250.66 A

[Mark in the dark]

I am trying to identify the corresponding article to 250.66A from the 2008 code book that is in the 2011 code book. This is the article that specifies the maximum size copper conductor you need to the ground rod is # 6. I have both 2008 and 2014 code books but I cant seem to find my 2011. Any help with this will be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

Mark in the dark

 

[iwire]

It's been 250.66(A) for a long time. 2011 included.

 

[Mark in the dark]

I am trying to identify the corresponding article to 250.66A from the 2008 code book that is in the 2011 code book. This is the article that specifies the maximum size copper conductor you need to the ground rod is # 6. I have both 2008 and 2014 code books but I cant seem to find my 2011. Any help with this will be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

Mark in the dark


Thank you for the information.

 

[david]

I am trying to identify the corresponding article to 250.66A from the 2008 code book that is in the 2011 code book. This is the article that specifies the maximum size copper conductor you need to the ground rod is # 6. I have both 2008 and 2014 code books but I cant seem to find my 2011. Any help with this will be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

Mark in the dark


Thank you for the information.

Its common practice here to go from the ground rod to the rebar in the footer. keep in mind that section only stipulates that max. size when it is a sole connection to the ground rod electrode. I realize your question implies that to be your situation.

 

[iwire]

Its common practice here to go from the ground rod to the rebar in the footer. keep in mind that section only stipulates that max. size when it is a sole connection to the ground rod electrode. I realize your question implies that to be your situation.

That makes no sense.

If there is a uffer there is no reason for a ground rod

 

[david]

That makes no sense.

If there is a uffer there is no reason for a ground rod

except the utility still have two ground rods in the regulations until that changes its not ours to argue.

 

[david]

That makes no sense.

If there is a uffer there is no reason for a ground rod

Inspection
In addition to complying with the NEC, the service shall be in accordance with the requirements
of the Company and such state and local inspection requirements as may be in force at the time
such installation is made.

Grounding/Bonding
The customer shall install the service entrance so that all of the grounding/bonding requirements
of the NEC are met or exceeded. The customer’s service entrance shall have a minimum of two
driven ground rods (8 feet minimum length) at least six (6) feet apart. The grounding electrode
conductor shall be continuous from the service entrance main disconnect to both driven ground
rods. Refer to Exhibit 5.

 

[iwire]

It still makes no sense

And IMO a municple inspector should not be enforcing private companies rules.

 

[david]

Perhaps but the authority is split in this state on residential services and new construction state adopted uniform construction code.

Re- meter inspections both residential and commercial the utility is the authority.

Service upgrades or repairs residential the utility is the authority.

Commercial upgrades or repairs the UCC is the authority .

If we miss enforcing a utility regulation as I have from time to time. I get a phone call from the utility a get a chewing out.

 

[raider1]

Perhaps but the authority is split in this state on residential services and new construction state adopted uniform construction code.

Re- meter inspections both residential and commercial the utility is the authority.

Service upgrades or repairs residential the utility is the authority.

Commercial upgrades or repairs the UCC is the authority .

If we miss enforcing a utility regulation as I have from time to time. I get a phone call from the utility a get a chewing out.

I have a similar issue in my jurisdiction, the local utility has specific requirements such as a minimum 3" service lateral conduit and a minimum of 3' separation between the electrical service and any window or gas meter.

I won't specifically fail the installation if those items are not met but will let the owner and contractor know that Rocky Mountain Power will not hook up the service if they don't meet the utility companies requirements.

I have had the utility call me and ask why I approved a service that did not meet their specs and I have explained that I can only inspect to the NEC and not the Utility specs.

Chris

 

[david]

I have a similar issue in my jurisdiction, the local utility has specific requirements such as a minimum 3" service lateral conduit and a minimum of 3' separation between the electrical service and any window or gas meter.

I won't specifically fail the installation if those items are not met but will let the owner and contractor know that Rocky Mountain Power will not hook up the service if they don't meet the utility companies requirements.

I have had the utility call me and ask why I approved a service that did not meet their specs and I have explained that I can only inspect to the NEC and not the Utility specs.

Chris

That approach might work, but technically the utility is the authority requiring the inspection on the NON- UCC issues as I mentioned earlier since they are the authority requiring the non- UCC inspections we are simply a consultant required by utility regulations on those inspections.

The utility has the right if they chose to reject a consultants (electrical inspectors) findings. You actually have to be approved by a utility to conduct those type of inspections in their area.

The utilities have not flexed that mussel since the adoption of the Uniform construction Code, they as a matter of practice except any electrical inspectors that is certified under the PA UCC for required non - UCC electrical inspections