Continuous Grounding Electrode Conductor 250.64(C)(1)

[MazzEE]

The NEC 2011 250.64(C)(1) states that the grounding electrode conductor(s) shall be installed in one continuous length without a splice or joint. From the exception a splice shall be permitted either by irreversible compression-type connectors or by the exothermic welding process.

I have a main switchboard with a grounding electrode conductor from the main ground bus to a ground busbar adjacent to the equipment. From this busbar i then show the grounding electrode conductor attaching to the nearest water pipe as required by the NEC.

My question is at this busbar are the terminations required to be irreversible compression type/exothermically welded or can they be a standard listed bolt fitting as pictured below?


Code 250.64(F)(3) permits the use of listed connectors or an exothermic weld. (Picture below from Mike Holt's Grounding Vs Bonding Book page 94)


So it seems its acceptable however I'm confused if the 250.64(C) Continuous code supersedes 250.64(F)?
My goal is to make sure I either enforce an exothermic weld/compression fitting to the busbar or allow the much easier UL listed bolt.

 

[texie]

The NEC 2011 250.64(C)(1) states that the grounding electrode conductor(s) shall be installed in one continuous length without a splice or joint. From the exception a splice shall be permitted either by irreversible compression-type connectors or by the exothermic welding process.

I have a main switchboard with a grounding electrode conductor from the main ground bus to a ground busbar adjacent to the equipment. From this busbar i then show the grounding electrode conductor attaching to the nearest water pipe as required by the NEC.

My question is at this busbar are the terminations required to be irreversible compression type/exothermically welded or can they be a standard listed bolt fitting as pictured below?
View attachment 10613

Code 250.64(F)(3) permits the use of listed connectors or an exothermic weld. (Picture below from Mike Holt's Grounding Vs Bonding Book page 94)
View attachment 10614

So it seems its acceptable however I'm confused if the 250.64(C) Continuous code supersedes 250.64(F)?
My goal is to make sure I either enforce an exothermic weld/compression fitting to the busbar or allow the much easier UL listed bolt.

You're reading it correctly. You can use mechanical "listed" connectors in this case. FWIW, I am a big fan of using the ground bar option for larger services as it makes things so simple.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

You're reading it correctly. You can use mechanical "listed" connectors in this case. FWIW, I am a big fan of using the ground bar option for larger services as it makes things so simple.

I don't think a ground bar is the same as a busbar.

 

[texie]

I don't think a ground bar is the same as a busbar.

Well, yes, you are technically correct. I should have used the word busbar. I'm just in the habit of calling this the "ground bar option" when exercising the use of 250.64(F)(3).

 

[MazzEE]

Thanks, sometimes the code confuses me when it says in (C) to be continuous, but then in (F) you can use a ground busbar, so i guess the Code is saying you can use either one. Why wouldn't (C) just add what's in (F)(3) as one of the options?