# CSST:  Gas Supplier   vs.  The Manufacturer



## globe trekker (Mar 22, 2011)

I recently finaled out two "new" homes with CSST installed in both of them.

The builder told me that the homeowner did not want the bonding

requirements on their gas pipe.  O.K., fine, that's their privilege to

remove it.  It WAS installed when I performed the Final Inspection!

On this most recent Residential Final Inspection, the same builder

told me that the gas company would not release the meter for activation

while the bonding clamp & EGC were attached to the hard pipe gas

line, downstream of their meter.   The gas company even tagged the

meter with a "Do Not Turn On" sign.

*QUESTION #1:*  Who has jurisdiction?

*QUESTION #2:* Have any of you run in to this with a gas company?

This particular brand of CSST is Wardflex.

Thanks for any input!   

.


----------



## TimNY (Mar 22, 2011)

Bonding is required by the manufacturer's instructions.  In NY it is required by the Residential Code as well (ymmv).

Does the supplier give any reasoning for the prohibition?

I wouldn't feel comfortable ignoring installation instructions because the supplier "said so".

If it is really that much of a problem, CSST should not be permitted for use with street gas.  The owner could repipe in steel or get bottled gas.

What does the manufacturer say about not bonding the CSST?  Will they even consider it?


----------



## Jobsaver (Mar 22, 2011)

This has not been a problem in my ahj.

You have done your job properly, and should continue in like manner on future installations. I do believe it is in the gas company's prerogative to choose under what conditions they will supply gas.

Perhaps, as a courtesy, you might submit, in form letter format, to the proper authority at the gas company,  (preferably by email or fax w/confirmation), the relevant manufacturer's installation instructions along with the text for relevant code sections. Ask your clerical staff to fax the letter each time a gas inspection is called into the gas company, and have them copy the building file.


----------



## GHRoberts (Mar 22, 2011)

I would suggest that you change your code to comply with the gas company. (The alternative has been mentioned above.)

It is important to be consistent. Your office and the gas company need to agree with what is going to be done. No need either side to say they are right or wrong. Only that they will change their requirement.


----------



## fatboy (Mar 22, 2011)

The gas piping system will be bonded to some extent anyway, via the EGC connection on the furnace/air handler.


----------



## Jobsaver (Mar 22, 2011)

The closest circumstance we have involves the installation of copper for gas. The code allows it, but the gas purveyor here will not hook up to it. We cannot "change the code", but we do tell people the situation. I have never seen anyone continue in an installation knowing the circumstances.

We have other similar exclusions by certain of our electric utility companies. One of three will not accept "ring-type" meters. A different one out of the three electric utilities in our area will not accept combo service entrance panel/meter sockets where the feed is underground, (because their workmen do not like the tight quarters when making the hook-up).

We let people know. It mostly works out.

Here is some good practical advice for anyone beginning any form of construction in an ahj they are unfamiliar with . . . call city hall first . . . they will actually know the local nuances about the area.


----------



## permitguy (Mar 22, 2011)

#1 - You have jurisdiction over code-related issues, they have jurisdiction over providing gas to the home.

#2 - We had the same problem in my last jurisdiction several years ago.  It took several meetings with the gas company to get it resolved, and we never made them completely comfortable.  They had several misconceptions about the possibility that the bonding jumper could ignite the gas.  In the end, I think they settled for a letter that showed we were driving the requirement so they would be off the hook when the big explosion occurred.  Hasn't happened yet.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Mar 22, 2011)

> I would suggest that you change your code to comply with the gas company.


I would not go that route since the CSST bonding requirement is a result of a class action lawsuit. I like permitguy's #2 response I would add maybe have an electrical engineer explain the reason behind the requirement and answer the misconceptions the gas supplier may have.

Our local gas company will not turn the gas on without the bond wire.


----------



## Daddy-0- (Mar 23, 2011)

Have them bond it just inside the foundation wall. The code requires bonding "at the point of entry." this could be inside or outside in my opinion. I think that the gas company loses it's authority after the meter, but they don't have to supply the gas either. After the meter it is not "their gas pipe" anymore. Stick to your guns on this one.


----------



## Mark K (Mar 23, 2011)

In California public utilities are regulated by the PUC and the building code does not apply.  You need to understand at what point their control ends and yours begins.

I believe that part of the concern is that if metalic gas pipes are connected to the building that this can result in small electrical currents in the gas piping which will lead to corrosion.  I believe that they have locally installed plastic pipes between the gas mains and the meter thus solving the problem.


----------



## GHRoberts (Mar 24, 2011)

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> We cannot "change the code", but we do tell people the situation.


I always thought that the AHJ adjusted the national code to suit his local conditions and gave that adjusted national code to those who vote to make it law. You can and do change the code.

As Mark K points out you need to know where your jurisdiction ends.


----------



## Jobsaver (Mar 24, 2011)

GHRoberts said:
			
		

> I always thought that the AHJ adjusted the national code to suit his local conditions and gave that adjusted national code to those who vote to make it law. You can and do change the code.As Mark K points out you need to know where your jurisdiction ends.


Yes. We can get involved in the code revision process on both the national and state level. Also, at least in Arkansas, we can, as a municipality, add more restrictive requirements to the state adopted code.

Not sure what you mean about knowing where my jurisdiction ends?


----------



## Mark K (Mar 24, 2011)

There are some states where the local jurisdiction is constrained as to the local amendments if any that they are allowed to make.

In the case of California your jurisdiction would end where the State PUC starts regulating the public utility.


----------



## GHRoberts (Mar 24, 2011)

I guess that Mark K answered the question that was put to me.

---

I am amazed at how many people try to regulate the gas and electric companies by local ordinance.


----------



## permitguy (Mar 24, 2011)

Enforcing a nationally recognized code requirement (not to mention manufacturer's installation guidelines and listings) is not the same as trying to regulate gas companies by local ordinance.  State PUCs are not generally interested in matters related to individual dwellings.  If the gas companies don't want to provide service, that is their prerogative.  They should simply deny service to any home with CSST instead of insisting on an improper installation.

Of course, they don't realize that iron pipe has the same electrical potential imposed on it by simply connecting it to a furnace, but ignorance is bliss . . .


----------



## globe trekker (Mar 24, 2011)

Thanks to you all for your input!  I am enjoying the discussion and associated viewpoints.

Keep `em coming!

An update to this original question...  I had one local gas supplier [ the one in question  ],

to call me today to set up a meeting for next week.   The caller asked me which CSST

manufacturers were requiring this.  I told him "All of them!"  Short silence...

That's when he suggested that we get together for a pow wow next week.

Alrighty then...  Keep the comments and viewpoints coming in.  Someone else

out there may have the same scenario and is also looking for help / guidance.

.


----------



## GHRoberts (Mar 25, 2011)

permitguy said:
			
		

> Enforcing a nationally recognized code requirement (not to mention manufacturer's installation guidelines and listings) is not the same as trying to regulate gas companies by local ordinance.  State PUCs are not generally interested in matters related to individual dwellings.  If the gas companies don't want to provide service, that is their prerogative.  They should simply deny service to any home with CSST instead of insisting on an improper installation.Of course, they don't realize that iron pipe has the same electrical potential imposed on it by simply connecting it to a furnace, but ignorance is bliss . . .


You miss the point. The bond is between equipment owned by the gas company (regulated by the state PUC) and the homeowner's equipment. The building code is allowed to regulate the homeowner's equipment. It is not allowed to regulate the gas company's equipment.

If the CSST piping needs to be bonded to something, the gas company has the right to say it will not be bonded to the gas company's equipment. I disagree with the gas company's position, but it is their position and they have the right to that position.

As a professional I would find a solution.

---

I have both phone and electric service at my house. Both services have notices affixed to them as to what I can do to their equipment. I expect most utilities provide such notices.


----------



## jar546 (Mar 25, 2011)

We have a new member from Gastite.  Wonder if he would be willing to add some input.


----------



## jar546 (Mar 25, 2011)

Once the gas leaves the meter, it is no longer the gas company's.  If they want to be isolated, they can always ad and insulated bushing to isolate themselves.


----------



## permitguy (Mar 25, 2011)

> The bond is between equipment owned by the gas company (regulated by the state PUC) and the homeowner's equipment.


No, it isn't.  The bond is between equipment owned solely by the homeowner (the gas piping inside the home and some element of the EGC inside the home).


----------



## GHRoberts (Mar 25, 2011)

permitguy said:
			
		

> No, it isn't.  The bond is between equipment owned solely by the homeowner (the gas piping inside the home and some element of the EGC inside the home).


Then I misunderstood the situation.


----------

