Violation?

[blueheels2]

I built a 400 amp service. Exterior has a meter socket with a 200 amp disconnect on each side. I LB’d out of the bottom of the disconnects and pentrated the house. I set a 8”x 8”x 4’ wireway on the inside with 2 200 amp main lug panels mounted on the inside. Feeders are 4/0 Xhhw with #6 thhn as the ground. I also routed the gas bond through the trough in apiece of 1” pvc and terminated it in one of the exterior disconnects.
All raceways are pvc but the wireway is metal and needed bonding because it was isolated. In a hurry I stripped a section of the #2 cu gas bond and passed it through a lug in the wireway. My thinking was that it would be overkill, since I think I only needed to strip one of the # 6’ panel grounds to bond the wireway.

Was that a violation? Should I use one of the # 6’s instead? TIA

 

[infinity]

The wireway should be connected to the EGC run with the feeder. What violation did the inspector cite?

 

[blueheels2]

The wireway should be connected to the EGC run with the feeder. What violation did the inspector cite?

He didn’t site one. He gave me temporary and allowed me to turn power on but has to come back today to give me a colonoscopy. So I’m just going through everything in my mind to look for issues and correct them before they get there. He pointed out yesterday that I needed to have plastic bushings on all pvc terminal adapters. That’s a gray area imo but they are the ahj and I’m living in his world, so I spent 2 hours last night installing them. He also said something about labeling the meter socket. That confused me because I’m pretty sure he was referencing labeling required in 2020 code and we are on 2017!for residential.

All that said I am trying to reduce the pain I will feel today. Quicker I can get away from these guys the better I will be.

 

[RWC/NC.]

I built a 400 amp service. Exterior has a meter socket with a 200 amp disconnect on each side. I LB’d out of the bottom of the disconnects and pentrated the house. I set a 8”x 8”x 4’ wireway on the inside with 2 200 amp main lug panels mounted on the inside. Feeders are 4/0 Xhhw with #6 thhn as the ground. I also routed the gas bond through the trough in apiece of 1” pvc and terminated it in one of the exterior disconnects.
All raceways are pvc but the wireway is metal and needed bonding because it was isolated. In a hurry I stripped a section of the #2 cu gas bond and passed it through a lug in the wireway. My thinking was that it would be overkill, since I think I only needed to strip one of the # 6’ panel grounds to bond the wireway.

Was that a violation? Should I use one of the # 6’s instead? TIA

Quote: I also routed the gas bond through the trough in apiece of 1" pvc and terminated it in one of the exterior disconnects.

See 250.64(D) & paying close attention to last sentence.

 

[blueheels2]

Ok I only see 1 sentence

If a building or structure is is supplied by a service or feeder with two or more disconnecting means in separate enclosures the grounding electrode connections shall be made in accordance with 250.64 (D)(1), 250.64 (D)(2), or 250.64 (D)(3).

Im confused, the gas bond is a bonding conductor not a grounding electrode or part of the grounding electrode system (at least I didn’t think it was). My onl electrode is the 2 ground rods I drove at the service and terminated in the meter. Which tied into the 2 disconnects through the grounded conductor(s) which are bonded to the cans of the disconnects with the bonding screw.

Water line is plastic.
Are you implying I need to bond the gas twice, once at each disconnect even though they are bonded together through the neutrals and share the grounded electrode system in the meter?

 

[LarryFine]

Feeders are 4/0 Xhhw with #6 thhn as the ground.

It should be #4.

In a hurry I stripped a section of the #2 cu gas bond and passed it through a lug in the wireway.

Only needs to be #6.

Should I use one of the # 6’s instead?

Again, should be #4.

 

[blueheels2]

It should be #4.


Only needs to be #6.


Again, should be #4.

Why should the ground run with panel feeds be #4? Shouldn’t it be sized off of 250.122? 200 amp breaker ahead of the raceway (wireway in this case) is a #6.
As far as the gas bond is concerned can you give me a code reference on that . I always just size it as large as the main bonding jumper and then they can’t say it’s too small. But I’d love a code reference that allows me to save that money.

 

[blueheels2]

@LarryFine I get it now why you are saying it should be #4. If the ground was aluminum it would indeed be #4. But I ran the ground only in green #6 thhn (I have tons of it) so the 6 is sufficient.

 

[LarryFine]

My apologies.

 

[blueheels2]

My apologies.

Oh no problem I appreciate the input and I would’ve assumed an aluminum ground as well since I didn’t specify.

 

[blueheels2]

Should add the only reason I made a connection to the wireway is because it’s a piece of metal floating with energized conductors inside of it. Pvc is the only commection to this raceway.

 

[kwired]

Gas bond only needs to be #6 but shouldn't be anything wrong should you decided to run 500kcmil other than some of the difficulty factor that brings with it. Note that this rule is product installation requirement for some products and not something out of NEC though some localities sort of set their own rule for this as well. NEC alone just says the EGC for equipment that may energize the gas piping is sufficient to bond that gas piping.

Your inspector was right on the conduit bushings if contained conductors are 4 AWG or larger. I hope he at least could cite you the applicable code section though.

 

[LarryFine]

NEC alone just says the EGC for equipment that may energize the gas piping is sufficient to bond that gas piping.

That takes care of the appliance side of the CSST, which is why bonding the source side effectively bypasses the CSST.

It is my understanding that bare or yellow-jacketed CSST requires bonding around, but black-jacketed CSST does not.

 

[kwired]

That takes care of the appliance side of the CSST, which is why bonding the source side effectively bypasses the CSST.

It is my understanding that bare or yellow-jacketed CSST requires bonding around, but black-jacketed CSST does not.

Yes, product driven requirements not NEC driven like I said.

IMO an EI should never really have to cite bonding of CSST problems, unless they happen to be inspecting more than just NEC requirements. The CSST installer should be the one responsible to see that it is bonded properly. If they wish to have an electrician help in some way that is fine, but the electrician should not be the one that is cited if not compliant and they had nothing to do with installing the CSST.

 

[RWC/NC.]

My bad..forgive me. I misread your posting this morning. I thought the wireway enclosure, was installed on the outside exterior dwelling wall this morning. Seeing now the install is on interior inside wall, utilizing space below both the interior MLO panels and being load side, of the two exterior disconnecting means. I totally misread your posting. Have safe day.