Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    28,032

    Default Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    I was looking to put this under a heading which included fuel gas, but I didn't see a fuel gas heading. Being as this is also "electrical" ... I put this under Electrical.

    There are basically five types of fuel gas piping systems used for houses:

    - a) black iron pipe and other metallic pipe (such as copper where copper is allowed)

    - b) CSST that is listed as being arc-resistant (these are typically the black CSST)

    - c) CSST that is not listed as being arc-resistant (these are typically the yellow CSST)

    - d) Combination of a) black iron pipe and b) arc-resistant black CSST

    - e) Combination of c) non arc-resistant yellow CSST and ... anything else ... such as black iron pipe or arc-resistant black CSST (with "one or more" non arc-resistant yellow CSST in it).

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    The NEC basically has the general requirements for bonding:
    - 250.104 Bonding of Piping Systems and Exposed Structural Steel.
    - - 240.104(A) Metal Water Piping.
    - - 250.104(B) Other Metal Piping. If installed in or attached to a building or structure, a metal piping system(s), including gas piping, that is likely to become energized shall be bonded to any of the following:
    - - - - (1) Equipment grounding conductor for the circuit that is likely to energize the piping system
    - - - - (2) Service equipment enclosure
    - - - - (3) Grounded conductor at the service
    - - - - (4) Grounding electrode conductor, if of sufficient size
    - - - - (5) One or more grounding electrodes used, if the grounding electrode conductor or bonding jumper to the grounding electrode conductor is of sufficient size
    - - - The bonding conductor blah, blah, blah (does not matter for this discussion).


    - - - ... oh, wait, there is one of those NEC Informational Notes below which says:
    - - - - Informational Note No. 2: Additional information for gas piping systems can be found in Section 7.13 of NFPA 54 -2015, National Fuel Gas Code.

    The above NEC stated, though, we use the IRC for houses, and the IRC contains its own Chapter 24 Fuel Gas Code, as well as the IFGC for buildings not under the IRC (note that IFGC section numbers are in ( 'blah' ) after the IRC section numbers.)

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    From the IRC:
    - SECTION G2411 (310)
    - - ELECTRICAL BONDING


    - My comment Note A: The following three systems are essentially all bonded in the same manner: a); b); and d).
    - - For "Pipe and tubing other than CSST": the gas piping is considered bonded when: "shall be considered to be bonded where it is connected to appliances that are connected to the equipment grounding conductor of the circuit supplying that appliance". I.e., gas piping OTHER THAN CSST is considered bonded when connected to a grounded appliance and its equipment grounding conductor.
    - - - From the IRC: (bold and underling are mine)

    - - - - G2411.1 (310.1) Pipe and tubing other than CSST.
    - - - - - Each above-ground portion of a gas piping system other than corrugated stainless steel tubing (CSST) that is likely to become energized shall be electrically continuous and bonded to an effective ground-fault current path. Gas piping other than CSST shall be considered to be bonded where it is connected to appliances that are connected to the equipment grounding conductor of the circuit supplying that appliance.


    - - For "Arc-resistant CSST": the gas piping is considered bonded when: "shall be considered to be bonded where it is connected to an appliance that is connected to the appliance grounding conductor of the circuit that supplies that appliance.". I.e., arc-resistant covered or coated CSST (typically black CSST) is considered bonded when connected to a grounded appliance and its equipment grounding conductor ... UNLESS ... "Where any CSST component of a piping system does not have an arc-resistant jacket or coating system", then the entire CSST piping system is treated the same as in G2411.2 (310.2) CSST for non arc-resistant yellow CSST.
    - - - From the IRC: (bold and underling are mine)- - - - G2411.3 (310.3) Arc-resistant CSST.
    - - - - - This section applies to corrugated stainless steel tubing (CSST) that is listed with an arc-resistant jacket or coating system in accordance with ANSI LC1/CSA 6.26. The CSST shall be electrically continuous and bonded to an effective ground fault current path. Where any CSST component of a piping system does not have an arc-resistant jacket or coating system, the bonding requirements of Section G2411.2 shall apply. Arc-resistant jacketed CSST shall be considered to be bonded where it is connected to an appliance that is connected to the appliance grounding conductor of the circuit that supplies that appliance.

    This is the same as in G2411.1 (310.1) Pipe and tubing other than CSST ... put in one or more segments of yellow CSST and you treat the entire system the same as an entire yellow CSST system as stated in G2411.2 (310.2).

    - My comment Note B: The following two systems have the exact same bonding requirements, with the bonding requirements being different than the other types: c) and e)
    - - For "CSST" gas piping systems (yellow, non arc-resistant type), which includes black iron piping systems with "one or more segments of CSST": a) the bonding jumper shall be "bonded to the electrical service grounding electrode system or, where provided, the lightning protection grounding electrode system"; b) the bonding point of connection shall be "shall connect to a metallic pipe, pipe fitting or CSST fitting", and; c) the size of "The bonding jumper shall be not smaller than 6 AWG copper wire or equivalent".

    - - - From the IRC: (underlining and bold are mine)

    - - - - G2411.2 (310.2) CSST.
    - - - - - This section applies to corrugated stainless steel tubing (CSST) that is not listed with an arc-resistant jacket or coating system in accordance with ANSI LC1/CSA 6.26. CSST gas piping systems and piping systems containing one or more segments of CSST shall be electrically continuous and bonded to the electrical service grounding electrode system or, where provided, the lightning protection grounding electrode system.
    - - - - G2411.2.1 (310.2.1) Point of connection.
    - - - - - The bonding jumper shall connect to a metallic pipe, pipe fitting or CSST fitting.
    - - - - G2411.2.2 (310.2.2) Size and material of jumper.
    - - - - - The bonding jumper shall be not smaller than 6 AWG copper wire or equivalent.

    The key aspect to remember is that if there is "one or more" segments/components of non arc-resistant yellow CSST in the gas piping system, it is treated as though the entire gas piping system is non arc-resistant yellow CSST.


    Similar Threads:
    Last edited by Jerry Peck; 06-01-2022 at 06:45 AM. Reason: Formatting - added a hard return to create new line
    Inspection Referral
    Jerry Peck
    Construction/Litigation/Code Consultant - Retired
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    1,592

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Thanks Jery, for the effort, and for posting this info.


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    3,154

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    The one thing that I have not fully understood is that all (ok, maybe not all, but nearly all) newer homes in my area have a bonding clamp on the gas supply line adjacent to the gas meter in addition to the hot/cold jumper. This goes for homes for at least the last 10 years with black/galvanized pipe as well as those with yellow-jacketed CSST.

    The vast majority of panel change-outs also have bonded the gas pipe, typically adjacent to the water heater, presumably because the cold is usually already bonded and it's easier to bond hot/cold/gas where all three are close together.

    I have not determined if the electrical contractors are not fully informed (entirely possible) or if there is some local requirement to ensure all gas piping is fully bonded (possibly) because the building department believes that CSST will be added in the future without a permit.

    I suppose I should ask someone at the city and/or county building departments.

    Department of Redundancy Department
    Supreme Emperor of Hyperbole
    http://www.FullCircleInspect.com/

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    28,032

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Gunnar, I suspect one of the keys to bonding gas lines is this: electrical contractors (the ones who are responsible for 'wiring, grounding, bonding, etc') use the NEC, and as such go by ... are supposed to go by ... the NEC - as in the NEC section I posted.

    Electrical contractors don't own copies of the IRC or the Fuel Gas Code.

    Are electrical contractors responsible for bonding gas piping? Yes.

    Are they to know that other requirements apply? Yes, the NEC has an Informational Note that tells electrical contractors that.

    Should electrical contractors know what is required? Yes ... but there is that "should" word, but not "shall" ...

    Last edited by Jerry Peck; 06-02-2022 at 06:10 AM. Reason: Multiple spellin' typos and hard return formatting lines
    Jerry Peck
    Construction/Litigation/Code Consultant - Retired
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    28,032

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    A good way to describe this conundrum may be:

    a) The electrical contractor follows the NEC, which stops at the NEC section I gave ... sort of stops there as it does advise the electrical contractor "Informational Note No. 2: Additional information for gas piping systems can be found in Section 7.13 of NFPA 54 -2015, National Fuel Gas Code.", and, a such, the electrical contractor then knows that there are additional requirements ... don't stick your head in the sand and play dumb.

    b) The electrical inspector follows the NEC ... see a) above.

    c) The mechanical contractor follows the mechanical code and the fuel gas code (mechanical and fuel gas are inter-related), and, as such, they should be the one to advise the electrical contractor of the bonding requirements ... or ... in some (many?) jurisdictions, the mechanical contractor is allowed to make the electrical connections of the appliances they install (otherwise, many/most appliances a mechanical contractor "installs" will also require an electrical contractor to connect up the electrical wiring to the appliance - and common sense should tell everyone that the mechanical contractor should be allowed to connect the pigtail to their appliance ... not be allowed to run the circuit, not be allowed to install or replace the disconnect, but, yes, to connect the pigtails to the appliance), and thus the mechanical contractor should also be one of the persons responsible for bonding gas piping systems.

    d) The mechanical inspector ... see c) above

    e) The plumbing contractor follows the plumbing code and the fuel gas code (plumbing and fuel gas are inter-related) ... see c) above.

    f) The plumbing plumbing inspector ... see c) above.

    Mechanical and fuel gas, and, plumbing and fuel gas, are inter-related and cross over into each other, so the mechanical contractor and mechanical inspector, as well as the plumbing contractor and the plumbing inspector ... as well as the electrical contractor and electrical inspector ... ALL ... all have their part in the proper bonding of fuel gas systems.

    Yet, each one apparently says 'Not my job.', and that is a cause as to why gas piping system bonding is so screwed up ... at least that is my option as to a major reason it is so screwed up - I am open to have someone convince me of a better reason.


    Jerry Peck
    Construction/Litigation/Code Consultant - Retired
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Maryland, DC, and Northern Virginia, electrical only
    Posts
    444

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Peck View Post
    tor ... UNLESS ... "Where any CSST component of a piping system does not have an arc-resistant jacket or coating system", then the entire CSST piping system is treated the same as in G2411.2 (310.2) CSST for non arc-resistant yellow CSST.
    I really dislike this language. I believe the term "component" rings in "you know what i mean, dammit" and the term should be "segment" or something like that. The connectors at the ends of black CSST don't have the coating; are they not components? I don't know.

    Also, what's the "piping system"? Is it ALL CSST in the building, so that if black CSST is run initially and then someone adds a gas grill outlet fed via yellow the black requires bonding?

    Is there valid argument that you can interpret the bonding requirement as saying you bond yellow CSST once in a building, not once per run?

    Can you say it's the electrical contractor's responsibility to bond CSST that's run after they leave? It seems to me that it's their job, but the mechanical's or the HO's responsibility to make sure it's done. And if it's the HO's, and i can see the logic for that attitude, I think it's the mechanical's responsibility to notify the HO that it needs doing, even if the AHJ overlooks the ish.

    Appreciate your thoughts on this stuff.


  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    28,032

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Quote Originally Posted by david shapiro View Post
    I really dislike this language. I believe the term "component" rings in "you know what i mean, dammit" and the term should be "segment" or something like that. The connectors at the ends of black CSST don't have the coating; are they not components? I don't know.
    David, almost exactly what I was thinking when I read that word "component" as each individual part is a "component". "Segment" I can go with because the "segment" would be, should be, defined as "Segment. A section of a gas piping system from fitting to fitting.", and the CSST "segment" would include the nuts of the "fitting" at one end to the nuts at the "fitting" on the other end of that "segment".

    Also, what's the "piping system"?
    The entire "piping system" from beginning to end.

    Yes, if someone adds yellow CSST to the end of a black piping system or a black arc-resistant CSST piping system, then it ("it" being "the piping system") needs to be bonded as required for a yellow CSST piping system. Keeping in mind that the IFGC addresses a problem that NFPA 54 does not by stating copper 6 AWG "or equivalent" - I consider black iron pipe as 'more than just' "equivalent" to a copper 6 AWG conductor, don't you?

    Is there valid argument that you can interpret the bonding requirement as saying you bond yellow CSST once in a building, not once per run?
    "Equivalent" is the valid argument.

    Can you say it's the electrical contractor's responsibility to bond CSST that's run after they leave?
    It is everyone's responsibility to bond what they installed. Whoever installs something onto an existing gas piping system - it becomes their responsibility to verify that what they installed is bonded properly.

    If they add black iron pipe or black arc-resistant CSST, to a similar gas piping system, that should be easy.

    If they add yellow CSST, it's their responsibility to check how it's bonded at the other end (no longer just to the circuit likely to energize the yellow CSST).

    At least that's my thinking.

    Last edited by Jerry Peck; 06-11-2022 at 05:57 PM. Reason: typed on my phone, edited typos on my computer

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Maryland, DC, and Northern Virginia, electrical only
    Posts
    444

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Yes, Jerry, from the Georgia research I have to agree that any solid, tight-made threaded conduit is going to be more than equivalent to 6 AWG Cu. The area is so much greater. Now if someone, some time, manages to list a push-in connector for use with it, I'll pivot 180 because i don't trust them as equivalent to threaded couplings or connectors, and I don't feel safe saying yea when installed this way and nay when installed using that product that's listed for the use.

    What thoroughly bothers me about requiring a system to be bonded, and calling the system not just a run but all that's in the building is that i have no reason to believe running 6 AWG Cu to the nut on the end of yellow CSST to the furnace will protect from pinholing a run of yellow CSST stretching across the building to the stove.

    (I do like your thinking.)


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    28,032

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    David, I agree with you on that yellow CSST and the copper 6 AWG and pin holes.

    Also agree on any push-on fittings on threaded pipe, even if so listed as specifically being electrically continuous ... but listings are listings ... and are hopefully worth the paper they are written on.

    I consider black arc-resistant CSST to be equivalent to a copper 6 AWG because the code does.

    And if that black arc-resistant covering or coating is equivalent to a copper 6 AWG, then surely solid black iron pipe is.

    Jerry Peck
    Construction/Litigation/Code Consultant - Retired
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    3,154

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Unfortunately, I am now a little more confused than I was before (actually, I wasn't confused at all before).

    Let's see if I have it right.

    1) Iron pipe gas supply system is considered bonded when the gas-fired appliance (furnace/range/whatever) has an equipment grounding conductor as a part of the electrical connection for that appliance.
    (In the above case, it seems to me, that if we have more than one gas-fired appliance (in a completely iron pipe gas piping system) that also utilizes an electrical connection (i.e. range & furnace), each appliance should be equipped with an equipment grounding conductor because one appliance (i.e. the range) could be unplugged but another (i.e. the furnace) could still have power that could energize the gas piping.)

    2) When any amount of yellow-jacketed CSST is present in a gas piping system, the gas piping system is required to be bonded with #6 copper. (As near as I can figure, that bond can be pretty much anywhere in the gas piping system. It is not required to be connected immediately adjacent to the CSST.)

    3) When more than one length of yellow-jacketed CSST is present (let's say a main line of iron pipe and a branch of yellow CSST from the iron pipe to the furnace and another branch of yellow CSST from the iron pipe in another location to the range), the single #6 copper bond is still acceptable.

    4) Or, is it required that each length/section/branch of CSST off of the iron pipe now needs its own bond? If so, presumably then presumably bonding of yellow-jacketed CSST should occur immediately adjacent to each length of CSST (#2).


    Department of Redundancy Department
    Supreme Emperor of Hyperbole
    http://www.FullCircleInspect.com/

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    28,032

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Gunnar,

    1) is correct for any of the following:
    - a) black iron pipe end-to-end
    - b) black arc-resistant CSST end-to-end
    - c) any combination of a) and b) end-to-end

    2) if ANY segment is yellow non arc-resistant CSST ... then a copper 6 AWG bond is needed to the grounding electrode system (may be from one or more points, but only one is required, and that one or more grounding electrodes must be bonded to the grounding electrode system ... as is the case for ALL grounding electrodes).

    That last part is a good reason NOT to "add" a ground rod for a gas pipe bonding point - that added ground rod then needs to be bonded to the grounding electrode system, so why make more work for oneself? Verify that the gas piping system is bonded to the grounding electrode system at any convenient point*, which typically would be the end by the meter (for natural gas) or supply pipe and regulator (LPG/propane).

    *My "any convenient point" phrase means "any convenient point" to these: (see italics I've added to "electrical service grounding electrode system or, where provided, the lightning protection grounding electrode system" in the quote below from my first post on this topic)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Peck View Post
    - - - From the IRC: (underlining and bold are mine)

    - - - - G2411.2 (310.2) CSST.
    - - - - - This section applies to corrugated stainless steel tubing (CSST) that is not listed with an arc-resistant jacket or coating system in accordance with ANSI LC1/CSA 6.26. CSST gas piping systems and piping systems containing one or more segments of CSST shall be electrically continuous and bonded to the electrical service grounding electrode system or, where provided, the lightning protection grounding electrode system.


    Last edited by Jerry Peck; 06-12-2022 at 07:05 PM. Reason: Added quote from my first post to clarify my "any convenient point" phrase - see "*"
    Jerry Peck
    Construction/Litigation/Code Consultant - Retired
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    3,154

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Thanks Jerry,

    That was what I understood. I was unsure if the discussion that you and David were having suggested that each separate length/section of CSST would require a separate bond.

    I typically see gas piping bonded at one of two locations. Adjacent to the gas meter on a newer home or adjacent to the water heater on an existing home.

    I do recall seeing documentation and video about failures of black-jacketed CSST when subjected to 120v (through a deliberate ground-fault at a recessed light fixture). The video is pretty frightening. If true, this is of concern to home inspectors as well. Does anyone know if this testing is valid and if further research has been done?

    https://www.firemarshals.org/resourc...t%20Report.pdf

    https://www.firemarshals.org/resourc...mmary%20SD.mp4

    Department of Redundancy Department
    Supreme Emperor of Hyperbole
    http://www.FullCircleInspect.com/

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    28,032

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Gunnar, interesting test and results ... should scare the crap out of anyone who installs CSST gas piping and who has CSST gas piping in their house ... seems that every time someone thinks of a test for CSST, the results show a concern for CSST usage?

    Seems like the yellow CSST, being non-arc-resistant, i.e., non-electrically conductive jacket, fares better than the electrically conductive jacketed arc-resistant CSST ... which seems backwards at first thought, then one realizes that it is the electrical conductivity which apparently sets things in motion.

    What was that thing I just recently said about hopefully the listings are worth the paper they are written on?

    Jerry Peck
    Construction/Litigation/Code Consultant - Retired
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Maryland, DC, and Northern Virginia, electrical only
    Posts
    444

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunnar Alquist View Post
    Thanks Jerry,

    That was what I understood. I was unsure if the discussion that you and David were having suggested that each separate length/section of CSST would require a separate bond.
    That would be a question of satisfying the requirement, "shall be electrically continuous."


  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Maryland, DC, and Northern Virginia, electrical only
    Posts
    444

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Peck View Post
    Seems like the yellow CSST, being non-arc-resistant, i.e., non-electrically conductive jacket, fares better than the electrically conductive jacketed arc-resistant CSST ... which seems backwards at first thought, then one realizes that it is the electrical conductivity which apparently sets things in motion.
    I'd have to see data to convince me that the yellow is safer than the black in dealing with induced current. Obviously you're going to have some arcing if a fault touches properly installed EMT and not properly installed RNMC. I'm not as worried about a short as about spike-induced pinholes.

    Does anybody have an idea about which is more likely?

    All tin foil is conductive, so no CSST is a dielectric. Given that the black has something conductive (and thicker, I believe) added to the tinfoil, sure, it still is not a nice secure 14AWG Cu grounding conductor, or even a standard MC sheath in terms of grounding, but it may do well enough if the fault is sufficiently minor; or if it needs to maintain its integrity for the moment while lightning-induced voltage goes to ground.
    It may be in a way like HT cables, whose shields add a little something. (Rank speculation there.)

    And thanks, Gunnar, for the links. Good stuff!

    Last edited by david shapiro; 06-14-2022 at 04:55 PM.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Maryland, DC, and Northern Virginia, electrical only
    Posts
    444

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    The (in this forum, arguably) final word, via Bob Neary, a colleague with a focus on electrical forensics:
    The current code requires CSST be kept at least 12 in from metallic or any grounded surfaces.
    This has been true for the black. It is now true for the yellow because its jacket is no insulator for the voltages induced by lightning.
    See Fire and Arson Investigator, 60(1), July 2009for tidbits: such as the jacket on yellow CSST creating a capacitor, meaning the induced charge can burn a nice pinhole as it discharges; such as ground at least within 20 ft if you want this to protect the CSST.


  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    28,032

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Another thing depicted in those ground-fault fire investigation, but I didn't want to disrupt what it was doing, is that none of the CSST was secured as required by the various installation instructions.

    1/2" CSST is to be supported and secured: (from GasTite Installation Instructions)

    That said, GasTite also states:

    - Section 4.0 Installation Practices
    - - 4.1 General Provisions
    - - - g.
    - - - - - "Tubing shall be supported in a workmanlike manner with pipe straps, bands
    or hangers suitable for the size and weight of the tubing, at intervals not to exceed those shown in Table 4-3."
    - - - - - With Table 4-3 stating:
    - - - - - - 1/2" | 6 Feet
    - - - - - - 3/4" | 8 Feet (USA) 6 Feet (Canada)
    - - - - - and:
    - - - - - - "Direct contact between Gastite yellow CSST and continuous metallic systems is prohibited. When supportingGastite CSST tubing runs, the use of other conductive metallic systems such as metallic appliance vents, metallicducting and piping, and insulated or jacketed electrical wiring and cables should be avoided."
    - - - - - - followed by:
    - - - - - - - "When supporting FlashShield+ tubing runs, contact with other continuous metallic systems is acceptable."

    Jerry Peck
    Construction/Litigation/Code Consultant - Retired
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Maryland, DC, and Northern Virginia, electrical only
    Posts
    444

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Peck View Post
    When supportingGastite CSST tubing runs, the use of other conductive metallic systems such as metallic appliance vents, metallicducting and piping, and insulated or jacketed electrical wiring and cables should be avoided."
    - - - - - - followed by:
    - - - - - - - "When supporting FlashShield+ tubing runs, contact with other continuous metallic systems is acceptable."
    I don;t own a copy of either fuel gas code; I wonder how these instructions align.


  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    28,032

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    I simply went online, did a Google search for csst gas line and clicked on this link:
    https://www.gastite.com/downloads/pd...e_di_guide.pdf

    Jerry Peck
    Construction/Litigation/Code Consultant - Retired
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Maryland, DC, and Northern Virginia, electrical only
    Posts
    444

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    Understood, Jerry.

    I've known occasions when a company's website--hell, a company's youtube videos--have not kept up with code changes, as I'm sure you have.

    Some might say Musk is a law unto itself, and that's why the EVSE instructions blithely conflict with the NEC. I have no way to know what motivations determine when a company supplying a listed product provides instructions that conflict with rules such as NEC 110.3(B), or the presumed equivalent in the fuel gas codes.


  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fletcher, NC
    Posts
    28,032

    Default Re: Bonding fuel gas piping systems

    [QUOTE=david shapiro;288606I have no way to know what motivations determine when a company supplying a listed product provides instructions that conflict with rules such as NEC 110.3(B), or the presumed equivalent in the fuel gas codes.[/QUOTE]

    The equivalent to NEC 110.3(B) in the Mechanical Code and the Fuel Gas Code are basically written as this:

    Blah-blah "shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions and this code."

    I like that wording as it eliminates conflicts because the way to comply with 'blah "and" blah' is to meet the most-restrictive of each. Meeting the most restrictive of one exceeds the lesser restrictive other one, and if both are equally restrictive, both are met.

    One thing I like about the way the Florida Building Code, Building is set up is that each subcode (Plumbing, Mechanical, Fuel Gas, Electrical, etc) is that each one is a chapter of the main Building volume. Electrical (NEC) is Chapter 27 and is both a stand-alone Electrical Code for anyone doing only Electrical, but is also, at the same time, a Chapter of the Building volume.

    Which means that all of Chapter 1 Administrative also applies to all "electrical" work without requiring anything to be duplicated. Permits? Covered. Etc.

    Jerry Peck
    Construction/Litigation/Code Consultant - Retired
    www.AskCodeMan.com

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •