Gas pipe bonding

[iwire]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Paul you can always put in a permanent bond if you would like when doing your own work, but you certainly can not force other electricians to when you do your inspections.

I was taught that the more stringent applies when there is a conflict.

The more stringent relevant code.

For this bond to become disconnected that would mean the power is also disconnected, now nothing is likely to energize the gas line.

Bob


Thanks Scott.

 

[brentp]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

So the grd prong of an appliance cord is a "bonding jumper"? The definition of bonding is "the PERMANENT joining of metallic parts...".

I also read "may become energized" in 250.104(B), which includes all metal parts of any system. Example...the conduit is the egc, plumber comes in and breaks a coupling nicking a 'hot' wire(your pipe was in the way) which interrupts the egc. The 'hot' wire lands across his gas pipe which is not properly bonded. The gas pipe becomes energized but does not short. Do we really want a short circuit to occur across this gas line?

 

[iwire]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

So I have to ask Paul and brentp.

What do you think these lines in the code mean?

Part of 250.104(B)

The equipment grounding conductor for the circuit that may energize the piping shall be permitted to serve as the bonding means.

It is clear as day, and has been modified over time to refine it.

[ April 20, 2004, 07:31 PM: Message edited by: iwire ]

 

[iwire]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Guys Charlie is not one to blow his own horn, but trust me, he is in a unique position to have some info on this subject.

Originally posted by charlie:
The bonding is done with the circuit that feeds the gas appliance. The bonding is done when the appliance is grounded and nothing else needs to be done . . . period. This is from an official interpretation from NFPA 54. This is also the intent of CMP-5.

This should have been the end of this thread long ago.

 

[brentp]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

iwire,

Again, I'm reading "may become energized". My scenario describes where ANY circuit 'in the area' MAY energize a gas line, same as a water line. With all due respect, where do you disagree?

 

[ryan_618]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Originally posted by brentp:
iwire,

.... same as a water line. With all due respect, where do you disagree?

Where so you read the term "likely to become energized", or even "may become energized" in the water pipe section [250.104(A)]?

 

[iwire]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Originally posted by brentp:
I'm reading "may become energized". My scenario describes where ANY circuit 'in the area' MAY energize a gas line, same as a water line. With all due respect, where do you disagree?

I respectfully disagree with you adding words that are not in the code.

ANY circuit 'in the area'

So buy that interpretation you would have to size the bonding jumper by 250.66 because the service entrance conductors might energize the gas line.

I am not saying you can not bond it beyond the code only showing what is required by code.

Bob

 

[a.wayne3@verizon.net]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

OK ,I`ll throw a wrench in these gears,Around here the under ground gas is run in plastic piping from point of connection to the egc so where does it become an EGC. I`ts isolated.

 

[brentp]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Ryan'

I got "may become energized" from 250.104(B). I never said "likely to become energized" or quoted 250.104(A). Although I did refer to 250.104(A) indirectly, what's the difference between metal water pipe & any other metal pipe system bonding?

Don't forget I'm an electrician and am not just trying to be argumentative.

 

[websparky]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Don't both of these say the same thing?

2002 NFPA 54 NFGC
6.13 Electrical Bonding and Grounding.
6.13.1 Each aboveground portion of a gas piping system that is likely to become energized shall be electrically continuous and bonded to an effective ground-fault current path. Gas piping shall be considered to be bonded when it is connected to gas utilization equipment that is connected to the equipment grounding conductor of the circuit supplying that equipment.

2002 NEC
250.104 Bonding of Piping Systems and Exposed Structural Steel.(B) Other Metal Piping. Where installed in or attached to a building or structure, metal piping system(s), including gas piping, that may become energized shall be bonded to the service equipment enclosure, the grounded conductor at the service, the grounding electrode conductor where of sufficient size, or to the one or more grounding electrodes used. The bonding jumper(s) shall be sized in accordance with 250.122 using the rating of the circuit that may energize the piping system(s). The equipment grounding conductor for the circuit that may energize the piping shall be permitted to serve as the bonding means. The points of attachment of the bonding jumper(s) shall be accessible.

The only difference with metal water piping is when it qualifies as a grounding electrode.

 

[brentp]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

OK iwire,

I guess I'll be a little argumentative.

BTW, is a grd prong on an attachment cord a bonding jumper?

 

[iwire]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Originally posted by brentp:
what's the difference between metal water pipe & any other metal pipe system bonding?

Not much except as Dave has pointed out water piping may be a grounding electrode and a gas pipe is not supposed to be one, even though it ends up as one through the bonding.

Electrician and argumentative go together like bread and butter.

 

[iwire]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Originally posted by brentp:
BTW, is a grd prong on an attachment cord a bonding jumper?

Next time your using a metal cased drill you had better hope so.

It is sized for the circuit that may energize the drill, now if you drill a PVC conduit with 100 amp conductors inside your a goner along with that light weight cord.

But do we call that likely?

 

[brentp]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

I disagree Dave,

250.104(A) calls for a bond to the interior metal water pipe system. Why? This rule has nothing to do with the grding electrode conductor.

 

[iwire]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

That is true but notice that section also requires the use of 250.66 instead of 250.122.

It almost seems the code wants the water pipe ready to be a grounding electrode even if it is not one.

Perhaps they see a possibility of a plastic water main being changed to a metal one without an electrician around.

I am just guessing now though.

 

[brentp]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

iwire,

Read my posts again.

 

[iwire]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Brent can you be a little more specific what did I miss?

 

[electricmanscott]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Still going... :roll: I can't even follow what the issue is here.

 

[websparky]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Brent,

My post was in reference to "Gas piping shall be considered to be bonded", not GEC.

 

[brentp]

Re: Gas pipe bonding

Sorry to bring this to the top again, but I have no closure to this topic.

p.s. - iwire, I reread my posts and I know where you got confused. I was all over the place. I hope I have made things a little more clear.