600 amp water main grounding conductor AHJ problem

[iwire]

Smart I really don't have the energy to debate with you as you never, not once admitted you may be mistaken.

I can live fine with your misunderstanding the NEC.

 

[iwire]

According to you, these terms are moot when the Service Point differs and the item of issue is not under NEC jurisdiction. I find that quite odd, as POCO's use the same terminology.

That is correct and it is not 'odd', of course two separate codes refer to smilier conductors that same way.

A line had to be drawn between the NESC and the NEC, that line is the service point.

The service point is determined by the local utility commission.

 

[roger]

Bob, just ask smart a question, he'll disappear?


Roger

 

[don_resqcapt19]

The definitions are conflicting in this case as per the NEC you can't have service condcutors on the line side of the service point and the defintion of service lateral says that the lateral conductors become service conductors at the point of entrance to the building. That is in direct conflict with the defintion of service conductors which says that you can't have service conductors on the line side of the service point.
Don

 

[Smart $]

...you never, not once admitted you may be mistaken.

Oh but yes I have. I'll even do it here: I may be mistaken. I'll even admit I have been, am, and will be mistaken on certain occasions.

All I'm trying to point out is that the NEC does not explicitly provide, as far as I can determine, the recourse you say it does, and therefore one cannot (should not) be bound to such an extraneous interpretation.

I can live fine with your misunderstanding the NEC.

So can I

 

[Smart $]

Bob, just ask smart a question, he'll disappear?


Roger

Do you have anything professional and substantive to offer this discussion?

 

[Smart $]

That is correct and it is not 'odd'...

I was referring to, "According to you, these terms are moot..."; not that its odd that the codes use the same, not "smilier", terms.

A line had to be drawn between the NESC and the NEC, that line is the service point.

The service point is determined by the local utility commission.

I'm not contesting that issue.

 

[Smart $]

The definitions are conflicting in this case as per the NEC you can't have service condcutors on the line side of the service point and the defintion of service lateral says that the lateral conductors become service conductors at the point of entrance to the building. That is in direct conflict with the defintion of service conductors which says that you can't have service conductors on the line side of the service point.
Don

I'll accept that as substantive justification for sizing the GEC for NEC-equivalent service entrance conductors. However, I do not see conflicting definitions as an explicit form of documenting the issue.

 

[roger]

Do you have anything professional and substantive to offer this discussion?

Absolutely, I just chose not to.

I read almost every thread and choose to reply in relatively few, I just couldn't help myself commenting on your history of not answering questions, so I apologize.

Roger

 

[Smart $]

Absolutely, I just chose not to.

I read almost every thread and choose to reply in relatively few, I just couldn't help myself commenting on your history of not answering questions, so I apologize.

Roger

My history of answering questions is really quite good, from my point of view. Yes there was one thread where I was bombarded with responses... and I simply did not (and do not, for future reference) have the time to answer each and every response. I do have a life beyond work and this forum, ya know!

 

[roger]

My history of answering questions is really quite good, from my point of view.

The last five words of the sentence may be where the problem lies.

Roger

 

[charlie b]

Alright boys and girls, let's end the bickering here and now.

 

[Smart $]

The last five words of the sentence may be where the problem lies.

Roger

You're entitled to your opinion, as am I. An adjustment to my outlook on matters to suit yours will not be forthcoming.