ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
twh 10
Admin 4
Recent Posts
Dryer, Range grounding from "Main" panel
by sparkync. 05/23/17 03:32 PM
Any UL 508 experts out there?
by sparkyinak. 05/21/17 08:57 PM
Heat pump conundrum
by sparkyinak. 05/21/17 08:49 PM
Interesting week
by HotLine1. 05/20/17 11:57 AM
Electrical Pricing Guide
by ElectricianBud. 05/18/17 12:17 PM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
236,663 Are you busy
171,639 Re: Forum
164,625 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (brsele), 58 guests, and 10 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#81770 - 09/18/02 09:01 AM Gas pipe bonding  
George Corron  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 717
Lorton, Va USA
Guys,
I started a fight..maybe, on the above subject. Here are the links in case ya wanna join in or just read about the responses. The post is the same at both websites.
http://www.boards2go.com/boards/board.cgi?&user=VBCOA
http://www.boards2go.com/boards/board.cgi?action=read&id=1032353432&user=IAEIVA

Feel free to join in the fray if you like, here or there [Linked Image]


2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides

#81771 - 09/18/02 05:07 PM Re: Gas pipe bonding  
Tom  Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,044
Shinnston, WV USA
George,

Whats to argue with? NEC is as plain as day on the subject. However, this is never enforced here in WV as far as I know. Gas company guys usually get real excited when they see the bond conductor. Don't know why, there is almost always some other unintentional path back the the service neutral.

Tom


Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example.

#81772 - 09/18/02 07:07 PM Re: Gas pipe bonding  
Tony Moscioni  Offline
Moderator
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 144
CANADA
George,

I know this issue deals with the US, but in Ontario, Canada, we The Electrical Safety Authority (formerly Ontario Hydro Inspection) adopted this practice of BONDING the interior gas piping in 1996 and have been enforcing it regularly.

SUBJECT: BONDING INTERIOR METAL GAS PIPING (SUBRULE 10-406(4))

Rule 10-406(4) requires that all interior metal gas piping which may become energized shall be made electrically continous and shall be bonded.

Questions have been asked on specific circumstances where the subrule applies, who is responsible for installing any bonding conductors and the acceptability of a particular way to meet the requirements.

Responsibility

Bonding in accordance with Subrule 10-406(4) is required for:

1. New buildings with gas piping installed at that time. The contractor responsible for making application for inspection of the electrical service and panelboard is responsible for the bonding.

2. Electrical service upgrades in buildings with gas piping. The contractor responsible for making application for inspection of the service upgrade is responsible for the bonding.

3. Gas piping being installed for the first time in a building with no change in the main electrical service but with electrical work associated with appliances supplied by the gas piping. The contractor responsible for making application for inspection of the electrical work is responsible for the bonding.

A #6 bonding jumper (or larger), from the metal gas pipe after the meter to the closest cold water pipe, is an acceptable means of bonding the metal gas piping as per Sub Rule 10-404(4), provided the Electrical Inspector is satisfied the water pipe is part of an electrically continuous path to the system grounding conductor. In other words, it is not necessary in every case, to bond the metal gas piping directly to the system grounding conductor.

Tony Moscioni
Electrical Inspector
Electrical Safety Authority


#81773 - 09/18/02 10:35 PM Re: Gas pipe bonding  
harold endean  Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,233
Boonton, NJ
Its funny you guys brought this up. Here in NJ, the gas company DOES NOT want us to bond to the gas pipe. Even though the NEC requires it. The Gas co. and the state feel that through normal grounding situations ( a gas stove, gas dryer, etc. with a 3 prong plug, will provide the proper grounding path. Well, today I just inspected a house which had a problem on Mon. It seems the gas co was in the area changing over their pipes, (making them larger or something.) and when they disconnect tis one house, a man was shocked, the gas piping started to "pop", and there were sparks. The power co. was called, the fire trucks rolled, police, etc. Long story short, the neutral on the service was bad, as was the cold water ground. (as far as I know). So I inspected a brand new 100 amp over head service today with a new grounding electrical conductor to the water service. The homeowner also lost a TV, garage door opener, and several surge suppresors.


#81774 - 09/19/02 06:01 AM Re: Gas pipe bonding  
George Corron  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 717
Lorton, Va USA
Tom - Agreed, I don't see the argument either, but it sure seems to rear it's ugly head on a regular basis.

Tony - Thanks, good to hear from another source, and that does lend credence to the enforcement.

HE - I really expect we have more problems out of this than ever gets reported. If a house blew up, it would likely be reported as an "electrical" problem, and likely no one would ever publish that some inspector enforced the code wrong.

Thanks for all posts here, it really is good to hear some varying opinions.


#81775 - 09/19/02 06:30 AM Re: Gas pipe bonding  
sparky66wv  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,236
West Virginia
Assuming there's at least 10' of metallic pipe buried outside of the structure, how would bonding to the pipe be any different than using it as a third grounding electrode?

The only difference I see is that #4 AWG must be used rather than the exception to use #6 for GEC...

Other than that, aren't they technically the same?

[Linked Image]


-Virgil
Residential/Commercial Inspector
5 Star Inspections
Member IAEI

#81776 - 09/19/02 08:20 AM Re: Gas pipe bonding  
tdhorne  Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 345
Maryland, USA
Quote
sparky66wv Wrote:
Assuming there's at least 10' of metallic pipe buried outside of the structure, how would bonding to the pipe be any different than using it as a third grounding electrode?

The only difference I see is that #4 AWG must be used rather than the exception to use #6 for GEC...

Other than that, aren't they technically the same?


sparky66wv
You have hit on the heart of the problem. My solution is to ask the pipe fitters to install a dielectric union between the utility and interior piping. One plumber said he would only do it as an extra and was shocked when I wrote the order. The underground piping that is installed for gas these days is usually coated to prevent corrosion so it won't be an effective electrode anyway until it is all the way back at the main under the street. I do completely understand why the gas utility does not want there piping carrying the neutral currents. What is needed is a change in the fuel gas code to require isolation of the underground piping from the interior piping through the use of dielectric unions. As you have already pointed out the Equipment Grounding Conductor (EGC) of every circuit to a gas appliance plus the nearly inevitable contact between other grounded objects and the gas piping makes deliberate bonding a better thing than the existence of high impedance accidental or incidental grounds to that piping.
--
Tom


Tom Horne

"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous for general use" Thomas Alva Edison

#81777 - 09/19/02 09:01 AM Re: Gas pipe bonding  
George Corron  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 717
Lorton, Va USA
The gas equipment I have seen lately does contain pressure fittings and regulators. This stuff is often not conductive, similar to water meters that we must bond around. The EGC attached to an appliance occasionally does not bond the pipe. That is my only contention with this one.

The difference is Sparky, it may function as an electrode, but we cannot count on it per Code. Prior to about 84, we were required to treat it as such, but the NFPA recognized that plastic pipe was becoming the prevalent method in the gas industry.

A lot of guys mistakenly took this as an edict that we were not allowed to bond it, obviously a very big mistake.

The VA state VBCOA site had a post from Wash. Gas, who agreed that it is a big problem, and that they require it to be bonded ON THE HOUSE SIDE, the problem comes when it's on the street side. I was real glad to see it addressed by Mr. Johnston.

[This message has been edited by George Corron (edited 09-19-2002).]


#81778 - 09/19/02 09:19 AM Re: Gas pipe bonding  
sparky66wv  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,236
West Virginia
250.104(B) has a clause that leads me to belive that the EGC for, say, the furnace blower motor and ignition/logic circuit would suffice. Would there need to be an actual clamp with say, a #12 green going to it from the device box, or is the internal bonding from the EGC in the device box, throught the frame of the furnace, to the gas pipe enough of a bond?


-Virgil
Residential/Commercial Inspector
5 Star Inspections
Member IAEI

#81779 - 09/19/02 09:31 AM Re: Gas pipe bonding  
resqcapt19  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
IL
The gas utilities have used dielectric fittings between the building piping and the underground piping for at least 40 years in this area. I thought that all gas utilities isolated their underground distribution from the building piping, but apparently not. In this area, it is no longer any type of problem as all of the gas underground distribution up to 800 psi is nonmetallic pipe.
As far as an actual bonding connection, many code authorities agree that the mechinical connections on a gas appliance that has electric power is a sufficient bond to comply wiht 250.104(B). In some cases the mechinical connection may be good enough, but on other appliances a bond directly to the gas pipe would be required. This should be addressed by CMP 5 as the wording in the current code does not clearly require an actual bond to the pipe.
Don


Don(resqcapt19)

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Member Spotlight
SafetyWired
SafetyWired
Pa, USA
Posts: 44
Joined: July 2013
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.019s Queries: 15 (0.002s) Memory: 0.8228 MB (Peak: 0.9977 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-05-23 22:38:45 UTC