Equipment Grounding Conductor to Equipment Bonding Conductor

[tom baker]

A set of proposals to change EGC to EBC. Don G made the same proposals in 2005 cycle, some panels liked, but said lets see what CMP 5 says. Same this time.
Anyone (Hello Don) know what CMP-5 said?

I am reading thru the proposals during lunch. Haven't gotten to Art 250 yet

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Tom,
I haven't looked at that yet. When I made my proposals there was a majority of CMP 5 in favor, but was one vote short of the required 2/3s majority. Had CMP 5 accepted, the other panels would have been directed by the TCC to accept the change.

 

[jumper]

I am all in favor of calling it a EBC instead of EGC. Way mo' bettah IMO.

If it does involve dirt/ground than it is bonding. Much simpler.

 

[rbalex]

I am all in favor of calling it a EBC instead of EGC. Way mo' bettah IMO.

If it does involve dirt/ground than it is bonding. Much simpler.

Well get ready to support them in the public comment stage.

 

[George Stolz]

Basically they said the problem was solved to their satisfaction, and changing the wording further would not overcome what they call "a problem of education" as opposed to verbiage.

 

[rbalex]

Basically they said the problem was solved to their satisfaction, and changing the wording further would not overcome what they call "a problem of education" as opposed to verbiage.

Unless the source is a "giant in the industry" CMP5 has a very definite Not Invented Here attitiude. Several other CMPs do too.

 

[hurk27]

Unless the source is a "giant in the industry" CMP5 has a very definite Not Invented Here attitude. Several other CMPs do too.

So Don needs to wine and dine them a little more like the big industry lobbyist:angel:

 

[jumper]

I am all in favor of calling it a EBC instead of EGC. Way mo' bettah IMO.

If it does involve dirt/ground than it is bonding. Much simpler.

If it does not involve dirt/ground than it is bonding. Much simpler.

Forgot a word.:slaphead: