ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade General Discussion Area Gas Pipe Bonding??

Do you have a verifiable reason to believe that it is changing?

only in it's history, and the now defunct ROP's.

So....can we install a UFER and use the G-rods to rabbit hunt instead?

I challenged a cocky teenager to show me how far he could throw a ground rod. He had not picked it up and didn't realize how heavy it was. Mr. Ufer is a winner. But if you hunt with a 0.625" ground rod, I'll bet on the rabbits. Sorry!

this appears to be the languge that was proposed for the 2002 NEC.

Looks like we are reverting to the language that was in the previous code.

Revise Section 250.104(B) of the 2002 NEC ROP draft to read as
follows:
(B) Other Metal Piping. Where installed in or attached to a
building or structure, metal piping system(s), including gas piping,
that may become energized shall be bonded to the service
equipment enclosure, the grounded conductor at the service, the
grounding electrode conductor where of sufficient size, or to the
one or more grounding electrodes used. The bonding jumper(s)
shall be sized in accordance with 250.122 using the rating of the
circuit that may energize the piping system(s). The equipment
grounding conductor for the circuit that may energize the piping
shall be permitted to serve as the bonding means. The points of
attachment of the bonding jumper(s) shall be accessible.
FPN: Bonding all piping and metal air ducts within the premises
will provide additional safety.

Was that language final?

Dspark,
I'm just pointing out Ufer's superior ohmic value vs. G-rods. the entire history of GEC's is somewhat checkered, even the UG water pipe has been opposed since day one by water workers orginizations.

the problem is in the lack of 250 to allow the field sparky to quantify GEC values.

what say we use 250-52(b) for an underground fuel tank??

I just don't see the problem that you do. The Ufer is superior primarily because of its great earth contact area.

To me it appears
that those who oppose
have an open circuit between the ears.

Water mains must be bonded.
Workers must treat them as energized and jumper around them before removing or replacing a meter, valve, fitting, or section.

If there is a problem, it has to be insufficient bonding. They should be demanding using dielectric couplings where necessary. Not bonding is not a real solution.

There are some municipalities that will not allow you to bond to the water systems, because of the possibility of low leakage currents eating away their old piping systems. I once worked on a project in Charleston, SC and at that time the local code would not allow bonding to their water pipes, and yes, we had to isolate project piping from their system. If gas and water companies used cathodic protection schemes on their systems, there might not be a problem. However, that will be very expensive and cost prohibitive to gas and water companies and would reflect in higher rates, which we don't want.

Putting in a dielectric union or coupling underground outside the building solves the problem, does it not?

well yes, it solves the problem of the water workers doing a nuetral impression, yet diminishes the value of the Grounding Electrode (note it's the only full sized one, can't cop out to a #6..)

it would also solve the problem of mettallic raceways common to the serving X-former.

would'nt you can the entire deal for a UFER ?

>diminishes the value of the Grounding Electrode
As if I am supposed to care? I could say the same thing if they wanted to make the whole line plastic. If someone wants a good GE, he needs to make it.

>it would also solve the problem of metallic raceways common to the serving X-former.
Right.

>wouldn't you can the entire deal for an Ufer?
No. The metallic interior piping must be bonded. I don't accept any exception.

Ufer grounds are not exactly retrofit items, certainly not in most cases.