jxofaltrds
Inspector Mike®
- Location
- Mike P. Columbus Ohio
- Occupation
- ESI, PI, RBO
IMO if they're not connected together with a bonding jumper then no. What do you think?
I have no problem with it from a theory perspective, I'd guess most will say it is not in compliance with NEC unless you prove the one at the service is 25 ohms or less.
I have no problem with it from a theory perspective
250.121 Use of Equipment Grounding Conductors. An equipment
grounding conductor shall not be used as a grounding
electrode conductor.
Exception: A wire-type equipment grounding conductor installed in
compliance with 250.6(A) and the applicable requirements for both the
equipment grounding conductor and the grounding electrode conductor
in Parts II, III, and VI of this article shall be permitted to serve as both
an equipment grounding conductor and a grounding electrode conductor.
IMO, it is legal as the equipment grounding conductor could be used as grounding electrode conductor if it is sized properly and of a wire type.
Simple question. Is this code compliant?
If no, please explain why you would fail me.
Hopefully these other inspectors are using the right article when dealing with manufactured homes I do not see how they support that positionOther inspectors require 4 ground rods and 2 even on a temporary for a new build.
Yes but using the EGC as a GEC requires bonding bushings on any metallic conduits. plus the extra loops add impedance see note to
250(A)(1), there is a section on use of the EGC as GEC...the GEC has to be unspliced, so not sure how it would work to use the EGC
How would an injury occur with just one ground rod to a temporary service? It would be interesting to see if there has been any studies done on injuries that have occured by just installing one ground rod for temporary services.2 rods on a temporary pole would be standard around my area. If the temporary pole constitutes a service, then grounding needs to meet the requirements of 250. If someone is injured, then you would have to explain why the second rod was not provided or when the test was observed for 25 ohms or less. Rods and bonding jumpers are cheap at that point.
Spot on !!! I've seen that happen more than once in legal disputes. One, unrelated Code violation, means the entire job is non-compliantAn attorney doesn't need to demonstrate that improper grounding caused an injury. The way it works is, the attorney convinces a jury that the contractor obviously was not properly trained, incompetent, greedy, or evil by not complying with one code rule so he/she obviously had no regard for any of the other rules. The contractor's credibility and competence is destroyed and the jury has its villain. This is done routinely in civil and criminal court cases.
I am in total agreement with the legal ramifications of not being code compliant. For the sake of discussion, how would an injury occur with just one ground rod to a temporary service and does anybody know of any documented injuries from this type of installation?An attorney doesn't need to demonstrate that improper grounding caused an injury. The way it works is, the attorney convinces a jury that the contractor obviously was not properly trained, incompetent, greedy, or evil by not complying with one code rule so he/she obviously had no regard for any of the other rules. The contractor's credibility and competence is destroyed and the jury has its villain. This is done routinely in civil and criminal court cases.