gas hot water heater jump or not

[LarryFine]

Here nothing else is required.
In this scenario the water pipe is not part of the electrode system. There is no requirement to bond around anything outlined in 250.104(A)(1) therefore no jumpers are required anywhere on this system.

Interesting that, while I have never had concern for making sure the hot was bonded to the cold, I get a twinge of a problem with JW's "250.104(a)(1)" connection point, on the 'load' side of the water heater.

I've always (that makes it the right way, right?) made sure that the bond was to the cold-water supply pipe, and I guess a big part of why is that removal of the water heater doesn't compromise the effectiveness of the connection.

Sounds like a conflict, doesn't it? :roll:

 

[jwelectric]

Interesting that, while I have never had concern for making sure the hot was bonded to the cold, I get a twinge of a problem with JW's "250.104(a)(1)" connection point, on the 'load' side of the water heater.

I've always (that makes it the right way, right?) made sure that the bond was to the cold-water supply pipe, and I guess a big part of why is that removal of the water heater doesn't compromise the effectiveness of the connection.

Sounds like a conflict, doesn't it? :roll:

I can?t remember which cycle it was but one of the comments that was stated for the reasons to bond the metal water pipe from 250.66 was the fact that a metal underground water pipe ?might? be installed at some point in time.

The reason I thought of this is because if, like you said, the hot water side is bonded and dielectric unions are used at the water heater the statement from the panel member would be useless.

 

[George Stolz]

I think that you are wanting so hard to justify the bonding across a water heater that you can?t see the wording found in 53(D)(1). If there are no ?removable devices? there is no need for the bonding jumper if the first place.

I do not want to have to install jumpers at water heaters, to be clear. I see it to be a waste of time. I keep coming back to this out of dread that I could be right about the wording. To be clear.

To say that the water heater is a removable piece of equipment would equate to a section of the pipe being removed.

Pipes are generally sweat together, water heaters screw into the line. I don't see the analogy.

I take this to mean that if there was one piece of nonmetallic pipe installed that is no more than ? inch long then the requirements of 250.104(A) would no longer apply.

That could be their intent - but I fear 250.53's words go above their intent. Maybe.

 

[jwelectric]

Pipes are generally sweat together, water heaters screw into the line. I don't see the analogy.

What about galvanized metal water pipes or black iron such as on a sprinkler system. These piping systems will have unions that screw together. Are we to bond around these fittings?

That could be their intent - but I fear 250.53's words go above their intent. Maybe.

George, you are taking a rule that applies to the water pipe grounding electrode and trying to apply it to bonding. This just doesn?t work.

If I am on a public water utility and two or three months go by and I don?t pay the bill someone is coming to my house with a lock.
Five minutes after they leave I cut the lock and have water again. Next someone comes to my house and take the meter back to the water utility with them. When this happens there will be no path to bond the metal water pipe. 250.53(D)(1) address this problem. The same is true with a water filter. Some filters can be removed which breaks the continuity of the metal water pipe. In this case a bonding jumper is required to be installed in case one or more of these devices are removed.
Notice that 250.53(D)(1) does not address any thing that is nonmetallic such as fittings or short sections of nonmetallic pipe. It only address, ?shall not rely on water meters or filtering devices and similar equipment.?

When I change a water heater I take one out and put one right back in place, but this don?t matter in the first place due to the fact that the metal piping system would be bonded before it ever got to the water heater should a metal piping system be used.

Better still if you would take the time to read a few of the ROPs on 250.104 you will have a different outlook on the bonding of metal water pipes.
If I understand the Comments of the Panel the only time that bonding from 250.66 is required is when there is a totally metal water system involved. The inclusion of any nonmetallic pipes, devices, or similar equipment then the water system will fall under the requirements of 240.104(B).
Based on the statements of the code panel one can see how silly the bonding jumper across a water heater is.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Mike,

The inclusion of any nonmetallic pipes, devices, or similar equipment then the water system will fall under the requirements of 240.104(B).
Based on the statements of the code panel one can see how silly the bonding jumper across a water heater is.

I just can't understand the logic that CMP 5 used here. How does a nonmetallic fitting make a water pipe not a water pipe?
Don

 

[natfuelbill]

Mike,
[/SIZE][/FONT]
I just can't understand the logic that CMP 5 used here. How does a nonmetallic fitting make a water pipe not a water pipe?
Don

Go back to Article 100.
Bonding (bonded) The permanent joining of metallic parts to form an electrically conductive path that ensures electrical continuity and the capacity to conduct safely any current likely to be imposed.

Gotta make it continuous....

 

[George Stolz]

Go back to Article 100.
Bonding (bonded) The permanent joining of metallic parts to form an electrically conductive path that ensures electrical continuity and the capacity to conduct safely any current likely to be imposed.

Gotta make it continuous....

Bill, how does the definition of bonding require us to make a water pipe electrically continuous?

 

[George Stolz]

Next someone comes to my house and take the meter back to the water utility with them. When this happens there will be no path to bond the metal water pipe. ...The same is true with a water filter. Some filters can be removed which breaks the continuity of the metal water pipe. In this case a bonding jumper is required to be installed in case one or more of these devices are removed.

How is the bonding not disrupted by removing a water heater?

Based on the statements of the code panel one can see how silly the bonding jumper across a water heater is.

Based on their statements, I'd say they need to clarify their intentions. 250.53(D)(1) defies their statements, IMO.

 

[jwelectric]

Mike, I just can't understand the logic that CMP 5 used here. How does a nonmetallic fitting make a water pipe not a water pipe? Don

Once the nonmetallic fitting is installed the system is no longer a metal system it becomes an integrated water system and is no longer subjected to the rules of 250.104(A)(1) but instead falls under the requirements of 250.104(B).

I think that there is a lot of confusion over just what is taking place when bonding of a metal water pipe.

Go back to Article 100. Bonding (bonded) The permanent joining of metallic parts to form an electrically conductive path that ensures electrical continuity and the capacity to conduct safely any current likely to be imposed. Gotta make it continuous....

Here if is obvious that this person thinks that the words ?shall be bonded TO the ? might mean the complete system is to be bonded. If the system is made of metal would it not already be electrically continuous.

Based on their statements, I'd say they need to clarify their intentions. 250.53(D)(1) defies their statements, IMO.

And I agree with you that 53(D)(1) is very clear that from the point of attachment of the metal water pipe bonding connection back to what ever point on the service or the grounding electrode can not depend on any thing such as a meter or a filter.

If the water heater was installed on the right of the valve in the picture that you posted of Mike Holt?s and it was removed would it interfere with the current that might be flowing on the bonding jumper that is across the removable device?
Would it break the path of flow from the point of attachment on the interior pipe and the grounding electrode?
Remember we are bonding TO not

Bill, how does the definition of bonding require us to make a water pipe electrically continuous?

making the metal water pipe electrically continuous.

 

[George Stolz]

So, what is the point of the requirement, in your opinion, Mike?

 

[jwelectric]

So, what is the point of the requirement, in your opinion, Mike?

Which requirement?

 

[George Stolz]

Sorry, 250.53(D)(1)'s bonding-side requirement.

 

[jwelectric]

George, in 250.53(D) what is being address if the ?metal? water pipe that is being used as an electrode. (D)(1) addresses the bonding of a ?metal? water piping system to the ?metal? water pipe electrode.
Just as in your scenario #3 where the ?metal? water piping system is being bonded back to the panel the jumper across the meter is doing the same job. Once the jumper is landed on the interior side of the ?metal? water pipe no matter if it lands on the grounding electrode or the panel it has now bonded ?TO? the interior ?metal? piping system.

A meter or a filter could be removed permanently but a water heater is going to be replaced as soon as it is removed or the pipe will have to be made up in order for the hot water pipes to have water in them. If the hot water pipes don?t have any water in them then they wouldn?t be required to be bonded in the first place.

For the past couple of code cycles it seems to be the opinion of Code Panel 5 that a ?METAL WATER PIPING SYSTEM? is just that, made completely from metal water pipe.
If the system is made completely of metal pipe then the continuity of the system would not be an issue but they know that the plumbing codes will allow for a water pipe to be repaired using nonmetallic material. This allowance in the plumbing codes is why Code Panel 5 removed the requirement for a water system to have continuity and the use of the water pipes use as an EGC was removed from 250-50.
They have voiced several times that the inclusion of any type of nonmetallic pipe or pipe fitting would exclude the system from the requirements of 250.104(A) in the 2008 ROPs.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Mike,

Once the nonmetallic fitting is installed the system is no longer a metal system it becomes an integrated water system and is no longer subjected to the rules of 250.104(A)(1) but instead falls under the requirements of 250.104(B).

It is no longer a metal water piping system...it is now multiple water piping systems.
Don

 

[jwelectric]

Mike,

It is no longer a metal water piping system...it is now multiple water piping systems.
Don
[/size][/font][/color]

I don't think that is what the Code Panel is saying. It is still one system it is no longer a "metal" system.

 

[George Stolz]

Mike, if the system bonded can be four inches long, I don't understand the point of the section at all.

(Not that I did in the first place... )

 

[jwelectric]

Mike, if the system bonded can be four inches long, I don't understand the point of the section at all.

(Not that I did in the first place... )

George
The section that has you confused (250.53(D)(1)) is not the section that is the problem.
The problem stems from the teachings and comments found throughout the electrical industry.

From the introduction of metal water piping systems into buildings (back when water was invented) the electrical code has mandated that the underground metal water pipe be used as a grounding electrode. This has always been in the electrical code.

At one time the electrical code required that a water system that contained any metal pipes be made electrically continuous. As the plumbing industry started producing nonmetallic plumbing pipes and fittings and the plumbing codes were allowing more and more nonmetallic material to be installed the requirement to have a water piping system that would be electrically continuous became all but impossible.

Dielectric unions was introduced to install water heaters because the plumbing industry seemed to think that current flowing on the copper pipes was causing holes to form in the copper pipes. These fittings (dielectric) stopped the flow of current.
To this day should there be any discolor found in the water of a metal water system that has an electrical conductor ran to it the conductor gets the blame.

The electrician of that day had been taught that 250-80 required that a water piping system that contained metal pipes was required to be made electrically continuous.
This brought on the unfounded rule of bonding across a water heater because these dielectric fittings would not carry current.
To justify this rule all kinds of theories was dreamed up with the most popular being that some how a house now has two different water systems, one the cold water and the other the hot water. This is not true; they both are part of the same system but we still have the same type of thinking that has not passed by yet that ?all metal pipes MUST be bonded? as outlined in the original post of this thread.

I think that it is very clear by the comments of the Code Panel that a water piping system that is not 100% metal is not required to be bonded using table 250.66 but instead it will fall under the rule of 250.104(B). I base this statement on these proposals;

5-235 Log #1834 NEC-P05 Final Action: Reject
(250.104(A)(1))
____________________________________________________________
Substantiation: Nonmetallic water piping systems are being inserted between our metal water piping system and today?s code is not recognizing these changes.
Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement: The conditions indicated in the substantiation are already covered by 250.104(B) where there is not a complete metallic water piping system.

5-236 Log #2432 NEC-P05 Final Action: Reject
(250.104(A)(1))
____________________________________________________________
Substantiation: With much expanded use of plastic water piping system(s) isolating section of metal piping systems. This type of installation leaves contractors and inspectors what is required to be bonded.
Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement: The requirements of 250.104(A) apply to complete metallic water piping systems. Where there is no complete metallic water piping system, then the requirements of 250.104(B) would apply for those portions of isolated metal water piping system likely to become energized.

Notice that the persons making these proposals have the mentality that the insertion of a piece of nonmetallic pipe made the piece of metallic pipe a system of itself, ?Nonmetallic water piping systems are being inserted between our metal water piping system?
The code panel on the other hand is calling the system one system. The nonmetallic piece of pipe did not make different systems but instead changed the rule we use to do our bonding to the one system that is in place.

Based on the past requirement that a water system that contained metal piping be made electrically continuous the theory of bonding across a water heater has not yet gone away. Unless the jurisdiction in which the work is being done has amended the NEC there is no requirement to bond around anything except when a 100% metal water piping system is installed and is also part of the grounding electrode system. Then the continuity of the 100% metal water pipes can not depend on such things as meters or filters as the path for bonding. If the metal water pipe electrode is present and the interior water system is not 100% metal then the jumper around a meter or filter is not required.

 

[Bob NH]

There is another common system that could offer some benefits and raise some issues.

Hydronic heating system are used in much of the northern areas of the country. Makeup water is supplied by potable water systems, but they are systems themselves starting with the boiler. Some of them contain sections of copper pipe, much more than 10 ft long, under a concrete floor and in contact with the earth.

Those uncerground heating pipes could be construed to constitute a second grounding electrode per 250.52(A)(7). The question arises, whether they are "not effectively bonded to a metal water pipe". They may be incidently or accidently connected, but they are usually not "bonded" in the sense of having intentional bonds to the water supply pipe.

The significance of the determination of whether such pipes are a separate electrode under 250.52(A)(7) is that the hydronic heating system pipe under the concrete floor could qualify as the supplemental electrode required by 250.53(D)(2).

 

[George Stolz]

Unless the jurisdiction in which the work is being done has amended the NEC there is no requirement to bond around anything except when a 100% metal water piping system is installed and is also part of the grounding electrode system. Then the continuity of the 100% metal water pipes can not depend on such things as meters or filters as the path for bonding.

Mike, do you realize this represents a reversal of your opinion previously stated?

You just said, "when there is a 100% metal system, we can't rely on removeable appliances for continuity." But then, all we have to do is install a plastic fitting in the system to override the requirement? Then it becomes an "integrated" system? :-? :-?

This isn't rational.

Next cycle, I'm going to take a swing at eliminating 250.104(A) and amending 250.53(D)(1). It will likely go down in flames, but I am going to give it an effort.

 

[jwelectric]

[/font]

[/size]
Mike, do you realize this represents a reversal of your opinion previously stated?

You just said, "when there is a 100% metal system, we can't rely on removeable appliances for continuity." But then, all we have to do is install a plastic fitting in the system to override the requirement? Then it becomes an "integrated" system? :-? :-?

This isn't rational.

Next cycle, I'm going to take a swing at eliminating 250.104(A) and amending 250.53(D)(1). It will likely go down in flames, but I am going to give it an effort.

Not appliances. The removal of a water heater in a 100% metal water piping system would not open the point at which the metal water system is bonded.

I don?t understand how you see the removal of a water heater being anything like a meter or a filter or any thing similar to these items.

If scenario #3 that you drew is code compliant then think of the same bonding jumper being installed back to the grounding electrode which would also be code compliant