ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues yet another Grounding Q

well zap,

i'd want to apply 250-64-(e) 2nd sentence , if it applies at all. we have a wire serving all 3 functions in 250 here. bond, EGC, GEC for certain points as run, so it's definitionally interesting.there is also the issue of 'parralleling', if it were to enter the panel it has to make on!.... but hey! if i've missed a code please point it out to me, as unpalatable as it may be, chewing over a missed code is condusive to climbin' the bell curve!

it's not easy being a groundaholic!


[This message has been edited by sparky (edited 04-22-2001).]

Sparky,

I'm not sure exactly why, but I don't think your installation would pass around here at least not without some serious head scratching. I can't cite you a Code section though. You would seem to have 3 parallel paths going on here. I don't know if that's a good idea.

(Under 'Normal' circumstances) When installing a Meter-main We are required to lift the bond from Neutral to Service panel and treat it as a subpanel. The GEC would then go from a point in Meter-Main Enclosure to Waterpipe directly. .. Why?

Bill

Understanding the NEC grounding requirements is truly the hardest code subject. Makes me grind me teeth sometimes. Ouch!

Mike,
i've got stubs!
especially since 250 was [revised]
since the entire code has a continous line, how can one tell the changes from 96' to 99'? No, i don't mean the cross-ref appendix, i mean all the small, one-sylable-change-the-whole-meaning stuff!
Bill;
this, to me, is a good example of why 90-1 should be applied for lack of a code section. How many parrallel's does the NEC permit? It's not a good idea at all, it's a bad idea!

thanks for all the input guys, i'll pipe down now , maybe go have a brewski......