Grounding Installation

[scbunker]

Hello all, I have a question. I have a job where my drawings say to install the grounding electrode conductor in Sch 80 PVC to underground. The contractor has installed it per the photos attached, coming out of a hole in the side of the load center then routed down the rack with zip ties.

My question: Is this installation against Code, and what's the code reference? I'm certainly going to write up that it isn't installed per plans. But this doesn't 'feel' per-code and I'd like to provide a code justification.

Thanks for your input!

 

[tom baker]

In Washington we are not permitted to run GEC exposed per state rule
You show a common method, is it 6 or 4 AWG, 6 requires protection from damage
If the plans that were bid show using Sch 80 that’s the way it should be installed.
Otherwise 2 snips of wire cutters and it’s gone

 

[petersonra]

Off the top of my head I do not see anything all that awful.

IMO, a violation of the contractual requirements is adequate to red tag it, whether it is code or not.

 

[tom baker]

Also, it’s a violation to attach cables to a conduit, I don’t know if it’s allowed for a GEC

 

[qcroanoke]

is it 6 or 4 AWG, 6 requires protection from damage

When did that change from 8 or smaller? Or is 6 a Washington thing too?

 

[hbiss]

Also, it’s a violation to attach cables to a conduit, I don’t know if it’s allowed for a GEC

I'm thinking that that conduit is just a support post for the strut and panel. I do agree that it should have been run in PVC down to the ground. I'm also not happy with the way it enters the enclosure- on the side with RTV globed around it. It should at least come out the bottom with the PVC and a male adaptor.

-Hal

 

[augie47]

If it's accessible to the public, the Cu will likely be gone soon


At an absolute minimum I would require the ty-raps be sunlight resistant

 

[LarryFine]

Also, it’s a violation to attach cables to a conduit, I don’t know if it’s allowed for a GEC

If it contains no wire, it's not conduit, it's just galvanized pipe that resembles conduit.

Yes, it should be installed to both plans and to code, whichever is more restrictive.

 

[petersonra]

Also, it’s a violation to attach cables to a conduit, I don’t know if it’s allowed for a GEC

The code does not actually prohibit it outright. It says something about it being required to be identified for the purpose, a very nebulous term. But given how common such an installation is, I would have to say that it is so identified.

 

[infinity]

If it's accessible to the public, the Cu will likely be gone soon


At an absolute minimum I would require the ty-raps be sunlight resistant

I agree, ugly but code compliant with the correct supports. If it were stapled to a wood post no one would look at it twice.

 

[scbunker]

Thank you all for your input.
For now, I'm just going to comment that it's not per contract documents.
If asked for further justification, 250.64 says the GEC must be "securely fastened" (which I think I can argue it is not based on how I was able to pull it away from the pipe - if this were stapled to a wooden pole it would hardly budge) and must be installed in conduit where exposed to physical damage. This is at a high school; kids damage what they can. Both of those are subjective, but it's just my opinion, such as it is.

 

[Fred B]

Also, it’s a violation to attach cables to a conduit, I don’t know if it’s allowed for a GEC

The picture looks to be a support post, note the strut and enclosure mounted.