Tying egc together

Status
Not open for further replies.
mcclary's electrical

mcclary's electrical

Senior Member
Location
VA
Volta said:
In my opinion that would be a violation.

250.148 says, "...any equipment grounding conductor(s) associated with those circuit conductors shall be connected within the box...".

Seems like they need to be connected within the box, to me.
Click to expand...

and they would be connected within the box


"associated with those conductors" is what makes it legal,,,IMO

the 14's are not associated with the 12's
 
Y

yired29

Senior Member
mcclary's electrical said:
I believe so,,,,,but lets stretch it a bit further.

A switch box in a bathroom has 2 switches fed from 14 guage circuit, and a GFI fed from a 12 guage circuit. By the wording, It would require all grounds to land under a wirenut, and bond the box(if metal)

But what if it's a nonmetallic box, the 14's hit one greenie, and the 12's land under another greenie, and then both go the their prospective devices without ever coming together. Violation?
Click to expand...

I third the violation.
 
mcclary's electrical

mcclary's electrical

Senior Member
Location
VA
Volta said:
I swear I didn't PayPal him into agreeing!
Click to expand...



Give him a minute, he'll come around.

If being on a totally different circuit doesn't "unassociate" the two circuits,,,then what does? Different voltage? different service?,,,I think the fact that they are on a different breaker allows them to not come together.
 
iwire

iwire

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Massachusetts
chris kennedy said:
Agreed. But lets say the OP has a metal wireway above two panels with multiple conduit entries and nipples into the panels. All conduits meet the requirements of 250.118 yet specs call out a wire EGC also. One circuit has conductors entering the wireway from multiple conduits so a joint is made in the gutter. Those associated EGC's are splices together and pigtailed to the gutter. All other EGC's pass through the wireway unbroken to the ground bars in the panels. Compliant? I believe so.
Click to expand...

Which is nothing different than what I have said.

Why is this hard? :confused::confused::confused:
 
Y

yired29

Senior Member
I think the question should be why would you not splice all EGC's together. What is the advantage of keeping EGC's separate? As long as none of the EGC's are part of an IG circuit.
 
V

Volta

Senior Member
Location
Columbus, Ohio
yired29 said:
I think the question should be why would you not splice all EGC's together. What is the advantage to by keeping EGC's separate? As long as none of the EGC's are part of an IG circuit.
Click to expand...

Well not much in a 2-gang. But think of a pull box with a couple panels worth of circuits and twenty green wires running through it.

It would be the usual advantages: Time and money.
 
Y

yired29

Senior Member
Volta said:
Well not much in a 2-gang. But think of a pull box with a couple panels worth of circuits and twenty green wires running through it.

It would be the usual advantages: Time and money.
Click to expand...

Would tying them all together make a safer install?
 
V

Volta

Senior Member
Location
Columbus, Ohio
yired29 said:
Then why is it in 250.148 (C) clear as day? I know your question is in regards to nonmetallic.
Click to expand...

That might be 'what if' territory.

If the separate circuits' EGCs are not connected within the box, and the circuit #1 is abandonded at the source during a project which includes a panel change, and the old line end of circuit #1 is then brought into a nail-on 1g nm box to abandon safely in place, then the load end of the EGC of circuit #1 is ungrounded, but is still within the building, and electrical boxes.

The EGC then, if energized by circuit #2, would not cause the OCP device to operate, but may still be connected to some normally non-current carrying metal.

That could be considered unsafe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top