utility's service lateral lands in a remote ct-can where there wasn't room to put the service equipment. the gc lands on a lug with the gc going out to the service enclosure with the main disconnect. we put a supplementary ge at the ct-can [ct-can is not the service equipment, 230.66, i assume applies to ct-cans as well]. the ct-can is bonded to the gc's and to the ge, 250.92. the gc from the ct-can to the service gc lug will act as the bonding conductor between ge's. it was suggested to me that the ge bond between this supplementary ge and the service ge had to be exterior from ge to ge and not by using the gc from the ct-can to the service. i'm sticking with my gc/ge bond unless someone tells me why i can't to it this way. another question is if you can consider this a supplemental ge vs supplementary, and use it as the 2nd ge? didn't need to here, but i'm not sure why it couldn't be used. the ge's are tied together with the same idea of putting all the metal equipment at the same potential with a low impedance ground fault path, that seems to me to be improved here.
sometimes i write like i talk, too fast and jumbled, so i'll separate things to help maybe.
this is a bussed c.t. enclosure with lugs for line and load built-in
utility gc is connected to ct-can bus lug
gc to disco is connected to ct-can bus lug
gec from ge is connected to ct-can bus lug
this "first" ge is located at the ct-can and i called it supplementary because i didn't really need it to meet nec ge requirements since i have other ge's at the service disco
guess my understanding is that we call these ge's supplementary if they are used for things like limited energy grounds or remote ge's for utility, or others not nec mandated
so thought i'd ask if you'all see it the same way ---- then i was thinking that it seems "legal" and "tc" [theoretically correct] to be able to use the ct-can ge as the required supplement"al" ge if desired
also thought that the "gc" from the ct-can to the service disco gc bus lug should be "legal" and "tc" to act as the "gec" so it should be ok to use it as the supplement"al" vs supplement"ary" ge connected by this "gc/gec bonding conductor"
supplemental ge's are supposed to be connected to the ge-system, like for limited energy systems, but there isn't a gec to these that's sized to do the job so they are added, but with a ge that is located ahead of the service, there is a large enough conductor that is "tc" to use as the gec, and that's the gc going to the same place as the gec would be going if separate...... i feel like i'm starting to ramble on and repeat myself so if you don't get it, i don't know how to describe it right
no big deal, i'm probably wrong, but has anybody ever had to run a 100 foot ge bond from a service to a remote ct/meter at a pole for a utility? not me. i've connected the ge at the pole to the gec and tied into the gc and the only tie to the service ge-system is through the gc from the pole..... rambling again, bye
Re: CT bond#11269 07/08/0207:17 AM07/08/0207:17 AM
Actually, the members here at ECN have sort-of unofficially adopted some shortcuts to make it faster/easier/more efficient when posting.
What I'm trying to say is, Cindy is a whole lot less to blame than say myself, "sparky" (Steve), or Bill. I mean no harm or disrespect, but Cindy has merely been following sort of a tradition started by some of us others, and it has become sort-of "universal" to us.
Go here for a brief synopsis of abbreviated and otherwise shortened terms we are likely to use here.
Case-in-point: Since one is likely to draw remarks from saying things like "neutral" or "ground" we shorten the "true" names of "grounded conductor" to gc and "equipment grounding conductor" to egc.
"gc" can also be used to mean "general contractor", so context must be noticed as well for some of them.
Hope this helps...
Maybe we need a Frequently Asked Questions as well as a Glossary?
-Virgil Residential/Commercial Inspector 5 Star Inspections Member IAEI
Re: CT bond#11271 07/09/0211:58 AM07/09/0211:58 AM
Cindy, to the best of my understanding, there is nothing wrong with your installation. Do not forget your bonding jumpers in both enclosures and conduit if this is metalic conduit. The easiest way to characterize what you are doing would be to think of suppling an out building and follow the requirements of 250.32. Hi Ed, Nice too see you here.
Instead of a Glossary I was thinking more like a "Decoder Ring" ... That would be something!
No, seriously, I think that some slang terms and abbreviations are sure to come about amongst people that get together a lot but it is still important that comments be easily understood by everyone so that additional explanation is not necessary.