Concrete encased electrode

[nizak]

Code states that all electrodes that are present need to be bonded together to form the GE system. With that being said, is there actual wording in the code that REQUIRES this to be installed at the time the footing is being installed whether it be building or electrical code? If one is not present at the time the EC shows up at the job can it simply be dismissed and alternate forms(driven rod, etc) be installed to meet code requirements? I realize that contractors who work with the same subs will probably have this issue down pat, but what about the EC's who get the job after the foundation work is completed and it's not available. Has anyone had an AHJ insist that the foundation be excavated and this installed after the fact? Thanks,

 

[iwire]

It is an issue handled differently by each area.

 

[nizak]

I agree, never really know what to expect. Here in MI. we have (1) code that covers all 1 and 2 family residences. The bad part is we have 83 counties and probably 200 townships which could translate to several hundred inspectors.

 

[iceworm]

... Has anyone had an AHJ insist that the foundation be excavated and this installed after the fact? Thanks,

I wish they would - consistently. Having worked on the contractor side for a lot of years before moving to the owner's agent side, I am of the opinion the only way the majority of the contractors get it is to wack them alongside their wallet.

Most (contractors) are smart enough they get it after the first time. A few might take twice. After that, no longer a problem.

Now for the cynical part:
This only works up to where the money gets substantual. Then the response leaves the land of physics and reverts to the political.

ice

 

[GoldDigger]

Code states that all electrodes that are present need to be bonded together to form the GE system. With that being said, is there actual wording in the code that REQUIRES this to be installed at the time the footing is being installed whether it be building or electrical code? If one is not present at the time the EC shows up at the job can it simply be dismissed and alternate forms(driven rod, etc) be installed to meet code requirements? I realize that contractors who work with the same subs will probably have this issue down pat, but what about the EC's who get the job after the foundation work is completed and it's not available. Has anyone had an AHJ insist that the foundation be excavated and this installed after the fact? Thanks,

There have been several comprehensive threads on this subject already.
The consensus (not counting inspectors) has been, IMHO, that for an existing building it is not necessary to excavate the foundation to make a CEE accessible. But there IS a CEE if the rebar and concrete meet the definition whether a means has been provided to connect to it or not.
So for a new building, if the slab is poured without an electrode connection the Code states that it has to be made accessible and used.
The situation is simpler in areas that have a local amendment which simply requires a CEE for new construction, regardless of other available electrodes. For those AHJs it may be necessary to keep vapor barriers off a suitable section of footing if it would otherwise prevent a CEE from being created. (Note also that vapor barriers under a slab will not prevent the footing/foundation area of the concrete from being a good CEE, and vapor barriers under footings are uncommon.)
Insulated Concrete Form, ICF, as a construction method can cause problems even for footings though. You must at least leave the bottom of the form open to earth contact.

 

[GoldDigger]

There have been several comprehensive threads on this subject already.

See http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=158788, for example.

 

[infinity]

Around here the CEE connection is inspected by the building inspector during the footing inspection.