CEE or Bonding of foundation steal ?

[cschmid]

I would NOT pass this job if I was an inspector nor should any inspector with any competence.

With that logic you could build a house complete without wiring and then show up and say it's existing I don't have to do anything.

I hate to inform you of this but the inspectors here are very well qualified..

Here is what we are talking about..250.4 General Requirements for Grounding and Bonding. The following general requirements identify what grounding and bonding of electrical systems are required to accomplish. The prescriptive methods contained in Article 250 shall be followed to comply with the performance requirements of this section.
Section 250.4 provides the performance requirements for grounding and bonding of electrical systems and equipment. Performance-based requirements provide an overall objective without stating the specifics for accomplishing that objective.
now we read the requirements of the electrodes..

III. Grounding Electrode System and Grounding Electrode Conductor
250.50 Grounding Electrode System.
All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(7) that are present at each building or structure served shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system. Where none of these grounding electrodes exist, one or more of the grounding electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4) through (A)(8) shall be installed and used.

now what I am saying is that when the foundation is already poured and I was not there and no one has an inspection sticker on the re-bar and no connection point is present..I am going to assume there is no legal re-bar present to connect to..just hammering away a piece of the foundation and finding some happen chance piece of re-bar does not constitute a legal re-bar installation..Unless you can verify the re-bar meets the requirements of this section you can not use it..So go ahead and not pass me I will call and have a senior state electrical inspector come out and pass the install and you will have to deal with the complaint process..It is not my responsibility to make sure the CG or HO install the re-bar correctly and have it inspected..how ever It is my responsibility to connect to all the metal that meets the code and can be verified at the time our company is hired..So if the re-bar does not meet requirements then I can not connect to it and unless it is inspected before the pour I have no way of knowing if it is legal or not..

 

[mpd]

the released plans are going to show what size rebar is in that footing if any

 

[A/A Fuel GTX]

This would not fly here in MA.

2) The electrical inspector would have had to look at the rebar before the pour to see if the rebars where in fact tied and near the bottom of the footing.

Bob....as I read 250.52(A) (3), as long as the listed clamp is attached to a 20' piece of 1/2" rebar, at or near the bottom of the footing, it is irrevelant whether or not the rebar is tied together.

 

[electricmanscott]

I hate to inform you of this but the inspectors here are very well qualified..

Here is what we are talking about..250.4 General Requirements for Grounding and Bonding. The following general requirements identify what grounding and bonding of electrical systems are required to accomplish. The prescriptive methods contained in Article 250 shall be followed to comply with the performance requirements of this section.
Section 250.4 provides the performance requirements for grounding and bonding of electrical systems and equipment. Performance-based requirements provide an overall objective without stating the specifics for accomplishing that objective.
now we read the requirements of the electrodes..

III. Grounding Electrode System and Grounding Electrode Conductor
250.50 Grounding Electrode System.
All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(7) that are present at each building or structure served shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system. Where none of these grounding electrodes exist, one or more of the grounding electrodes specified in 250.52(A)(4) through (A)(8) shall be installed and used.

now what I am saying is that when the foundation is already poured and I was not there and no one has an inspection sticker on the re-bar and no connection point is present..I am going to assume there is no legal re-bar present to connect to..just hammering away a piece of the foundation and finding some happen chance piece of re-bar does not constitute a legal re-bar installation..Unless you can verify the re-bar meets the requirements of this section you can not use it..So go ahead and not pass me I will call and have a senior state electrical inspector come out and pass the install and you will have to deal with the complaint process..It is not my responsibility to make sure the CG or HO install the re-bar correctly and have it inspected..how ever It is my responsibility to connect to all the metal that meets the code and can be verified at the time our company is hired..So if the re-bar does not meet requirements then I can not connect to it and unless it is inspected before the pour I have no way of knowing if it is legal or not..

This is not that difficult. Or maybe it is.

If there is rebar that qualifies as a CEE YOU HAVE TO USE IT. If you do not you do not get your electrical inspection signed off. Not saying I would fail you per se but I would not sign off to allow a CO to be issued.

If an inspector does disregard this requirement or the senior state inspector disregards this requirement solely because of lack of planning they are NOT very well qualified.

 

[iwire]

Bob....as I read 250.52(A) (3), as long as the listed clamp is attached to a 20' piece of 1/2" rebar, at or near the bottom of the footing, it is irrevelant whether or not the rebar is tied together.

I agree, but after the pour you can't tell if it is 20' of rod or if it's near the bottom.

 

[iwire]

now what I am saying is that when the foundation is already poured and I was not there and no one has an inspection sticker on the re-bar and no connection point is present..I am going to assume there is no legal re-bar present to connect to..

Thats all well and fine, but the building department will know if there is steel in the footing or not.

Hey, you seem to be happy with selective enforcement so great, but I can tell you that is not how it works everywhere.

 

[cschmid]

Bob not saying selective, what I am sayings is like Scott is saying lack of planing..why am I responsible for someone else's mistake..so i have to pound out spot in foundation and then find a suitable clamping method and the assume responsibility for the weakened foundation..when it was someone else's responsibility to start with..

Most of the concrete guys are leaving a piece of rod out to connect to but then we are back to the issues we discussed earlier..I believe we should show up attach a #4 bare and stick it up were it goes and then encase it in concrete..so my next question is could you bend a copper ground rod and wire tie it to the re-bar and have that protrude through the concrete and would that be a legal connection point..

 

[e57]

so my next question is could you bend a copper ground rod and wire tie it to the re-bar and have that protrude through the concrete and would that be a legal connection point..

I dont see why not - but thats me.... I was beating my little head about CEE's and putting a proposal together and I did think about that very scenario - IMO it would be better than a rebar poked out - corrosion protection via the copper cladding - identifiable to silly framers who have a tendacy to cut rebar sticking out OFF.... And could be connected via any clamp listed for rod...

IMO it is already there - just not spelled out:

consisting of at least 6.0 m (20 ft) of one or more bare or zinc galvanized or other electrically conductive coated steel reinforcing bars or rods of not less than 13 mm (? in.) in diameter, or consisting of at least 6.0 m (20 ft) of bare copper conductor not smaller than 4 AWG. Reinforcing bars shall be permitted to be bonded together by the usual steel tie wires or other effective means.

Depending on who reads it.... A ground rod tie wired to a piece of rebar at the bottom makes sense... Don't know of anyone practicing this method????

That said a galvy anchor bolt may also qualify????

 

[cschmid]

I suppose if it was tied to the rear with wire it would qualify..so how do you feel about assuming the liability of smashing the foundation up to hook up to hidden re-bar which you can not tell if the piece you found was the one that was wire tied and was 20 ft long..so when the foundation cracks is your insurance going to cover it..because of someones lack of proper planing..

Just for the record here that is my beef lack of proper planing on the GC or HO part does not force me into having to assume unnecessary liability..

 

[e57]

I suppose if it was tied to the rear with wire it would qualify..so how do you feel about assuming the liability of smashing the foundation up to hook up to hidden re-bar which you can not tell if the piece you found was the one that was wire tied and was 20 ft long..so when the foundation cracks is your insurance going to cover it..because of someones lack of proper planing..

I'm sure someone is going to disagree - but IMO if you got to any tie wired rebar at all - top bottom or otherwise - since it can be "one or more" - "tie wire or other effective" all rebar in the footing would count IMO/ But thats me.... Maybe someone should list a retro fit product - think of the mulla.... Some plate with a lay-in lug that you bolt into the concrete with 100 tapcons...

 

[iwire]

why am I responsible for someone else's mistake..so i have to pound out spot in foundation and then find a suitable clamping method and the assume responsibility for the weakened foundation..when it was someone else's responsibility to start with..

You have not been listening. :smile:

I never said you are responsible for another's mistake. But the NEC does require the CEE if it's there.

IMO it is the GCs or HOs mistake for pouring a footing without getting the CEE either connected or accessible and it is up those people to pay for the work.

Lets say that an idiot GC calls you to a new home after he hangs drywall.

Could you say it is existing so you do not have to provide any of the required outlets?

(e57 - Mark, notice I have not once tried to confuse this thread with my own feelings about stub outs :smile: )

 

[iwire]

so how do you feel about assuming the liability of smashing the foundation up to hook up to hidden re-bar which you can not tell if the piece you found was the one that was wire tied and was 20 ft long.

In MA I could not if I wanted to, the EI is supposed to look at the entire CEE and sign the building permit before the pour.

Chiseling till you find the first re-bar and connecting to it would not be correct even though I have seen that in a few MA buildings.

 

[iwire]

I'm sure someone is going to disagree - but IMO if you got to any tie wired rebar at all - top bottom or otherwise - since it can be "one or more" - "tie wire or other effective" all rebar in the footing would count IMO/ But thats me....

Mark, you can stop all the little digs and rolling eyes when you talk about this subject. We both have opinions on this and neither of our opinions is any better or worse then the others.

There are many intelligent people that agree with your view and there are many intelligent people that agree with my view. Put in your proposal if you see a need, I have moved on.

 

[cschmid]

You have not been listening. :smile:

I never said you are responsible for another's mistake. But the NEC does require the CEE if it's there.

IMO it is the GCs or HOs mistake for pouring a footing without getting the CEE either connected or accessible and it is up those people to pay for the work.

Lets say that an idiot GC calls you to a new home after he hangs drywall.

Could you say it is existing so you do not have to provide any of the required outlets?

(e57 - Mark, notice I have not once tried to confuse this thread with my own feelings about stub outs :smile: )

good point yet I can choose not to take the job with sheet rock hung and I could choose not to take the job without a cee..yet one is a smart choice and the other a not so smart choice drive 2 rods and your covered..I do like MA law though and it will spread..

so how do you determine what spot and what rod you use..in the original OP pic it looks like a random hole was pounded in the concrete or a location that would be benefical to the installer..what about all the spidder webs created by the impact device for removing the concrete and what about the repair to the concrete..who is responsible for the concrete if it fails in that location..

 

[electricmanscott]

what about all the spidder webs created by the impact device for removing the concrete and what about the repair to the concrete..who is responsible for the concrete if it fails in that location..

As far as I am concerned the GC that screwed up in the first place bears the responsibility. In fact if I was involved (it wouldn't have gotten to this point :grin: ) that is who would be chipping out the concrete anyway.

 

[cschmid]

As far as I am concerned the GC that screwed up in the first place bears the responsibility. In fact if I was involved (it wouldn't have gotten to this point :grin: ) that is who would be chipping out the concrete anyway.

Now you are talking my language..

 

[sandsnow]

if you as an electrical inspector require a GC to jackhammer a footing to expose the rebar, do you also notify the building inspector & the engineer or architect that designed the footing

I had to do it with pool steel. The design professional of record and the building inspector have to agree where the rebar will be exposed BEFORE the jackhammer is used.

 

[e57]

Mark, you can stop all the little digs and rolling eyes when you talk about this subject. We both have opinions on this and neither of our opinions is any better or worse then the others.

There are many intelligent people that agree with your view and there are many intelligent people that agree with my view. Put in your proposal if you see a need, I have moved on.

I hope you realize that any digs were 1) of friendly intent, and 2) not solely directed at you personally - just of people of similar school of thought on the matter - you are only one of them, there are others.... :grin: So it's not just you. Nor am I taking it personally - neither should you.

Oh FYI - I enjoyed that debate thoroughly! Too bad you quit....

 

[cschmid]

I started a new house that the foundation rebar (UFFER) was not accessible to be used as a CEE. So I had them chip the side of the concrete out to add a burial rated clamp attached to the rebar. Since the rebar is tied and continuous would this be considered a CEE and not need the addition of ground rod or is it just bonding the building steal and need a ground rod driven ? The hole will be patched and sealed.

[/IMG]

so who choose the location for the hole and determined this was a the correct spot..

 

[cschmid]

I hve not seen where the EI has to sign off on any form before the pour and I have not heard of any being forced to pound away the concrete to attach to re-bar..I do not work in th MN metro area is this done the way MA does it in the MN metro area..I am sure there is MN metro electricain around..


were is al hildenbrand when you need him..