What is NEC Code For This Grounding Scheme ?

Woops, my mistake -- I thought that was (A)(6) and required to be part of the system; actually, it's (A)(7). You did get this part right: underground tanks aren't required to be bonded into the grounding electrode system.

You got everything else wrong.

So those millions of fuel oil tanks buried outside homes to provide fuel for winter heat - all tanks are code violations? How curious that electrical inspectors did not see them as code violations. According to Doug Miller, all those fuel oil tanks are code violations because a 6 AWG wire does not connect them to the breaker box. Doug - you don't do this stuff, do you? You are assuming a layman's interpretation of the word 'present'. A tank that meets paragraph (A)(7) as an electrode also is not 'present' according to the code.

If word definitions were so obvious, then explain why a rope does not bond two items together. Code says two items must be bonded. They look bonded together to me. We cannot pull them apart. Therefore they must be bonded - by a rope. Clearly that meets code since the meaning of bonding is obvious to any layman. Or maybe words have context. Obvious is that millions of household oil tanks are not in code violation as you have just posted. Please learn the code before lecturing others.

Bud promoted for plug-in protector manufacturers. He will not admit that. He follows me everywhere to turn discussions nasty. He will do this here. He has no technical experience. But as long as he can attack, then many will only see the attacks - not see facts. Bud is one of the last people I would want to install wiring. It does not matter what reality is. His purpose here is to attack me. Anywhere I post, he will immediately follow with attacks. He is not honest; he does not have technical experience; but he knows dirty politics. Do you believe a politician - or the facts? Many will make the mistake of listening to the one who insults. Many will make the mistake of confusing credibility with Bud.

What part of "all ... that are present ... shall be bonded together" are you having trouble understanding?

This whole thing started with your idiotic statement that a metal underground water pipe was not required to be used as a grounding electrode, remember?

Now go *read* the Code, and STFU.

Doug and I both answered that. The NEC does not require tanks to be part of the grounding electrode system.

If only you could read and think.

The code requires items in ?250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6)? be bonded. I realize it is difficult math for you, but 7 is past 6 and so tanks in (A)(7) are not required by the NEC to be part of the grounding electrode system.

Well beyond stupid. Perhaps your meds should be increased. If it is serious point perhaps you could look at the definition of "bonded" in the NEC chapter 100.

Please learn to read. Then learn to think. Then learn the code before lecturing others.

? bud--

Anyone who corrects w_?s bullcrap apparently has an ulterior motive. My only connection with suppressors is I have several. Poor w_ has to try to discredit opponents because he has no valid arguments.

Already covered f*****ad. I am an electrical engineer and master electrician.

It does not matter to w_ what reality is because he has minimal connection with it.

When I see you spreading bullshit I point it out. Your post before last had virtually nothing that was correct. No one agrees with you in this thread. You are always challenged by someone in this newsgroup on your idiotic comments on water pipe.

A whole post full of attacks - no facts. Perhaps you could stick to the facts. That is the real facts, not your delusional facts.

?- bud--

Doug Wrestling with a pig is a waste of time. You'll just get filthy rotten dirty and the pig enjoys it. Or as someone else here has pointed out trolls cannot be shouted down but they can be killed off by starving them of the attention that they crave.

-- Tom Horne

No wonder Doug Miller does not know the code. You still don't comprehend what I posted? Posted was something completely different

- that a water pipe earth ground is insufficient for earthing. Even if earthed by the water pipe, building still requires another earth ground to meet post 1990 code requirements. Doug - why do you forget what I posted - and also completely misunderstand paragraphs from the code. Why do you misrepresent what I posted just so you can argue?

At least Doug Miller is conceding that other electrodes - ie underground tanks - need not be connected to breaker box.

It should be obvious to John Ross that your electrical knowledge comes only from reading - not from industry experience. You did not even correctly read what I had posted.

John Ross requires earthing. One earth ground rod close to AND wired directly to his breaker box provides sufficient earthing - would meet code. Any other utility that is also earthed must also connect to this same earthing 'system'. That earthing to provide human safety (as defined by code) also provides surge protection.

Why does the telephone line need earth ground? The telco installed (for free) protector will not provide surge protection without a short connection to earth ground.

Meanwhile, volts500 demonstrates other grounding that are now required for human safety in

You still don't comprehend that what you posted was a load of nonsense.

You wrote that the metal water pipe is not required to be bonded as a grounding electrode.

True -- but not relevant.

Why are you lying about what you posted?

In this post

Remember that this is in the context of an original post which asked about adding more grounding electrodes, _in_addition_to_ the metal water pipe that he already has.

And that metal water pipe is *required* by Code to be bonded as part of the grounding electrode system.

I acknowledged my mistake with respect to the underground tanks. We're still waiting for you to realize, and admit, that you were wrong about everything else.

What part of "all ... that are present ... shall be bonded together..." are you having trouble understanding?

True enough -- but when the pig is posting things like "If using any other earthing electrode, then a water pipe earthing electrode is not required" the pig *needs* to be shouted down.

Are you saying it's standard to bond together in service panel or it's common to just have the "neutral" bar and put grounds and neutrals on it? I was thinking that they may have just made them like this all those years ago, but now have the two bars in newer ones. But it's good to know at least ONE thing seems to be clear cut that it is OK to do. I was worried that would be a whole new can of worms.

thanks

-- John

If it does trigger the new code, what are the restrictions in doing this? Can you find where the old wire connected to the pipe and then splice that to new wire and run it to within 5 feet?

-- John

Short answer:

You can splice it, if you do it the right way [see (1) below], or you can connect the existing conductor to a busbar instead of the pipe, and connect a jumper between the busbar and the pipe within 5' of the entrance.

Long answer:

"Grounding electrode conductors shall be installed in one continuous length without a splice or joint, except as permitted in (1) through (4): (1) Splicing 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 bonded together to form a grounding electrode conductor. (3) Bonding jumper(s) from grounding electrode(s) and grounding electrode conductor(s) shall be permitted to be connected to an aluminum or copper busbar not less than 6mm x 50mm. The busbar shall be securely fastened and shall be installed in an accessible location. Connections shall be made by a listed connector or by the exothermic welding process. (4) [installation req'mts for aluminum busbars]"

Bonding together is required. It is almost always done in the service panel.

Just a neutral bar also used for grounds is common.

To clarify -- the reason this is acceptable in a service panel is that Code requires the ground and neutral to be bonded together at/in the service panel, so it doesn't matter whether two bars are used, or one -- electrically, it's all one continuous piece anyway. Subpanels require separate bars *not* bonded together.

Only if you splice it by non reversible means such as a crimp connector.

-- Tom Horne

Under 250.64(C)(3), he's also permitted to install a busbar where the old wire connects to the pipe, connect the wire to the busbar instead, and run a jumper from the busbar to the pipe within 5' of the entrance.

I'm glad you posted that. I thought busbars only went in panels, so I didn't quite get your first response regarding that.

Do I understand that you are saying that in the crawlspace where the current bonding wire is attached to the pipe, you can install a busbar right there? How would you secure such a thing (can it just be attached to a joist).

If above is correct, then you mean the old wire can be put on the busbar with a clamp (would that be similar to the one's they use to attach to pipe where it just screws on--splitbolt if I recall?). Then take the new wire and also clamp to busbar and then run to withing 5 feet.

As far as Tom Horne's comment about the crimp connector, which method is easier or less labor intensive for electrician? I don't know what a crimp connector is, but it *sounds* like it would be a lot easier than the busbar, but again I am not sure what that involves.

But as far as that busbar method. Would that be considered a permitted connection point to attach the receptacle ground wires? If so, that could be very advantageous to do it that way.

-- John

I had talked to an electrician on the phone and he said something like "oh, those old panels just had a neutral bar and they put the grounds on there too. That is not good, especially for eletronic devices to be protected." He then went on to say he would install a ground busbar in panel.

This is what I am dealing with! If it wasn't for you guys, I would have had some pretty off the wall things done to my electric service. It seems like I am at a point where I know more than they do about this. This is truly backwards, but with all the help here, I will know when I find an electrician who knows what he is doing. Ususally, the response is "hire a professional", but in my case, it's "go to NG and THEN be informed enough to hire a professional (if one exists in my city).

Anyway, thanks to everyone who is participating in this thread. It is VERY helpful to me.

-- John