The panel does not accept the concept of deleting Section 250.32(B)(2) from the NEC. There are instances where this method of grounding for a separate building or structure is warranted and can be accomplished by compliance with the current provisions of the Code. The panel does accept the concept of continuation of migrating away from the use of the grounded circuit conductor for grounding as emphasized clearly by the submitter. By changing provisions in 250.32(B)(2) to an exception to a base rule in 250.32(B)(1), the code can continue to include requirements that would be applicable to existing buildings or structures grounded in this manner, and at the same time strengthen the requirement in 250.32(B)(1) as the main rule with having to qualify to use the method provided in the exception [former 250.32(B)(2)] which is more restrictive. This change as suggested by the submitter would help reduce the number of designs that purposely invite the possibilities of inappropriate neutral-to-ground connections that can and often do happen at a later date, which is uncontrollable by any code rule. Revise the proposed changes to retain the text of 250.32(B)(2), but incorporate those provisions into an exception to Section 250.32(B)(1). The change is consistent with they way the Code currently addresses the grounding of frames of existing dryers and ranges as provided in Sections 250.140 Exception, and 250.142, which is by exception. This action promotes code text that is consistent with Section 3.1.1 of the NEC Style Manual by removing a mandatory section that conflicts with another mandatory section.
Number Eligible to Vote: 15
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 14 Negative: 1
Explanation of Negative: TOOMER, R.: Deletion of this provision in the code, which has been successfully used for many years, is not warranted by the submitter?s substantiations. No specific safety incidents or evidence has been provided to warrant this major change.
