Service metallic raceway to panel not required to be bonded if gec in meter cabinet

[detroitelectrician]

For A 600 a service I landed my 4/0 Al. GEC from the water meter in the CT cabinet which is allowed by NEC and my Utility company. The crazy part is the inspector agrees its okay to do that but you can't bond the service panel (green screw) or the metallic raceway with grounding bushings ( #4 copper) to the neutral/ground bar. I think he is confused and wants to treat the CT cabinet (metering only) as if it is a disconnect. Because He kept saying you are creating a parallel path if you bond met.raceway and panel at main service panel after landing GEC in the meter cabinet. Does landing the GEC in meter cabinet make the main service panels sub-panels that should be treated as such? I say no way what say you??? By the way I called the state of Michigan and they told me this city inspector is way wrong. Can you add????

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I agree the inspector is wrong. Ask him if you had a standard meter socket and used metal conduit to the first disconnect would he require a bonding bushing? Of course he should and you would have a parallel path but that is what the code requires. For some reason that parallel path has been okay forever- almost every commercial job uses metal conduit and it will have that parallel path.

 

[ActionDave]

By the way I called the state of Michigan and they told me this city inspector is way wrong. Can you add????

The NEC's firm belief is that electrons know which side of the service they are on and behave themselves accordingly.

Anybody, sparky or inspector, that cares enough to wrestle with this issue has to come to to the above conclusion or they will have no hair left to pull out of their heads by the end of the day.

 

[John120/240]

Does landing the GEC in meter cabinet make the main service panels sub-panels that should be treated as such? I say no way what say you??? By the way I called the state of Michigan and they told me this city inspector is way wrong. Can you add????

NO. Your CT/meter cabinet doesn't contain any OCPD's . Parallel GEC paths are acceptable up to the first means of disconnect. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[packersparky]

The NEC's firm belief is that electrons know which side of the service they are on and behave themselves accordingly.

Anybody, sparky or inspector, that cares enough to wrestle with this issue has to come to to the above conclusion or they will have no hair left to pull out of their heads by the end of the day.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::thumbsup:

 

[ActionDave]

:lol::lol::lol::lol::thumbsup:

And I have the hairline to prove it.

 

[electricalist]

So if you have SDS. 480- (XFMR) -240, the bond can be done at the xfmr or panel, but not both. The xfmr isnt the first means of disconnect?

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk

 

[iwire]

So if you have SDS. 480- (XFMR) -240, the bond can be done at the xfmr or panel, but not both.

Actually for added confusion the NEC has an exception that allows it at both locations.

 

[detroitelectrician]

It gets worst. You are not allowed to tap supplemental GEC coming from ground rods ?

It gets worst. You are not allowed to tap supplemental GEC coming from ground rods ?

today I was told by the Elec supervisor you can't tap the GEC going to the ground rods when you have more than one panel. Its okay to tap GEC to water meter but you have to use more than one acorn clamp and do them all separate when you have more than one panel. Also if you land the GEC in CT cabinet its okay but you must also land the GEC from the ground rods in the ct cabinet to be code complaint. What say you?????

 

[electricalist]

I have friends who say they tap the gec and those who say you never do it. We do alot of service changes on lease spaces so I dont do it because its easier to add a gec or remove it.

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk

 

[meternerd]

I've found that inspectors may not be too "up to speed" on services. As a POCO, I've found quite a few problems with grounding and bonding at services. Seems the inspectors leave it up to us to check Code compliance. Not a bad thing, either, because we, as an AHJ, have requirements that are more restrictive than Code. Such as....we would not allow a GEC connection in a CT enclosure if it did not also contain the service disconnect. Bonding, yes, GEC, EGC, no. If your utility is OK with it, then make the inspector happy or make him show you in the Code why you have to do it his way. Most inspectors we work with are happy to get an "education" about service bonding and grounding. I would have to agree with you, though. Grounding or bonding ahead of the service disconnect doesn't eliminate the Code requirements "at the service disconnect". Personally, I'd still want any metallic raceway ahead of the disconnect bonded .

 

[Smart $]

... what say you???

Inspector is wrong.

.. What say you?????

Supervisor is wrong.

Do you need section references?