Non-Issue, Likely to become Energized

[benaround]

May become or likely to become energized, is this a non-issue?

#1 fact; If a circuit is not needed for an item, such as Gas piping or other metal systems or structures,Than it is not likely to become energized.

#2 fact; If a circuit is needed for the above mentioned items, Than the EGC may serve as the bond.

Question; Are there any circumstances where these two facts will not rule?

Question; Are they really needed at all?

#3 fact ;Even after a good dinner there is always room for crow. Leftovers anyone?

Note: It seems to me that by following the NEC,anything that needs bonded is required to be anyway,and the EGC does the rest.That along with #1 and #2 I see Likely to become Energized as a non=issue.

Guidance accepted,

frank

 

[physis]

Re: Non-Issue, Likely to become Energized

Well, I think that "likely to become energized" is well within the scope of Possibly Unenforceable and Vague Terms.

I've always kind a wondered what makes it likely.

 

[charlie]

Re: Non-Issue, Likely to become Energized

A gas log in the end of a home that has a piezoelectric igniter is not likely to become energized and is not required to be bonded. Should it be bonded? That is up to you.

I'll pass on the crow, I have had way too much of it and still haven't developed a taste for it. You may have my share of crow, thank you.

 

[charlie]

Re: Non-Issue, Likely to become Energized

I've always kind a wondered what makes it likely.

Sam, I have always looked at it like a circuit feeding a gas furnace may have a ground fault and energize the gas line and furnace. In that case, the grounding conductor will protect the gas line from becoming energized.

 

[physis]

Re: Non-Issue, Likely to become Energized

Yeah, I understand the typical intrpretation. Just not the English.

I really wouldn't say that a fault to the chassis is "likely".

I would actually be more inclined to say it's "unlikely"

But that's just me.

 

[stud696981]

Re: Non-Issue, Likely to become Energized

One thing we do, on ANY service change over, or new construction, we place a bonding jumper from hot to cold to gas line near the water tank. We usually place it near the top of the ceiling so it is doesn't stick out and look wierd. This way we have NO debates with the inspector as to whether or not something could become energized.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Re: Non-Issue, Likely to become Energized

In my opinion the change in wording from "may become energized" to "likely to become energized" reduces the requirement for bonding. Any conductive object "may" become energized, but it is not "likely" to become energized. Note that CMP 5 does not agree and has made statements that the word "may" and "likely" mean the same thing. I think that the change makes it much harder to enforce any of the bonding requirements as the words "likely to" as so subjective. Under the 2002 code it is my opinion that the code words always require the gas piping and other piping systems along with a steel building frame to be bonded. Under the 2005 code this requirement has become very subjective as it is my opinion that these items are not "likely to" become energized.
Don

 

[benaround]

Re: Non-Issue, Likely to become Energized

Gentlemen,

Thank you for your comments and opinions.

frank

 

[petersonra]

Re: Non-Issue, Likely to become Energized

I have never really understood what "likely to become energized" means. I have always assumed that it really means that it probably won't ever happen, but there is this remote chance it might if something goes wrong.

 

[benaround]

Re: Non-Issue, Likely to become Energized

Can you imagine the Plumbers Code saying, Likely not to drain,or Likely to drip or leak.

Or Carpenters Code saying, Likely to Colapse or Likely to fall over.

It's almost an insult to have it in print in the NEC.

frank

 

[jim dungar]

Re: Non-Issue, Likely to become Energized

How do you bond a nail used for picture hanging?

It is must be "likely to be energized" otherwise why do we need arc-fault protection for an entire circuit?