' of pipe in contact with the earth outside of the building is not present at the building unless it enters the building. We will continue to disagree on this issue until I see a published comment in the ROP or ROC or FI from CMP5 that says otherwise.

 

[iwire]

Then you are not reading your code book but instead just making assumptions.

I am reading the code book, but like many things in life different people see the same thing differently.

Read this:
Grounding Electrode. A conducting object through which a direct connection to earth is established.

250.52 Grounding Electrodes.
(A) Electrodes Permitted for Grounding.
(1) Metal Underground Water Pipe. A metal underground water pipe in direct contact with the earth for 3.0 m (10 ft) or more

Lets stick to the water pipe as that is what the topic is about.

Read this

III. Grounding Electrode System and Grounding
Electrode Conductor
250.50 Grounding Electrode System. All grounding electrodes
as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(7) that are
present at each building or structure served........

Pray tell me how it can be in direct contact with earth and be inside the building at the same time?

It can't be and it does not have to be, IMO it is not present at the building.

This entire discussion is based on the definition of present at the building.

We just don't agree on that point, and that is fine. We can both have opinions and neither of those opinions mean a thing as the AHJ will decide what is present and what is not.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

So this existing electrode that is not inside the building would be required to be used although the electrical contractor did not install the electrode. Then it must be present at the building.
...

Like I said before you have fabricated a very rare case, maybe one that would never even exist in the real world.

There will always be special cases that fall outside the general rules.

Made electrodes are most commonly installed by the electrical contactor and when he installs the electrode he also installs a grounding electrode conductor.

 

[jwelectric]

Okay let?s stay with nothing but the water pipe and what would constitute it being present at the building.
In 250.52(A)(1) it states that the only part of this water pipe that is electrode is that part that is in direct contact with earth for 10 feet or more and I think we all agree with this. I think that we agree that this 10 feet is also outside the building.

So now comes the question of how to connect the grounding electrode conductor to this electrode.


We find permission in 250.68(C) to use the first five feet of the interior water pipe if it is metal for the conductor to connect to this electrode.
(C) Metallic Water Pipe and Structural Metal. Grounding electrode conductors and bonding jumpers shall be permitted to be connected at the following locations and used to extend the connection to an electrode(s):
(1)

Interior metal water piping located not more than 1.52 m (5 ft) from the point of entrance to the building shall be permitted to be used as a conductor to interconnect electrodes that are part of the grounding electrode system.

How would this connection be made if the water pipe that entered the building was nonmetallic.
From what I am reading the two of you are saying that 250.52(A)(1) would not apply in this case. What I am saying that the requirement would still be that the outside metal water pipe is still an electrode and is present at the building therefore is required to be used.

250.52(A)(1) is very clear that if there is 10 feet of metal water pipe in contact with earth it is an electrode and will have to be used as part of the electrode system.
All 250.68(C) is doing is giving us permission to use the interior pipe as a conductor to attach the grounding electrode conductor to the outside water pipe and is not a requirement that it be done here.

To say that ?present at? means that the water pipe is required to enter the building would be saying that all the other electrodes must enter the building in order to be present at. 250.50 does not just address the water pipe but address six other electrodes when it is addressing the ?present at?
To just pick out the water pipe out of this section and say it must enter the building to be present at would mean that the other six would have to meet the same requirement.

 

[ActionDave]

Mike is winning me over in this debate.

 

[jwelectric]

Mike is winning me over in this debate.

Dave I thank you for the support but I am not looking at this as a competition but instead of a learning experience.

Part III of 250 is addressing grounding electrodes and the grounding electrode conductor. An interior water pipe is not addressed until Part V of 250. The only part of a metal water pipe that would fit into Part III of 250 is required to be underground therefore not inside the building.

250.50 Clearly makes this statement to the electrical contractor and the electrical inspector;

250.50 Grounding Electrode System.
All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(7) that are present at each building or structure served shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system.

Here it says that ALL seven electrodes that are present must be bonded together then it goes on and gives instruction as what to do when none of these 7 electrodes are present;

Where none of these grounding electrodes exist, one or more of the grounding electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4) through (A)(8) shall be installed and used.

In the scenario I posted about the ground ring the electrical contractor would be required to use the ground ring as it is present even if they decided to install two rods.
This section makes no requirement that the metal water pipe has to enter the building or that the metal water pipe has to be potable water.
A metal irrigation pipe that is installed in the yard and does not enter the building would also be required to be used as an electrode.

What is being addressed in this section is the grounding electrode and the grounding electrode cannot enter the building. Should someone want to take the time to look it up Mr. Holt made a proposal to extend the rebar to the inside cavity of a wall and connect to the concrete encased electrode there. The proposal was rejected. The comment of the panel was that this type of installation would be alright but once the rebar left the bottom of the footer it was no longer an electrode so the part above the bottom of the footer would be the same as the metal pipe that enters the building, a conductor to the electrode.

The same is true with the metal water pipe. Once it leaves from underground it is no longer an electrode no matter where it goes.
What 250.50 is addressing is the electrode which is underground not what is above ground or what enters the building.

Bob and Don are not looking at this part of the discussion and are hung up on trying to prove that the pipe must enter the building to be? present at? and trying to say that all the other electrodes are installed by the electrical contractor. This is not what the first sentence of 250.50 is saying and this is proved by the second sentence where it says if there is no existing electrodes already there then install one.

 

[George Stolz]

Bob and Don are not looking at this part of the discussion and are hung up on trying to prove that the pipe must enter the building to be? present at? and trying to say that all the other electrodes are installed by the electrical contractor....

I'll start with you: can you acknowledge that there is merit to the "present at the building" concept they support?

Can you acknowledge that there is a paradox here, since the NEC doesn't define a distance?

 

[iwire]

Can you acknowledge that there is a paradox here, since the NEC doesn't define a distance?

Which is a nicer way of putting it than I did back many posts

Enjoy your fun with words, luckily most inspectors are better than that.

What I meant by that was this, yes if you want to read the words with the intent of a certain outcome you can do that. But most AHJs are going to read the words with commonsense involved.

I have never heard of an AHJ making anyone dig a path from the home out to a remote metal water line. That does not mean it has not happened somewhere, I just think it is very rare.

 

[jwelectric]

I'll start with you: can you acknowledge that there is merit to the "present at the building" concept they support?

Can you acknowledge that there is a paradox here, since the NEC doesn't define a distance?

I would ask what is being discussed here. Are we discussing what the code says as is pointed out many times in other discussions or are we discussing what someone might do or think?

Personally I am discussing what is written in the codes and what every inspector in my state is sworn to enforce not what someone might do or what we think.

The absence of a defined distance is what makes the verbiage as written to mean that any metal water pipe on the load end of the utility or from the well subject to the requirement to be used as part of the grounding electrode system.

If we are going to discuss what the definition of ?present at? we can bring in many scenarios to establish a definition.
Is my front yard present at my home? What about my back yard? If you say yes then anything buried out there is also present. Oh by the way, we mow five acres.

To apply the term present at and try to limit that to a distance for a water pipe then it would also have to be applied to the other six electrodes mentioned in that same code section. To say that a metal water pipe is only present at a building if it enters the building would mean that the other six electrodes mentioned in that section would also have to enter the building in order to be present.

The max distance put on one of these electrodes would have to apply to the other six.

No I don?t see a paradox at all nor do I see merit to a metal water pipe having to enter a building to be present at that building any more than I see that a ground rod has to enter the building in order to be present at the building.

 

[infinity]

Mike,

You've done a good job at defending the word "at". I can see your point. I would add that around here it wouldn't be applied as you've outlined. IMO this is just another example of something that has fallen through the cracks of the NEC where the written word doesn't support what most of us are doing out in the field. I will be adding to my list of code changes for the next cycle.

 

[jwelectric]

Which is a nicer way of putting it than I did back many posts



What I meant by that was this, yes if you want to read the words with the intent of a certain outcome you can do that. But most AHJs are going to read the words with commonsense involved.

I have never heard of an AHJ making anyone dig a path from the home out to a remote metal water line. That does not mean it has not happened somewhere, I just think it is very rare.

How many times have you told me, ?that is not what is written??

I think that the title of this part of the forum is NEC, not what will some inspector do. What I am discussing is what is written in black and white as the rules of the NEC not what some inspector would do or what kind of common sense some inspector might have. I am not even talking about what I would do or how I would inspect something.

What is it that Charlie says?

If you feel that in order for a metal water pipe to be present at a building it must enter the building simply submit a proposal to have the code say that. Until that time it says what it says not what we want it to say.

I personally know of installations where metal water pipes that didn?t come within several feet of a building being required to be bonded to the electrode system. The fact that you would bring this up means to me that you also believe that they are required to be bonded by the verbiage of the code as it stands now.

 

[jim dungar]

The absence of a defined distance is what makes the verbiage as written to mean that any metal water pipe on the load end of the utility or from the well subject to the requirement to be used as part of the grounding electrode system.

What do you mean by "pipe on the load end of the utility"?
At my house, the meter is inside my basement, so there is no underground pipe on the load side of the water utility.

If distance does not mater, then do I need to connect to any underground metal pipes on my neighbors property also (per 250.50)?

 

[iwire]

How many times have you told me, “that is not what is written”?

Many times.

But this is not as black and white as you try paint it. I have not seen you yet limit the distance in anyway which leaves gaping hole in your position.

You seem to have created a new term 'load end of the utility'. Like Jim my meter is inside my basement and the water company handles it from there to the street so I guess I don't even actually have an electrode at all. All the underground portion is is on the supply side of my water meter.

I think that the title of this part of the forum is NEC, not what will some inspector do. What I am discussing is what is written in black and white as the rules of the NEC not what some inspector would do or what kind of common sense some inspector might have. I am not even talking about what I would do or how I would inspect something.

Again, you feel it is black and white, and that is certainly your right to. I don't see it the same way which is my right.

Neither of us is the AHJ.

What is it that Charlie says?

I am familiar with what he says and I do not disagree with him.

What does 90.4 say?

The authority having jurisdiction for enforcement of the Code has the responsibility for making interpretations of the rules,

If you feel that in order for a metal water pipe to be present at a building it must enter the building simply submit a proposal to have the code say that. Until that time it says what it says not what we want it to say.

Back to your own opinion of the sections, not facts.

I personally know of installations where metal water pipes that didn’t come within several feet of a building being required to be bonded to the electrode system.

I sure that is possible.

The fact that you would bring this up means to me that you also believe that they are required to be bonded by the verbiage of the code as it stands now.

Ah, no. :happyno:

 

[jwelectric]

What do you mean by "pipe on the load end of the utility"?
At my house, the meter is inside my basement, so there is no underground pipe on the load side of the water utility.

If distance does not mater, then do I need to connect to any underground metal pipes on my neighbors property also (per 250.50)?

Why are you trying to be so absurd?
Yes the underground metal water pipe supplying you home is an electrode and you have permission found in 250.68(C) to land the grounding electrode conductor between where the pipe enters the basement and the water meter.

No you don?t have to cross property lines in order to install a bonding conductor to the metal water pipe in your neighbor?s yard as this would violate other laws. But if you choose you could go to the property line to install the conductor if that would trip your trigger.

The one thing I like most about this site is how people will say one thing in one thread but change their ways of posting in another. Is it any wonder there are so many that just leave.
Look at the original poster of this thread. He has not returned.

 

[iwire]

Why are you trying to be so absurd?

Mike, it is not absurd in the least, we have asked repeatedly for you to tell us where you think the limit is and you have not told us so.

 

[iwire]

Yes the underground metal water pipe supplying you home is an electrode and you have permission found in 250.68(C) to land the grounding electrode conductor between where the pipe enters the basement and the water meter.

Now lets make the last 15' of this plastic to the water meter leaving the metal line out in the yard.

 

[roger]

Look at the original poster of this thread. He has not returned.

Mike, the OP joined that morning, posted his question, logged out, and never waited to see if his question was answered, he wouldn't have any clue as to what has been disscussed.

Roger

 

[jwelectric]

Many times. But this is not as black and white as you try paint it. I have not seen you yet limit the distance in anyway which leaves gaping hole in your position.

Oh yes I have many times. You just refuse to acknowledge it. There is no minimum or maximum distance mentioned anywhere in 250.50 so how far would you say would be the maximum distance any of the grounding electrodes in 250.52(A)(1) through (7) could be installed? Therein you will find your answer.
Whatever you say is the maximum distance that a ground ring, rod and pipe, other listed electrode, or a plate electrode can be installed from the building and still be present at is the same for the water pipe electrode.
I will let you determine this amount of distance.

What does 90.4 say?

What does it matter what in written in the Introduction as not even one word there can be enforced.
90.4 is addressing the governmental bodies that exercise legal jurisdiction over the codes and has nothing at all to do with Part III of 250

I sure that is possible.

Then explain what code section he stood on to enforce this.

 

[jwelectric]

Now lets make the last 15' of this plastic to the water meter leaving the metal line out in the yard.

Well let's look at 250.52(A)(1) and see what it says

 

[jwelectric]

Mike, the OP joined that morning, posted his question, logged out, and never waited to see if his question was answered, he wouldn't have any clue as to what has been disscussed.

Roger

I have no way of knowing if he came back or not. All I have to go on is the fact he only posted once but thank you for letting me know.