250.64 (e)

[chip]

I appreciate everbody's input. But whats confusing me is in the 2008 handbook 250.64(E), at the end of the section it explains to use 250.102(C) to size the bonding jumper. Thanks again, Chip

 

[radiopet]

I am not sure Chip...All i can say is the handbook is only an interp which is no different than mine or yours. Mike Holts interp. is the same as mine so go figure.

I will get the 2008 Handbook which is in my office on Monday and give it a look see...but unless the basis fo 250.64(E) was re-written then it would lead me to believe nothing has changed in the intent.

 

[benaround]

Chip,

I think I found the problem.

2005 Handbook 250.64(E)

1. this section is talking about 'enclosures' such as panels, or gutters etc

2. it is NOT talking about raceways. You are dealing with a raceway, right.

3. the commentary does NOT lead you to 250.102. The first sentance in the

commentary agian is dealing with enclosures and the sentence ends with a

period right after 250.102(C).........period. The next sentence starts, Exhibit

250.32--------shows the bonding of a ferrous metal 'raceway'----

I hope this clears up the confusion.

 

[tom baker]

not sure Chip....I have looked at the revisions for 2008 and I dont see anything other than above. I dont have a 2008 Handbook " handy "....but I do have Mikes 2008 NEC Changes and IAEI's 2008 NEC Changes here and I dont see where 250.64(E) has changed....maybe others know but I dont believe in regards to the GEC bonding that it would need to be larger than the conductor you have already run....would not make sense to increase it and still have only 3/0 going to the electrode.....You are just trying to bonded each end of the ferrous raceway....per 250.64(E)

The change for 08 was to clarify bonding is needed only for ferrous raceways.

 

[chip]

Yes that helped, and thanks again everybody

 

[radiopet]

The change for 08 was to clarify bonding is needed only for ferrous raceways.

That is correct...just did not want him to think it had anything directly to do with the bonding of the protective raceway ( if ferrous ) when it comes to the requirements of 250.64(E)....I think he was linking the whole commentary that one section which is usually a problem with commentary anyway.