Gas Dispenser (Art 514) & 501.30

Status
Not open for further replies.

augie47

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee
Occupation
State Electrical Inspector (Retired)
A little enlightenment is needed.
I have a typical gas station installation. The E/C took advantage of 514.8 Exception 2 and used PVC in his underground runs to the dispensers.
At the service distribution, his GRS conduits from his pumps have the required seal-offs and then enter a metallic wireway. The wireway routes the conductors to the dispenser over-current panel thru a PVC Nipple.
There is an equipment grounding conductor installed in each conduit.
It appears the 501.30 would require bonding of these raceways (and a metallic conduit into the panel) by a means other than double-locknuts, however, with the use of PVC in the underground run this makes no sense to me.
What am I overlooking ?
 

rbalex

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Mission Viejo, CA
Occupation
Professional Electrical Engineer
...
What am I overlooking ?
The "equipment grounding conductor installed in each conduit" is sufficient to be the EGC. However, Section 514.8 Exception 2 only allows omitting the concrete encasement; otherwise it must still be consistent with Section 501.10(A)(1)(a) and its Exception.

The RMC must still somehow be properly bonded to the EGC though, but only at the exposed ends; essentially in line with Section 250.4(A)(3) and other parts of Art 250.
 
Last edited:

augie47

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Tennessee
Occupation
State Electrical Inspector (Retired)
The "equipment grounding conductor installed in each conduit" is sufficient to be the EGC. However, Section 514.8 Exception 2 only allows omitting the concrete encasement; otherwise it must still be consistent with Section 501.10(A)(1)(a) and its Exception.

The RMC must still somehow be properly bonded to the EGC though, but only at the exposed ends; essentially in line with Section 250.4(A)(3) and other parts of Art 250.

I basically understand (asking this may prove otherwise :) )
Are you saying the provisions of 501.30 (double locknut, locknut bushing not acceptable) are not applicable as we have a EGC, but, as with all metallic systems, we must assure "standard" bonding means ?
 

rbalex

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Mission Viejo, CA
Occupation
Professional Electrical Engineer
This tread and this thread are recent examples that expanded on the concepts. Essentially, metal raceway(s) must somehow be bonded back to the service or SDS. The simplest and most effective means is bonding them to the EGC when the EGC is a wire type conductor included in the raceway.

A double locknut or locknut/bushing alone are unacceptable means of bonding and must be supplemented with "...bonding jumpers with proper fittings or other approved means of bonding..." So a locknut/listed grounding bushing with a lug to connect a wire to the EGC would be an example of a suitable connection. It isn't exclusive by any means, just an example.

Ideally, the bushing would have five threads fully engaged to the metal raceway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top