I would like to know if it is a violation and if it is not a violation, is it a good idea to use the egc as a gec? After my research I’ve found it to best run them separate being the the gec needs to be continuous and should not be bounded to equipment or fittings. The company master electrician thinks otherwise. Please provide code ref. This is my first post and am looking forward to learning from the best in the biz.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
EGC as a GEC or visversa
- Thread starter Dbarrett
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
petersonra
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern illinois
- Occupation
- engineer
I would like to know if it is a violation and if it is not a violation, is it a good idea to use the egc as a gec? After my research I’ve found it to best run them separate being the the gec needs to be continuous and should not be bounded to equipment or fittings. The company master electrician thinks otherwise. Please provide code ref. This is my first post and am looking forward to learning from the best in the biz.
what research led you to believe this?
take a look at the exception to 250.121.
jaggedben
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern California
- Occupation
- Solar and Energy Storage Installer
If you are talking about an EGC for an old-school solar inverter that requires one, then 690.47 in the 2014 and previous codes allows you to combine the function into one conductor. The GEC should be bonded to all the fittings and equipment it passes through, that's what the code says. Most solar inverters these days, except for some very big ones, don't require their own GEC at all anymore.
If you're asking about 690.47(D) for an array electrode then ask your AHJ if you can combine them. Stupid requirement, no practical purpose, so it just comes down to how legalistic your AHJ wants to be about it. Most around here are quite reasonable and either allow us to combine or don't enforce it at all.
If you're talking about a GEC for a service or something else then see previous response.
If you're asking about 690.47(D) for an array electrode then ask your AHJ if you can combine them. Stupid requirement, no practical purpose, so it just comes down to how legalistic your AHJ wants to be about it. Most around here are quite reasonable and either allow us to combine or don't enforce it at all.
If you're talking about a GEC for a service or something else then see previous response.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.