Offset Nipple between Meter and Disco

[iwire]

I don't reject that interpretation out of hand. I've never looked in to it from that perspective. Here we only bond the neutral to the equipment at one location. The rest of the bonding is just jumpers from enclosures to fittings and etc.

I thought (assumed) that multiple bonding points between the grounded conductor and equipment was only allowed in the case where the equipment was connected together via PVC or some other non-conductive method.

I have never seen a meter socket that did not have the neutral factory bonded to the enclosure, that combined with the bond you and I install at the service disconnect makes at least two.

250.142(A) allows this.

 

[e57]

Are you serious? Are you unaware of the reason why 250.64(E) requires that ferrous metal conduit to be bonded on both sides? Are you unaware why it is recommended that GECs not be longer or contain more twists and turns than absolutely necessary?


What else are you bonding to?

George, let us set aside the example I made before, and the analytical....

I made a drawing stating my position on 250.92(B) - for the time being let us stick to that one code. (NOTE *)

There are two paths of continuity:

1. The grounded service conductor - a circuitous path, and not specifically mentioned as one of the methods. 250.92(B)1 describes an action, of bonding a generalized term "equipment" to a specific item - "the grounded service conductor". In 250.92(B)1~4 it makes no mention of that conductor being used as a bonding jumper. IMO...
2. The metallic raceway is a path of continuity that does not disappear with the addition of the circuitous path through the grounded service conductor. It will continue to be conductive unless purposefully and intentionally isolated. And IMO not fitting the letter of the code as written, as electrical continuity is not assured on this path. Even if a parallel path is provided in the grounded service conductor...

 

[e57]

I have never seen a meter socket that did not have the neutral factory bonded to the enclosure, that combined with the bond you and I install at the service disconnect makes at least two.

250.142(A) allows this.

I have seen a few where the bond in the meter is optional by way of a screw or jumber buss - specifically multi-meter pans - but yes for the most part the neutral is mounted directly to the meter pan. And yes 250.142(A) allows such...

 

[ike5547]

*deleted*

May have spoken to soon

 

[ike5547]

I have never seen a meter socket that did not have the neutral factory bonded to the enclosure, that combined with the bond you and I install at the service disconnect makes at least two.

250.142(A) allows this.

Interesting. It does appear to permit it.

I rarely use a single meter only enclosure ( I usually use a combination), but when I do I keep the grounded conductor isolated in the disconnect enclosure.

 

[e57]

The source of the misunderstanding has been made clear. I'm sure that everyone here would agree that the diagram you've provided represents a violation.

Do you care to elaborate on HOW it represents a violation? Or what I am saying about it is a mis-interpetaion?

250.4 requires the connection. 250.92(B) tells us the methods. IMO - At issue here is if the grounded service conductor is one of those methods.

As Bob (Iwire) mentioned in 250.142(A) - ('Equipment Grounding' section 7) the meter is allowed to be grounded by the neutral. And additionally required in 250.80 But the grounded service conductor is not mentioned in the describtion of an Equipment bonding jumper as described in 250.102(C), And IMO a single locknut does not qualify the connection required by 250.90, or 250.92(A) by the requirements in 250.92(B).

 

[e57]

Interesting. It does appear to permit it.

I rarely use a single meter only enclosure ( I usually use a combination), but when I do I keep the grounded conductor isolated in the disconnect enclosure.

The '08 code - which we're not under yet actually requires it.... in a language change 250.80.

 

[ike5547]

Do you care to elaborate on HOW it represents a violation? Or what I am saying about it is a mis-interpetaion?

I deleted that post almost the instant I hit the submit button because I didn't at first notice the neutral to ground connection in the enclosure on the right.

 

[ike5547]

Do you care to elaborate on HOW it represents a violation? Or what I am saying about it is a mis-interpetaion?

250.4 requires the connection. 250.92(B) tells us the methods. IMO - At issue here is if the grounded service conductor is one of those methods.

As Bob (Iwire) mentioned in 250.142(A) - ('Equipment Grounding' section 7) the meter is allowed to be grounded by the neutral. And additionally required in 250.80 But the grounded service conductor is not mentioned in the describtion of an Equipment bonding jumper as described in 250.102(C), And IMO a single locknut does not qualify the connection required by 250.90, or 250.92(A) by the requirements in 250.92(B).

Well, I've learned a few things today. From what I've learned the installation you've diagrammed appears it may comply with the code and serve its purpose.

But I don't like it for a variety of personal reasons.

 

[George Stolz]

The grounded service conductor - a circuitous path, and not specifically mentioned as one of the methods. 250.92(B)1 describes an action, of bonding a generalized term "equipment" to a specific item - "the grounded service conductor". In 250.92(B)1~4 it makes no mention of that conductor being used as a bonding jumper. IMO...

Call it a a bonding jumper, or tuna sandwich if you prefer, but it does make specific reference to multiple components being connected to a single neutral conductor.

The metallic raceway is a path of continuity that does not disappear with the addition of the circuitous path through the grounded service conductor. It will continue to be conductive unless purposefully and intentionally isolated. And IMO not fitting the letter of the code as written, as electrical continuity is not assured on this path.

Let's back up:

250.92(B) Method of Bonding at the Service. Electrical continuity at service equipment, service raceways, and service conductor enclosures shall be ensured by one of the following methods:
(1) Bonding equipment to the grounded service conductor in a manner provided in 250.8
(2) Connections utilizing threaded couplings or threaded bosses on enclosures where made up wrenchtight
(3) Threadless couplings and connectors where made up tight for metal raceways and metal-clad cables
(4) Other listed devices, such as bonding-type locknuts, bushings, or bushings with bonding jumpers

Put simply, these items...
1. Service equipment (which would be meter sockets, service disconnects)
2. Service raceways
3. Service conductor enclosures
...must be bonded. "Bonding" is defined as "Connected to establish electrical continuity and conductivity" by Article 100. Does that look familiar? Electrical continuity = bonded.

How are we to bond it? There is no EGC! They tell us to...
1. Connect the item to the neutral.
2. Connect the item to the next can beside it and ultimately connect that can to the neutral using one of the methods mentioned.

Daisy chained or spiderwebbed makes no difference. The item is either bonded, or not bonded. There is no half bonded. There is no requirement for the bonding to occur in any order, or twice. Bonded is bonded.

In your picture, is the nipple bonded? Yes. Then it is bonded, complies with 250.92(B).

 

[e57]

I deleted that post almost the instant I hit the submit button because I didn't at first notice the neutral to ground connection in the enclosure on the right.

FYI - When you get a chance between NOW (Time) and OUR (California) next CEC cycle - take note of the code change between '05 and '08 in 250.80 - it will require the neutral to ground connection in each enclosure - meaning gutters and meters etc....

 

[e57]

Well, I've learned a few things today. From what I've learned the installation you've diagrammed appears it may comply with the code and serve its purpose.

But I don't like it for a variety of personal reasons.

Nor do I - and thats my point...

 

[George Stolz]

I rarely use a single meter only enclosure ( I usually use a combination), but when I do I keep the grounded conductor isolated in the disconnect enclosure.

That would be a code violation: 250.24(B).

250.24(B) Main Bonding Jumper. For a grounded system, an unspliced main bonding jumper shall be used to connect the equipment grounding conductor(s) and the service disconnect enclosure to the grounded conductor within the enclosure for each service disconnect in accordance with 250.28.

 

[ike5547]

That would be a code violation: 250.24(B).

Foiled again.

 

[e57]

Call it a a bonding jumper, or tuna sandwich if you prefer, but it does make specific reference to multiple components being connected to a single neutral conductor.

Let's back up:

Put simply, these items...
1. Service equipment (which would be meter sockets, service disconnects)
2. Service raceways
3. Service conductor enclosures
...must be bonded. "Bonding" is defined as "Connected to establish electrical continuity and conductivity" by Article 100. Does that look familiar? Electrical continuity = bonded.

Continuity is ensured - (or "assured" if you look way back to former code changes in this article) by 4 methods - the tuna sandwich is not one of them...

How are we to bond it? There is no EGC! They tell us to...
1. Connect the item to the neutral.
2. Connect the item to the next can beside it and ultimately connect that can to the neutral using one of the methods mentioned.

~~~~~

Yep - thats it exactly... In one direction the nipple is bonded, in the other there is a tuna sandwich in the way. You could call it the neutral or grounded service conductor, but it is not an equipment bonding jumper or other listed means in the sense of bonding - so it that sense it is a tuna sandwich.

 

[e57]

Foiled again.

Not yet for you and I - we are not on the '08 YET... The '05 only requires one connection, and not in each enclosure as it does in the '08 NEC.

The fact that there are periodic changes to 250 is testiment to the fact that it was not written on stone tablets from on high....

 

[George Stolz]

Yep - thats it exactly... In one direction the nipple is bonded, in the other there is a tuna sandwich in the way. You could call it the neutral or grounded service conductor, but it is not an equipment bonding jumper or other listed means in the sense of bonding - so it that sense it is a tuna sandwich.

You're missing the point.

The question is: "Is the nipple bonded?"

The answer is: "Yes."

The presence of a tuna sandwich at the other end is entirely irrelevant.

 

[George Stolz]

Not yet for you and I - we are not on the '08 YET... The '05 only requires one connection, and not in each enclosure as it does in the '08 NEC.

You are really on fire today.

250.24(B) Main Bonding Jumper. For a grounded system, an unspliced main bonding jumper shall be used to connect the equipment grounding conductor(s) and the service-disconnect enclosure to the grounded conductor within the enclosure for each service disconnect in accordance with 250.28.

 

[iwire]

The presence of a tuna sandwich at the other end is entirely irrelevant.

Irrelevant? I think not, I like a good tuna sandwich.

 

[e57]

You're missing the point.

The question is: "Is the nipple bonded?"

The answer is: "Yes."

The presence of a tuna sandwich at the other end is entirely irrelevant.

You are really on fire today.

I do what I can.... But I need a nap before dinner...