ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues Color Code for GEC in a Main Service Panel

Don:

I agree with your comments here, and I corrected my statement above.


I really would like to see the code make it clear that GREEN can be used for the GEC, EGC, EBJ, and MBJ when a conductor is used ....

Now here's another question on the "EBJ" pigtail used to ground the receptacle green screw to the system EGC in a box using a listed clip or screw .. does it have to be green, or must it be bare?

Joe,
Don't we have the same issue with the bonding jumpers and equipment bonding jumpers as we have with the grounding electrode conductors? The color is not specified in the code.

I agree that it would be best if the code was changed to require all of the bonding and grounding conductors to be green green. We'll have to see what the ROP says when it comes out in July.

Don


[This message has been edited by resqcapt19 (edited 03-09-2003).]

As was mentioned briefly in an earlier post, if you use a covered or insulated conductor for the GEC, as is allowed by the NEC, and you use a conductor insulated or covered that is black, aren't you then prohibited by art. 310.12(c)from using a black insulated conductor as an UNGROUNDED conductor anywhere else in the same electrical system? Art. 310.12(C)" Conductors that are intended for use as ungrounded conductors, whether used as a single conductor or in multiconductor cables, shall be finished to be clearly distinguishable from grounded and grounding conductors." The same being true if you used any other color conductor other than green since art. 200.6 requires all GROUNDED conductors to be white or natural gray and specifically NOT green. So by deductive reasoning here's my interpretation: The grounding electrode conductor can be bare or covered or insulated. If it is covered or insulated it cannot be white, natural gray or the same color as any UNGROUNDED conductor within the same electrical system. Since a green ungrounded conductor is a clear violation we know there won't be any green UNGROUNDED conductors in an electrical system(at least not intentional ones). As I see it the 2002 NEC compliant installation is either bare or, if insulated or covered, green or re-marked with green. Doesn't the NEC make it clear that GROUNDED conductors must be identified with white or natural gray. GROUNDING conductors must be bare, green or green with yellow stripes. UNGROUNDED conductors must be covered or insulated and can be identified with any color NOT assigned to the GROUNDED or GROUNDING conductors as set forth in arts. 250.119 and 200.6.

O.K., usual disclaimers: Johnny Foreigner, not on intimate terms with the intricacies of the language used in the NEC, etc.

I haven't had a chance to scan the NEC for other articles that might affect this argument, but based on those cited in this thread I have to agree with Don's interpretation that there is nothing to say that the GEC cannot be green.

As a first step I double checked on the NEC definitions of GEC and EGC just in case I was missing something. In fact I was wondering if the term equipment grounding conductor could be taken to include the GEC, thereby making use of green (or green/yellow or bare) mandatory for the GEC, but no, the NEC definition of the EGC makes it clear that it does not include the GEC.

200.7 reserves the colors white and gray for use as grounded circuit conductors only. It seems everybody is agreed that the GEC cannot, therefore, be white or gray.

250.119 specifies the methods that must be used to identify an EGC. It makes no mention of the GEC, neither does it specify that green (or green/yellow) must not be used for conductors other than an EGC.

310.12(B) seems to be a superfluous entry to me. It just says that equipment grounding conductors must comply with 250.119. Again, no mention whatsoever of the GEC, either directly or by cross-reference to 250.119.

It does seem that 310.12(C) might indeed prevent plain black from being used as the GEC if black is used as an ungrounded (phase) conductor in the installation (as it almost certainly will be). This rule just catches what colors may NOT be used for the GEC if that same color is already in use as an ungrounded conductor. It in no way says that green may not be used for a GEC (unless green is being used as a phase somewhere!).

310.12(C) just mentions "distinguishable" rather than colors. Presumably this would allow black to be used as the GEC if it were suitably tagged at regular intervals, thereby making it easily distinguishable from a plain black ungrounded conductor. Marking with green tape seems to be the easiest way to achieve this.

Sorry Joe, but I don't see how 250.119 and 310.12(B) that you cited could be interpreted in any way as to make it a violation to use green for the GEC. Could you explain how you come to this interpretation?

From near the top of this thread:
OK, I'm not familiar with the way these Code Panels operate, but what did they cite to backup their assertion that the GEC may not be green? 200.7 clearly specifies, by exclusion, that the GEC cannot be white or gray, but there's still nothing there to say it cannot be green.

I agree with the last part of the quote. The GEC and other bonding cables should be obvious as to their function whatever color they may be. Even if some interpretation of the NEC meant that green was not permitted for the GEC, would anybody argue that such use could constitute a safety problem?

To paraphrase that last quote, if the installer doesn't understand the purpose of a green-colored GEC at the busbar, he still has no business being inside the panel.

An afterthought: There doesn't seem to be anything which specifies that green cannot be used as an ungrounded conductor, except for 310.12(C) which would prhibit such use if green is used for the EGC. Does this mean that if all EGCs are left bare or identified green/yellow that plain green could be used as a hot?


[This message has been edited by pauluk (edited 03-09-2003).]

Hi Paul, you're a brave man. However, I agree with you entire post.

Roger

LOOK AGAIN:



READ YOUR COMMENT AGAIN


This is not what the my original quote says!!



[This message has been edited by Joe Tedesco (edited 03-09-2003).]

Joe, what does have to do with anything.

All due respect, you seem to be grasping for straws here.

Roger

Roger:

When discussing the National Electrical Code and the way in which it is interpreted in this country, I would expect that those who have the time to write such a detailed personal opinion about what they read here, would do so with some knowledge of the code making system here in this country.

My questions were not grasping for straws, they were posted to the writer just to level the playing field a bit.

I would ask the same of anyone who responded to the threads here with their personal opinions, especially this one!

Don said...

Gentlemen,
It seems as though this arguement could last for some time.But until that time,I see nothing that prohibits the use of green for the GEC and green is used extensively in these parts.

Joe,
I think that you are way out of line with your comments to Paul, and you didn't respond to his questions.

Do you have a proposal number and year for the proposal that you are talking about? I'd like to read the proposal and comments myself. Its not fair for you to quote what you think that you remember about a proposal, but not give us enough details so that we can look it up ourselves. The only proposal on this subject that I have found in the 95 ROP is 6-32 which would have required the GEC to be green. Panel 6 accepted this at both the proposal and comment stage, only to have the TCC report it as rejected because the color of the GEC is not within the scope of Panel 6.
Don