GEC connection to multiple ground rods

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

czars

Czars
Location
West Melbourne, FL
Occupation
Florida Certified Electrical Contractor
The Palm Bay, FL Building Department requires that, because of the generally dry, sandy, soil, each residential electrical service shall be grounded via two, 8 foot minimum ground rods spaced a minimum of 6 feet apart. Since they require two ground rods, their contention is that a single, continuous, Grounding Electrode Conductor shall be used to connect the outside disconnect switch to both ground rods with one clamp on each ground rod. They site NEC 250.64C as the reference and because the City of Palm Bay requires two ground rods the GEC must be continuous. I haven't been able to find anything in the NEC that addresses this particular situation. What do you think?
 
(a) I think as the AHJ, they can adopt whatever rule they wish
however
(b) IMHO, that is not a vilation of the NEC.
The grounding electrode conductor is contnuious to the 1st grounding electrode. By the use of an additional clamp, you may run from that electrode to as many as you desire.
It is common practice here to have to acorn clamps on the 1st rod.
One from the service and the other to run a wire to the second rod.
 
They are not enforcing an NEC requirement. The GEC ends at the first rod. Everything after that is a bonding jumper. Here's Mike's graphic on the subject:

1113919386_2.jpg
 
One wire per clamp NEC 250.70. I do prefer to see it continuous but will allow more than one clamp per rod as long as there is only one wire per clamp.

Question: What do they want to see for a service with more than one panel??

I like to see a continuous GEC from one panel thru rods to second panel.
 
why do you like to see the GEC going to each panel? we take one GEC from the meter base to the electrode. Does your poco not allow this?
 
brantmacga said:
why do you like to see the GEC going to each panel? we take one GEC from the meter base to the electrode. Does your poco not allow this?
Click to expand...

The GEC is at the main disconnect bonding in WA residential to UFER and other electrodes 2008. rbj
 
mistermudd said:
One wire per clamp NEC 250.70. I do prefer to see it continuous but will allow more than one clamp per rod as long as there is only one wire per clamp.

Question: What do they want to see for a service with more than one panel??

I like to see a continuous GEC from one panel thru rods to second panel.
Click to expand...


It sounds as if you actually frown upon enforcing the code as written?
 
infinity said:
It sounds as if you actually frown upon enforcing the code as written?
Click to expand...


Seriously. What is with these guys. Read the book, enforce the code. It is not rocket science and I don't give two poops about what "You Like To see" :mad: :rolleyes:


How sporting of you too "allow" more than one clamp per rod. :rolleyes:


How about this mistermudd, you tell me why YOU know better than the NEC and why this should be done YOUR way. Why do you like to see it this way? What is the reason behind why you prefer it this way? Other than it is the way you might do it which has absolutely nothing to do with anything when you are inspecting. NOTHING!
 
Last edited:
mistermudd said:
I like to see a continuous GEC from one panel thru rods to second panel.
Click to expand...

Really?

What I have four 100 amp panels fed from a 200 amp service on a three family dwelling? What would you like to see? Why?

Yes I am picking on you, but you kind of had it coming.
 
You beat up on your inspectors like you beat up people here. You must have a great working relationship. In fact I have never given "two poops" about what EMS has ever posted on this sight & I feel like I am lowering myself to his level by even responding. I don't frown on using more than one clamp on a ground. I simply stated I prefer to see the GEC continuous. If my answer seemed short or not nice I did not mean to come across like that, I just like to keep it short & to the point.


brantmacga
why do you like to see the GEC going to each panel? we take one GEC from the meter base to the electrode. Does your poco not allow this?

The connection is required to remain accessible NEC 250.24(A)(1), after the poco seals the meter it is not. May be different in other areas, but that is the way it is called in my area. Hope I don't get beat on the head for being on the same page with other inspectors in my area.
 
mistermudd said:
The connection is required to remain accessible NEC 250.24(A)(1), after the poco seals the meter it is not. May be different in other areas, but that is the way it is called in my area.
Click to expand...

Well what about the other connections in the meter?

The NEC requires those to be accessible as well, so IMO all of you are on the wrong page. :smile:
 
mistermudd said:
we take one GEC from the meter base to the electrode.

The connection is required to remain accessible NEC 250.24(A)(1), after the poco seals the meter it is not.
Click to expand...
Isn't that a contradiction? :-?
 
mistermudd said:
You beat up on your inspectors like you beat up people here. You must have a great working relationship. In fact I have never given "two poops" about what EMS has ever posted on this sight & I feel like I am lowering myself to his level by even responding. I don't frown on using more than one clamp on a ground. I simply stated I prefer to see the GEC continuous. If my answer seemed short or not nice I did not mean to come across like that, I just like to keep it short & to the point.


.
Click to expand...


I do not beat up on anyone. But if you try to screw me I will not roll over like some of the guys here or in the trade. Inspectors are not a godly being, they are people and can be incorrect at times. An inspectors misinformation is not going to be my financial loss.


In fact my inspectors know exactly what they are getting with me and most (this may or may not speak to their competence) will come right in and sign off and then shoot the breeze for a while. They know from experience that I know the code and how it applies to my work and actually respect that rather than pulling the old "well I like it this way" nonsense.

YOU have NO right to decide what YOU like to see or not unless it is on YOUR work. I install per code you approve it. That's all. If you as an inspector are going to tell ECs how to do their job, you better be prepared to be questioned and have something to back you up.

That is all I getting at.

I do notice you answered eaxctly ZERO of the questions I asked.

Welcome to "MY Level" :grin:
 
Last edited:
here's my 2 cents and I'm curious; Clamps suck and come loose so I shoot CaldWelds when I find your grounds hanging in the dirt 5 years later so is that acceptable, as long as I use a "T" or "I" type mold. I find it funny that a "clamp" is the requirement in the code and they typically fall apart when the whole point was to insure a good ground anyhow and yes the soil sucks in the south so why chance that on a $3.00 clamp? spend $6.00 on a CaldWeld that's a neater connection and makes it easy. Just curious...!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top