If anything else, the depth and detail of the responses are worth reading in the IAEI BB. Many lead me to investigate the current ROP's , where said issues may be in the process of being addressed. This is testimonial to the 'chat level' there, so i understand why it's a 'take no prisoners' room. [Linked Image]

So Virgil,
I've been struggling with 250 for some time, ask a lot of Q's, that's all. what's 'voltage gradient', i suppose the term implies that stray voltage could not exist in different readings given the amount of bonding.
note the same term is applied to pools in 680-22 and the intent of it being an isolated entity.
Consider also the theory, in that only energized equipment can constitute a return path, the point being that the bonding of such items, and/or it's direct line of sight back to the power source would be what is most pertinent to bond. Note rop # 3720 mentions Mich State U as having done studies on the topic, that would be good info if we could access it.

The pad being poured, i would simply make the best of the situation here. There is no harm in running a #2cu around the pad, loop it thru as many G-rods as you can, maybe a bag or 2 of bentonite, and hit at least all 4 corners of the pad's rebar via J-hammer at points where the sill plate will hide the damage. Note the article does not go into detail on HOW this bonding is done....

Note 250-32(e) is for a reason, probably to exclude any opportunity for parrallel paths.

hope this helps, maybe others will comment on the fix for this, i call this the NEC's "field of dreams" mentality, assuming other trades ( or manufacturers)will acknowledge their wishes.
It would seem this requirement would be just as easy as requiring cows to sing the national anthem on sunrise.. [Linked Image]

have you ever said "equpotential plane" to a farmer? most would probably tell you to land it elsewhere....

[Linked Image]






[This message has been edited by sparky (edited 05-24-2001).]