250.32 - please help me make sure I've got this.

[bjp_ne_elec]

First when reading 250.32, I have to admit, I was confused - but then after "reading every word" I think I may have it, but I want to be sure. It's my feeling that Article 250 is one of the least understood, but in my mind, one of the most important.

When I first read 250.32(B)(1), I understood that you SHALL run an EGC with the supply conductors to a building or structure supplied by feeders or branch circuits. But then when I read 250.32(B)(2), I was at first confused, as it mentioned "where an ECG is not run - and I'm thinking - hey, they just told me that it SHALL be run.

Well, my understanding was - I hope - cleared up when I read 250.32(B) over again - and the key word is OR. The connections to the Grounding Electrode shall comply with either 250.32(B)(1) OR 250.32(B)(2).

So now if I understand 250.32(B)(2) correctly: if I don' have an EGC, there is no continuous metallic path bonded to the grounding system in each building, and there is no ground-fault system installed - and again, I must meet all three conditions. Then I must tie (bond) the grounded conductor (neutral) to the grounding electrodes. Then this will create the ground path for all grounding and bonding of equipment, etc.

Is this all correct?

Thanks

Brett

 

[romeo]

I agree

romeo

 

[bphgravity]

I also agree. Just treat the feeder and equipment at the separate structure as if it were a service, with all rules of a service applying.

 

[tom baker]

The NEC allows you to "reground" the neutral if there are no parallel paths.
This is not allowed in Washington State since since 2003.
I suspect this entire section will be deleted in the 2008 NEC

 

[bdarnell]

Re: 250.32 - please help me make sure I've got this.

Is this all correct?

By George, I think you've got it.

And, for what it's worth, I agree. 250 is probably the most read and least understood section of the Code. I wish they would overhaul it but that's like trying to push a chain.