Multiple GEC's can terminate in different locations. For example you can terminate the GEC for a ground rod electrode at the meter and the GEC for the water pipe electrode at the panel containing the service disconnect.
It maybe compliant but I still see ground loops and parallel neutral paths, so IMO I can see better ways of doing it.
So your saying a grounded conductor can be a jumper to other electrodes?
Absent an additional jumper directly from one ground to the other, any such loops and parallel paths go through the earth, so it that really a problem? Genuinely curious. A similar loop through the earth would exist any time a single service separately supplies two buildings.
Are these two buildings connected? Where would two buildings be served from one service with out one of them be supplied by a feeder?
I'm was thinking of say an underground service, an underground splice box, one set of service conductors exiting to one building, one set exiting to another building. [Although if those outgoing sets are interpreted to be SECs, then given 230.40, it would have to be an Exception 3 or Exception 5 application. I've never been clear if those outgoing sets are SECs or can just be underground service conductors.]
Your the moderator I respect whatever you think is best.
What I have found is when one GEC is connected at the EM disconnect and another GEC at the service disconnect, if there is considerable distance between the two points and a metallic piping system such as CSST is installed that connects the two electrodes by way of multiple #6 jumpers form fittings, a measurable amount of neutral current will flow across the metal pipe.
Nothing in the NEC would prohibit that installation. Sounds like the bonding for the gas pipe is incorrect.
As you would expect. An argument for not doing that, either connect both electrodes to the grounded service conductor at the same point, or only bond the metallic piping system at one point to the GES. If the metallic piping system is bonded via equipment EGCs, that would mean only separately bonding the metallic piping system via the GEC/electrode closest to the MBJ.
Yes it would require that the incorrect bonding of the CSST be remedied. I was referring to bring a GEC to two separate pieces of equipment upstream of the service disconnect.
But you can end up with the situation mentioned even without any particular connection being wrong.
Yeah thats what we have here, interesting discussion I am not up on this since we dont have it here, but a MGN system that the OP is discussing is in IEC terms a 'TN-C' system. You transition to a 4-wire TN-C-S at the Service disconnect, I wish the NEC used IEC terms for grounding and bonding.
That happens in the 2026 code. The service disconnect for one- and two-family dwelling must be outside on the dwelling itself or remote from the dwelling in accordance with 110.29.
Is that going to force the manufacturers of meter cans to put a switch in the can with a handle on the side so that nothing is changed? 3-wire in, 3-wire out to a main panel with a main CB and bonding there? Or is this looking for a main CB outside of the dwelling which changes nothing as far as what is discussed.
Everything changes.
Or were trying to figure out.
