GEC Protection

Status
Not open for further replies.
After crossing my eyes and reading 250.64(E) I suppose I will have to concede and say that as written, the EMT would require bonding. However, the last sentence sort of implies that if a raceway is just used for protection, that the only requirement is that it be installed according to directions for the type of raceway.

If a
raceway is used as protection for a grounding electrode conductor,
the installation shall comply with the requirements
of the appropriate raceway article.
Click to expand...

That sentence and the countless hundreds of installs around here makes it hard for me to see why it's required.

Here's a couple of examples. I could spend about an hour and take several more just in my neighborhood.









All I am saying is if it's never been done or enforced here, I find it hard to comply!
 
Little Bill said:
After crossing my eyes and reading 250.64(E) I suppose I will have to concede and say that as written, the EMT would require bonding. However, the last sentence sort of implies that if a raceway is just used for protection, that the only requirement is that it be installed according to directions for the type of raceway.



That sentence and the countless hundreds of installs around here makes it hard for me to see why it's required.

Here's a couple of examples. I could spend about an hour and take several more just in my neighborhood.









All I am saying is if it's never been done or enforced here, I find it hard to comply!
Click to expand...

Just to toy with the AHJ, why don't you change that EMT to a piece of AL conduit with no bonding on the ends. That would be compliant. Kidding aside, just use a piece of PVC and problem solved.
 
texie said:
Just to toy with the AHJ, why don't you change that EMT to a piece of AL conduit with no bonding on the ends. That would be compliant. Kidding aside, just use a piece of PVC and problem solved.
Click to expand...
Replacing and re-bonding the "continuous" GEC may be a little more work than just changing the sleeving around it. :)
 
texie said:
250.64(E) directs you to 250.92(B) for this. 250.92(B) is very clear that "special" bonding is required.
Click to expand...
I still don't read it that way. In my opinion, the bonding rule only applies when the ferrous raceway is not electrically continuous. If it is connected by standard methods to a metallic enclosure, it is electrically continuous.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
I still don't read it that way. In my opinion, the bonding rule only applies when the ferrous raceway is not electrically continuous. If it is connected by standard methods to a metallic enclosure, it is electrically continuous.
Click to expand...

My feeling as well but would a standard locknut suffice?

250.64(E) Bonding methods in compli-
ance with 250.92(B) for installations at service equipment lo-
cations and with 250.92(B)(2) through (B)(4) for other than
service equipment locations shall apply at each end and to all
intervening ferrous raceways, boxes, and enclosures between
the cabinets or equipment and the grounding electrode.
Click to expand...

250.94(B) Method of Bonding at the Service. Bonding jumpers
meeting the requirements of this article shall be used
around impaired connections, such as reducing washers or
oversized, concentric, or eccentric knockouts. Standard
locknuts or bushings shall not be the only means for the bond-
ing required by this section but shall be permitted to be in-
stalled to make a mechanical connection of the raceway(s).
Electrical continuity at service equipment, service race-
ways, and service conductor enclosures shall be ensured by
one of the following methods:
(1) Bonding equipment to the grounded service conductor
in a manner provided in 250.8
(2) Connections utilizing threaded couplings or threaded
hubs on enclosures if made up wrenchtight
(3) Threadless couplings and connectors if made up tight
for metal raceways and metal-clad cables
(4) Other listed devices, such as bonding-type locknuts, bush-
ings, or bushings with bonding jumpers
Click to expand...
 
texie said:
Just to toy with the AHJ, why don't you change that EMT to a piece of AL conduit with no bonding on the ends. That would be compliant. Kidding aside, just use a piece of PVC and problem solved.
Click to expand...

GoldDigger said:
Replacing and re-bonding the "continuous" GEC may be a little more work than just changing the sleeving around it. :)
Click to expand...

Exactly! If I would go to the trouble to take the GEC loose to replace the conduit, I could just do it like the inspector wants!:roll::)

Again, my main concern/problem is I didn't install the original setup, nor am I changing anything on the outside. I was just going to add the bonding bridge.

Also, after talking to some other electricians, the bonding bridge isn't even required if doing just a panel swap and no changes are being made to the outside service.
 
infinity said:
My feeling as well but would a standard locknut suffice?
Click to expand...
In my opinion the bonding requirement in 250.64(E) only applies where the ferrous raceway is not continuous. If it is physically connected to a metallic enclosure it is continuous at that end of the raceway.
 
Little Bill said:
Exactly! If I would go to the trouble to take the GEC loose to replace the conduit, I could just do it like the inspector wants!:roll::)

Again, my main concern/problem is I didn't install the original setup, nor am I changing anything on the outside. I was just going to add the bonding bridge.

Also, after talking to some other electricians, the bonding bridge isn't even required if doing just a panel swap and no changes are being made to the outside service.
Click to expand...
I see no reason that you should have to make the original installation compliant on your dime. It is not your problem unless there is specific language in your local electrical code making you bring the complete installation up to code.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
I see no reason that you should have to make the original installation compliant on your dime. It is not your problem unless there is specific language in your local electrical code making you bring the complete installation up to code.
Click to expand...

No local amendment on bringing anything to current code.

Well except having to install smokes, but we can use battery operated ones on an existing installation.:happyyes:
 
Little Bill said:
That's how we do new installs or service changes with this particular POCO. The other POCO will not allow us to land the GEC in the meter socket.
Thing is, this is an existing install. All I'm doing is changing the panel inside, nothing outside except adding the required bonding bridge.
Click to expand...

Here we can just come out of the meter socket.

You could come out of the panel and hit the bonding bridge that way right?

Little Bill said:
As I already stated, the GEC is attached to the grounded conductor at the weather head and run straight down to the rod or whatever electrode is in the ground. It is not connected to any cabinet. The EMT sleeve has been there since the original install.
Click to expand...

That seems crazy having to do it that way , and it looks crappy too.:happyno:
 
suemarkp said:
Perhaps what's hanging people up are the words "ferrous enclosure". I'm thinking anything iron/steel that surrounds the GEC is an enclosure. It isn't a just a box or cabinet. The EMT completely encircles the GEC, so it encloses it. Ferrous enclosures that aren't connected to bonded cabinets/boxes at both ends require their own bonding jumper at each end.
Click to expand...
I agree.

I will also add that a piece of EMT or any other piece of "raceway" that is not continuous from enclosure to enclosure is not being used as a raceway. See 300.12. One could have a similar piece of pipe or tubing that is not listed as a raceway and the rules don't change any.
 
George Stolz said:
I think this is key; technically, although the raceway bonding on both ends should be required, a raceway or a sleeve is not an enclosure. See definition of "enclosure" and informational note.
Click to expand...

But raceway stock not used as a raceway isn't exactly a raceway either. :eek: To be used as a raceway it must follow the applicable chapter 3 article, and generally must be continuous from enclosure to enclosure.
 
Yes, the word enclosures is being used incorrectly in this code section. A case of the use of a generic meaning of the word as opposed to the code meaning as defined in Article 100. A good spot for a 2017 code proposal.
 
Bill just take out the emt and install a piece of pvc. Is it not worth making it right if you are not certain. I agree you shouldn't have to but why not. Explain to the home owner the situation
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top