Signs & Light Pole Grounding & Access Covers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bob Kraemer

Bob Kraemer

Senior Member
Location
Ohio
A friend of mine is a GC located in Cincinnati, Ohio and does work out of town also.
This project is located in Akron, Ohio. The sign contractor has driven a metal pole in the ground about 7ft deep to attach the sign to. The electrical contractor ran PVC under ground to the pole attached a W/P box for the electrical connections. The final inspections were yesterday and the electrical inspector turned the job down because 1) there wasn't an access cover on the pole itself for the electric connections "The box was weather proof and did have a proper cover on it" 2) There wasn't a ground rod driven for the pole. I don't have a copy of the 2005 NEC handy to look it up for him & the inspector didn't give any article numbers for failing the inspection for reference like 600-7.
What is you opinion on this?

Thanks
Bob Kraemer
RK Electric
 
Bob,
Look at 410.15(B) for the handhole. Not sure if that applies to your application, but I bet that is what the inspector is looking at.
As far as the ground rod as long as there is only a single branch circuit feeding the sign there is no requirement. If there are multiple branch circuits or a feeder involved, then 250.32(A) would require a grounding electrode.
Don
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Bob,
Look at 410.15(B) for the handhole. Not sure if that applies to your application, but I bet that is what the inspector is looking at.
As far as the ground rod as long as there is only a single branch circuit feeding the sign there is no requirement. If there are multiple branch circuits or a feeder involved, then 250.32(A) would require a grounding electrode.
Don
Click to expand...
Does 250.32(A) really apply to a light pole? Do you consider that a structure? I don't and wouldn't think that applys.
 
I know here if there isn't that little "UL" sticker on the sign, it gets rejected immediately. Here signs fall under zoning but are still required to have an electrical permit for installation. Not sure what a ground rod at the pole will do if there isn't an equipment ground pulled.
 
I do work in Akron Ohio and each inspector is required to write the article and subsection on the slip. Akron has its own set of work rules which can be found at www.ordlink.com/codes/akron/. All the signpoles or pole lights that I have installed in Akron the prints have required a ground rod driven in the hand hole connected to the light and the grounding conductor. IMHO the grond rod is redundant and a grounging conductor is all that is required.
Larry
 
There is an equipment ground installed in the raceway so the ground rod doesn't make sense to me except meeting AHJ requirements.
 
chevyx92 said:
Does 250.32(A) really apply to a light pole? Do you consider that a structure? I don't and wouldn't think that applys.
Click to expand...
See the definition of "Structure" in 100. IMO, a pole light is built or contructed, and is a structure. :)
 
georgestolz said:
See the definition of "Structure" in 100. IMO, a pole light is built or contructed, and is a structure. :)
Click to expand...
I have looked at the definition and don't agree that a light pole is a structure. Everything is either built or constructed in some way. So if you have some 120v ground lights (mounted on a concrete pad lets say) shining up on a sign are you suppose to set a ground rod there. The lights would come from manufacturer (which at some point were built or constucted to be a fixture). A building is built or constructed and is what I believe the code is referring to.
 
If the WP box serves as the access means of connections then that would serve as the "Handhole" Also, the EGC is your path back to grounding source. The GE may give some protection from trasient uninvited voltages ie lightning. However, a GE may be required due to the length of EGC from service. Also, make sure the metal pole is bonded. Yes it meets the def. of structure.
 
Last edited:
The ground rod must be an Akron specific reg. Cincinnati doesn't require one. The handhole is covered in 600.5(C)(3) which refers to 410.15(B). We generally provide a handhole no matter the height of the pole.
 
chevy,
Does 250.32(A) really apply to a light pole? Do you consider that a structure? I don't and wouldn't think that applys.
Click to expand...
The code does. That is the reason that Exception #4 was added to 225.32.
Don
 
The length of the EGC from the service should be sized to ensure that if there is a fault anywhere in the circuit, especially in the poles, that the OCPD will trip. I believe that is in Art 250.4(A)(5). Also 110.3(B) should apply as well.The ground rod is probably used as a pacifier to the AHJ for lightning protection, or they are from the old school that says when in doubt slap a ground rod on it. What other purpose will it serve?
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
chevy,

The code does. That is the reason that Exception #4 was added to 225.32.
Don
Click to expand...
That article mentions poles used for support of signs. A light pole is not a sign so I would say that article does not apply to the question I asked.
 
Chevy,
A light pole is not a sign so I would say that article does not apply to the question I asked.
Click to expand...
So a light pole is a structure and a sign is not? I don't understand how one can be and the other not.
Don
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Chevy,

So a light pole is a structure and a sign is not? I don't understand how one can be and the other not.
Don
Click to expand...
225.32 is talking about the disconnecting means location. Not whether or not a sign or pole light needs a ground rod.
 
chevyx92 said:
225.32 is talking about the disconnecting means location. Not whether or not a sign or pole light needs a ground rod.
Click to expand...

Yes that is true.

225.32 requires a disconnecting means at each separate building or structure

Because the light pole is a structure it would require a disconnecting means.

Someone realized that was not good so they added an exception to eliminate the requirement for a disconnecting means at a light pole even though it is a structure.
 
chevyx92 said:
So if you have some 120v ground lights (mounted on a concrete pad lets say) shining up on a sign are you suppose to set a ground rod there.
Click to expand...
Not if each was fed solely from a single circuit (250.32(A), exception).

The lights would come from manufacturer (which at some point were built or constucted to be a fixture). A building is built or constructed and is what I believe the code is referring to.
Click to expand...
My home was manufactured in a factory, and delivered to the job site with some relatively minor assembly required. Would you say it's not a structure? :)
 
chevyx92 said:
I have looked at the definition and don't agree that a light pole is a structure. Everything is either built or constructed in some way. So if you have some 120v ground lights (mounted on a concrete pad lets say) shining up on a sign are you suppose to set a ground rod there. The lights would come from manufacturer (which at some point were built or constucted to be a fixture). A building is built or constructed and is what I believe the code is referring to.
Click to expand...
There was a change in the 2002 NEC due to this issue. Inspectors were calling a luminiare pole a structure, which kicks in the rules on disconnects and GES, so it was clarified that a pole, while a structure is exempt from the disconnecting means requirement.
In 225.32 we find the requirements for the location of the disconnecting means.
Exception 3 and 4:
Exception No. 3: For towers or poles used as lighting standards, the disconnecting means shall be permitted to be located elsewhere on the premises.
Exception No. 4: For poles or similar structures used only for support of signs installed in accordance with Article 600, the disconnecting means shall be permitted to be located elsewhere on the premises.


The code is clear that a sign or luminare pole is a structure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top