Ufer, Connection of copper to rebar

[Joe.B]

Yes.

Not trying to argue, just genuinely concerned that I'm missing something, here's what I'm looking at:

250.64 (C) Continuous

Except as provided in 250.30(A)(5) and (A)(6), 250.30(B)(1), and 250.68(C), grounding electrode conductor(s) shall be installed in one continuous length without a splice or joint. If necessary, splices or connections shall be made as permitted in (1) through (4):

(1)Splicing of the wire-type grounding electrode conductor shall be permitted only by irreversible compression-type connectors listed as grounding and bonding equipment or by the exothermic welding process.
(2)Sections of busbars shall be permitted to be connected together to form a grounding electrode conductor.
(3)Bolted, riveted, or welded connections of structural metal frames of buildings or structures.
(4)Threaded, welded, brazed, soldered or bolted-flange connections of metal water piping.

250.68 Grounding Electrode Conductor and Bonding Jumper Connection to Grounding Electrodes

The connection of a grounding electrode conductor at the service, at each building or structure where supplied by a feeder(s) or branch circuit(s), or at a separately derived system and associated bonding jumper(s) shall be made as specified 250.68(A) through (C).

(A) Accessibility

All mechanical elements used to terminate a grounding electrode conductor or bonding jumper to a grounding electrode shall be accessible.

Exception No. 1: An encased or buried connection to a concrete-encased, driven, or buried grounding electrode shall not be required to be accessible.

Exception No. 2: Exothermic or irreversible compression connections used at terminations, together with the mechanical means used to attach such terminations to fireproofed structural metal whether or not the mechanical means is reversible, shall not be required to be accessible.

 

[infinity]

Not trying to argue, just genuinely concerned that I'm missing something, here's what I'm looking at

The bold in Ex(2) is for when attaching to metal that has the connection covered in fireproofing. The general rule is that even if there is an irreversible connection that connection needs to be accessible unless it meets the exception.

 

[Joe.B]

The bold in Ex(2) is for when attaching to metal that has the connection covered in fireproofing. The general rule is that even if there is an irreversible connection that connection needs to be accessible unless it meets the exception.

Got it, that makes sense, I was looking at it parsed out and not as a complete conditional statement. I've only encountered it once when a new foundation had a piece of #4 copper sticking out at the location where the service was supposed to go. Then PG&E made them relocate the panel completely. When I saw it next the panel was in the new location and the electrician had driven two ground rods. I asked them to connect the CEE as well then the debate ensued about all that, landing on a crimp (non-reversible) to extend the GEC to the CEE, and since the ground rods were already there, they left them in place. That crimp ended up in the wall, not accessible. Not the end of the world, but now I'm seeing that that's not technically correct. It should have been in a junction box.

 

[d0nut]

Got it, that makes sense, I was looking at it parsed out and not as a complete conditional statement. I've only encountered it once when a new foundation had a piece of #4 copper sticking out at the location where the service was supposed to go. Then PG&E made them relocate the panel completely. When I saw it next the panel was in the new location and the electrician had driven two ground rods. I asked them to connect the CEE as well then the debate ensued about all that, landing on a crimp (non-reversible) to extend the GEC to the CEE, and since the ground rods were already there, they left them in place. That crimp ended up in the wall, not accessible. Not the end of the world, but now I'm seeing that that's not technically correct. It should have been in a junction box.

I think that the installation is compliant as described and would not require the junction box. The CEE is the 20' of copper in the footing. Any length beyond that could be described as the GEC rather than the grounding electrode. If you use that argument, then the connection of the CEE to the GEC would be in the concrete and not required to be accessible per 250.68(A) Exception 1. The irreversible crimp is a splice of the GEC as permitted by 250.64(C), not a connection to the grounding electrode. As far as I can tell, the irreversible splices of a GEC are not required to be accessible like the connection to the grounding electrode as required under 250.64(A).