Bonding the copper plumbing in a dwelling.?

[jxofaltrds]

A reasonable sounding statement sure doesn't make the statement correct.

The water heater has never been in the path of the Grounding Electrode Conductor going to the buried metal water pipe, even when the connection of the wire GEC was permitted at the closest convenient cold water pipe to the location of the electrical service disconnect.

Al

This is bonding that we are talking about. Not the electrode system.

 

[jxofaltrds]

I agree, many plumbing fixtures use nonmetallic components...but that is irrelevent.

The NEC does not require hot and cold water piping to be bonded together at every fixture...it only requires a single mechanical connection between the two systems at any point within the structure; this is achieved at the shower/tub valve. Every such valve in America is a solid cast housing; if you have a metal water piping system these pipes connect mechanically to the solid metal housing of the valve.

Why would you need to establish additional bonds elsewhwere within the same system just because other fixtures are nonmetallic? You seem to be argueing that because 'some' plumbing fixture may be nonmetallic then those shower/tub valves that are metallic are negated.

You were quoting plumbers [I am a licensed plumbing contractor too], ask them if they have ever seen a nonmetallic shower/tub valve. There may be some nonmetallic components inside the solid metal housing, but that does not negate the solid metal mechanical connection from metal pipe to housing.

We are talking about the 'piping' not the fixtures. The code does not say bond fixtures.

I too hold that license.

Again the piping is address. This includes the fittings not shut offs or fixtures.

Since you are also a plumber what is your defintion of 'other metal piping'?

 

[iwire]

“There is nothing in 90.1 that applies to the above question.”

It applies to everything. It is the purpose of the code. It is the first statement in the code. Why do you think that it is first?

Yes you would fail. 250.104(B). And it does not have to be bonded ‘at’ the hot water tank.

(A) First I do not think that the cold or hot waterlines need to be bonded at all. Why? If they were properly installed they are NOT likely to be energized. Just MHO.

(B) But we all know that the industry, everyone in the trade, bonds the cold waterlines. Same as we ‘jumper’ the water meter. No code requirement for jumping the water meter.

So if you objected to my failing (red tag) you, here is how it would play out.

1. As the ESI (Electrical Safety Inspector) I would ask my RBO (Residential Building Official) the AHJ. (I am a RBO)
2. Next he would ask the RPI (Residential Plumbing Inspector), are the cold and hot water pipes different systems? (I am a RPI)
3. The RPI would say yes because there is no requirement to have a hot water piping system. Just hot water.
4. The RPI would use Chapter 607 of the plumbing code to prove the hot water pipes (lines) are a separate system.
5. The RBO would make a decision.
6. The RBO would tell me to treat these as separate systems.
7. Then I would explain to you that ‘all’ other metal piping ‘shall’ be bonded.

End of story. Yes you have a right to appeal but I doubt if you could rebut, and win on, my opinions.

Mike, it's too bad an inspector is so off base and can not accept what many knowledgeable people are trying to show them.

In my example the systems are bonded at the shower valve, that is the end of story and if you ask for more you have gone beyond the NEC.

Very disturbing indeed.

A real 'not in my town cowboy'.

 

[jxofaltrds]

Mike, it's too bad an inspector is so off base and can not accept what many knowledgeable people are trying to show them.

In my example the systems are bonded at the shower valve, that is the end of story and if you ask for more you have gone beyond the NEC.

Very disturbing indeed.

Bob

I respect you and your opinions. I know that you use common sense.

Please tell me how you know that shower valve(s) are bonded? Do you have a spec.?

Remember this is other metal piping not my Moen faucet.

No fixtures have to be present at the rough or final for an electrical inspection. We only look at the 'codes' that apply to us.

If I had both city water and a private water system (a well) would you make me 'bond' the well metal piping? BTW the well piping is isolated via a filter.

 

[iwire]

I know that you use common sense.

Please tell me how you know that shower valve(s) are bonded? Do you have a spec.?

So lets use commonsense

This has been addressed already a number of times, if you insist on a 'bonding spec' on the metal bodied shower valve you will need to insist on that same spec for every coupling, tee, elbow in the entire system.

Remember this is other metal piping not my Moen faucet.

I am well aware of what we are talking about.

No fixtures have to be present at the rough or final for an electrical inspection. We only look at the 'codes' that apply to us

So if the plumbing rough is not done just how are your checking the bonding at all? :roll:

If I had both city water and a private water system (a well) would you make me 'bond' the well metal piping? BTW the well piping is isolated via a filter.

Thats the entire key right there, if the systems are isolated I would have to join them, but if the systems are not isolated I do not have to 'un-isolate' them again.

 

[jxofaltrds]

So lets use commonsense

This has been addressed already a number of times, if you insist on a 'bonding spec' on the metal bodied shower valve you will need to insist on that same spec for every coupling, tee, elbow in the entire system.



I am well aware of what we are talking about.



So if the plumbing rough is not done just how are your checking the bonding at all? :roll:




Thats the entire key right there, if the systems are isolated I would have to join them, but if the systems are not isolated I do not have to 'un-isolate' them again.

Bob

Now we are getting closer.

Isolated is where we disagree.

Click on the link on the bottom so that my quotes to not seem out of context.

Mark C. Ode ODE is staff engineering associate at Underwriters Laboratories Inc., in Research Triangle Park, N.C.

Here are a couple of his statements:

This is from the first line.

"A simple change in construction and plumbing methods over a period of years may have resulted in many water-piping systems being inadequately bonded to the electrical system."


"The cold and hot copper water lines were isolated from each other at the water heater by dielectric unions (an insulating bushing built into the union) and then connected from the dielectric union into the tank using galvanized or black-steel nipples. The dielectric unions provided isolation from the water heater?s metal tank and the steel nipples to the copper water pipe connections at the water heater. This isolation was designed to prevent deterioration of the noncopper metal from cathodic reaction to the copper piping system."

From:http://www.homebuyeradvocates.com/PDF/water_pipe_bonding.pdf

Let us say we go to court. Even if the commentary is NOT part of the code. What do you think the judge or 'joe blow' would say if they read it? And we all use, or should use, the handbook.

If asked why do you use the handbook what would be your response? Because you want another or expert opinion.

 

[jxofaltrds]

This is a while back but:

"Where hot and cold water pipes are electrically connected, you need only one bonding jumper ? to either the cold- or hot-water pipe. Otherwise, use a single bonding jumper sized per 250.104(A)(1) to bond the hot- and cold-water piping together."

Guess who the author is?

"Grounding vs Bonding - Part 10 of 12
Oct 1, 2005 12:00 PM, By Mike Holt, NEC Consultant "

http://ecmweb.com/grounding/electric_grounding_vs_bonding_10/

 

[al hildenbrand]

Al

This is bonding that we are talking about. Not the electrode system.

Yes. I know. Bonding of metallic water pipe system(s)

Yet in your claiming that "even plumbers understand this", you quote a plumber talking about interrupting the current path from the electrical service to the cold water Grounding Electrode by having dielectric unions at the hot water heater. . .

It's obvious that the plumber quoted didn't understand all that well, assuming that the quote is accurately recounting what the plumber in fact did communicate.

 

[jxofaltrds]

Yes. I know. Bonding of metallic water pipe system(s)

Yet in your claiming that "even plumbers understand this", you quote a plumber talking about interrupting the current path from the electrical service to the cold water Grounding Electrode by having dielectric unions at the hot water heater. . .

It's obvious that the plumber quoted didn't understand all that well, assuming that the quote is accurately recounting what the plumber in fact did communicate.

Al

My only point is that plumbers are now understanding why we bond.

And isn't that the point? To educate and protect everyone?

 

[M. D.]

Al

My only point is that plumbers are now understanding why we bond.

And isn't that the point? To educate and protect everyone?

The requirement to keep/ make the water piping system electrically continuous was removed back in the eighties ,.... bond the hot and cold today ,.. interrupted with an insulating plumbing fitting tomorrow.

If for any reason the water piping system is a cmbo of plastic/ non conductive parts in conjunction with copper conductive parts you have a 250.104(b) system and the bonding can be done by the EGC of the circuit that is likely to energize the piping of concern .

 

[jxofaltrds]

The requirement to keep/ make the water piping system electrically continuous was removed back in the eighties ,.... bond the hot and cold today ,.. interrupted with an insulating plumbing fitting tomorrow.

If for any reason the water piping system is a cmbo of plastic/ non conductive parts in conjunction with copper conductive parts you have a 250.104(b) system and the bonding can be done by the EGC of the circuit that is likely to energize the piping of concern .

I agree with you.

So why do we jumper the water meter?

Why is there any bond to the metal piping?

It should never be energized if properly installed. But yet we bond.

Who said just the cold waterlines? Does it say 'just' cold waterlines in the code?

Removed in the 80's?

Maybe someone should have told Mike Holt.

This is a while back but:

"Where hot and cold water pipes are electrically connected, you need only one bonding jumper ? to either the cold- or hot-water pipe. Otherwise, use a single bonding jumper sized per 250.104(A)(1) to bond the hot- and cold-water piping together."

Guess who the author is?

"Grounding vs Bonding - Part 10 of 12
Oct 1, 2005 12:00 PM, By Mike Holt, NEC Consultant "

http://ecmweb.com/grounding/electric...vs_bonding_10/

 

[M. D.]

This is a close to understanding intent as we get ,.. it seems clear to me ,. given the changes over the years that a mixed system is a xxx.104(b) and a complete metallic is a xxx.104(A).

from the code making panel 2007

5-235 Log #1834 NEC-P05 Final Action: Reject
(250.104(A)(1))

__________________________________________________ __________

Submitter: Mark T. Rochon, Mark J. Rochon Master Electrician

Recommendation: Revise as follows:
General Combination metal water piping system(s) separated by nonmetallic
water piping system(s) where may become energized installed in or attached to
a building or structure shall be bonded to the service equipment enclosure, the
grounded conductor at the service, the grounding electrode conductor where of
sufficient size, or the one or more grounding electrodes used.

Substantiation: Nonmetallic water piping systems are being inserted between
our metal water piping system and today?s code is not recognizing these
changes.

Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement: The conditions indicated in the substantiation are already
covered by 250.104(B) where there is not a complete metallic water piping
system.

Number Eligible to Vote: 15
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 15
__________________________________________________ __________
5-236 Log #2432 NEC-P05 Final Action: Reject
(250.104(A)(1))

__________________________________________________ __________

Submitter: Robert P. McGann, City of Cambridge

Recommendation: Revise text to read as follows:
Metal water piping system(s) that is likely to be energized , installed in or
attached to a building or structure shall be bonded.

Substantiation: With much expanded use of plastic water piping system(s)
isolating section of metal piping systems. This type of installation leaves
contractors and inspectors what is required to be bonded.

Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement: The requirements of 250.104(A) apply to complete metallic
water piping systems. Where there is no complete metallic water piping
system, then the requirements of 250.104(B) would apply for those portions of
isolated metal water piping system likely to become energized.

Number Eligible to Vote: 15
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 15

 

[jxofaltrds]

Ok.

The NEC is not the only code used in building a home.

"Here is a reference plumbers must use:

"601.3 Existing piping used for grounding.

Existing metallic water service piping used for electrical grounding shall not be replaced with nonmetallic pipe or tubing until other approved means of grounding is provided.""

Now this is Ohio:

"102.4 Referenced codes and standards.

The codes and standards referenced in this code shall be considered part of the requirements of this code to the prescribed extent of each such reference.'

There is more to the code than The NEC.

What about 110.2 of the NEC? Or 110.3(A)(8)?

We do not quote these sections often!

 

[M. D.]

"For God's sake Jim ,.I'm an electrician not a plumber"

I must say you have lost me and that I'm not into arguing plumbing requirements .
Bond it if you want to ,..just keep in mind all the non-conductive fittings available to fix a leak or add a shut off , clean the water or whatever .. In an old house here in the northeast , where K&T is still in use (some folks used the water line for a neutral) bond away ,..no harm in it and not a bad idea ,. just no longer a requirement...

On second thought
maybe it would be better to upgrade the K&T

 

[daleuger]

Boy, I'm never sending you to the supply house! :grin:

I almost spit mt dew on my shiny new monitor and keyboard. Thanks, Larry. :grin:

 

[M. D.]

This leads to one of my favorite unanswered questions. 250.104(A)(1) tells us the bonding jumper to a metallic water line shall, in most cases, be sized per 250.66. Bonding other metallic piping is sized per 250.122.
If the metallic water piping is not a grounding electrode (as is often the case her with PVC underground), why does it require a 250.66 jumper ??

Wonder no more Gus,.. Here the exact same circumstance you raise is presented to the CMP

5- 218 - (250-104(a), Exception (New) ): Reject

SUBMITTER: Steve Canaday, Dept. of Labor and Industries, WA

RECOMMENDATION: Add an exception to 250-104(a) to read
as follows:

Exception: Where the water piping system entering a one or two
family dwelling is nonmetallic or is less than 10 ft of metallic
piping in contact with earth, the size of bonding jumper may be
sized from Table 250-122.

SUBSTANTIATION: Due to the ever-increasing use of
underground nonmetallic piping systems entering one and two
family dwellings, the need to bond as per Table 250-66 is relieved
and does not provide a path to interrupt the current of the fault.
This exception to permit the bonding of interior metal water
from Table 250-122, based on the largest circuit likely to energize
the piping system, should interrupt the circuit safely.

PANEL ACTION: Reject.

PANEL STATEMENT: The panel intends to reference Table 250-
66 since there is nothing to prohibit the nonmetallic system from
being replaced with a metallic system.
NUMBER OF PANEL MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 17
VOTE ON PANEL ACTION:
AFFIRMATIVE: 17

 

[augie47]

Wonder no more Gus,.. Here the exact same circumstance you raise is presented to the CMP

You obviously have ESP-N You tried to tell me that back in Post #65.

Very interesting that the CMP rules in favor of "what-if" requirement. I guess we should make it a 1/0 because you never know someone might change the service to 400 amp.:grin:

It is one of those requirements thats hard to explain in the field without resorting to "because the Code says so", which I hate doing.

Thanks

 

[M. D.]

Not ESP,. Mike Whitt mentioned something about it in that great discussion I linked to... I was just poking around the rop's this A.M.( normal folks read the paper) and saw it ,. thought you might like to see it is all.

 

[jwelectric]

I have already said all there is to say concerning this matter but I can?t refrain any longer.

I am an electrician and by NC law I am to make my installations according to the adopted NC Electrical Code which is the NEC with amendments. As an electrical inspector I would have to inspect the installation using the same document.

There is no requirement for me to reference any other code such as building, mechanical, plumbing, or fire codes. The definitions found in these codes have no reflection to the NEC what so ever. The verbiage of these codes has no reflection on the electrical inspection either. Should I saw the top plate above the panel completely out the electrical inspector could not turn down the electrical installation, as the issue would be addressed by the building inspector and the GC.

If we are going to take the comments of authors such as those found in the NEC Handbook, Soars on Grounding and so forth why don?t we include the Fine Print Notes found in the NEC itself?


250.104(B) Other Metal Piping. ????. FPN: Bonding all piping and metal air ducts within the premises will provide additional safety.

In my old house all the duck work is exposed metal. With a 400 amp service I suppose I need to bond this with a 1/0 copper conductor back to the service. Could a code enforcement official require me to bond this duck work? Well I ain?t gonna do it even if one tried to force me to 90.5(C).

My waste water pipes are all PVC but in my bath tub I can see a little shiny metal thing right where the water leaves the tub. Is possible that this little shiny thing could become energized? I feel that it should be bonded back to the service equipment with a 1/0 copper conductor as I have a 400 amp service.

I have windows that have an aluminum frame in my sunroom. I have been known to sit a box fan in one of these windows to give air flow to the room. Again a 1/0 copper bonding conductor back to the service.

The bottom line is simple, show me in writing in the adopted electrical code or pass my job. I will accept nothing less and sure would not accept the inclusion of any other code or the comments of some author into the electrical inspection unless these have been adopted into the electrical code.
Examples: I don?t vent bath fans, Mechanical inspection. I don?t do draft stop, Building inspection. I don?t bond metal water pipes unless they are complete metal water pipe systems. If I use a meter anywhere on the metal pipes and don?t have continuity then there is no bonding conductor installed as it is not a complete metal system. It then falls back to 250.104(B).

 

[hurk27]

It's amazing how our views have changed over the years or not

From "2003"

From "2004"

another "2004" start at post #13

And another in "2004"