wwhitney
Senior Member
- Location
- Berkeley, CA
- Occupation
- Retired
(2020) 310.3(D) says that conductors not permitted elsewhere in the Code to be covered or bare shall be insulated.
250.140 is about bonding the frame of a clothes dryer or range to the EGC, but the exception allows bonding to the grounded conductor for existing installations without an EGC, including the case of an SE-type cable originating at the service entrance with a bare, covered grounded conductor.
But where is that bare, covered grounded conductor for the branch circuit itself allowed? Is it just implicit in the wording of 250.140 Exception, or is it more explicit elsewhere?
And if only implicit, does that mean that if you don't bond the frame of the clothes dryer or range to the grounded conductor, because you've run a separate EGC per 250.130(C), the bare, covered grounded conductor is no longer allowed per 310.3(D)? Which would mean it's pointless to do a 250.130(C) EGC in such a case, you'd need to run a new 3 conductor plus ground wiring method.
Cheers, Wayne
250.140 is about bonding the frame of a clothes dryer or range to the EGC, but the exception allows bonding to the grounded conductor for existing installations without an EGC, including the case of an SE-type cable originating at the service entrance with a bare, covered grounded conductor.
But where is that bare, covered grounded conductor for the branch circuit itself allowed? Is it just implicit in the wording of 250.140 Exception, or is it more explicit elsewhere?
And if only implicit, does that mean that if you don't bond the frame of the clothes dryer or range to the grounded conductor, because you've run a separate EGC per 250.130(C), the bare, covered grounded conductor is no longer allowed per 310.3(D)? Which would mean it's pointless to do a 250.130(C) EGC in such a case, you'd need to run a new 3 conductor plus ground wiring method.
Cheers, Wayne