gas hot water heater jump or not

Status
Not open for further replies.
How do you decide which pipe is going to be your 250.104(A) pipe, and which is going to be your (B) (unbonded) pipe? None of them are likely to become energized.
 
georgestolz said:
How do you decide which pipe is going to be your 250.104(A) pipe,
Click to expand...
If it is a complete metal water piping system
georgestolz said:
and which is going to be your (B) (unbonded) pipe?
Click to expand...
If it is not a complete metal water piping system.
georgestolz said:
None of them are likely to become energized.
Click to expand...
Old habits are hard to break.

5-231 Log #3215 NEC-P05 Final Action: Reject
(250.104(A))
____________________________________________________________
Submitter: Gus Bryan, Deputy ELectrical Inspector State of TN
Recommendation: Add text to read as follows:
?...bonding jumpers shall be accessible. (add) Effectively grounded metal water piping shall have jumpers sized per 250.66, metal water piping not effectively grounded shall have jumpers installed per 250.122.?
Substantiation: Metal water piping systems that are not effectively grounded are no different from process piping, etc. and should not require bonding beyond that required by 250.104(B).
Panel Meeting Action: Reject
Panel Statement: The submitter proposes lessening the minimum sizes required for bonding jumpers for metal water piping systems without substantiation. The panel maintains that the minimum size of the bonding jumpers for metal water piping systems is required to be in accordance with Table 250.66.
Number Eligible to Vote: 15
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 15

I have been looking for the past couple of days and can?t find the article or proposal but I do remember reading somewhere why Panel 5 maintains the complete metal water piping is to be bonded based on the service conductors (Table 250.66).
If memory serves me (don?t bet that it does) it had something to do with the underground nonmetallic pipe that supplies a metal water system being replaced with metal pipes. In the event that this happened on a public water utility there is the possibility that the metal water system of that building could be back fed from an open ground (neutral) from another building. If the metal water system was bonded with an EGC it might not be large enough to handle the load.
By bonding the metal water system using Table 250.66 it would offer better protection in this type of scenario.
 
If memory serves, they've also stated that the NEC is not designed for isolated incidents such as open service neutrals. :D

I guess my closing statement will be that these sections are subject to a degree of interpretation. The wording can use improvement.

I think at some level, we're both right, that's no joke. And tonight, it's getting close to bedtime, so I am inclined to allow the issue to die until proposal time, 2010. :)
 
In Article 90 the definition of bonded is as follows: 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.
how can the "system" be bonded if it is not continuous? (as per the definition?)
the NEC handbook states
"where it cannot reasonably be concluded the hot and cold water pipes are RELIABLY interconnected,an electrical bonding jumper is REQUIRED to ensure that this connection is made"
it seems (to me) the NEC wants this system "continuous"
what say you?
 
Last edited:
mayjong said:
In Article 90 the definition of bonded is as follows: 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.
how can the "system" be bonded if it is not continuous? (as per the definition?)
Click to expand...

I don?t see anywhere that states that the water pipe is to be bonded. What I see is that the water pipe is to be bonded to something. This does not mean that the pipe itself is bonded or made electrically continuous it only means that the water pipe is joined to the equipment outlined in 250.104(A)(1).

First look at 250.4(A)(4) and then at 250.104(A)(1) and it will be clear that there is no requirement to make the water pipe electrically continuous.
 
the NEC handbook states
"where it cannot reasonably be concluded that the hot and cold water pipes are RELIABLY interconnected, an electrical bonding jumper is REQUIRED to ensure that this connection is made"
it seems to me that would be (required) continuous...
what say you?
 
Last edited:
mayjong said:
the NEC handbook states
Click to expand...
mayjong said:
what say you?
Click to expand...

Soars on Grounding published by the IAEI states that the metal gas pipes, metallic drains, metal hot water and metal cold water pipes be bonded based on Table 250.66 in addition to making the statement that the pipes be electrically continuous. Soars includes metallic air ducks, TV antenna poles and downspouts in their things to bond. They even go as far as to say on page 137 of the Eight Edition that this is a mandatory and essential requirement of the NEC.

Aren?t we glad that these other books can?t be enforced?

The only book that counts is the NEC. I have learned that when I am in doubt about a code section the ROPs is a good place to see why the Code Panel decided the way they did. The second best place to find what a consensus might be is a NEC forum such as this one.

The NEC can not regulate the plumbing codes and the code panel realizes this. The plumbing codes do not forbid the installation of non metallic pipes, fittings, devices or fixtures in a system that also has metal pipes.
The argument that the reverse could take place in a complete metal water system that is supplied by non metallic pipes, (the non metallic supply being replaced with metal pipes) is the strong arm that holds the requirement to bond based on the service in place is my understanding.

With careful reading of 250.104(A)(1) we can see that there is no requirement to bond metal water pipes. What is required is that any metal water SYSTEM to be bonded to the service grounded conductor.
 
jwelectric said:
With careful reading of 250.104(A)(1) we can see that there is no requirement to bond metal water pipes. What is required is that any metal water SYSTEM to be bonded to the service grounded conductor.
Click to expand...

Mike, I still believe a close reading of 250.53(D)(1) can be interpreted as cancelling that idea. I'm just re-airing my belief, not diving back into the discussion. :)

mayjong said:
sorry, i didn't think those posts were going through, they weren't showing up on my comp....
Click to expand...
Until you reach a number of posts, the forum software will not allow your post to be visible until a moderator approves it. This is the mechanism by which we enjoy a porn-free, solicitor-free, and DIY-reduced forum; so we appreciate your patience if you post close to bed-time. Stick around and you'll see your posts instantly like everyone else. :)
 
George,and Mike,

I'd like to take a second to say thanks for the efforts you two have put

into this thread, I think more than just my eyes have been opened, agian.

It's kind of funny what some people consider 'good reading' hey.
 
Natfuelbilll said:
How does the NEC define SYSTEM?
Click to expand...

Here is a statement from the code panel in charge of this section.

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.

I take it to mean that if anything non metallic is installed then it is not a complete metallic water piping system,
 
jwelectric said:


Soars on Grounding published by the IAEI states that the metal gas pipes, metallic drains, metal hot water and metal cold water pipes be bonded based on Table 250.66 in addition to making the statement that the pipes be electrically continuous. Soars includes metallic air ducks, TV antenna poles and downspouts in their things to bond. They even go as far as to say on page 137 of the Eight Edition that this is a mandatory and essential requirement of the NEC.

Aren’t we glad that these other books can’t be enforced?

The only book that counts is the NEC. I have learned that when I am in doubt about a code section the ROPs is a good place to see why the Code Panel decided the way they did. The second best place to find what a consensus might be is a NEC forum such as this one.

The NEC can not regulate the plumbing codes and the code panel realizes this. The plumbing codes do not forbid the installation of non metallic pipes, fittings, devices or fixtures in a system that also has metal pipes.
The argument that the reverse could take place in a complete metal water system that is supplied by non metallic pipes, (the non metallic supply being replaced with metal pipes) is the strong arm that holds the requirement to bond based on the service in place is my understanding.

With careful reading of 250.104(A)(1) we can see that there is no requirement to bond metal water pipes. What is required is that any metal water SYSTEM to be bonded to the service grounded conductor.
Click to expand...

the NEC handbook says (and this is a quote)

" all of the commentary material has been written,researched and reviewed by NFPA staff and members of the National Electric Code Commitee."
this IS an official NFPA book ( they ONLY write the NEC) if i can't use this as a reference for (and i quote) "code intent and interpretations" then why use anything?
i will agree that it seems as though the code panel ROP's and the handbook (researched,written and reviewed by NFPA and NEC Committee) contradict each other. (understatement)
i don't even disagree with your interpretation (jumper not needed)
however, until there is a clear (is any code clear?!?!? good grief!) decision,(in my mind) i will go with the most restrictive of the two
 
mayjong said:
the NEC handbook says (and this is a quote)

" all of the commentary material has been written,researched and reviewed by NFPA staff and members of the National Electric Code Commitee."
this IS an official NFPA book ( they ONLY write the NEC) if i can't use this as a reference for (and i quote) "code intent and interpretations" then why use anything?
i will agree that it seems as though the code panel ROP's and the handbook (researched,written and reviewed by NFPA and NEC Committee) contradict each other. (understatement)
i don't even disagree with your interpretation (jumper not needed)
however, until there is a clear (is any code clear?!?!? good grief!) decision,(in my mind) i will go with the most restrictive of the two
Click to expand...

It also makes this statement;
The commentary and supplementary materials in this handbook are not a part of the Code and do not constitute Formal Interpretations of the NFPA (which can be obtained only through requests processed by the responsible technical committees in accordance with the published procedures of the NFPA). The commentary and supplementary materials, therefore, solely reflect the personal opinions of the editor or other contributors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the NFPA or its technical committees. ?Registered Trademark National Fire Protection Association, Inc.
Click to expand...

I have myself defended the commentary of the Handbook only to be let down in the end.

There is no requirement in the plumbing code to make the water piping system 100% metal nor is there a requirement in the plumbing code to replace metal for metal in the process of repairing a metal water pipe.

One could rest assured that in a rental property that the cheapest repair will be made to the plumbing. The cheapest devices will be used at sinks, tubs and showers when replacing these devices in rental property. It would be next to impossible to police the plumbing systems to assure that the metal water pipes maintain electrical continuity therefore the requirement to make the metal water piping system electrically continuous was removed from the NEC.

In North Carolina a plumber would be required to obtain an electrical license in order to install a bonding jumper around the non metallic pipe that he installed in a metal piping system or he would need to hire an electrician to install this jumper.

Scenario;
Homeowner calls plumber; my pipes froze last night and busted and water is every where.
Plumber comes out and replaces metal pipe with non metallic pipe and informs homeowner that he will need to have electrician come out and bond pipes.
Homeowner calls electrician; Electrician comes out and sees the non metallic pipe and turns off power to house. The electrician informs the homeowner that due to the danger of the water pipe not being electrically continuous that the power will be off until the following steps are taken.
1- Electrician obtains electrical permit
2- Electrician installs bonding jumper across the non metallic pipe
3- Inspector inspects the bonding jumper and reissues a CO
4- Power Company comes out to reconnect power.

Being there is no requirement to make a piping system electrically continuous in the Plumbing Code the plumber instead replaces the busted pipe with non metallic pipe and this is the end of the story.

Scenario;
An industrial warehouse is being renovated into apartments. The building is supplied with a 2000 amp service and one water main. The building has 100% copper water pipes including the new apartments. The metal water supply pipe is bonded from the service with a 3/0 conductor.
Each unit is supplied with a 100 amp panel and has 100% gas appliances including water heaters. These water heaters are installed using dielectric unions and there is not an electrical path between the hot and cold water pipes.
Does this mean that each unit will require a 3/0 bonding jumper between the hot and cold water pipes?
If you answer yes please take a moment and explain how the hot water pipes in each unit can be energized.
 
I swear, you're dragging me back in. :D

jwelectric said:
If you answer yes please take a moment and explain how the hot water pipes in each unit can be energized.
Click to expand...
Mike, that would be an argument to not bother bonding anything at all.

It makes more sense to bond everything or nothing as opposed to an undefined piece of something. :)
 
George I too came from the old school of thinking.

My point of view on these apartments is that the water pipes are bonded at the supply and service any other bonding would be redundant.

The use of a 3/0 bond between the hot and cold water pipes would carry more current than any ungrounded circuit that would be installed in the vicinity of the hot water pipe should it have isolation from the cold water.

I also contend that the metal hot water pipe is no more dangerous than the undefined metal stubs installed at fixture locations.
I am installing a KOHLER IV Georges Brass? bath faucet that is being supplied with copper stubs 20 inches long at my whirlpool tub. How can this be less dangerous than a hot water pipe?

georgestolz said:
It makes more sense to bond everything or nothing as opposed to an undefined piece of something.
Click to expand...
True words of wisdom my friend.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top