250.130(c)

[Charlie Bob]

Would this section apply to this ?
I ran into a customer that wanted an outside light pole installed.
The wire feeding the old light didn't have a EGC, it was a rigged up job with old UF wire as branch circuit.
I told them i wouldn't hook it up without a EGC, it was a metal pole. I ran a totally new wire from the house.

I wonder if 250.130(c) would have applied, meaning i could have run a EGC to one of my options?

I know it's for non grounding recep. replacement or branch circuit extentions, which i think describes my case.

 

[LarryFine]

Are you asking if you could have run a new EGC instead of a new cable?

If so, wouldn't the labor be the same? I think the cable was a better fix.

 

[RUWired]

I wonder if 250.130(c) would have applied, meaning i could have run a EGC to one of my options?

I know it's for non grounding recep. replacement or branch circuit extentions, which i think describes my case.

Sounds like it could apply but the requirements are to run it to the existing grounding electrode system and GEC's smaller than # 6 need a raceway for protection. Sounds like it would have needed a pick and shovel anyway.

 

[Charlie Bob]

thank you guys. I thought so too that's why i ran a new cable and be done with it.
I was curiuos though as if it would have been code compliant with just the EGC.