MENU
Florida Chapter Officers
BOD Chairman
Dan Prater
President
Ted Licitra
1st Vice President
Mark Deegan
2nd Vice President
Richard Wheelus
3rd Vice President
Vince Dellacroce
Chaplain
James Douglas
Secretary
Joe DuPriest
Treasurer
Eric L Wasser
Parliamentarian
Tim Wright
Who's Online
0 registered (), 4 Guests and 16 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
ddasa, mcfs509, Spike, dsf, Christoper
519 Registered Users
Top Posters (30 Days)
Nick Sasso 5
Bryan Holland 5
Heinz R. 2
TerryR 1
Mike Timpanaro 1
Google Search
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#8072 - 02/17/11 07:33 AM 250.104
Paul J Cameron Offline
Mechanic Member
***

Registered: 11/04/03
Posts: 412
Loc: Pasco County Florida
Does this metal water piping system require bonding per 250.104?
Notice the rubber vibration sections between incoming and outgoing sections through the motors. Is a bonding jumper required here?
Here is an explanation from an engineer on why this does not need to be bonded:
Quote:
My thoughts are as follows :



1) I believe the intention of 250.104 (A) is to provide for the bonding of the cold and/or hot water piping systems within a building. I believe the commentary text contained in the 2008 handbook (following 250.104 (A) (1)) confirms this.



As I mentioned previously, the inspector raised several bonding issues. I think it is important to point out that I agreed with a portion of the inspector’s concerns and with that in mind, the contractor was asked to go back and bond portions of the domestic water piping system in order to satisfy 250.104.



2) I believe that the distribution piping in question would fall under 250.104 (B) – Other Metal Piping. With this being said (and again, I find the commentary text very helpful here) the other metal piping would not become energized because we have an electrical installation (disconnect, conduit, motor, etc) which is grounded and bonded (per NEC) to prevent the distribution piping from becoming accidentally energized




Attachments
HPIM1876-Revised.JPG (18 downloads)

_________________________
Paul Cameron
Chief Electrical Inspector
Pasco County
Past President IAEI Suncoast



Top
#8073 - 02/17/11 08:41 AM Re: 250.104 [Re: Paul J Cameron]
Nick Sasso Offline

Post-A-Holic Member
****

Registered: 11/08/01
Posts: 1451
Loc: West Palm Beach
So his point being that you don't have to bond the piping because the motor is grounded? I don't get it.
_________________________

Top
#8074 - 02/17/11 12:39 PM Re: 250.104 [Re: Paul J Cameron]
gfretwell
Unregistered


Can he demonstrate that the piping was bonded to the EGC of the circuit likely to energize it?

Top
#8079 - 02/22/11 06:05 PM Re: 250.104 [Re: Paul J Cameron]
Bryan Holland Offline

Secretary
*****

Registered: 10/05/04
Posts: 1622
Loc: City of North Port
I believe it is up to the AHJ and/or their representative to determine what is effectively bonded and what means or code section is to be used to make that bond AND not the design professional overseeing the project.

Instead, the design professional should be detailing the means to make the correction and requested bond.

_________________________
Bryan P. Holland, MCP

Top



Active Topics
May Meeting Minutes
by Bryan Holland
05/17/12 02:05 PM
May Meeting Announcement
by Bryan Holland
05/08/12 07:58 AM
Visual Alarms
by Nick Sasso
05/02/12 03:55 PM
Nonmetallic Extensions
by Nick Sasso
04/25/12 03:33 PM
Selective Coordination of Circuit Breakers
by Heinz R.
04/24/12 05:03 PM
May
M Tu W Th F Sa Su
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
Featured Member
JBD
JBD
Registered: 03/20/10
Posts: 0
Forum Stats
519 Members
29 Forums
1892 Topics
8569 Posts

Max Online: 53 @ 03/30/12 04:16 PM
Uploaded Pictures
Can You Spot The Electrical Violation?
1948 Signalite Fuse
Portable Generator Grounding
2011 Florida Gulf Coast Division - Seminar
Knob and tube in industrial application
1920's Duplex Radio Outlet
Random Gallery Image