Ground rods at light poles

[AC\DC]

What does the specs say though I am curious. Install rods per 250:53?
Or just install ground rods.

 

[AC\DC]

That's an interesting point, and maybe a new thread. We do enforce job specs, or more exactly, approved plans. If the engineer shows 4/0 run to ground rods, the service isn't passed ay other way, even though a #6 meets code. Or a over-sized conductors to a transformer. Or ground rods at light poles. Plan review make sure the plans meet code, the inspector makes sure the installation is per code and per plan. To not install per plan requires a letter from the engineer/architect.
Plus, the job should have been bid to meet all plans and specs.

Glad are inspector just cares about NEC.
Following spec is GC/ engineer issue

 

[jap]

View attachment 2562486
The EC is installing per the spec which called for rods at the poles. They'll be in compliance with 250.53, driving rods vertically, except where rock prohibits, then 45 degrees if vertical doesn't work, and then in a 30" deep ditch as a last resort. You can see from the snip that it's all rock.

It doesn't have to be in compliance with the NEC since it's not an NEC issue.

The NEC does not require a ground rod to be driven at a light pole.

JAP>

 

[acrwc10]

It sounds like the job price included the ground rods, now because it’s more work than expected someone doesn’t want to give the customer what they are paying for and using the “it’s not required by the NEC so I don’t have to do it” as their reasoning. Isn’t that like stealing?

 

[jap]

It sounds like the job price included the ground rods, now because it’s more work than expected someone doesn’t want to give the customer what they are paying for and using the “it’s not required by the NEC so I don’t have to do it” as their reasoning. Isn’t that like stealing?

He did do it.

He provided the rod, and installed it horizontally in an 18" deep ditch.

The part where someone tries to enforce an NEC code rule on an installation not governed by the NEC is where the wheels fall off.

JAP>

 

[Danielt]

Are you an inspector?

JAP>

I was a commercial electrical inspector, and I'm now in plan review.
If the engineer/ architect wants ground rods, he can certainly go above Code requirements. But as an AHJ, they have to be installed per code.
Lights and receptacles are put in that are above and beyond the Code requirements. They have to be installed in a code-compliant manner

 

[Danielt]

He did do it.

He provided the rod, and installed it horizontally in an 18" deep ditch.

The part where someone tries to enforce an NEC code rule on an installation not governed by the NEC is where the wheels fall off.

JAP>

"Not governed by the NEC"? Installation of ground rods is governed by the NEC .
If you mean "not required by the NEC", that's different. Ceiling fans aren't required in bedrooms, but if they're on the plans, the AHJ will make you install them per code. Hanging a fan on an old work box is like laying a ground rod in a shallow ditch

 

[petersonra]

IMO, these are auxiliary grounding electrodes. i don't recall the code actually specifies any special way they have to be installed.

 

[jap]

I was a commercial electrical inspector, and I'm now in plan review.
If the engineer/ architect wants ground rods, he can certainly go above Code requirements. But as an AHJ, they have to be installed per code.
Lights and receptacles are put in that are above and beyond the Code requirements. They have to be installed in a code-compliant manner

"Not governed by the NEC"? Installation of ground rods is governed by the NEC .
If you mean "not required by the NEC", that's different. Ceiling fans aren't required in bedrooms, but if they're on the plans, the AHJ will make you install them per code.

If you could please site the code rule you would enforce for a ground rod installation at a light pole.

JAP>

 

[rc/retired]

" Ceiling fans aren't required in bedrooms, but if they're on the plans, the AHJ will make you install them per code.

Neither I nor my AHJ would require a fan installed in a bedroom. And what code requires it?

Ron

 

[Danielt]

If you could please site the code rule you would enforce for a ground rod installation at a light pole.

JAP>

250.53G . There's no exception to this code for voluntary ground rods required by the engineer

 

[jap]

"Not governed by the NEC"? Installation of ground rods is governed by the NEC .
If you mean "not required by the NEC", that's different. Ceiling fans aren't required in bedrooms, but if they're on the plans, the AHJ will make you install them per code. Hanging a fan on an old work box is like laying a ground rod in a shallow ditch

Please site the code that covers ceiling fan installations.

JAP>

 

[Danielt]

Neither I nor my AHJ would require a fan installed in a bedroom. And what code requires it?

Ron

Exactly my point. It's not required. But if you put it in, it must meet code.
Ground rods aren't "required" much any more with ufers, but they are often on the plans, and must be installed per code

 

[jap]

250.53G . There's no exception to this code for voluntary ground rods required by the engineer

And what is the reasoning for all the requirements of 250.53g ?

JAP>

 

[petersonra]

Exactly my point. It's not required. But if you put it in, it must meet code.
Ground rods aren't "required" much any more with ufers, but they are often on the plans, and must be installed per code

what installation requirements in the code are there for auxiliary grounding electrodes?

 

[jaggedben]

250.53G . There's no exception to this code for voluntary ground rods required by the engineer

I strongly disagree. 250.3 is titled "Grounding Electrode System Installation". We are talking about auxiliary electrodes as permitted in 250.54, which are not part of the GES. In my opinion there are zero NEC requirements that cover 250.54 electrodes. I could use an unlisted 3/8" rod, or a 12" long pipe, it doesn't matter what nonsense I use for an electrode that isn't required by the NEC (and probably doesn't do anything at all anyway).

 

[ActionDave]

I strongly disagree. 250.3 is titled "Grounding Electrode System Installation". We are talking about auxiliary electrodes as permitted in 250.54, which are not part of the GES. In my opinion there are zero NEC requirements that cover 250.54 electrodes. I could use an unlisted 3/8" rod, or a 12" long pipe, it doesn't matter what nonsense I use for an electrode that isn't required by the NEC (and probably doesn't do anything at all anyway).

I agree. Well said.

 

[winnie]

A ground rod is not a 'real grounding electrode'.

A ground rod that isn't deep enough to meet the requirements for embedment/burial is what? A piece of random metal in the ground.

When you have ground rods in a circle around a structure connected by bare copper buried 6" in the ground, what do you call that bare copper? It isn't a ground ring because it isn't buried deeply enough. But it will clearly have some conductivity to the soil.

-Jon

 

[jap]

A ground rod that isn't deep enough to meet the requirements for embedment/burial is what? A piece of random metal in the ground.

When you have ground rods in a circle around a structure connected by bare copper buried 6" in the ground, what do you call that bare copper? It isn't a ground ring because it isn't buried deeply enough. But it will clearly have some conductivity to the soil.

-Jon

I'd still call a ground rod a ground rod regardless of whether it was buried in the ground or leaned up against the wall at a supply house or laying in the bed of the truck.
and
I'd call the bare copper 6" in the ground a bonding jumper that connects all the ground rods together.

I think Jaggedben was having a little fun with the wording in the OP.

Jap>

 

[electrofelon]

I'm involved in a situation where ground rods were specified to be provided at light poles. .......... I personally would not have specified rods at light poles ......... but from what I understand the facility wanted them.

The requirement for a ground rod at each light pole is in the job specification, and we wrote the spec,

This all sounds a little vague as to who wanted ground rods at the poles, and perhaps a little more work could have been done to just get everyone to agree on skipping them and not wasting everyone's time and money? Sorry I jut get frustrated about these things that just waste everyone's time an money and do nothing.