I'm about to run equipment grounds to some ungrounded receptacles. I will be doing so as allowed in 250.130(C)(3)

The way I read this, I will have to run an equipment ground back from each receptacle that I want to ground and I would not be allowed to tap off from from any new or existing equipment ground. I have no problem with this as I'll be on the job cost plus, but if there is an exception or other code article that would allow the tapping of an equipment ground, I wouldn't mind avoiding all that attic time.

How say you?

Tom

Tom,

Read the first part of 250.130. It says for replacement of non-grounded recpts only in existing installations that do not have and EGC in the branch circuit use a method as described in 250.130(C).

Since you said you have an EGC in a branch circuit you can tie onto, you can use it. Just make sure it is the appropriate size for the circuit.

I would also add that you should not tie onto any other egc of a circuit other than the circuit that is feeding the receptacle you are replacing.

Steve,

I'll be grounding these receptacles because there is no existing equipment ground in the cable feeding the receptacles in question. Previous owner of the home installed grounding type receptacles in several locations. Present owner has utilization equipment that is required to be grounded.

Basically, I feel that each receptacles equipment ground will need to be taken back to the one & only breaker box in the house (easier to get to than any of the other allowable connections in 250.130) and that I cannot just pull one equipment ground up into the attic & tap off from it where need be.

I am not sure why you couldn't "bus" a #6 around the attic (OK without protection) and fish #12 down to the receptacles(protected by the wall finish). The question is which splicing device you can use and not break the bank.
I don't see that specifically addressed anywhere in the code.

For that matter, wouldn't you be able to size a single ground wire in the attic or basement for the largest circuit involved? This would be no different than a multiwire circuit in the same conduit, which only needs one correctly sized ground.

I suppose that the #6 wire might fly since it could be called a grounding electrode conductor. Split bolts are fairly expensive, but then again, with #12 wire costing what it does, if the runs are over about 20 feet, then the bug would cost less than the wire. If this is a viable option, this would also allow additional receptacles to be converted in the future.

The reason I'm asking is that 250.130(C) addresses a receptacle (singular) and not receptacles (plural).

(Sigh) Had there been code enforcement in WV back in the late 70's, this house would have had grounded receptacles to begin with.

[This message has been edited by Tom (edited 10-26-2006).]

Silly question: given the cost of labor versus the cost of wire, does it really make sense to pull separate EGCs back to the panel rather than pulling new romex and simply installing new grounded circuits?

-Jon

Jon,

Not a silly question.

All the outlets involved are in the middle of a run. Box fill is already max, so I can't add another cable and replacing the boxes with deeper boxes will be labor intensive also and will be a serious pain where installed in ceramic tile. Cutting in an outlet next to an existing one isn't going to fly for aesthetic reasons.

Jon, you could fish the wire up next to the steel box on the outside and use a clip, then install a new self grounding 5-15. I would be hard pressed to find a violation and it would be a heluva lot safer than an ungrounded box/receptacle.