NM cable through a plastic box.

[KP2]

Did you run out of good 4" square boxes and end up using that beat up one with the 4 extra ko's removed just to save a trip back to the shop?

By the way, it looks like you forgot one ko seal in the bottom of the box....

Not that it has anything to do with the thread.

This is an Electrical Lab setting with material that is used several times.

That's why this is such a bizzare picture and important for me to have a correct and justified answer.

 

[KP2]

We are stuck with what nec says and that is they count as 1. I have no idea why or how they arrived at this. They also rate a device based on wire size and a cheap single pole switch counts for same as a GFCI receptacle.
So if this was a test question i would call the grounds 1
Note it did not say terminate or spliced.

Oh, you mean like this.

I still feel that the grounds are counted as an additional set.

 

[eprice]

I changed my wording later in the thread, I rhetorically mentioned Isolated ::grin:, because in 314.16(B)(5) it states " additional set of equipment grounding conductors ..."

But the complete reference is "additional set of equipment grounding conductors, as permitted by 250.146(D)". 314.16(B)(5) calls for an additional volume allowance only if a set of isolated grounding conductors is present. I don't see that in the opening post.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

I changed my wording later in the thread, I rhetorically mentioned Isolated ::grin:, because in 314.16(B)(5) it states " additional set of equipment grounding conductors ..."


To Quote you literally the EGC inside the NM cable is separate because it doesn't stop at this box and equipment in this box can not be connected to it. Therefore making it a separate set.

In conclusion it must be added to the box fill calculation.

NEC only says if it is a grounding conductor. It does not say to what circuit or if connected together. Flat out it simply enters the box so it is included with the others for a count of 1

 

[KP2]

I can see your point, and if they were spliced together they would be counted as one anyway. I really have a hard time accepting the grounds not being spliced together which leads to me wanting to count them seperatly because I don't see the ground in the NM as an equipment grounding conductor for that box. It is an equipment grounding conductor for another box.

Not only that but lets face it this should never be done and that is the other problem.

Thanks for your input
Kevin

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

I can see your point, and if they were spliced together they would be counted as one anyway. I really have a hard time accepting the grounds not being spliced together which leads to me wanting to count them seperatly because I don't see the ground in the NM as an equipment grounding conductor for that box. It is an equipment grounding conductor for another box.

Not only that but lets face it this should never be done and that is the other problem.

Thanks for your input
Kevin

In real life you likely will never see it.
But we must use the words in nec as written and they saying nothing about what they go to. That is the real lesson they need to learn. NEC often has poor wording but it says what it says, no not try to use common since with nec.