Gastite bonding

Status
Not open for further replies.
1793 said:
In my opinion, NO. I think the inspectors point was nothing needs to be done at all. The requirement for the full sized bonding jumper was from the Technical Bulletin from WardFlex.
Click to expand...
e



bottom line is if the listing instructions from the mfg requires a bond connection (250.66 type). Then it is going to be mandated, but untill there is a NEC or local requirement the responsibility is on the gas fitters. The theory should be that a permit is pulled and a licensed electrician installs the bond and the electrical inspector checks the installation.

But the current language in 250.104 (B) by itself does not require the installation that is required by the pipe manufacture.
 
I really do not see the point in a bonding conductor sized in accordance with TA 250.66, if the CSST is the problem
 
From what I can make of this, the flex gas line is too thin. I'm not sure I understand how bonding a single fitting, CSST, is going to protect the entire system of flex gas lines.

I'm sure I am missing something, I just can't see it. :cool:
 
bonding

bonding

The NYS Res. code section E 3509.7 states ... each above ground portion of gas piping system upstream from the equipt. shut off valve shall be electrically continous and bonded to the grounding electrode system. CSST companies are now stating that and many require that Lic. Electrician perform this. It states it in code and manf. specs so it must be done. If a municapality chooses not to enforce the code, good luck.
 
1793 said:
From my conversation with the Inspector, lightning strikes are blowing the thin walls of this stuff
Click to expand...

If this is the case, then it shouldn't be used! It wouldn't be in MY house!

The last few times I ran into this, I asked the inspector, and I was permitted to bond with the EGCs of the gas appliances
 
I think when I am called to bond the gastite I will do so happily , What won't make me happy is if an inspector of wires fails my work because another trade's code has been violated.

Case in point , I wired a small addition for a G.C. , they added a bedroom and a bath , In the Peoples republic of Mass. when you add a bedroom the house has to meet the current requirements for smoke detection . To make a long story short the G.C. did not want to, I said fine, but I will put one in the new bedroom regardless of the fact the rest of the house is not in compliance. I passed my final inspection , then the fire dept. came in and said, nope , your house needs to comply with today's rules . The H.O. called me , mad as a wet hornnet , after he finished I asked him if the inspector of wires signed off on the finish ? He said yes. I said the requirement is in the Massachusetts State Building Code and as such is not enforceable by the inspector of wires , I also told him that I informed the G.C. what would be expected. The stinky part is he then called the G.C. and asked why he did not know his trade, the really stinky part is I have not worked for the G.C. or the H.O. since. I guess I should have taken the blame,...
 
Scott said
I also sent an email to Rich Fredette at the Mass board. But in reality what do we do NOW. Not when all this shakes out at some later date. I see this stuff in just about every job I do that has gas. Most times it is an addition to the existing steel pipe system to supply a stove. According to the manufacturer I would have to run a # ?? (not exactly clear) from the service to this small section of pipe to properly bond it.
__________________
Click to expand...

Not sure this small section of the gas pipe system is a system in and of itself and I don't think you would need to run a bonding wire based on the amperage of the service to it . I would ask for it in writing
 
M. D. said:
Scott said


Not sure this small section of the gas pipe system is a system in and of itself and I don't think you would need to run a bonding wire based on the amperage of the service to it . I would ask for it in writing
Click to expand...



I don't see anything that determines that a short section of this pipe would not have to be bonded. The manufacturer does not specify specific installations only that they require bonding with their "special" bonding method. So if it is 10 feet or 100 feet to me does not make a difference.

Who would you ask for it in writing? It seems that nobody knows right now. Also it is in writing from the manufacturer the question is do we follow them, The NEC, the inspectors, or what. They are not all on the same page.
 
M. D. said:
Case in point , I wired a small addition for a G.C. , they added a bedroom and a bath , In the Peoples republic of Mass. when you add a bedroom the house has to meet the current requirements for smoke detection . To make a long story short the G.C. did not want to, I said fine, but I will put one in the new bedroom regardless of the fact the rest of the house is not in compliance. I passed my final inspection , then the fire dept. came in and said, nope , your house needs to comply with today's rules . ...
Click to expand...


When you take out a permit to install a smoke detector system I would think you are legally bound to install it to comply with current code. I don't think that it matters at all that this code requirement is not in the NEC. In my view you really are responsible and should be held accountable.


Think about it this way. If you were to wire a house and along the way you cut out a few joists for recessed lights to fit in your wiring inspection may pass just fine but the building inspection would not. Point is we have to follow more than just "Our" code. The wiring inspector can only inspect for NEC issues but other codes affect us as well.

In reality you probably should have made a bigger stink about it in the first place. I beleive that is just part of the business. No way would I have not brought that house up to code as required.


Also while I would agree with anyone who says we live in a screwball state, I have to say that this is a good requirement. Smoke detectors may be the difference between life and death.

Edit to remove political comment - George
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I just read through this thread for the first time - wow.
eek.gif


I would hope that this product is headed for extinction on it's own, and it won't even show up as a blip on the NEC's radar, to be honest. I can visualize the 'requirements' being generated by the gas-pipe manufacturers as a short-term measure, to either confuse the issue by making it seem as though the NEC is asking for something it isn't, or perhaps an attempt to force an electrical solution to a problem they've created on their own.

It seems to me the most obvious solution is to remove the UL listing from the product and get it off the market as soon as possible. Who would want this in their house, bonded or not? Bonding is not a guarantee that lightning will not puncture it, IMO.

It seems to me the most prudent measure would be for each building department to step forward and not approve the product for installation in their jurisdiction, IMO.

Maybe I'm nuts. Sometimes I can't see the dollar signs for the trees. :)
 
georgestolz said:
... I can visualize the 'requirements' being generated by the gas-pipe manufacturers as a short-term measure ... to force an electrical solution to a problem they've created on their own.

.... Bonding is not a guarantee that lightning will not puncture it ...
Click to expand...
IMO George just hit the nail on head!

This seems to me not an NEC issue, but rather a product listing/durability issue; one which might possibly be "linked" to NFPA 780 (LPS).

The CSST manufacturer's attempts at "linking" to NFPA 70 -- no doubt a tactic recommend by their lawyers -- is just causing confusion.

Jim
 
Last edited:
it seems like somebody dropped the ball on the testing of csst before it was put in the market,
 
Scott said
When you take out a permit to install a smoke detector system I would think you are legally bound to install it to comply with current code. I don't think that it matters at all that this code requirement is not in the NEC. In my view you really are responsible and should be held accountable.


Think about it this way. If you were to wire a house and along the way you cut out a few joists for recessed lights to fit in your wiring inspection may pass just fine but the building inspection would not. Point is we have to follow more than just "Our" code. The wiring inspector can only inspect for NEC issues but other codes affect us as well.

In reality you probably should have made a bigger stink about it in the first place. I beleive that is just part of the business. No way would I have not brought that house up to code as required.


Also while I would agree with anyone who says we live in a screwball state, I have to say that this is a good requirement. Smoke detectors may be the difference between life and death.
Click to expand...

Scott, I made the builder aware of the requirement as I understand them to be. Told him ,based on my expieriance, that it would most likely fail, It did , it was not my fault , it was he who made the call , he did not want to pay and I did not want to give it away. I could have gone to the H.O. but that would have pissed him off, so I kept it between me and the guy paying untill the H.O. went off on me. Telling the H.O. who's responsibility it was , was my only mistake.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps this does not belong in this thread but the issue of who is responsile is of concern to me. Lets say I was hired to add some recetecals in someone's house and after I'm done I call for an inspection ,then on the day of inspection the gas fitter is there, adding a gas dryer,.He uses the csst piping, the electrical inspector sees this and is aware of this csst bonding issue is he allowed to fail the work I did? I say no. There is Nothing in the code for him to stand on once the dryer is plugged in with the 3 wire crod cap 250.104 (b) has been met. It is the Gas fitter that needs to make the arangements for the bonding , I'll be happy to pull a permit and do the work.
I wired a bathroom the H.O. did not want to install a vent the builder did not give it much thought and went along, I came in and said where do you want the switch for the vent he said "no vent ",I said "they are required by the building code ,he said 'no vent" I said O.K. My rough inspection passed, His did not, the system worked, the vent was installed. Is it my responsibility to force the H.O. & builder to comply ? nope. Should I have installed the vent over the objections of the H.O. and G.C.? Nope. Will it be my responsibility, today, to force the gas fitter to hire me to bond his work ? Nope .He can hire any qualified person he wants.If on the other hand I am hired to bond it and I do not do it properly then that is my responsibility.,
 
Hi: Wouldn't 110.3(A)(1)and its FPN apply as well as 110.3(B) to the manufacturer's instructions now provided with Gastite CSST? Their updated Technical Bulletin TB2007-01 01-26-07 was amended to reflect arcing effects on the thin wall of their product and they specify a method in which they insist their product is installed. This method is in addition to 250.104(B). That's the way inspectors around here are interpreting and enforcing.
 
wbalsam1 said:
Hi: Wouldn't 110.3(A)(1)and its FPN apply as well as 110.3(B) to the manufacturer's instructions now provided with Gastite CSST? Their updated Technical Bulletin TB2007-01 01-26-07 was amended to reflect arcing effects on the thin wall of their product and they specify a method in which they insist their product is installed. This method is in addition to 250.104(B). That's the way inspectors around here are interpreting and enforcing.
Click to expand...

I don not install csst , How am I supposed to know if it is being or has been installed? These bulletins have changed in a very short time , since I am not qualified to install this stuff I will not see the newest and latest instructions.Do I shadow the plumber/gas fitter? demand to know what tpye of piping is being used? IMO this stuff should be taken off the market if it is not the requirement to bond metalic gas piping/tubeing should be in the NEC and that it should be a # 6 seems reasonable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top