Gas pipe bonding
- Thread starter brother
- Start date
- Status
A
a.wayne3@verizon.net
Guest
Re: Gas pipe bonding
Howard you will find this a great web site,lots of info and knowledge.
Howard you will find this a great web site,lots of info and knowledge.
Re: Gas pipe bonding
My 02: Here in Tucson, Arizona the AHJ always checks for a gas line bond, #4. What we do is bond it at the water heater with a short piece of #4. Yes I understand what the NEC says about the appliance likely to energize the piping, but for myself $4 worth of materials and 15 minutes of time is easier than arguing with the inspector. Besides, a lot of older homes here only have two wire receps, even at the furnace. I can't tell ypou how many furnace cords I have seen with the grounding pin broken off. (Cord and plug furnaces are the norm here, although fused receptacles are now required)
Brian
My 02: Here in Tucson, Arizona the AHJ always checks for a gas line bond, #4. What we do is bond it at the water heater with a short piece of #4. Yes I understand what the NEC says about the appliance likely to energize the piping, but for myself $4 worth of materials and 15 minutes of time is easier than arguing with the inspector. Besides, a lot of older homes here only have two wire receps, even at the furnace. I can't tell ypou how many furnace cords I have seen with the grounding pin broken off. (Cord and plug furnaces are the norm here, although fused receptacles are now required)
Brian
brother
Senior Member
Re: Gas pipe bonding
Thanks for the code info yall. Not soon after i posted that question, i found it. LOL I never knew this topic would have soo many responses.
its interesting how this issue of 'bonding or not bonding the GAS PIPE' causes a stir in my parts. Some one told that they plan to have Gas company reps on the next Nec code board, and also some plumbing reps on the board as well (im told they dont like for us to use the water pipe as a grounded electrod in single or double family dwellings). LOL Well i guess time will tell.
Thanks for the code info yall. Not soon after i posted that question, i found it. LOL I never knew this topic would have soo many responses.
its interesting how this issue of 'bonding or not bonding the GAS PIPE' causes a stir in my parts. Some one told that they plan to have Gas company reps on the next Nec code board, and also some plumbing reps on the board as well (im told they dont like for us to use the water pipe as a grounded electrod in single or double family dwellings). LOL Well i guess time will tell.
charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
Re: Gas pipe bonding
This is a touchy subject because of an error.
Section 250-80(b) in the 1996 Code permitted interior metal piping systems to be bonded and Section 250-83(a) prohibited the metal gas piping from being a grounding electrode.
Article 250 in the 1999 Code was rearranged to make it more used friendly and panel 5 made a major error with the gas piping. Section 250-80(b) was moved to 250-104(b) and stated, "Each aboveground portion of a gas piping system upstream from the equipment shutoff valve shall be electrically continuous and bonded to the grounding electrode system." Section 250-52(a) prohibited the metal gas piping from being a grounding electrode.
Section 250.104(B) in the 2002 Code requires only the circuit that may energize other piping systems to be used to bond it. Section 250.52(B)(1) prohibits the metal gas piping from being a grounding electrode.
Due to inadequate education, poor interpretation, or local jurisdictions wanting to see everything bonded with the 250.66 rules, a lot of areas do it different ways.
This is a touchy subject because of an error.
Section 250-80(b) in the 1996 Code permitted interior metal piping systems to be bonded and Section 250-83(a) prohibited the metal gas piping from being a grounding electrode.
Article 250 in the 1999 Code was rearranged to make it more used friendly and panel 5 made a major error with the gas piping. Section 250-80(b) was moved to 250-104(b) and stated, "Each aboveground portion of a gas piping system upstream from the equipment shutoff valve shall be electrically continuous and bonded to the grounding electrode system." Section 250-52(a) prohibited the metal gas piping from being a grounding electrode.
Section 250.104(B) in the 2002 Code requires only the circuit that may energize other piping systems to be used to bond it. Section 250.52(B)(1) prohibits the metal gas piping from being a grounding electrode.
Due to inadequate education, poor interpretation, or local jurisdictions wanting to see everything bonded with the 250.66 rules, a lot of areas do it different ways.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
Re: Gas pipe bonding
Charlie,
The wording in the '99 code is a direct quote from the Fuel Gas Code. Note the superscript "x" in front of 250-104(B) in the '99 code. I don't see how that is CMP 5's mistake, when they are only using the requirements from another NFPA code.
Don
The bonding requirement for the interior gas piping system comes from NFPA 54, the Fuel Gas Code. The gas industry is well represented on the code making panels for their own code. If they don't want the gas piping to be bonded, they have to first remove the rule from their code.
Charlie,
The wording in the '99 code is a direct quote from the Fuel Gas Code. Note the superscript "x" in front of 250-104(B) in the '99 code. I don't see how that is CMP 5's mistake, when they are only using the requirements from another NFPA code.
Don
charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
Re: Gas pipe bonding
Yes Don, I know is was a direct quote. However, take a look at the following.
The following reply to an e-mail I sent to John Beck, former Chairman of CMP-4.
"Just so you know....the NFPA-54 (National Fuel Gas Code) Committee has issued a Formal Interpretation of the NFPA-54, 3.14(a) which pertains to NEC 250-104 and electrical bonding of gas pipe. I attended the NFPA-54 Meeting in San Antonio, Texas (end of February) and was asked to speak on this issue. I did so and so did Ted Limoff of NFPA Staff.
The statement of issue and question asked were:
NEC 250-104(b) states: "Each aboveground portion of a gas piping system upstream of the equipment shutoff valve shall be electrically continuous and bonded to the grounding electrode system."
"Is it the intent of NFPA-54, 3.14 (a) and NEC 250-140(b) (metal gas piping), to consider this bonding requirement to be satisfied where a grounded gas appliance is attached to the metal gas piping system?"
The answer was: "Yes"
The intent expressed by the Committee is that when connected to grounded equipment (e.g. equipment connected to an equipment grounding conductor) the pipe is considered bonded.
I was asked to keep the NFPA-54 Committee appraised of this issue, informed if further clarifications were considered needed, and asked to kept them informed of Panel 5 Actions pending on Proposals 5-64 & 5-65 (removal of the phrase "likely to be energized") or which I intend to send in a Comment to Reject. I believe in the zeal of grounding and bonding, Panel 5 is, unfortunately, and unwittingly creating safety issues and concerns for systems regarding which they have limited exposure and knowledge.
John Beck
Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
Chairman CMP-4"
Even though it was a direct quote, it was contrary to the intent of the NFPA 54 technical committee and was changed in the following Code cycle.
Yes Don, I know is was a direct quote. However, take a look at the following.
The following reply to an e-mail I sent to John Beck, former Chairman of CMP-4.
"Just so you know....the NFPA-54 (National Fuel Gas Code) Committee has issued a Formal Interpretation of the NFPA-54, 3.14(a) which pertains to NEC 250-104 and electrical bonding of gas pipe. I attended the NFPA-54 Meeting in San Antonio, Texas (end of February) and was asked to speak on this issue. I did so and so did Ted Limoff of NFPA Staff.
The statement of issue and question asked were:
NEC 250-104(b) states: "Each aboveground portion of a gas piping system upstream of the equipment shutoff valve shall be electrically continuous and bonded to the grounding electrode system."
"Is it the intent of NFPA-54, 3.14 (a) and NEC 250-140(b) (metal gas piping), to consider this bonding requirement to be satisfied where a grounded gas appliance is attached to the metal gas piping system?"
The answer was: "Yes"
The intent expressed by the Committee is that when connected to grounded equipment (e.g. equipment connected to an equipment grounding conductor) the pipe is considered bonded.
I was asked to keep the NFPA-54 Committee appraised of this issue, informed if further clarifications were considered needed, and asked to kept them informed of Panel 5 Actions pending on Proposals 5-64 & 5-65 (removal of the phrase "likely to be energized") or which I intend to send in a Comment to Reject. I believe in the zeal of grounding and bonding, Panel 5 is, unfortunately, and unwittingly creating safety issues and concerns for systems regarding which they have limited exposure and knowledge.
John Beck
Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
Chairman CMP-4"
Even though it was a direct quote, it was contrary to the intent of the NFPA 54 technical committee and was changed in the following Code cycle.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
Re: Gas pipe bonding
Charlie,
Did they also change the wording in NFPA 54? Also how does the point of bonding change the safety of the system. I see no electrical difference, other than installation costs, between having the gas piping connected to the EGC or having the gas piping connected to the grounding electrode system.
Don
Charlie,
Did they also change the wording in NFPA 54? Also how does the point of bonding change the safety of the system. I see no electrical difference, other than installation costs, between having the gas piping connected to the EGC or having the gas piping connected to the grounding electrode system.
Don
charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
Re: Gas pipe bonding
I do not have access to NFPA 54 so I can not answer your first question.
Moving to the safety issue, in an EEI meeting, John Beck passed around some parts from the gas hookup that was pitted and leaking. He indicated there was a problem with some installations using a bonding jumper from the service equipment. I do not know anything more than that since that is out of my area of expertise.
I do not have access to NFPA 54 so I can not answer your first question.
Moving to the safety issue, in an EEI meeting, John Beck passed around some parts from the gas hookup that was pitted and leaking. He indicated there was a problem with some installations using a bonding jumper from the service equipment. I do not know anything more than that since that is out of my area of expertise.
ryan_618
Senior Member
- Location
- Salt Lake City, Utah
Re: Gas pipe bonding
It is my understanding that there is a non-conductive fitting on the gas piping at the meter location. I believe the NEC addresses the gas piping as a grounding electrode to prevent someone from attaching a GEC to the buried portion of the piping. If it is attachted to the above ground portion on the load side of the gas meter it would be impossible to make the piping an electrode because of this fitting.
Again, this is just what I've been told, but it makes sense to me.
It is my understanding that there is a non-conductive fitting on the gas piping at the meter location. I believe the NEC addresses the gas piping as a grounding electrode to prevent someone from attaching a GEC to the buried portion of the piping. If it is attachted to the above ground portion on the load side of the gas meter it would be impossible to make the piping an electrode because of this fitting.
Again, this is just what I've been told, but it makes sense to me.
Re: Gas pipe bonding
Gentlemen,
I have a current copy the NFGC-NFPA-44-2002 Edition.
Article 8.6.1 Electrical Connections:
Electrical connections between gas utilization equipment and the building wiring, including the grounding of the equipment, shall conform, to NFPA 70 NEC.
Article 8.6.4 Continuous Power:
All gas utilization equipment using electrical controls shall have the controls connected into a permanently live electric circuit --that is, one that is not controlled by a light switch. Central heating equipment shall be provided with a separate electrical circuit.
The following commentary was taken from the NFGC NFPA-54-2002 Handbook:
"The National Electrical Code requires a separate electrical circuit and over current protection for central heating equipment, as well as a means for disconnecting the power source at or within sight from the appliance. This separate circuit also can include circulating water pumps, valves, humidifiers, electronic air cleaners, and other accessories normally associated with the equipment. Certain appliances and installations also are permitted to be connected with a flexible cord that has a grounding-type attachment plug. The grounding-type attachment plug also serves as a disconnecting means for future service & maintenance. In subsection 8.6.4, note the phrase "a permanently live electrical circuit --that is, one that is not controlled by a light switch." This requirement thus prohibits "emergency shutoff" switches. In areas where oil is a common source of heating fuel, wall switches with red cover plates marked "Oil Burner Emergency Switch" are installed in buildings heated by fuel oil, as required by NFPA-31, Standard for the Installation of Oil-Burning Equipment, to stop the flow of oil to the burner. When converting an oil furnace or boiler to gas, the emergency switch must be removed. Emergency switches must not be installed when installing a new gas boiler. The emergency shutoff switch provides safety for oil-fired heating equipment, because failure of the boiler or furnace to shut off can prevent the oil pump from shutting off, thereby filling the equipment and surrounding area with oil. An oil pool fire is possibile. With gas-fuelded equipment, the emergency shutoff valve required in subsection 6.9.3 provides equivalent safety.
I don't know about you guys, but I always install an emergency shutoff switch with the appropriate indicating cover plate. I guess this is a voilation? Maybe the arcing of a shutoff switch could ignite a gas mixture, but then again, most people will turn on the basement light first. Additionally, I have numerous rooftop Gas Fired HVAC units that all have disconnects, how can this be a violation. The emergency switch does not interrupt or break the grounding & bonding. This subject definitely needs some clarification
[ April 19, 2004, 01:39 PM: Message edited by: sbe ]
Gentlemen,
I have a current copy the NFGC-NFPA-44-2002 Edition.
Article 8.6.1 Electrical Connections:
Electrical connections between gas utilization equipment and the building wiring, including the grounding of the equipment, shall conform, to NFPA 70 NEC.
Article 8.6.4 Continuous Power:
All gas utilization equipment using electrical controls shall have the controls connected into a permanently live electric circuit --that is, one that is not controlled by a light switch. Central heating equipment shall be provided with a separate electrical circuit.
The following commentary was taken from the NFGC NFPA-54-2002 Handbook:
"The National Electrical Code requires a separate electrical circuit and over current protection for central heating equipment, as well as a means for disconnecting the power source at or within sight from the appliance. This separate circuit also can include circulating water pumps, valves, humidifiers, electronic air cleaners, and other accessories normally associated with the equipment. Certain appliances and installations also are permitted to be connected with a flexible cord that has a grounding-type attachment plug. The grounding-type attachment plug also serves as a disconnecting means for future service & maintenance. In subsection 8.6.4, note the phrase "a permanently live electrical circuit --that is, one that is not controlled by a light switch." This requirement thus prohibits "emergency shutoff" switches. In areas where oil is a common source of heating fuel, wall switches with red cover plates marked "Oil Burner Emergency Switch" are installed in buildings heated by fuel oil, as required by NFPA-31, Standard for the Installation of Oil-Burning Equipment, to stop the flow of oil to the burner. When converting an oil furnace or boiler to gas, the emergency switch must be removed. Emergency switches must not be installed when installing a new gas boiler. The emergency shutoff switch provides safety for oil-fired heating equipment, because failure of the boiler or furnace to shut off can prevent the oil pump from shutting off, thereby filling the equipment and surrounding area with oil. An oil pool fire is possibile. With gas-fuelded equipment, the emergency shutoff valve required in subsection 6.9.3 provides equivalent safety.
I don't know about you guys, but I always install an emergency shutoff switch with the appropriate indicating cover plate. I guess this is a voilation? Maybe the arcing of a shutoff switch could ignite a gas mixture, but then again, most people will turn on the basement light first. Additionally, I have numerous rooftop Gas Fired HVAC units that all have disconnects, how can this be a violation. The emergency switch does not interrupt or break the grounding & bonding. This subject definitely needs some clarification
[ April 19, 2004, 01:39 PM: Message edited by: sbe ]
Re: Gas pipe bonding
The fitting you are referring to is a "dielectric union"Originally posted by ryan_618:
It is my understanding that there is a non-conductive fitting on the gas piping at the meter location. I believe the NEC addresses the gas piping as a grounding electrode to prevent someone from attaching a GEC to the buried portion of the piping. If it is attachted to the above ground portion on the load side of the gas meter it would be impossible to make the piping an electrode because of this fitting.
Again, this is just what I've been told, but it makes sense to me.
Re: Gas pipe bonding
I know this argument has been had many times, but I still have problems with using the grounding tang of an appliance cord as an equipment bonding jumper.
My logic is this: the definition of bonding (110-A in 99NEC)(99 NEC used throughout as 99 still in effect many places) is a "permanent connection".
That internal gas piping is to be bonded is basic (250-2 C).
250-8 requires a listed connection for bonding. I do not know of any UL listing for using a cord and plug for the egc. I do not know of any duplex receptacle listed for grounding tang socket as egc,nor any cord manufactured that lists its cord plug grounding tang as egc. a listed connector is required.
And according to 250-102 e, egc's shall comply (SHALL) with 250-119 and 250-148. 250-148 states "The arrangement of grounding connections shall be such that the disconnection or the removal of a receptacle, fixture or other device fed from the box will not interfere with or interrupt the grounding continuity." The one listed exception has nothing to do with this topic. No other exceptions are limited.
This is the more stringent letter of the code, and i was taught that the more stringent applies when there is a conflict.
On a separate note about this topic, several types of gas appliances used in residences do not use electricity. Does that mean that the NEC's requirement for bonding is voided. I thinknot. Water heaters use gas and the water pipe inlet/outlet is required to be bonded, but not the gas??? I see many commercial stoves in high end kitchens, and many like Wolf stoves use no electricity. Does that mean the NEC's req. is voided?
There are two moderators here, how about some basics
I thought the phrase "likely to be energized" was a giveaway to the CSST industry, as their piping is almost impossible to bond correctly.
soon to be educated, paul
hi Ryan (paulse)
I know this argument has been had many times, but I still have problems with using the grounding tang of an appliance cord as an equipment bonding jumper.
My logic is this: the definition of bonding (110-A in 99NEC)(99 NEC used throughout as 99 still in effect many places) is a "permanent connection".
That internal gas piping is to be bonded is basic (250-2 C).
250-8 requires a listed connection for bonding. I do not know of any UL listing for using a cord and plug for the egc. I do not know of any duplex receptacle listed for grounding tang socket as egc,nor any cord manufactured that lists its cord plug grounding tang as egc. a listed connector is required.
And according to 250-102 e, egc's shall comply (SHALL) with 250-119 and 250-148. 250-148 states "The arrangement of grounding connections shall be such that the disconnection or the removal of a receptacle, fixture or other device fed from the box will not interfere with or interrupt the grounding continuity." The one listed exception has nothing to do with this topic. No other exceptions are limited.
This is the more stringent letter of the code, and i was taught that the more stringent applies when there is a conflict.
On a separate note about this topic, several types of gas appliances used in residences do not use electricity. Does that mean that the NEC's requirement for bonding is voided. I thinknot. Water heaters use gas and the water pipe inlet/outlet is required to be bonded, but not the gas??? I see many commercial stoves in high end kitchens, and many like Wolf stoves use no electricity. Does that mean the NEC's req. is voided?
There are two moderators here, how about some basics
I thought the phrase "likely to be energized" was a giveaway to the CSST industry, as their piping is almost impossible to bond correctly.
soon to be educated, paul
hi Ryan (paulse)
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: Gas pipe bonding
If a gas appliance that uses no electricity is the only item connected to the gas line what is the source likely to energize the gas line?
If a gas appliance that uses no electricity is the only item connected to the gas line what is the source likely to energize the gas line?
Seems straight forward to me, what am I missing?
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: Gas pipe bonding
What does that mean?
charlie
Senior Member
- Location
- Indianapolis
Re: Gas pipe bonding
Bob, I am guessing that moderators are more intelligent and know more than everyone else . . . HMMM . . . I don't think so! We are here to moderate if things start getting out of hand. We also have some expertise in different areas so we jump into a thread to help out. I generally stay out of the conversations unless I feel like I have something pertinent to add.
Bob, I am guessing that moderators are more intelligent and know more than everyone else . . . HMMM . . . I don't think so! We are here to moderate if things start getting out of hand. We also have some expertise in different areas so we jump into a thread to help out. I generally stay out of the conversations unless I feel like I have something pertinent to add.
- Location
- Massachusetts
Re: Gas pipe bonding
Charlie I am glad you knew what I was asking.
Charlie I am glad you knew what I was asking.
Re: Gas pipe bonding
Charlie: i was pointing much of my argument at what you had mentioned earlier in this post. I meant it as no slight to the intelligence or clear headedness of other contributors. you and the other moderator were talking about the origin and changes relating to this.
I am still unclear how those who read that the allowance for the circuit energizing the pipe to use its ground (and stretching the interp to allow the grounding tang and receptacle slot) to bond the piping system get around the basic definitions and strictures of bonding as I mentioned in my post, namely permanence and continuance of bond with removal of plug, as well as listed components.
paul
Charlie: i was pointing much of my argument at what you had mentioned earlier in this post. I meant it as no slight to the intelligence or clear headedness of other contributors. you and the other moderator were talking about the origin and changes relating to this.
I am still unclear how those who read that the allowance for the circuit energizing the pipe to use its ground (and stretching the interp to allow the grounding tang and receptacle slot) to bond the piping system get around the basic definitions and strictures of bonding as I mentioned in my post, namely permanence and continuance of bond with removal of plug, as well as listed components.
paul
electricmanscott
Senior Member
- Location
- Boston, MA
Re: Gas pipe bonding
Once again Bob you are the voice of reason. I can't believe how many posts this has gone and how many people, inspectors too, get it wrong.
- Status