# Bonding the Hot and Cold of a Water Heater



## jar546

We all know that this is a touchy subject.  That is why I would like to discuss it here.  There are a lot of viewpoints on this and I have come across many electricians and inspectors that differ in opinions on this subject.

There is no need to comment that you only see PEX these days, we are talking about copper piping systems, key word _systems _and the need for the _system_ to be bonded.

My personal thought is that if there is a metal mixing valve installed in the system (crimped/soldered) then there is no need for a bond across the hot and cold.  Most, if not all water heaters come with dielectric fittings making bonding across the hot and cold a requirement when the water piping system is broken into two areas, hot and cold.

Will you find a code section that tells you to specifically bond the hot and cold?  No there is not.  There is a requirement, however to bond the _system_.

Some don't understand, some do and some just do because it was always done that way.  What is your opinion on this subject?  Do you require it in your town and why / why not?


----------



## fatboy

We require it, based on your premise. In our thinking, (my senior electrical inspector) all piping must be bonded. And you can not depend on a valve downstream to accomplish that.


----------



## jwelectric

Where is the requirement found to bond metal water pipes in or on a building? A- 250.104

How many ends are there to a bonding conductor? A- two

Where is the requirement for this bonding jumper required to end? A- 250.104(A) (last sentence) The points of attachment of the bonding jumper(s) shall be accessible.

Now that the point of attachment to the pipe has been established where is the other end of this conductor “required” to land? A- 250.104(A) (1) *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.

If one is going to call the metal piping of a building two different systems such as hot and cold then each system is required to be bonded to one of the four places outlined in the section that requires the bonding. From one pipe to another pipe is not outlined in that section.

Also if we are going to be connecting these pipes to a kitchen sink then we must follow the plumbing codes which only allows for one piping system to be connected to this mixing valve and it will be potable water. One system called potable water not two systems called potable cold and potable hot.

If we think that the two pipes need bonding across a water heater then explain what would be the requirement should a short repair to the copper pipe be made with nonmetallic pipe? This is allowed by the plumbing code by the way.

Well let’s see what the Code Making Panel has to say about this repair.

5-235 Log #1834 NEC-P05 Final Action: Reject

(250.104(A)(1))

____________________________________________________________

Submitter: Mark T. Rochon, Mark J. Rochon Master Electrician

Recommendation: Revise as follows:

General Combination metal water piping system(s) separated by nonmetallic water piping system(s) where may become energized installed in or attached to a building or structure shall be bonded to the service equipment enclosure, the grounded conductor at the service, the grounding electrode conductor where of sufficient size, or the one or more grounding electrodes used.

Substantiation: Nonmetallic water piping systems are being inserted between our metal water piping system and today’s code is not recognizing these changes.

Panel Meeting Action: Reject

Panel Statement: The conditions indicated in the substantiation are already covered by 250.104(B) where there is not a complete metallic water piping system.

Number Eligible to Vote: 15

Ballot Results: Affirmative: 15

Haint going to do it for anyone unless they can show an amendment adopted by their jurisdiction in writing making it a requirement.


----------



## jwelectric

I just noticed that the plumber used Teflon tape when he installed my hose bib on the outside of my home which has copper pipes. Do I need to bond this hose bib with a #2 copper conductor as I have a 300 amp service? Could someone tell me just how to accomplish this?


----------



## Dennis

Let me get this straight.  If you have an old water heater-mine is 5 years old and does not have dielectric fittings- then you require the bonding anyway.  Is that correct?

Around here it has never been enforced to bond the hot water pipes.  I think it makes good sense to bond across from the cold to the hot since those pipes do go into areas of the home where one could get hurt if they get energized.  I don't see a need with the old water heaters but if in fact the new units are coming with dielectric fittings then it would seem appropriate to do so.


----------



## jar546

Dennis said:
			
		

> Let me get this straight.  If you have an old water heater-mine is 5 years old and does not have dielectric fittings- then you require the bonding anyway.  Is that correct?Around here it has never been enforced to bond the hot water pipes.  I think it makes good sense to bond across from the cold to the hot since those pipes do go into areas of the home where one could get hurt if they get energized.  I don't see a need with the old water heaters but if in fact the new units are coming with dielectric fittings then it would seem appropriate to do so.


Who are you asking?


----------



## Dennis

Anybody, but your post seem to suggest that


----------



## jar546

Dennis said:
			
		

> Anybody, but your post seem to suggest that


Then I will answer to clarify my OP.

IF you had dielectric fittings on your water heater AND you lacked any metallic mixing valve such as for a shower, then I would require a bond at some point between the hot and cold.  There have been times where the hot and cold pipes ran right next to each other in a location other than the water heater and I found that bonding to be acceptable.

I rarely see the lack of a mixing valve so this is usually never an issue.

What I do see a lot, however is when a water treatment company comes in and puts their system in near the water main and uses all non metallic pipes at which point we have a problem with the 200' of pipe on the other side of the main water bond but that's another story.


----------



## ICE

We required a jumper for a few years and then stopped.

Some of us took it a step further and extended the jumper to the gas pipe.

I for one see the jumper, hot water and gas, as a good idea.


----------



## ICE

jar546 said:
			
		

> Then I will answer to clarify my OP.IF you had dielectric fittings on your water heater AND you lacked any metallic mixing valve such as for a shower, then I would require a bond at some point between the hot and cold.  There have been times where the hot and cold pipes ran right next to each other in a location other than the water heater and I found that bonding to be acceptable.
> 
> I rarely see the lack of a mixing valve so this is usually never an issue.
> 
> What I do see a lot, however is when a water treatment company comes in and puts their system in near the water main and uses all non metallic pipes at which point we have a problem with the 200' of pipe on the other side of the main water bond but that's another story.


Your big IF assumes that you are able to verify a mixing valve at each service upgrade inspection.  I would find that difficult.

My first thought is that the electrician would rather install a jumper.


----------



## Dennis

Why is there a dielectric fitting on the water heater?

The issue of plastic pipe being added causes many questions.  When this was brought up at the meeting in Raleigh, NC, with many members of the code making panel there, I asked at what point does the plastic not require a jumper.  I have seen inspectors make a contractor put a jumper to every copper pipe that was stubbed down into the crawl space when they remolded the house and added plastic thru the crawl area.  To me this was just wrong.

The problem is the code as written would exempt any copper from being bonded if it were not a complete system of metal pipe.  So if you add 2" of copper then theoretically no bond is needed as Mike would agree, I believe.  So for those who don't agree with that then at what point does it get ridiculous to bond around every piece of plastic?


----------



## jar546

Dennis, I completely understand where you are coming from.  Many systems are being broken up into sections of copper and plastic.  Some things that I have done in the past:

1) Entire system is  PEX but there is a large copper manifold about 36" long, fed by PEX from the water meter that distributes to the rest of the PEX installation.  In this case, I saw no reason to add bonding to that manifold.  The copper pipe coming in at the water service was sufficient for bonding.

2) Copper water service, then PEX for water conditioner then rest of house was copper.  In this case I thought it was prudent to bond from the water main to the cooper system on the other side of the conditioner.

I believe that jwelectric's issue is that the bonds should go back to the panel, not from pipe to pipe.  Am I correct JW?


----------



## ICE

> 250.104 Bonding of Piping Systems and Exposed Structural Steel.(A) Metal Water Piping. The metal water piping system shall be bonded as required in (A)(1), (A)(2), or (A)(3) of
> 
> this section. The bonding *jumper(s)* shall be installed in accordance with 250.64(A), (B), and (E). The points of
> 
> attachment of the bonding jumper(s) shall be accessible.
> 
> (1) General. Metal water piping *system(s)* installed in or attached to a building or structure 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 Table 250.66 except as permitted in 250.104(A)(2) and (A)(3).


Note that the words jumper and system are also plural.  Certainly this question has been addressed by a code making panel.  What was the outcome of that?

We allowed the jumper to be located at the laundry as well as the water heater.


----------



## jar546

I am at a loss for words for what I am seeing here.  Are you sure you are in California and not a 3rd world country?


----------



## ICE

jar546 said:
			
		

> I am at a loss for words for what I am seeing here.  Are you sure you are in California and not a 3rd world country?


SoCal has all types of areas just as does the rest of the country.  I only show the outlandish examples.  Shirley I can find similar examples anywhere in the USA.  I just happen to encounter a lot of it.


----------



## jwelectric

jar546 said:
			
		

> I believe that jwelectric's issue is that the bonds should go back to the panel, not from pipe to pipe.  Am I correct JW?


250.104 is clear on where the bonding is to take place. It mentions four places that the bonding is to take place and for the life of me I can't find hot to cold anywhere.

250.104 Bonding of Piping Systems and Exposed Structural Steel.  See related ROP

(A) Metal Water Piping. The metal water piping system shall be bonded as required in (A)(1), (A)(2), or (A)(3) of this section. The bonding jumper(s) shall be installed in accordance with 250.64(A), (B), and (E). The points of attachment of the bonding jumper(s) shall be accessible.

(1) General. Metal water piping system(s) installed in or attached to a building or structure *shall be bonded to*

1- the service equipment enclosure,

2- the grounded conductor at the service,

3- the grounding electrode conductor where of sufficient size,

4- or to the one or more grounding electrodes used.

The bonding jumper(s) shall be sized in accordance with Table 250.66 except as permitted in 250.104(A)(2) and (A)(3).

Anything less than this requirement is nothing more than a wish of someone who thinks something is good instead of something required.

The code making panel in their statement says anything that is not a "complete" metal piping system is to be bonded by 250.104(B) so should someone somehow think that it needs a jumper from one pipe to the other pipe is wrong.

The bonding of gas piping has never been allowed to hit a water pipe unless is was the part of the pipe that is underground or the first five feet inside leading to the underground portion of the system.

We can't enforce a picture we saw somewhere or something someone thinks is a good idea. We can only enforce what is written.


----------



## jar546

So does that mean that you have to run separate conductors to two ground rods?  When a jumper is installed across a water meter for example, does that mean that they should have run 2 wires back to the first disco for the service?

The bond between the hot and cold simply ensures that the metal waterpipe system is bonded to 1-4


----------



## jwelectric

jar546 said:
			
		

> So does that mean that you have to run separate conductors to two ground rods?  When a jumper is installed across a water meter for example, does that mean that they should have run 2 wires back to the first disco for the service?The bond between the hot and cold simply ensures that the metal waterpipe system is bonded to 1-4


 The requirement for bonding of grounding electrodes is found in Part III of Article 250 but the bonding of a metal piping system is found in Part V of Article 250.These are two very different types of bonding.

When we bond across a water meter that is within the first five feet of the metal pipe as it enters a building we are doing a Part III electrode bond and a Part V interior metal pipe bond.

Yes it would be permissible to run the 250.52(A)(1) and the 250.104(A)(1) with separate conductors just as it would be permissible to run a separate conductor to all 8 of the electrodes described in 250.52.

The requirement that cannot be found in the NEC is to install a bonding jumper between the hot and cold potable water pipes.

In the 1975 code cycle in 250-50 there was a requirement that any and all metal piping systems installed were to be made electrically continuous but this requirement was removed by the 1981 edition. The old habit of doing this is still around today.

Also in the ’75 edition a two prong receptacle could be replaced with a three prong receptacle and the EGC carried to the closest cold water pipe. The use of the hot water pipe was not allowed even though there was a requirement to make the piping system electrically continuous.

By the ’81 edition the code making panel realized that they had no control over the plumbing rules and this was abolished and the requirement was to land the EGC to the service at either the neutral or grounding electrode.

In today’s code there is no requirement to make and keep a metal water pipe electrically continuous. Even if there was a bond done at a water heater what is to stop a plumber from repairing the metal pipe with a nonmetallic repair just above the bonding? If this is done just what is the benefit of the bond?


----------



## jwelectric

The allowance to use the water pipe for the EGC in the ’75 cycle is in 210-7© Exception


----------



## jwelectric

As defined by the ICC what is a water heater?

WATER HEATER. Any heating appliance or equipment that heats potable water and supplies such water to the potable hot water distribution system.

Well then what is potable water?

POTABLE WATER. Water free from impurities present in amounts sufficient to cause disease or harmful physiological effects and conforming to the bacteriological and chemical quality requirements of the Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards or the regulations of the public health authority having jurisdiction.

So by the definition of potable water and water heater by the plumbing codes is there two different systems that need to be bonded by the NEC?

NO!

Then why all this uproar about bonding across a water heater?

Maybe it is because of the lack of knowledge of just what is required by the NEC and the (s) found at the end of word “system”

 Just how many different water systems are there in a building?

At least two.

GRAY WATER. Waste discharged from lavatories, bathtubs, showers, clothes washers and laundry trays.

POTABLE WATER. Water free from impurities present in amounts sufficient to cause disease or harmful physiological effects and conforming to the bacteriological and chemical quality requirements of the Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards or the regulations of the public health authority having jurisdiction.

Can either or both be in metal pipes?

Yes!

Does this explain the (s)? It does to some of us like those on the CMP in the proposal I posted.

The requirement to bond a metal water pipe is the end of the conductor that lands on the pipe is to be accessible and the other end is to land at one of four places outlined in 250.104(A)(1).

Why do any bonding in the first place? Is it to establish an Effective Ground-Fault Current Path or a Ground-Fault Current Path? Is there a difference between the two?

Effective Ground-Fault Current Path. An intentionally constructed, low-impedance electrically conductive path designed and intended to carry current under ground-fault conditions from the point of a ground fault on a wiring system to the electrical supply source and that facilitates the operation of the overcurrent protective device or ground-fault detectors on high-impedance grounded systems.

Ground-Fault Current Path. An electrically conductive path from the point of a ground fault on a wiring system through normally non–current-carrying conductors, equipment, or the earth to the electrical supply source.

If it is for either of these two then it is clear that the bonding is to be carried to the electrical supply source not from one pipe to another pipe.

Comments.


----------



## jar546

It is about the break of continuity in the metallic piping system to ensure it is bonded.  Real simple.  It does not matter if it is a water heater, a boiler, water conditioning system or whatever.  If it breaks the continuity of the metallic piping system then a bond is needed.  Good luck with your CMP submission, I hope you get what you want.  Until then, on the 1 out of every 99 jobs that does not have a metallic shower mixing valve and a water heater that breaks the continuity by its design, we every electrician in our jurisdiction will be bonding the break in the line, no matter where it is.  Many actually do it whether it needs it or not.


----------



## jwelectric

In 300.10 electrical continuity is a requirement

In 300.12 mechanical continuity is a requirement

In 314.3 requires electrical continuity

In 250.53(D)(1) continuity to the electrode of the first five feet is required

What I can’t find anywhere in the NEC is a requirement to make the plumbing pipes electrically continuous or to make a gas pipe electrically continuous. Could you point out this requirement for me please?

The NEC addresses the installation of electrical equipment including raceways and cables. I can’t find anywhere in the NEC that requires any type of installation requirements for plumbing or gas pipes.

I do see the requirement to bond these items if they are a complete system but a complete system will have continuity all by itself without any bonding around anything. Where is the requirement to bond around any nonmetallic parts of a plumbing system? 250.53(D)(1) says we can bond the 250.104(A) to the 250.52(A)(1) if we so desire but there is not a requirement that the bond has to be here.

Help me to understand why someone would install a bonding jumper at a water heater.


----------



## RJJ

JW: You raise an interesting point!


----------



## RJJ

JW: 250.104 (1) Does not say "if we so desire" it says Shall!


----------



## jwelectric

RJJ said:
			
		

> JW: 250.104 (1) Does not say "if we so desire" it says Shall!


I was addressing 250.53(D)(1).If the electrician choses he can install a jumper from the underground metal water pipe to the interior metal water pipe or the electrician can install a bonding jumper from the interior metal water pipe to one of the other three places outlined in 250.104(A)(1)

1- the service equipment enclosure,

 2- the grounded conductor at the service,

 3- the grounding electrode conductor where of sufficient size

The Title of Section 250.104 “Bonding of Piping Systems and Exposed Structural Steel” and includes the rules for bonding these two systems. I cannot find a requirement in this section to make a metal pipe system electrically continuous by installing a bonding jumper or jumpers between insolated parts.

If we look at 250.52(A)(1) we see the mention of electrically continuity but not in 250.104. Wonder why they forgot to include this in the bonding requirements?

It used to be a requirement see the insert from 1975





If it was so important why was it removed from the NEC? Answer- Because the electrician has no control over the plumber nor does the electrical code enforcement official.

Article 602 of the ICC Plumbing code is the requirement for water supply to a building. It does not require a water heater to be installed.

Here is what the plumbing code says about fixtures in a building:

602.2 Potable water required.

Only potable water shall be supplied to plumbing fixtures that provide water for drinking, bathing or culinary purposes, or for the processing of food, medical or pharmaceutical products. Unless otherwise provided in this code, potable water shall be supplied to all plumbing fixtures.

It does not break it down into two different types of water but it is only one system and needs to be bonded in one place.

The Code Making Panel said in their statement;



> Panel Statement: The conditions indicated in the substantiation are already covered by 250.104(B) where there is not a complete metallic water piping system.


If it is possible to use a cheap millimeter and not have continuity from any point to any other point on a piping system then it is not a complete metallic system.


----------



## ICE

The NFPA 2008 NEC handbook has this to say regarding 250.104(A)(1):



> Where it cannot be reasonably concluded that the hot and cold water pipes are reliably bonded through mechanical connections, an electrical bonding jumper is required to ensure that this connection is made.  Some judgement must be exercised for each installation.


Reasonably intelligent code enforcement officials have concluded that there is a need for a jumper and reasonably intelligent code enforcement officials have determined that there is not a need for a jumper.   When in Rome.....


----------



## jwelectric

I have asked both Mark and Jeff to show support for their commentary to no end. Just as no one else can they have failed to point me in the direction of that requirement.

Old habits are hard to break. I was in the business way back when the continuity of metal pipes was a requirement and was also involved with the proposal process of trying to get the panel to understand that the electrical code had no influence over a plumber.

I have even seen where the pipes were repaired with nonmetallic on both sides of the bonding clamp so just how much good is the bonding?


----------



## jwelectric

As code enforcement officials all we can enforce is what is adopted in our jurisdictions. We cannot enforce a commentary of the handbook, what a reasonably intelligent code enforcement official has determined, a picture we have saw in a book, or our own wishes.

Unless a code enforcement official can back their statement up with writing then the contractor can ignore the code enforcement official. As a contractor the inspector will either show me in writing or leave my job. As an inspector I will show you in writing or I will keep my opinions to myself.

A simple question, can anyone show me in writing the requirement to bond the hot to the cold.


----------



## jar546

250.104 is very clear and the language on the NFPA website for NFPA Plus clearly states the intent of the code.  All across this entire country reasonable electricians and inspectors recognize the word system and continuity and ensure in the rare occasion that there is a loss of continuity between sections of a metal piping system, a bonding jumper must be installed.

Your interpretation obviously varies and you are entitled to perform the work you do as an electrician.  In thinking about it, not one inspection in 2012 or 13 so far has has an issue with this section as every house either had plastic pipe or a metal mixing valve somewhere in the system.  I believe that the last time this was an issue, it was an older home that had a single bathroom with separate hot and cold on an old style tub.  In that instance, the electrician has bonded the hot and cold at the newly installed water heater and it was never in question.  On all jobs before and after that I inspected for the electrician he never installed a jumper and we never talked about it which means  he too has a reasonable understanding of the code.

In PA, if you don't agree with a code official, you can file an appeal (for a fee) and the burden is on you to prove that your interpretation is correct and the inspector is incorrect.  I have had appeals filed in multiple municipalities and have yet to lose an appeal based on my or our companies decision because we do our due diligence and do our homework before it gets that far.  In some instances, although the commentary is not adopted as law, it is admissible to the appeals board as evident as to the intent of the code.

JW, I know this is your big pet peeve and you are passionate about this particular subject on something that is a rarity to begin with, but in this case, until you get the CMP to change the wording and get the commentary changed,  this will continue everywhere outside of your own jurisdiction.  You are a lone wolf on this one.


----------



## jar546

jwelectric said:
			
		

> Unless a code enforcement official can back their statement up with writing then the contractor can ignore the code enforcement official. As a contractor the inspector will either show me in writing or leave my job.


A few things now that you have successfully gotten my little pink panties into a bunch with that statement.

1) It is not your job, it is the customer's job that you are being paid to perform.

2) If you ignore a violation, that will result in a $1,000 a day fine for every day the violation exists.  That is a summons to appear in court for each day of the violation and each day that you ignore is a new violation.

If you don't believe me, I will tell you that there was a commercial roofing contractor that had the same attitude and brought his attorney to the hearing.  The $18,000 fine was upheld plus he had to pay for the permit.

There is an appeals system in place to keep the inspector in check and allow the violator an opportunity to prove they are not a violator.  The contractor is not the AHJ and decision maker unlike your belief.

You and I agree on a lot of things concerning the electrical code.  This is certainly not one of them.  This is such a rare occasion anyway, I don't think it's worth the effort to discuss.


----------



## jwelectric

Maybe I should be a little clearer with my statement.

First I am speaking of the laws that govern the enforcement of the building codes in North Carolina. I am a certified instructor of the mandated electrical courses for electrical inspectors for my state.

Electrical Classes that I teach

In NC in order to sit for a Standard Certificate in any trade the inspector must take and pass a course given by the Community College System of NC. These courses are designed by the OSFM/DOI and I sit on this committee.

Here there are three levels of inspection; see this link

NCDOI OSFM | Engineering and Codes - CEO - Inspector Pre-qualification Program-CEO_Certification_Tools Requirements for code officials

Notice that the inspector must also take and pass a "Law and Administration" course before being allowed to take the Standard Certificate test and in order to be able to teach these courses at the community college one has to first have a level III certificate in the trade in which they teach.

I am a Level III Electrical Inspector for the state of NC and a certified instructor of the same.

Here in NC it is required that the code enforcement official state the Article and Section of code that is standing in violation. This code violation must be documented in writing and given to the permit holder. If it cannot be backed by code Article and Section then there is no violation.

In other words the code official can’t say this is what I want unless there is code to say it with and a commentary is not a code.

Should a code enforcement official who is doing an inspection on a job that I am installing under my Unlimited Electrical License and they start with “this is what I want to see in order for this job to pass” I promise that inspector will never inspect another job that I am doing and I can’t help how it makes them or anyone else feel.

I take my profession to heart and would like to think that anyone who is accepting pay for checking behind me was as dedicated as I am. I have devoted my life to the NEC and have been in deep study for more than two decades now.

I sit in many chairs here in NC which is devoted to the continuing education of the electrical trade.

North Carolina Ellis Cannady Chapter IAEI Click on officers and committees

I apologize if anything I have said has upset you or anyone else on this forum but once again I state that this is “MY” profession and I take it very serious. I skip over the appeal process when I get an official that thinks it is his way or no way.

Once again all I ask for is for the code section in the NEC that requires the bond between the hot and cold potable water pipes in a building. Is it 250.?? or is it found somewhere else in the NEC?


----------



## jwelectric

My main purpose of using these sites is to educate or be educated, nothing personal toward anyone. I will give code section and ask that people do the same when making a point. Debating these code sections is how we learn. Teach me please


----------



## ICE

jwelectric said:
			
		

> I promise that inspector will never inspect another job that I am doing and I can’t help how it makes them or anyone else feel.


North Carolina electricians have a lot of juice hey!


----------



## ICE

deleted a double


----------



## jwelectric

jar546 said:
			
		

> 250.104 is very clear and the language on the NFPA website for NFPA Plus clearly states the intent of the code. In PA, if you don't agree with a code official, you can file an appeal (for a fee) and the burden is on you to prove that your interpretation is correct and the inspector is incorrect.  I have had appeals filed in multiple municipalities and have yet to lose an appeal based on my or our companies decision because we do our due diligence and do our homework before it gets that far.  In some instances, although the commentary is not adopted as law, it is admissible to the appeals board as evident as to the intent of the code.


On the first page of the NEC Handbook we find these words

The commentary and supplementary materials in this handbook are not a part of the code and do not constitute Forman Interpretations of the NFPA (which can be obtained only through request processed by the responsible technical committees in accordance with the published procedures of the NFPA.) The commentary and supplementary materials, therefore, solely reflect the personal opinions of the editor or other contributors and do not necessarily represent the official position of NFPA or its technical committees.

In an appeal process this would be the first thing I would point out and that anything that Mark or Jeff had to say in their handbook commentaries holds nothing but the commentaries of those fifteen people charged with the process of deciding what goes into a code section is the exact intent of the NEC. This would be Code Making Panel #5 and their statement that I have posted earlier in this thread. If it is not a complete metal system then bond using 250.104(B)

Common sense tells us that if something is a complete metal system then we will have continuity from any point on the system to any other point on the system.

I would also point out those places where electrical continuity is required and then ask where this requirement is found for the bonding process outlined in 250.104.

The only requirements found in 250.104 are that where it lands on the pipe to be accessible and the four places that the other end of the bonding jumper is to land.

Just because old wives tales exist today in no way means that it is a NEC rule. Just because something is a standard of practice in no way means that it is a NEC rule.

Please show me where a code enforcement official would go to in the NEC to enforce this jumper from one pipe to another pipe. I don’t mean to be hard to get along with but do want to better understand this requirement that so many are sold on.

From the NECPlus website

In issuing and making NFPA Documents available, the NFPA is not undertaking to render professional or other services for or on behalf of any person or entity. Nor is the NFPA undertaking to perform any duty owed by any person or entity to someone else. Anyone using this document should rely on his or her own independent judgment or, as appropriate, seek the advice of a competent professional in determining the exercise of reasonable care in any given circumstances.


----------



## jwelectric

ICE said:
			
		

> North Carolina electricians have a lot of juice hey!


 So do elec. in other states if they truly know their stuff. It is when the elec. blindly follows an off base code official that things go array.


----------



## jwelectric

Could or would someone please show verbiage from the NEC that requires a cold to hot bonding jumper at a water heater or at any other place on the potable water system.

I hope that my request is not beyond the scope of what so many inspectors are requiring to be done. Surely if this is so important there is verbiage that can be found that requires this method of bonding.

On another train of thought, what if a building had a 480/277 and a 240/120 system, what is the color code for the phases of the 480/277 system?


----------



## jwelectric

I am beginning to think that the reason no one has posted a response to my question of the past few days is because there is no answer. This means that there is no requirement to bond the hot to the cold


----------



## Dennis

jwelectric said:
			
		

> I am beginning to think that the reason no one has posted a response to my question of the past few days is because there is no answer. This means that there is no requirement to bond the hot to the cold


Or that got tired of arguing with you. :surr


----------



## jwelectric

I hope they don’t think that I am arguing with them.

I love this type of discussion as someone including me might get a chance to learn.

I don’t think that my question is a hard one, it seems simple enough.

Please show me verbiage that requires a bond between the hot and cold metal pipes. It is a simple matter to post a code section.

If there is not a code section that can be posted showing the requirement this means that it is not a requirement. With the consensus being that it is a requirement then the section that makes that requirement should be easy.

Maybe it would be simpler to state why one thinks this is a requirement so I would accept that for discussion.


----------



## jar546

There is no specific language in the code that specifies that a hot and cold pipe must be bonded.  Is that what you are looking for?

There is also no language in the code that specifies that:

1) A hot air furnace must have an equipment ground.  It only says equipment likely to be energized.  Hmmm, that sounds familiar doesn't it?

2) A disconnect for a service must be within 5' of where it enters the building.  That is subjective per the AHJ and what he says goes.  What is your subjective opinion as an inspector?

What bothers me the most is that you are in a position of authority and are teaching others your personal opinion regardless of what the NFPA intended and what is in commentary directly on the NFPA site.  You are among a very, very, very, very, small percentage of people who do not believe the intent of the code because you are unilaterally skewing it to your extremist, minority opinion.  Many on Mike Holt's site have also given up arguing with you because it is like talking to a brick wall in the middle of the desert.  I may have better luck trying to pound sand up my *** with a rubber mallet than getting you to accept a point.

If I were in a position of authority where I was responsible for teaching others, I would show them what flexibility is, what prudence is and get a written code interpretation directly from the NFPA before you continue to teach them your beliefs vs the intent.  This is very much a small, rare issue to begin with as most homes have continuity in the metal water pipe system due to heavy mixing valves so we don't have to worry about half of the "system" not having continuity.  It is a simple, yet effective safety method.

I have spoken to a lot of inspectors about this subject over the years and can't seem to find one that has your opinion.  I just got off the phone with the NFPA again and still got the same opinion that I expected.

So why is no one responding?  Look at all of your posts, read them again and again and again with an objectionable mind.  99% of the inspectors out there understand this section of the code, the NFPA does too along with the commentary but YOU must be right because you know something the rest of us don't.

I eat humble pie every day.  You apparently don't even want to know what it tastes like.

I'm done and just threw away my pink big girl panties so you don't get them in a bunch for me anymore.


----------



## RJJ

Well said! The sad part is that he is a teacher of others. If he feels so strongly on the subject he should have NFPA strike the section from the code. Produce evidence & testimony to have the code revised. Unfortunately, the word shall means if I feel it applies:banghd!


----------



## Dennis

I think that Mike is coming from the standpoint of what is actually written in the code.  Part of this is an exercise, at least for me, to see if the wording in the code should be changed.  It is clearly unclear, at least to me, based on the wording.  Even more so is why does the water pipe need bonding that may be different than a gas pipe.  If the equipment grounding conductor is good enough for the gas pipe then why is it not good enough for water pipe especially if there is plastic coming into a house.

Something to think about

The cmp members have stated that a gas pipe that is likely to be energized must be bonded.  But what does that mean?  If a piece of nm cable crosses the pipe then is it likely to be energized?

Apparently that is not what it means- it means if any equipment connected to the system that may accidentally energize it as in a gas furnace connected to a gas pipe then a bad connection of the equipment grounding conductor and a fault could potentially energize the pipe.  So if there is metal water pipe in a house, plastic coming in, that is not connected to anything that requires electricity- thus a gas water heater,  then why does it need bonding?

I know what the code states but there is alot here that needs to be better written.  I have seen inspectors make a steel beam in a crawl space get bonded because it may get energized.

Although I have never put a jumper between the hot and cold I cannot see it as a bad thing.  I think Mikes point is that is not clear in the code that it is needed- well in his interpretation it does not need to be done.  Around here it has never been required and we have some very thorough inspectors in neighboring areas.

I don't think it is fair to say things like was mention above about Mike.  He is extremely knowledgeable and I certainly don't always have to agree with him either.


----------



## RJJ

Dennis: good point! Then it should be fixed! Hot & cold water pipes that is! But the language is shall. The underlining issue is that with the use of Pex and other materials including mixing valves it is not big deal.


----------



## chris kennedy

jar546 said:
			
		

> I may have better luck trying to pound sand up my *** with a rubber mallet than getting you to accept a point.


Absolutely classic, thats funny stuff right there.


----------



## jar546

The NEC has been around for a very long time and I am sure that the reason it gets changed is more than just keeping up with technology.  There are changes that are not code changes but simply clarifications to help understand the intent of the code.  Many of the changes are driven by the need to close loopholes that electricians seem to have an uncanny ability to find.  Some code sections read the same today that they read decade ago.  Nothing is perfect, not one single code book.  This is why we have commentaries.  Yes, we all know that commentaries are not adopted into laws in most states but many jurisdictions recognize them. Commentaries help us to understand the intent and meaning of the code in an easier to read fashion.

If I were to pick apart every single sentence of every single code out there I would drive myself crazy and waste a lot of time, effort and brainpower for no reason whatsoever.  Instead of trying to find fault, I simply go with a common sense approach of intent.  Yes, I said the word intent again.  For whatever reason the code requires metal water pipes to be bonded, I can only guess.  I have a good idea but the exact reason is not something that I know.  What I do know is that if I am told to bond a system and the system has a break in it.  I cannot effectively bond the system with that break.  So when an extension cord gets worn and rests against a bonded part of the system, I can be reasonably assured that it will trip the breaker.  If it touches the other part that is not bonded because that part of the system has lost its continuity, I cannot be reasonably assured that the breaker will trip and maybe when I touch that unbonded section of the system while I am grounded, I then become part of the path to ground and I don't know about you but my body does not accept ac voltage too well (although I have been defibrillated in the emergency room with DC).

The essence of this discussion is to whether or not people recognize the fact that the SYSTEM is required to be bonded and a simple bonding wire across a break in continuity of the system can potentially save a life.  There is no reason to spend so much effort and time for something that is a rare occasion, unlikely to be an issue with all of the wonderful mixing valves out there.

For the inspector who requires a bond from hot to cold no matter what.  Shame on you for not understanding what you do.

For the inspector who does not check to see if there is continuity, shame on you too.

For the contractor who puts the jumper in automatically for peace of mind.  I commend you.

For the contractor that wants to argue with the inspector when there is a clear break in continuity, shame on you.

Again, this is rare these days an virtually a non-issue but it can be a deadly issue if you want to live in Literal World while ignoring intent, meaning and safety.

Last time I tried flying to Literal World, I was stuck in Nowhere Land for a very long time and I have things to do other than preach.

So here are some options:

1) Get the CMP to change the language to what you feel it should be.

2) Get the authors to change the commentary.


----------



## ICE

jar546 said:
			
		

> 1. For the inspector who requires a bond from hot to cold no matter what.  Shame on you for not understanding what you do.
> 
> 2. For the inspector who does not check to see if there is continuity, shame on you too.
> 
> 3. For the contractor who puts the jumper in automatically for peace of mind.  I commend you.
> 
> 4. For the contractor that wants to argue with the inspector when there is a clear break in continuity, shame on you.


1.  In your jurisdiction(s) you are able to apply the requirement for a bonding jumper on a case by case basis.  With most jurisdictions it is all or none.  The inspector follows the rule set out by the building official.

2.  My bosses, from little to big, would have a cow if I used tester.  I have a dial up GFCI tester so I can tell if a GFCI trips out of the range.  I was told to not use any GFCI tester beyond the test button on the receptacle.  I would also question if continuity equals a low impedance path.

3.  We asked for the jumper for about three years and stopped about a year ago.  Contractors still install the jumper and when I tell them that it is no longer required many say that they like the idea and still do it.  Many AHJs around here started after we did and are still doing it.

4.  There's usually a much worse correction than a jumper.


----------



## jwelectric

Dennis said:
			
		

> I think that Mike is coming from the standpoint of what is actually written in the code.


 And in our state that is all that can be enforced.The commentaries in the handbook are nothing more than opinion and this is pointed out in the handbook itself. If someone is looking for intent then the ROPs and ROCs is where this intent is found.

What that is written in the commentaries of the handbook is not worth any more than the paper they are written on but the statements in the Report on Proposals carries a lot of weight. The statements in the ROPs and ROCs are an explanation of what the chosen members of the code making panel are saying. It is these code making panels that decide just what is to be written in each code section.

Now in good ole NC a code enforcement official cannot say this is what the handbook says so let’s do it like that, they must enforce what is written in the book. If there is no written requirement to bond hot to cold in the NEC then it can’t be enforced.

For those who think they are saving lives with such a foolish idea of bonding hot to cold pray tell me how many lives have been lost by a plumber making a nonmetallic repair in a metallic piping system. Is this type of repair not allowed by the plumbing code?


----------



## jwelectric

I will see you all tomorrow as tonight I am going to Wilmington to help plan the Southern Sectional of the IAEI this year. I hope to see some of you there

IAEI Southern Section Convention & Tradeshow

October 6-9, 2013

Hilton Wilmington Riverside

Wilmington, NC


----------



## jar546

I take electricity very seriously and lack of proper grounding/bonding can cause electric shock.  Almost 2 years ago today I was sitting with my mother in her hospice bed as we awaited the inevitable.  I received a phone call to assist the police on a Saturday which was extremely rare since we were only contracted with the City for occasional service that called me.  There was a fatal electrocution of a 14 year old boy who was playing hide and seek and decided to hide behind a dryer with wet shorts while his playmates were searching for him.  According to the girls, they ran into the laundry room and heard a popping noise.  At that time the boy stood up, clutched his chest and said he was going to die.  He did.  He dropped right there and his life was over.  I was asked to collect evidence and help them to determine what, if anything went wrong.  Every aspect of the circuit for the dryer and the washer was looked at, photographed and methodically taken apart.  What I found out was that someone had changed the location of the dryer from its original location and installed a 4" metal junction box, 2-1'8" deep to extend the NM circuit to a back wall.  In the process, they failed to ground the metal junction box although they did continue the ground to the washer but reduced it to a 3 wire.  The NM connector for the 10/3 coming from the basement was overtightened and cut through to one of the phases.  This made the junction box "hot" but with no ground, it was no more than another conductor without insulation.  Until someone touched it and a grounded device or piece of equipment, no one would ever know.  Had the quasi electrician ever grounded the box as required, it would have tripped the breaker but he did not.  So there it sat for months while in use, one phase always making the junction box hot just waiting for the wrong moment when someone makes the connection.  As he hid behind the dryer his wet shorts and his body eventually leaned against the junction box as he touched the back of the dryer leading to his death.

So, if it can happen, it can happen and did.  A lack of 1 simple ground screw and there is a set of parents grieving the loss of their 14 year old son.  Lack of continuity in the grounding and bonding of the circuit.

The code says the metal water pipe system is to be bonded therefore the system shall be bonded and I don't care how literal one wants to get with the codes, intent is simply intent which is safety, the entire existence of the codes.  For safety.  I am not going to compromise safety because I get a high finding problems and living in literal world.

Something not many of you know about me.   I worked part time as a Paramedic, then a Flight Paramedic on a critical care helicopter and in emergency rooms from 1995 until 2008 and continue to teach today on a part time basis.  In my time working on the helicopter I had the unfortunate experience of watching death on a daily basis from some of the most bizarre circumstances that only fate could bring.  With thousands of calls under my belt from thousands of flight and from time spent working in emergency rooms I have seen a lot of misfortune and electrical shock was no exception.  Many fatal, many not but the fact is there were many.  I have seen more than I could stand and wish I never saw half of what I did.

If it can happen, it probably will.  Just because you have not seen it in your world does not mean it has not happened and won't happen again.  There is a whole other, much larger world outside our own.

So go ahead and play judge, jury and executioner with your one man crusade.  In the mean time, I will be keeping people safe.  You choose your battles, I'll choose mine.

Click on the first link, look at his face and tell him just how right you are.

http://virginislandsdailynews.com/susquehanna-county-teen-dies-in-electrical-accident-in-wilkes-barre-1.1173726

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Teen-Electrocuted-in-Hide-and-Seek--125418608.html


----------



## jwelectric

I thought we were talking about bonding of water pipes not the Equipment Grounding Conductor of a dryer.


----------

