No ufer, only ground rods

[Brownetown]

home owner ripped out Ufer competently digging his trench for his well. I also already had 2 ground rods along with the Ufer. Passed inspection waiting of poco to do there end. My question is with the ufer beging gone will my 2 ground rods be sufficient?

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

The CEE is in the footing. And he ripped it out digging a utilities trench?

 

[Brownetown]

Yes, he was digging the trench, must of ripped it with the excavator. Anyways. I already have the rods installed , I’m just curious if that’s enough considering water will in coming in pvc.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

Yes, it’s “enough”, considering ground rods have limited useful on a good day.

But, depending on what code cycle you’re on, they are required in new construction. The code does not address destroying them afterwards, so if you’ve already gotten rough inspection, you might be OK, unless the inspector sees it.

If you haven’t gotten rough inspection, well, cowboy, you’re prolly ridin’ for a fall.

 

[Seven-Delta-FortyOne]

Did he saw cut through the footing?

If it was really the “homeowner” who did it, he can pay for whatever remediation needs to be done.

 

[infinity]

I don't see how digging a trench could remove an entire CEE within a footing, a ground ring maybe. Regardless if the CEE is no longer an electrode then two ground rods are sufficient to make up the GES.

 

[Brownetown]

I have no idea. I just got a call from him saying he broke it and the piece is now missing coming from the footer. It already passed and I added 2 grounds rods on top. Even though I only need the one coming from a concrete enclosure.

Yeah I know it’s his financial responsibility for what ever needs to be done, I just didn’t want to have to race and stress over something that doesn’t need to be done considering my ground rods didn’t get ripped up

 

[jaggedben]

I guess you're saying that the conductor emerging from the footing to connect the CEE/UFER got ripped off. (The actual CEE must presumeably still be in the footing.) 250.50 does contain an exception to the otherwise required usage of the CEE for an existing building, if it is 'not accessible for use without disturbing the concrete'. As long as your AHJ agrees that is the situation then only having two rods is acceptable per the NEC.

 

[busman]

Why not just crimp a new conductor to the tail of the old CEE conductor? Unless it broke off flush with the concrete (seems unlikely).

Mark

 

[electrofelon]

Why not just crimp a new conductor to the tail of the old CEE conductor? Unless it broke off flush with the concrete (seems unlikely).

Mark

yeah even if its completely flush, seems like a few minutes of chipping should get enough room to split bolt on a tail.

 

[busman]

yeah even if its completely flush, seems like a few minutes of chipping should get enough room to split bolt on a tail.

That was my other thought. Would not need to be a crimp connection if it went to the rods.

Mark

 

[NEC Inspector]

If an existing Ufer was destroyed, we would make you replace it here. While two ground rods would comply if no Ufer were available, they are not nearly as effective of a ground from a performance standpoint.

Any chance the well casing is metal where it could be a grounding electrode? I could be persuaded to trade a Ufer for a nice, deep well casing...

 

[roger]

If an existing Ufer was destroyed, we would make you replace it here. While two ground rods would comply if no Ufer were available, they are not nearly as effective of a ground from a performance standpoint.

Any chance the well casing is metal where it could be a grounding electrode? I could be persuaded to trade a Ufer for a nice, deep well casing...

I understand that if something existed is damaged or removed you can require it to be replaced but, what do you really think it does over and above a couple of ground rods

 

[electrofelon]

While two ground rods would comply if no Ufer were available, they are not nearly as effective of a ground from a performance standpoint.

I would agree that an ufer has a lower ground resistance than a couple rods. I would not say "better" or "more effective" or words like that.

 

[NEC Inspector]

Point taken.

Mainly, our stance is derived from the intent behind the requirements ascertained by the public inputs that brought 250.50 to be.

 

[AC\DC]

If it passed and it’s in the past I would not even worry. Things pretty much useless anyway. Why do you have rods if you had a ufer??

 

[Dennis Alwon]

If you are asking for permission to just use the ground rods then NO I cannot say that it would be okay. Can you get away with it? Probably but the code requires it so, IMO, you need to get a hammer drill and chip away.

I might add that the world will not end if you just use the rods.

 

[electrofelon]

Was there ever any instances of "inadequate grounding" to justify the UFER? I doubt it, probably just yet another completely unjustified code

 

[Murphy79]

Typically like in Kansas City there are two forms of grounding electrodes required one is the ground rod and the other is from the water line where it first comes into the house because it's most likely to be all metal. It then switches over to PEX after the meter in most cases . In some instances, if it's new construction, you will definitely have a UFER and the water line may be Pex from the utility so in that case some jurisdictions would want you to have the secondary ground rod. In other words, one is required for code for minimum standards but as we all have experienced it's up to the jurisdiction who may have the two meaning the Ufer and ground rod or water line and ground rod. I wonder if using building Steel such as a beam in a garage or a basement with suffice being at the house is part of the foundation and the house is built on it.

 

[infinity]

Typically like in Kansas City there are two forms of grounding electrodes required one is the ground rod and the other is from the water line where it first comes into the house because it's most likely to be all metal.

The NEC would also require a supplemental electrodes for the metal water pipe which is typically a pair of ground rods. The NEC is very clear on what is and isn't required. Once jurisdictions or POCO's start with their own code amendments then it may not be as clear what is actually required.