Gastite bonding

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reply to M.D.

Reply to M.D.

Hi: When I was doing electrical work, I did not install the water service to a building, yet I knew that Article 250 required such water pipe to be grounded, and the water piping within the building to be bonded, so even though I wasn't the plumber, I grounded the water to the GES. That was because my book - the NEC- told me to do that. I did not install the telephones, either, yet I knew that Article 800 prescribed the grounding methods. Same with CATV and NBCS. I did not install the metal siding, veneers and roofing, either, but I knew they were likely to be energized from holiday lighting, etc., so I bonded them to the GES. Before I left the job as complete, I made sure the the grounding electrode system was indeed a system. Part of an inspector's job is to detect field modifications to systems or equipment installations, and IMO, part of an electrician's duty and obligation -whether written, contracted for or contemplated- is to protect people from the hazards that arise from inadequate electrical systems. The Building Official is charged with the statutory authority to deem the permit process complete and ultimately sign the certificate of compliance or occupancy. Part of my ongoing committment to the industry I love, is being involved in an ever-widening knowledge of electrical, and it goes without saying that I've learned something about bonding CSST by staying involved in this process. That's what clues me in on a job to read the plumber's spec's.
 
wbalsam, at this point I am not responsible for bonding the gas pipe beyond 250.104 (2)(b) . I want to make it clear that the only time I must follow the instructions for installation is when I am the one doing the installing. I'll most likely start bonding the gas piping system with a # 6 regardless of the presence of csst., Not because it is required , but because It is clear that money matters more to whomever designed and those who would allow the continued use of this stuff, than safety does . I also know who will be installing the csst and most of those folks don't know or care about bonding and much of it will remain unbonded. My point is a house could burn to the ground because a piece of this stuff was used and not bonded. it is very possible the electrician may have had no idea a gas appliance was going to be installed let alone that they would use csst. How on earth is the electrician responsible ?? .
 
M.D. Senior Member

M.D. Senior Member

Hi: You raise an interesting scenario by asking what about a gas appliance being installed after the electrician completes his job and a gas man comes in and installs an appliance using csst piping and then wires it. In my area, a permit is required for electrical work and also gas appliance installations. In theory the building inspector would conduct an inspection and red tag the job for not being bonded in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions 110.3(A) and 110.3(B) even though 250.104(B) was complied with. But in the real world that you and I both are familiar with, this scenario is unlikely. Thanks for your answer.
 
Last edited:
I guess what I'm saying is it will be the gas inspector who tags it. Then an electrician will be called to bond it ,if it is not already bonded. It does not need to be bonded at the csst it can and most likely will be bonded much closer to where the gas enters the building. This is going to be a pain in the arse where this csst is popular. There have been a whole lot of gas space heating stoves installed in my neck of the woods , you know the ones that look like wood stoves, if I had to guess I would say, outside of those installed in new homes,at least 4 out of 10 get installed with no gas permit , my neighbor had one put in no permit and it plugs in, csst? Cheap and easy. bonded if it is there ? I'd bet a $100.00 it is not . How many with csst ? who knows. There are going to be house fires for a long ,long time. I don't want to be blamed because the gas fitter did not follow his installation instructions, it is hard enough to get liability insurance as it is.
 
Reply to M.D.

Reply to M.D.

Hi: again, an interesting and fitting question. For many years the equipment grounding conductor within the cord-and-plug connected gas appliance has been considered an adequate method of bonding the gas appliance. Then, it seems to me, when this class action suit comes into play, the manufacturer's installation instructions are amended and "someone" is required to observe them for code compliance. The question really is who is that "someone"? In your latest scenario, I would tend to agree that it would be the gas appliance installer since he's the one doing the work. Compliance paths are available through code research, and liability paths are also available through code books -law books. It's unfortunate that houses have to burn and people have to die before sufficient attention is paid to problems. It's hard to legislate morals and ethics. Common sense is a rare commodity. Especially these days what with all the pervasive urgency in construction deadlines.
 
To electricmanscott

To electricmanscott

Hi: The only way I can justify a #6 copper bond is through the manufacturer's installation instructions as amended by Technical Bulletin TB 2007-01 published 01-26-07 by Gastite in which it reads: "The bonding conductor shall be #6 AWG copper wire".
 
Ok just looked at the updated bulletin :mad: So here is at least the second bulletin on this peice of s*** product and I have not been notified of either. This is an obvious attempt by a manufacturer of an unsafe product to cover their rear ends by putting the burden of safety on others. (Us) The problem with that is there is nobody in our industry getting this info out there and no clear indication that we actually have any responsibilty to get this done.

Currently I am working in a house that has at least two different brands of csst gas pipe, neither of which is gastite. Is it up to me to research every product that other trades are using to see weather or not there are special requirements that affect me? Not going to happen. :rolleyes:

Also noted in the bulletin:
"This Technical Bulletin is effective for all Gastite CSST installed from this date forward"

So any gastite installed before this bulletin that may not have been bonded is safe???:rolleyes: :-?

I still don't understand how a #6 is going to be the savior from a lightning strike? :-?
 
Soapbox dissertation

Soapbox dissertation

Hi: Not to expand this thread too much away from the intent, but, this whole matter (csst problems) smacks of the similar discontent I have for the direction that the makeup of NEC code panels appears stacked. Too much industry pressure on code development, too little on safety. Too much emphasis on the "politics" of participation on code panels, too little on qualifications to even sit on such panels. I see it all over the place in similar industries nowadays. Shame.
 
I have looked a a few insrtuctions for the installation of gas stoves (wood stove look alikes) many if not the majority have been installed by qualitied gas fitters or plumbers. in the state of Ma. tthey are required to be installed by such persons
THIS PRODUCT MUST BE INSTALLED BY A
LICENSED PLUMBER OR GAS-FITTER WHEN
INSTALLED IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF
MASSACHUSETTS.

Even if there is a blower there is no requirement to call an electrician, many won't have blowers , it will be up to the qualified gas fitter to arrange for the bonding if he chooses a piping method that requires such bonding. If he or she does not arrange for the required bonding it will up to the gas inspector to fail the installation based on the instructions for the piping, as no electrical permit is required to install unit. The requirement for bonding beyond 250.104 is in the instructions for the piping used , The NEC has not been modified, and I am not qualified to install gas piping therefore I can not be resposible for the propper installation of it.
 
so , what if the gas piping system is only partially csst?
around here, some installers use hard pipe from the meter into the house and then branch off with csst "arms" .... i guess one bond would suffice? (for manufacturers requirements?)
 
to: Mayjong

to: Mayjong

Hi: Take this scenario and offer comment if you so desire: A 1-family dwelling has hard pipe gas entrance to meter and hard pipe from meter to manifold in basement near the electrical service panelboard. From manifold there are 3 runs of csst to various gas appliances. Two (2) of these runs are installed using Gastite csst and the other run is a generic brand that has not been sued in any class action suit and has not amended any installation instructions and simply requires compliance with the NEC. I would bond the manifold in accordance with Gastite amended instructions (provide #6 copper conductor and bond using saddle clamp to manifold), would'nt do anything to the remaining generic csst, since it is properly bonded through the equipment grounding conductor of the branch circuit supplying the appliance, and viola, code compliance! Yes? I think so.
 
wbalsam1 said:
I would bond the manifold in accordance with Gastite amended instructions (provide #6 copper conductor and bond using saddle clamp to manifold), would'nt do anything to the remaining generic csst, since it is properly bonded through the equipment grounding conductor of the branch circuit supplying the appliance, and viola, code compliance! Yes? I think so.
Click to expand...


According to what code? :-?
 
wbalsam1 said:
2005 NEC at 110.3(A)(1); 110.3(B)
Click to expand...

How can 110.3(B) apply?

The Gas pipe is not 'electrical equipment'

Take a look at 90.2(A).

I do not see anything about the NEC covering the installation of gas piping.
 
The application of 110.3(B)

The application of 110.3(B)

Hi: 110.3(B) is about equipment. So, first I would look at the legal definition of equipment at Article 100. It says its "A general term including material, fittings, devices, appliances, luminaires (fixtures), apparatus and the like used as a part of, or in connection with, an electrical installation". Just like the frame of a clothes washing appliance is likely to be energized and may in this example be connected to metallic piping that could also be energized, so too could be the frame of a gas-burning appliance. The gas-burning appliance is surely contemplated under the definition of equipment. So then next, we look at 90.2 (3) and we see that this installation is covered by the "Scope". Then its off to 110.3(B) for the listing, labeling and instructions, and 110.3(A)(1) and the FPN. What do you think....circuitous route of code compliance, eh?
 
wbalsam,

Your kidding,.... please tell me your kidding.

Are you responsible for supporting this stuff , are you going to test the piping for leaks too , make the adjustments to the gas valve ??

Outside 250.104 nothing in the gas piping instructions is enforceable by the A.H.J. of the electrical code.

Bond it because you want to, bond it because someone is paying you to, but if you do ,it is not because the N.E.C. requires you to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top