Code Question for meter--

[hotcoles87]

I recently had a property in New Jersey fail an inspection, because the water meter needed a "jump-out". Anyone ever heard of this? What is the reason for this? Any help would be appreciated- I need to know how big a job this will be because I am negotiating with a home sale.

Thanks a lot guys.

 

[iwire]

Yes that is a long standing requirement.

250.68(B) Effective Grounding Path. The connection of a grounding electrode conductor or bonding jumper to a grounding electrode shall be made in a manner that will ensure a permanent and effective grounding path. Where necessary to ensure the grounding path for a metal piping system used as a grounding electrode, effective bonding shall be provided around insulated joints and around any equipment likely to be disconnected for repairs or replacement. Bonding conductors shall be of sufficient length to permit removal of such equipment while retaining the integrity of the bond.

 

[infinity]

This is not a big job at all, but is required under article 250 of the NEC. Your electrical contractor will know exactly what to do. If that is the only issue than it shouldn't be more than the cost of a service call and a $20 worth of material.

 

[mdshunk]

I'm still not sure why we're bonding around water meters if we made the GEC connection before the water meter. I still do it anyhow, but if the GEC connection is between the water meter and where the pipe enters the building from the earth, no hazard will exist if there's an open neutral condition. Am I right or wrong?

 

[iwire]

Lets say the meter was plastic, your street side connection would still be good but than you would still have to bond the interior metal water pipes per 250.104(A)(1)

 

[mdshunk]

Lets say the meter was plastic, your street side connection would still be good but than you would still have to bond the interior metal water pipes per 250.104(A)(1)

True enough.

What then do you suppose is so special about interior water piping that they want it bonded "full size" with respect to the GEC, but other piping systems can be bonded by the EGC of the circuit that might possibly energize them? What I'm getting at is that the electric water heater EGC or the boiler circulator EGC, etc. out to serve to bond interior water piping... but it doesn't seem to be that way.

 

[iwire]

What then do you suppose is so special about interior water piping that they want it bonded "full size" with respect to the GEC,

I have no idea and have wondered all the same questions.

 

[mdshunk]

I have no idea and have wondered all the same questions.

I suppose so. I havn't dedicated much intellectual effort towards pondering these things in the past.

I do take a slight issue with the "jumper around the water meter" requirement by the inspector in the first post. If the GEC is connected before the water meter, the bond for the interior piping could be from the panel to any point at all on that interior piping. True though that a jumper around the water meter would be the quickest and cheapest method to meet that requirement, but this inspector seems to want to promote that method only.

 

[iwire]

The opening post did not specify which side of the meter the GEC is landed on.

I guess I see your point that if the GEC is on the street side the inspector should have failed them for 250.104(A)(1).

But lets be honest, which would you do?

Install 24" jumper at the meter or run a second conductor however many feet from the panel to water line?

 

[mdshunk]

But lets be honest, which would you do?

Install 24" jumper at the meter or run a second conductor however many feet from the panel to water line?

Oh, I'd certainly jump the meter. Matter of fact, I run the GEC completely through one water bond clamp to the second on the other side of the meter to save that 2 dollars for an extra clamp.

Maybe I'm just picking on that inspector for expressly requiring a water meter jumper when there is at least one other compliant method. I think that it is the goal of this site to take each and every code requirement to the sub-atomic level, is it not?

 

[hardworkingstiff]

Just out of curiousity, where physically in relation to the house and street is the water meter typically installed (up there in the North)?

In Va. Beach (where I grew up) and in Wilmington, NC (where I am now) it is very close to the street, underground.

 

[goldstar]

I believe we've had this discussion in some of the archived posts. But anyway, I've often wondered why we here in NJ are required to do this and the only thing I can come up with is the following scenario. Years ago wiring methods ( K&T and older armored cables) were such that the main branch lighting circuit feeders would run through the ceiling down the centers of rooms from one room to another dropping switch legs only down to operate the lights. Receptacles were wired on completely different circuits. When it came to the bathroom, homeowners and apartment dwellers would want a receptacle installed but had no neutral available at the switch locations. So, they would install the receptacle, tap off the switch for the hot leg and run a wire for a neutral and bond it to the closest water pipe. Functionally speaking this worked. Now, along comes a water company guy to replace the water meter. With the meter out the street side is still grounded but, if he happened to grab both the street side and the house side pipes he'd become a fuse. The same principle applies to hot water heaters and plumbers (although I must admit some of them deserve a jolt once in a while !!!). That's why we bond across them as well. My guess is that the people down in the DCA are hesitant to change this and have kept this ruling in affect. You can call Suzanne Borek down in the Regulatory Affairs office (609-984-7609). She's extremely knowledgable and will give you the right answer.

Phil,
Gold Star Electric
New Jersey

 

[goldstar]

In Va. Beach (where I grew up) and in Wilmington, NC (where I am now) it is very close to the street, underground.

In this case a bonding wire would be required and installed within 5' and before any tap-offs ( like for a hose bib) of where the water main enters the building.

 

[goldstar]

But lets be honest, which would you do?

Install 24" jumper at the meter or run a second conductor however many feet from the panel to water line?

Actually Bob they wouldn't allow you to merely install a jumper. The bonding wire has to be continuous and uncut. However,they will allow you to use an exothermic welding method.

 

[iwire]

Actually Bob they wouldn't allow you to merely install a jumper. The bonding wire has to be continuous and uncut. However,they will allow you to use an exothermic welding method.

The NEC does not require the jumper to be continuous, if someone is requiring that they are going beyond the NEC.

 

[infinity]

Actually Bob they wouldn't allow you to merely install a jumper. The bonding wire has to be continuous and uncut. However,they will allow you to use an exothermic welding method.

Where in NJ are they requiring an "uncut" conductor? I've installed them both ways without a problem. The NEC does not require them to be "uncut". Only the GEC is required to be installed as one piece, or spliced as outlined in Article 250. The conductor across the meter is a bonding jumper.

 

[goldstar]

Oh, I'd certainly jump the meter. Matter of fact, I run the GEC completely through one water bond clamp to the second on the other side of the meter to save that 2 dollars for an extra clamp.

Sorry guys, I stand corrected. This is the method I usually use when bonding to the cold water main. If you choose to terminate before the water meter and then install another ground clamp( if you have the room) and install the jumper that way it is acceptable. What I was thinking of when I read the term jumper (and did not make clear in my original post) was cutting back the insulation on the wire and bugging on rather than installing a clamp.

Thanks for picking up on this. As I get older my brain starts to fry (and I'm not on drugs) and I think more and more "in the box" rather than "out of the box".