GEC routing out of panel

[brianmiller]

Would you all make note in your report that the GEC is routed out of the large knockout opening?

Similar Threads:

• Routing of Neutral wires in panel
• Crazy TPR pipe routing
• Dryer line routing
• CSST routing
• Electrical cable routing

[Rick Cantrell]

I don't think I would.

[Jim Luttrall]

I would mention the excess opening unless there is a clamp or something I don't see closing the box opening. I don't care what hole they use, just use the proper fitting.

[Jerry Peck]

See those three knockouts to the left, the three which make a triangle, at the center of the base of that triangle is a very small knock made for the grounding electrode conductor to go through.

That hole needs to be closed off in some proper manner, moving the grounding electrode conductor to the proper knockout would allow a knockout plug to be installed in that hole.

My question is: Two grounding electrode conductors? Not good, there should only be one. Where do those two go? One goes to a driven rod, maybe? There should be only one grounding electrode conductor from the service equipment down to the first grounding electrode, and that conductor is required to be continuous, from there a bonding electrode conductor would be run to the next electrode, this conductor is required to be continuous from electrode to electrode.

[Roland Miller]

My question is: Two grounding electrode conductors? Not good, there should only be one. Where do those two go? One goes to a driven rod, maybe? There should be only one grounding electrode conductor from the service equipment down to the first grounding electrode, and that conductor is required to be continuous, from there a bonding electrode conductor would be run to the next electrode, this conductor is required to be continuous from electrode to electrode.

You can run an individual grounding electrode conductor to each qualifying electrode. If you have all 7 qualifying electrodes you could have 7 individual grounding electrode conductors ran to the panel..

[Corn Walker]

The electrode conductor is required to be continuous to one electrode; all other potential electrodes are required to be bonded together with the primary electrode to comprise the grounding electrode system (i.e. if an electrode is present, such as a UFER or copper water service it is required to be bonded to the existing grounding electrode system, even if that system consists of two driven rods spaced appropriately within the required impedance). I can not find anything in the code that excludes the panel enclosure as a suitable bonding location.

[Jerry Peck]

You can run an individual grounding electrode conductor to each qualifying electrode. If you have all 7 qualifying electrodes you could have 7 individual grounding electrode conductors ran to the panel..

One grounding electrode conductor from each service, if there is one service (such as in the photo) then one grounding electrode. It is run to any of the qualifying grounding electrodes (which typically is the closest grounding electrode, that is smart, convenient, and makes sense, but running to the closest grounding electrode is *not required* by the code, one could run the grounding electrode to the furthest grounding electrode and then work back toward the service bonding the grounding electrodes together to form one grounding electrode system. Only the conductor from the service equipment to the first grounding electrode is the 'grounding electrode conductor', the others are 'bonding jumpers.'

The electrode conductor is required to be continuous to one electrode; all other potential electrodes are required to be bonded together with the primary electrode to comprise the grounding electrode system (i.e. if an electrode is present, such as a UFER or copper water service it is required to be bonded to the existing grounding electrode system, even if that system consists of two driven rods spaced appropriately within the required impedance). I can not find anything in the code that excludes the panel enclosure as a suitable bonding location.

The grounding electrode conductors is required to be continuous to the one electrode, correct. The bonding jumpers are required to be continuous from grounding electrode to grounding electrode. Neither the grounding electrode nor the bonding jumpers are required to be continuous from one electrode to the next electrode to the next electrode, each is allowed to stop at the each electrode, be connected to the electrode with a properly listed clamp (termination) suitable for the use, is allowed to be cut, then a second conductor from a second clamp is allowed to be run to the next electrode. Some electricians will leave the grounding electrode long enough to be continuous to the first ground rod, to and through the clamp at that ground rod and continuous to the next electrode - allows using one clamp instead of two clamps at the first electrode ... but is not required to be continuous the full length of the grounding electrode system, just continuous from electrode to electrode and continuous from the service equipment to the first electrode.

There are 'options' which are allowed and are considered as being "continuous" when two sections of grounding electrode or bonding jumpers are joined together.

[Corn Walker]

There are 'options' which are allowed and are considered as being "continuous" when two sections of grounding electrode or bonding jumpers are joined together.

If there were only two grounding electrodes, and the conductors from the panel enclosure to those electrodes were continuous, and those electrode conductors were properly bonded within the enclosure, I don't see anything in the code that would suggest it's incorrect. As such, the situation in the picture above where there are two GECs leaving the enclosure could be made to be correct (agreed that the way they currently leave the enclosure is incorrect).

[Jim Port]

Except for the too large opening I don't see the issue. One conductor could be going to a water line and the other to a rod.

[Roland Miller]

Except for the too large opening I don't see the issue. One conductor could be going to a water line and the other to a rod.

That's the only issue.

The other is whether you can have multiple grounding electrode conductors ran from the panel to individual electrodes. The NEC says you can and they will be called grounding electrode conductors. Bonding jumper (such as the 2011 NEC calls them) are ran between individual grounding electrodes to "bond" them together to make a grounding electrode system.

[Jerry Peck]

That's the only issue.

The other is whether you can have multiple grounding electrode conductors ran from the panel to individual electrodes. The NEC says you can and they will be called grounding electrode conductors. Bonding jumper (such as the 2011 NEC calls them) are ran between individual grounding electrodes to "bond" them together to make a grounding electrode system.

Roland,

Do you agree that the grounding electrodes are required to be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system?

We'll go from there based on your answer. Remember that we are referring to a system with a single service equipment.

[Roland Miller]

What I am specifically referencing is 250.64(F) and the application of "(2)" which says "Grounding electrode conductor(s) shall be permitted to be run to one or more grounding electrode(s) individually." This allows multiple "grounding electrode conductors" attached to multiple grounding electrodes. These, once terminated properly, effectively creates a grounding electrode system. There is no requirement that there only be one grounding electrode conductor brought to a single service with the addition electrodes "bonded" to the (if you will) first electrode.

[Jerry Peck]

What I am specifically referencing is 250.64(F) and the application of "(2)" which says "Grounding electrode conductor(s) shall be permitted to be run to one or more grounding electrode(s) individually." This allows multiple "grounding electrode conductors" attached to multiple grounding electrodes. These, once terminated properly, effectively creates a grounding electrode system. There is no requirement that there only be one grounding electrode conductor brought to a single service with the addition electrodes "bonded" to the (if you will) first electrode.

What's the heading for 250.64 (F)?

[Jerry Peck]

What I am specifically referencing is 250.64(F) and the application of "(2)" which says "Grounding electrode conductor(s) shall be permitted to be run to one or more grounding electrode(s) individually." This allows multiple "grounding electrode conductors" attached to multiple grounding electrodes. These, once terminated properly, effectively creates a grounding electrode system. There is no requirement that there only be one grounding electrode conductor brought to a single service with the addition electrodes "bonded" to the (if you will) first electrode.

What's the heading for 250.64 (F)?

I will help: 250.64(F) Installation to electrodes.

The reason for the "Grounding electrode conductor(s)" is this (keep in mind that we are discussing a SINGLE service equipment): 250.64(D) Service with Multiple Disconnecting Means Enclosures, where 250.64(D)(2) is "Individual Grounding Electrode Conductors" which provides AN OPTION for where there are MORE THAN ONE service disconnecting means enclosures to connect a separate grounding electrode conductor from EACH enclosure (but only one per enclosure).

Going back to the SINGLE disconnecting means with more than one grounding electrode conductor going from the disconnecting means enclosure to the grounding electrode system ... what are some of the requirements and limitations on 'conductors in parallel'?

[Corn Walker]

what are some of the requirements and limitations on 'conductors in parallel'?

Please explain how these are "conductors in parallel."

[Jerry Peck]

Please explain how these are "conductors in parallel."

Those conductors go from 'Point A' (the single service equipment enclosure) to 'Point B' (the grounding electrode system).

With multiple service equipment enclosures (with the (s) and which creates the option for multiple grounding electrode conductor(s) ... ) there are several options offered for connecting the service equipment enclosure(s) to the grounding electrode system, one of those options is to install a separate grounding electrode conductor from each service equipment enclosure to the grounding electrode system, in which case those conductors are not in parallel as those conductors do not all originate at 'Point A', those conductors original at 'Point A1', 'Point A2', 'Point A3', etc., and then they go to 'Point B' (the grounding electrode system).

I find it interesting that some people will jump on anything which has two conductors running in parallel for any reason (happens here all the time) ... EXCEPT FOR when those conductors in parallel are grounding electrode conductors, and then they try to find some reason for those conductors to 'not' be in parallel.

[Roland Miller]

Grounding electrode conductors are not included for consideration in parallel conductors in the NEC. And 250.64(D) has nothing to do with 250.64(F). These are both under the heading "250.64 Grounding Electrode Conductor Installation". And although the heading of 250.64(F) is misleading to those that are untrained it still applies to Grounding Electrode Conductor Installation.

[Corn Walker]

Those conductors go from 'Point A' (the single service equipment enclosure) to 'Point B' (the grounding electrode system).

You're playing a bit loose with the terminology there. The grounding electrodes plus the grounding electrode conductors together form the grounding electrode system. If I have a conductor running from an enclosure to a UFER, that conductor plus UFER comprise the grounding electrode system. If there is copper water service, that copper pipe is not part of the grounding electrode system until I bond it to the existing grounding electrode system with a continuous bonding jumper (and the code REQUIRES that I do so). Likewise, if I then drive a grounding rod it does not create a parallel conductor to run a grounding electrode conductor to that grounding rod, as is required. Again, I can't find anything in the NEC suggesting that the bonding location for the various grounding electrode conductors can not be in the enclosure.

But, let's say you actually did have parallel grounding conductors (on one thread a couple years ago, you even suggested tying the unused red insulated conductor in a 12/3 cable to ground rather than leave it floating). This would mean that running a ground wire through rigid metallic conduit that had the proper positive grounding fittings would be disallowed since there would then be two parallel paths from point A (a receptacle, for example) and point B (the enclosure). Is that what you're arguing when you say the prohibition against parallel conductors (in some instances) applies to grounding conductors, that there can not be redundant paths to ground?

[Jerry Peck]

Grounding electrode conductors are not included for consideration in parallel conductors in the NEC. And 250.64(D) has nothing to do with 250.64(F). These are both under the heading "250.64 Grounding Electrode Conductor Installation". And although the heading of 250.64(F) is misleading to those that are untrained it still applies to Grounding Electrode Conductor Installation.

So are you untrained? Not literate? Or are you suggesting in some unclear manner there should be a code change? Or are you just digging in and trying to confuse the issue to prove you are right? Which one is it?

I am expecting that someone who is trained, as you supposedly are or pretend to be, can add 1 + 1 and get 2, then add +1 and get 3, etc. as the NEC builds on itself and one things adds to and relates to another, and no one thing stands alone by itself - as you seem to be implying it does ... in this one particular case ... but your thoughts usually try to tie all the loose ends together, yet here you are set on trying to untwist the stranded wire into separate strands and then say that it is not stranded wire.

Roland, if you know one thing, that is the NEC is not stand alone subsection by subsection, even though you are trying to imply that is the case here. You have really gone out on a limb to try to support yourself this time. Sheesh!

[Jerry Peck]

You're playing a bit loose with the terminology there. The grounding electrodes plus the grounding electrode conductors together form the grounding electrode system. If I have a conductor running from an enclosure to a UFER, that conductor plus UFER comprise the grounding electrode system. If there is copper water service, that copper pipe is not part of the grounding electrode system until I bond it to the existing grounding electrode system with a continuous bonding jumper (and the code REQUIRES that I do so). Likewise, if I then drive a grounding rod it does not create a parallel conductor to run a grounding electrode conductor to that grounding rod, as is required. Again, I can't find anything in the NEC suggesting that the bonding location for the various grounding electrode conductors can not be in the enclosure.

Talk about playing loosey goosey with terminology ... you've exceeded all expectations.

If you run a grounding electrode to a driven ground rod, and then another grounding electrode to an underground metal water pipe, those two grounding electrode conductors are not in parallel ... yet ... but the code requires that those two grounding electrodes be bonded together, and that is when those two grounding electrodes become in parallel as both are going to the grounding electrode system from the same point at the single service equipment.

This would mean that running a ground wire through rigid metallic conduit that had the proper positive grounding fittings would be disallowed since there would then be two parallel paths from point A (a receptacle, for example) and point B (the enclosure).

No, but I like your thinking ... ... maybe we should not allow any two current paths to go from Point A to Point B, such as redundant grounds, isolated grounds, etc. ... you are a bit screwy there ...

Is that what you're arguing when you say the prohibition against parallel conductors (in some instances) applies to grounding conductors, that there can not be redundant paths to ground?

Let's see, we run two ungrounded conductors from Point A to Point B and they are in parallel ... and we run two grounded conductors from Point A to Point B and they are in parallel ... and we run two grounding electrode conductors from Point A to Point B and they are ... not ... in parallel? Some magic trick you pulled there.

The NEC refers to "a" grounding electrode conductor from "a" service equipment enclosure, and then refers to grounding electrode conductor"(s)" from multiple service equipment enclosures, and now the code therefore allows grounding electrode conductor"(s)" to be installed from a single service equipment enclosure? That is Roland's point, do you agree with that?

If that is the case, then we need to pull ALL the sections and subsections we want to apply and begin applying them to whatever it is that we want to apply them to ... because apparently we can apply them where they are not applicable ... (must be something that Roland just made up because that has not been the case previously - let me know so I can learn that stuff as soon as you guys make it up).

[Corn Walker]

If you run a grounding electrode to a driven ground rod, and then another grounding electrode to an underground metal water pipe, those two grounding electrode conductors are not in parallel ... yet ... but the code requires that those two grounding electrodes be bonded together, and that is when those two grounding electrodes become in parallel as both are going to the grounding electrode system from the same point at the single service equipment.

No no no. That's what I mean about the terminology. The conductors don't GO to the grounding electrode system, they ARE (part of) the grounding electrode system. The water service and driven rod are not both point B; one is point B and one is point C and when they're bonded with point A they all together - points A, B, and C, and the conductors between them - form the grounding electrode system. The code requires that if point B and point C are present, they be bonded together with point A. The code does not say - near as I can tell and I keep looking - that it has to be daisy chained from A to B to C to D. As far as I can tell, I can go from A to B, and A to C, and A to D as long as all of those conductors are continuous and bonded appropriately.

[Jerry Peck]

No no no. That's what I mean about the terminology. The conductors don't GO to the grounding electrode system, they ARE (part of) the grounding electrode system.

Like I said, you are playing loosey goosey with terminology - look up 250.50 (see below) (did you catch the word "and" in that title?)

The code does not say - near as I can tell and I keep looking - that it has to be daisy chained from A to B to C to D. As far as I can tell, I can go from A to B, and A to C, and A to D as long as all of those conductors are continuous and bonded appropriately.

You need to keep reading then.

[Corn Walker]

The title doesn't mean what you're implying it means, namely that the Grounding Electrode System and Grounding Electrode Conductor are mutually exclusive things.

Here's a question: before they are bonded together, are the grounding electrodes, taken together, a "grounding electrode system?" Does your answer make sense in light of the wording at 250.53(C)?

I think you need to reread 250.64(F). Then read 250.53(D)(2), which I'll summarize for you.

The context is a discussion of the requirements when the only electrode present is the metal underground water pipe service. The code here requires a second electrode, such as a rod, plate, or pipe. Pay particular attention to this wording:

The supplemental electrode shall be permitted to be bonded to the grounding electrode conductor, the grounded service-entrance conductor, the nonflexible grounded service raceway, or any grounded service enclosure.

A grounding electrode conductor is required to connect the equipment grounds and/or the grounded conductor to the grounding electrode. Supplemental electrodes may be bonded to the grounding electrode conductor (the daisy-chain scenario) OR to the grounded service entrance conductor (via bonding jumper) OR to any grounded service enclosure (via bonding jumper). There is no exception that says, "except the service enclosure where the grounding electrode conductor is bonded to the equipment grounds and/or the grounding electrode." It says ANY grounded service enclosure.

Have a good night, sir.

[Jerry Peck]

The title doesn't mean what you're implying it means, namely that the Grounding Electrode System and Grounding Electrode Conductor are mutually exclusive things.

The title means what it says: that section covers the "Grounding Electrode System" "and" the "Grounding Electrode Conductor", which are two different things.

The "Grounding Electrode Conductor" connects the service equipment "to" the "Grounding Electrode System".

That section describes the elements of the "Grounding Electrode System" (the various grounding electrodes) "and" the "Grounding Electrode Conductor" "and" how the "Grounding Electrode Conductor" is connected to the "Grounding Electrode System.

Here's a question: before they are bonded together, are the grounding electrodes, taken together, a "grounding electrode system?"

The grounding electrodes, "before they are bonded together" are simply individual grounding electrodes.

The grounding electrodes are not interconnected by the "Grounding Electrode Conductor", therein lies your misunderstanding on the installation, the grounding electrodes are bonded together with bonding conductors, there is but one "grounding electrode conductor" and that is the conductor which connects the service equipment and its enclosure to the "grounding electrode system".

You can have/install all the various types of grounding electrodes, and bond them together with the bonding conductors, and that makes the "grounding electrode system".

That "system" of grounding electrodes now needs to be connected to the service equipment and its enclosure to do any good, and that is done with the "grounding electrode conductor.

You should be able to follow that and make sense out of it as you read through 250.50 and its subsections by putting the subsections together, the section as a whole (which includes all the subsections) is what governs the installation of the grounding electrode system AND the grounding electrode conductor, the subsections address the different components and the assembly of the grounding electrode system, AND the grounding electrode conductor and how it is connected to the grounding electrode system.

As you said, "Have a good night, sir."

[Corn Walker]

Go back and re-read that last paragraph I wrote explaining the grounding electrode system. Please point out any inaccuracies you find in it and the code sections that support the claim.

And then tell me how your opinion squares with the plain language of 250.53(D)(2) that states that supplemental electrodes can be bonded to the grounding electrode conductor OR the service enclosure (the latter of which requiring a bonding jumper).

[Roland Miller]

Never Mind Jerry, I have answered all the questions for you.

Again--Grounding electrode conductors are not included in 310.10(H) Conductors in Parallel. Quoting the "2014 NEC"

"310.10 (H)(2) Conductor and Installation Characteristics. The paralleled
conductors in each phase, polarity, neutral,grounded circuit conductor, equipment grounding conductor,or equipment bonding jumper shall comply with all ofthe following: (1) Be the same length(2) Consist of the same conductor material(3) Be the same size in circular mil area(4) Have the same insulation type(5) Be terminated in the same manner(6) When paralleled in ferrous metal enclosures or raceways,conductors shall be grouped to prevent inductive
heating. Informational Note: Where conductors are paralleled inferrous metal enclosures or raceways, failure to group oneconductor from each phase in each raceway or grouping
within a wiring method may result in overheating and current
imbalance. "

You can run individual GECs to grounding electodes- according to the NEC..

" 250.64(F) Installation to Electrode(s). Grounding electrode conductor(s) and bonding jumpers interconnecting grounding
electrodes shall be installed in accordance with (1), (2), or(3). The grounding electrode conductor shall be sized forthe largest grounding electrode conductor required among
all the electrodes connected to it.(1) The grounding electrode conductor shall be permitted
to be run to any convenient grounding electrode available
in the grounding electrode system where the other
electrode(s), if any, is connected by bonding jumpers
that are installed in accordance with 250.53(C).(2) Grounding electrode conductor(s) shall be permitted to
be run to one or more grounding electrode(s) individually.(3) Bonding jumper(s) from grounding electrode(s) shall
be permitted to be connected to an aluminum or copper
busbar not less than 6 mm × 50 mm (1⁄4 in. × 2 in.). The
busbar shall be securely fastened and shall be installed
in an accessible location. Connections shall be made bya listed connector or by the exothermic welding process.The grounding electrode conductor shall be permitted
to be run to the busbar. Where aluminum busbars
are used, the installation shall comply with250.64(A)."

I have seen some inspectors require the GEC system be installed exactly as shown on approved drawings. And those drawing show what Jerry is describing. But there are other NEC compliant ways to accomplish the same thing..

[Jim Port]

I have never seen an inspector interpret this the way Jerry is taking this. Multiple conductors can go in different directions and end at the panel, is A to B, A to C etc. As long as they are continuous between A and B and A to C etc.

[Roland Miller]

Attachment 29062

This is it...

for more info see http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_i...ding-rods.html

[Jim Port]

Since they can be going to different places I would not say they are in parallel.

[Roland Miller]

Since they can be going to different places I would not say they are in parallel.

This is how Jerry thinks "Not quite.

They can be parallel conductors of any lengths, of different material, and of different sizes.

You are referring to what the NEC "requires" of parallel conductors, but conductors in parallel which do not meet what the NEC "requires" are still parallel conductors." from the thread link above. You have to get him speaking in terms of the code so he is not trying to confuse everyone....

[Roland Miller]

And the beat goes on