well to be honest Scott, it's been posters like you that have got me off the "auto-pilot" grounding mentality we tradesmen seem to cultivate. and all your points are very valid, and appreciated, stay tuned!
so let's say for the sake of NEC arugement that i have managed to convince the local utility to make on my GEC at the nuetral by pointing out that it is allowed per 250-142, being that the grounded(nuetral) conductor is allowed dual-usage up to the main disco.
the continuos GEC is simply because i'm too cheap to supply any termination strip or enclosure.
[This message has been edited by sparky (edited 04-06-2001).]
Re: Grounding #76962 04/06/0106:56 AM04/06/0106:56 AM
I posted the original Q to consider what kind of trouble i could be creating with a COMPLIANT installation .
the definitions of what conductor does what job follow suit, which should be even more fun given Don's suggestion, it should be expanded on here!
Tom; utilities are a trip! in my area at one time, all lateral installations were scrutinized by utility engineers, had to meet their approval.. In later years all laterals were "customer owned" , they would actually give out a one page pictoral to DIY'ers! Recently, after many incidents of DIY'ers essentially creating bombs, they have revised their approach.
[This message has been edited by sparky (edited 04-07-2001).]
In response to your post on this thread dated 04-06-2001 07:56A.M. , if you have a 1995 ROP , check proposal 5-32 , the substantiation and the CMP comment.
There were about 50 related proposals ( in all Sections where "grounding" was mentioned )that needed to be altered if the 5-32 proposal was accepted. See proposal 1-71 on page 14 as one of the, 50 or so, of related proposals.