Existing Installations

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dan in San Diego

Member
Location
San Diego, CA
Our local utility is starting the under grounding of electrical wires and the city inspector is telling my neighbor that since they cannot see the existing ground on his electrical panel he needs to put a new one in.

The electrical panel on his house has not been changed since the house was built in 1956. I verified that there is a cold water bond via an continuity check but again the ground rod is not visible. I tried to discuss with the inspector that since this installation has not been changed since new and passed inspection then, why now does a ground rod need to be put in? Let me clarify that all the utility company has done is bring in conduit (PVC) underground and run it along the exterior wall and install it to a box with a new meter base which in turn has prongs that go to where the meter used to be. Could it be that since this new box has been put in it may not be considered grounded?

I have not seen any thing in the N.E.C about bringing existing installations up to current code?

Thank you,
Dan
 
Some of the POCOs in this area require a ground rod and visible grounding electrode conductor to the meter socket prior to installing a meter.
That definitely varies from area to area but POCO has informed the local inspectors of that requirement and they pass it along to the electricians/property owners.
Possibly the case there.
 
Dan;

That's in your local city regulations.
Chapter 14: General Regulation
Article 6: Electrical Regulations
​
146.0202 Alterations, Additions, Relocations, and Conversions of Existing Wiring​
(c) In an overhead to underground conversion district, the existing electrical service shall be replaced or repaired if any one of the following conditions exists:
​
(1) When the electrical service equipment is not dead-front operated;
(2) When the electrical service equipment is not readily accessible;
(3) When the electrical service equipment is not grounded; or
(4) When the electrical service equipment is not adequate to carry the actual load.
​
Click to expand...
 
Dan in San Diego said:
Our local utility is starting the under grounding of electrical wires and the city inspector is telling my neighbor that since they cannot see the existing ground on his electrical panel he needs to put a new one in.

The electrical panel on his house has not been changed since the house was built in 1956. I verified that there is a cold water bond via an continuity check but again the ground rod is not visible. I tried to discuss with the inspector that since this installation has not been changed since new and passed inspection then, why now does a ground rod need to be put in? Let me clarify that all the utility company has done is bring in conduit (PVC) underground and run it along the exterior wall and install it to a box with a new meter base which in turn has prongs that go to where the meter used to be. Could it be that since this new box has been put in it may not be considered grounded?

I have not seen any thing in the N.E.C about bringing existing installations up to current code?

Thank you,
Dan
Click to expand...

i just put in a ground on a new piece of gear. the ground rod comes up inside the gear, and is stubbed up 6".
below the pour, a 3/0 copper is burndy irrevocably connected to the ground rod, and comes up thru a pvc sleeve into the gear to tie
to the ground bus. inspector signed off on it, i explained how i was going to tie all the gear together. he was good with it.
we come to final, and he says you have to see the connection... i said but, but, but.... and then we reached this solution:



the 3/0 crimped to the ground rod, and the 3/0 to the ground rod's immediate left are both connected to the same
ground rod, one is a foot under the pour.... but that is what he wanted to see, and it took me about 15 minutes to do.
he's a very good inspector, but there are some things i've learned he wants to see, and on my jobs, he sees them.
 
Grounding of existing installations

Grounding of existing installations

starbolin said:
Dan;

That's in your local city regulations.
Click to expand...

Hi Starbolin,

As per 250.68 (A)

Exception No. 1..An encased or buried connection to a concrete in cased driven or buried grounding electrode shall not not be required to be accessible.

The inspector said that a ground rod has been required since the "Beginning of Time" why now is it a new ground rod required since it passed inspection in 1956?
 
I am not sure ground rods were required in the 50's.
UFER I would say for the most part but not always.
Cold water bond I would think so in that era.

I can see he has the code to back him up. If a new meter can is set then you need to comply.
 
Dan in San Diego said:
Hi Starbolin,

As per 250.68 (A)

Exception No. 1..An encased or buried connection to a concrete in cased driven or buried grounding electrode shall not not be required to be accessible.

The inspector said that a ground rod has been required since the "Beginning of Time" why now is it a new ground rod required since it passed inspection in 1956?
Click to expand...

I have personally seen hundreds of services which must have been installed prior to the Beginning of Time!!!
 
Dan in San Diego said:
Our local utility is starting the under grounding of electrical wires and the city inspector is telling my neighbor that since they cannot see the existing ground on his electrical panel he needs to put a new one in.

The electrical panel on his house has not been changed since the house was built in 1956. I verified that there is a cold water bond via an continuity check but again the ground rod is not visible. I tried to discuss with the inspector that since this installation has not been changed since new and passed inspection then, why now does a ground rod need to be put in? Let me clarify that all the utility company has done is bring in conduit (PVC) underground and run it along the exterior wall and install it to a box with a new meter base which in turn has prongs that go to where the meter used to be. Could it be that since this new box has been put in it may not be considered grounded?

I have not seen any thing in the N.E.C about bringing existing installations up to current code?

Thank you,
Dan
Click to expand...

It does not have to be in the. NEC, it can be in the power companies terms of service that the customer must follow if they want to remain a customer.
 
Sierrasparky said:
I am not sure ground rods were required in the 50's.
UFER I would say for the most part but not always.
Cold water bond I would think so in that era.

I can see he has the code to back him up. If a new meter can is set then you need to comply.
Click to expand...

Supplementing of the water pipe I think was a new code to the 1999 NEC, or the 1996, not sure, but if it was the water pipe electrode was all that was required it would have been code compliant.

It was moved from 250-50(a)(2) in the 1999 to 250.52(D)(2) in the 2002 then to 250.53(D)(2) in the 2005 where I think it still is today (it is in my 2011 but I don't have a 2014)

Article 9 section 21 of the US Constitution states "no post facto laws shall be enacted" which is the bases of all grandfather laws, so if it was code compliant when it was built it can remain, so an inspector can't require a change but like some said the POCO can as they have the right to refuse service just like an insurance company or mortgage company can refuse service if you don't fix what their HI finds, I just don't think the inspector should be enforcing the POCO's wishes as he is an officer of law and is bound by law to enforce the law as written.

The other side of it is sometimes it's best to just pick your battles and installing a ground rod connected to the meter should not be that big of a job?

Are there any other electrodes installed like a CEE you can show him? if so the code only requires us to use only one of the listed electrodes in 250.52(A)(2) through (A)(8) to supplement the water pipe.
 
Fulthrotl said:
i just put in a ground on a new piece of gear. the ground rod comes up inside the gear, and is stubbed up 6".
below the pour, a 3/0 copper is burndy irrevocably connected to the ground rod, and comes up thru a pvc sleeve into the gear to tie
to the ground bus. inspector signed off on it, i explained how i was going to tie all the gear together. he was good with it.
we come to final, and he says you have to see the connection... i said but, but, but.... and then we reached this solution:



the 3/0 crimped to the ground rod, and the 3/0 to the ground rod's immediate left are both connected to the same
ground rod, one is a foot under the pour.... but that is what he wanted to see, and it took me about 15 minutes to do.
he's a very good inspector, but there are some things i've learned he wants to see, and on my jobs, he sees them.
Click to expand...
Must not be that good of an inspector or he would have gotten the required second ground rod. 250.53(A)(2) :) Just saying.
 
Dan in San Diego said:
Our local utility is starting the under grounding of electrical wires and the city inspector is telling my neighbor that since they cannot see the existing ground on his electrical panel he needs to put a new one in.

The electrical panel on his house has not been changed since the house was built in 1956. I verified that there is a cold water bond via an continuity check but again the ground rod is not visible. I tried to discuss with the inspector that since this installation has not been changed since new and passed inspection then, why now does a ground rod need to be put in? Let me clarify that all the utility company has done is bring in conduit (PVC) underground and run it along the exterior wall and install it to a box with a new meter base which in turn has prongs that go to where the meter used to be. Could it be that since this new box has been put in it may not be considered grounded?

I have not seen any thing in the N.E.C about bringing existing installations up to current code?

Thank you,
Dan
Click to expand...
A cold water ground was the norm, back in the 50's, but many a galvanized water pipe was changed to plastic between then and now. You simply verified that you have continuity from the panel to the pipe, but do you have a ground? You yourself said bond.
 
hurk27 said:
Supplementing of the water pipe I think was a new code to the 1999 NEC, or the 1996, not sure, but if it was the water pipe electrode was all that was required it would have been code compliant.

It was moved from 250-50(a)(2) in the 1999 to 250.52(D)(2) in the 2002 then to 250.53(D)(2) in the 2005 where I think it still is today (it is in my 2011 but I don't have a 2014)

Article 9 section 21 of the US Constitution states "no post facto laws shall be enacted" which is the bases of all grandfather laws, so if it was code compliant when it was built it can remain, so an inspector can't require a change but like some said the POCO can as they have the right to refuse service just like an insurance company or mortgage company can refuse service if you don't fix what their HI finds, I just don't think the inspector should be enforcing the POCO's wishes as he is an officer of law and is bound by law to enforce the law as written.

The other side of it is sometimes it's best to just pick your battles and installing a ground rod connected to the meter should not be that big of a job?

Are there any other electrodes installed like a CEE you can show him? if so the code only requires us to use only one of the listed electrodes in 250.52(A)(2) through (A)(8) to supplement the water pipe.
Click to expand...

You'd be on thin constitutional ground if you tried to throw Article 9 Section 21 at anyone to prevent a retrofit. Keep in mind that the Constitution is about the citizen's relationship with the federal government, not the state and local jurisdictions. It's true that using the 14th amendment as a lever some of those protections have been pushed down to the state level. This wouldn't be such an instance.

In 2000 there was a fire in Boland Hall, a freshman dorm at Seton Hall University in New Jersey. Three students died. One of the results was legislation requiring all college dormitory facilities, public or private, to be sprinklered retroactively. I don't recall anyone even trying to claim a constitutional infringemnt.
 
cowboyjwc said:
A cold water ground was the norm, back in the 50's, but many a galvanized water pipe was changed to plastic between then and now. You simply verified that you have continuity from the panel to the pipe, but do you have a ground? You yourself said bond.
Click to expand...

Now the cold water connection is considered a bond. Then it was considered a ground. When I was a lad, I couldn't understand why the instructions for some old-timey electrical equipment (like Pop-pop's ham set) would tell you to ground it to the nearest cold water pipe. All the outlets in our house had a ground. The real question would be, is it acting like the ground it was supposed to be back then.
 
gadfly56 said:
Now the cold water connection is considered a bond. Then it was considered a ground. When I was a lad, I couldn't understand why the instructions for some old-timey electrical equipment (like Pop-pop's ham set) would tell you to ground it to the nearest cold water pipe. All the outlets in our house had a ground. The real question would be, is it acting like the ground it was supposed to be back then.
Click to expand...
That's my point. Main line changed to plastic or even if it was changed to copper, there is still a chance that the house has galvanized pipe, in which case there would be a dielectric fitting between the copper and galvanized.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top