Subpanel grounding need a second opinion

[Cruzan80]

Personally I would not open that can of worms.

You want to get failed on all the things?
This is how you get failed on all the things.

What is there to fail on? It is clear they don't know any of the codes!

 

[wyliesdiesels]

Personally I would not open that can of worms.

You want to get failed on all the things?
This is how you get failed on all the things.

GC should pay the electrician to install the ground rods ot notified the framing crew of what that rod was for and to not cut it off.

not true. not true at all. an inspector cant just fail you on stuff that is up to code because he is mad. That isnt how this works at all.

 

[Codyboy]

not true. not true at all. an inspector cant just fail you on stuff that is up to code because he is mad. That isnt how this works at all.

Well yeah. Maybe i should have chose different words.
He can be extremely nit picking. Can make it difficult for you.

 

[Cruzan80]

At this point, let the inspector nit-pick. There is a contractor that was hired to do the job to the correct code level. He didn't do so. If the inspector wants to be picky, the contractor does more work to the correct level, or doesn't get paid. If it was a home-owner/DIY level, I could see worrying more about being picked on, but even still...

But I am weird, in that I will give tons of grace if people are trying to do it right and having issues outside their control (working retail for years does that to you), but will raise holy hell if you are not doing what you should. Having been in those situations, I know what you "should" be doing, and will hold you to it.

 

[wyliesdiesels]

Well yeah. Maybe i should have chose different words.
He can be extremely nit picking. Can make it difficult for you.

with an install like this, I would welcome the inspectors nit-picking. the Cont did a real **** job.... the more nit-picking the better

 

[alfredeneuman]

Unless the rebar was inspected before the footing was poured he couldn't check the rebar for proper installation it can't be used.
The EC was to provide you with a job acceptable to the inspector.

 

[LOW1]

It sounds like you have a general contractor and then there are subs? The fact that the building passed inspection does not mean that it complies with code. The general contractor is responsible for delivering a building that complies with applicable code.

Perhaps it is more accurate to think of the electric subcontractor as the general contractors electrician and not yours. Your general needs to make it right. And I would think that for $350 worth of work no one wants to see the job not done right. The liability risk
Is not worth it.

So talk again with your general and don’t make final payment Until it is right.

(Interestingly (at least to me) Ontario at one time prohibited grounding rods in sub panels located in outbuildings. The theory was that in the event of a lightening strike current would run from the outbuilding grounding rod to the main panel grounding rod causing a shock risk to anyone located between the rods. I think that code has changed but it was weird to have US and Canadian codes having such a major difference on this basic point)

 

[Russell_Reid]

I want to finish out this thread as the help I received was invaluable. Thank you. The electrician did eventually come out and do exactly what I expected but not what I needed. He installed one grounding rod and tied it into the panel. Everything else was unchanged. I was unsurprised and had already decided to fix the grounding/bonding issues myself.
So I did. Bought and installed two Eaton ground bus bars. Relocated all ground wires to the new bus bars. Removed the panel grounding screw. Moved the white wire over to neutral bus. Installed a grounding lug to adjacent building steel and ran a 6ga ground wire to bond the building to the panel.
The only thing I have still to do is install the second ground rod. Waiting for cooler weather before I have to pound an 8' rod into the ground.
Unfortunately I had to extend the ground wires to reach the new ground bus. I left the neutral wires where they were. So the panel is not as pretty as it used to be. But it should be correct. Please let me know if you see anything wrong.

 

[PCustoms]

Picture?

 

[Russell_Reid]

Picture?

should be there now. had to reduce the size so it would upload. my phone produces pics too large to upload here directly.

 

[PCustoms]

should be there now. had to reduce the size so it would upload. my phone produces pics too large to upload here directly.

Lower right hole needs a clamp of some form

Plastic fittings on top/bottom need chafe bushings

 

[Russell_Reid]

Lower right hole needs a clamp of some form

Plastic fittings on top/bottom need chafe bushings

Yeah, the black wire in that hole is the grounding rod connection that he installed. He didn't put in a bushing for some reason. I put the building bonding wire (bare copper) through the same hole but I didn't have a bushing or I would have installed one. None of the Romex has clamps on the pass throughs. Only bushings. I will put that on my to fix list.

 

[Skooterj]

that would be crazy if theyre still on 1999 code cycle. i call BS

The entire state of Indiana is on 2008.

 

[BurtEggley]

My understanding is that if you are in a place with lightning you need grounding rods on the outbuilding subpanel. If you are in a place where there is little lightning then you do not. I added grounding rods to a shed here in Norcal because several people here flamed me for not having them for a shed subpanel. Then when the building inspector came out for something else electrical he saw them and said, "you really didn't need to do that here. Why did you do it? It is only a requirement where there is significant lightning. In fact we wish you had not done that. You created more of a hazard by adding them. We don't get lightning here except rarely. I should make you take them out." My licensed electrician told me the same. The moral is, find out what your local codes require. In Texas you get lightning so I would suspect you need good grounding rods. Use a strong rotating hammer drill to drive them in.

 

[mm08822]

Both of them need to read the NEC.

There is no exception for "low lightning" areas.
What is their definition of significant lightning?
What happens when you do get a lightning hit in your low lightning area?

What is the hazard created?

 

[BurtEggley]

Both of them need to read the NEC.

There is no exception for "low lightning" areas.
What is their definition of significant lightning?
What happens when you do get a lightning hit in your low lightning area?

What is the hazard created?

that is your opinion. If the city inspectors (two of them actually) and the electrician tell me it was not only not required but undesirable, they win over opinions here. I have read the NEC on it.

 

[BurtEggley]

the shed is semi attached to the house.

 

[mm08822]

Not my opinion but NEC code for seperate structures.

You need to decide if attached or seperate. It is or it isn't. Semi-attached sounds like the same building to me.

Then yes, there could be a situation created within the same building.

Simple fix, remove the GEC from the sub panel. Abandon the rods in place. Or more work, tie all the rods together.

 

[BurtEggley]

The shed is 4' from the main house and main building panel. The main panel has grounding into the foundation, rebar and a rod at that point. They said that the code in the NEC is there specifically to protect the outbuilding against a lightning strike, and that by adding the two new rods right adjacent to the panel at the shed, it is making it more probably that in a nearby strike, my main panel will get hit either from the shed or the panel itself. They were also concerned that some of the current in a strike nearby might flow the 4' from my house into the shed and down to the grounding rods, creating additional issues than if the main grounding of the panel was not so close to the shed grounds. They were well aware of the NEC when we discussed it because their comments caught me off guard.

 

[Russell_Reid]

Well, arguments aside, in my case the outbuilding is definitely detached, the building is all steel construction, and 'significant lightning' is the definition of Texas. The electrician did not bond the outbuilding structure to the subpanel, at all. The grounding between the main panel and the sub was wrong per NEC. And my inspection was mediocre at best. So we had a situation where the building could have energized, breakers may not have tripped in certain conditions, and a lightning strike to the outbuilding could have run right through the main panel. I had to fix that.
You don't state how the subpanel is fed from main. Is it fed 3 wire or 4 wire? That makes a big difference.
Not being an expert or a licensed electrician my first thought on your situation is your shed ground rods are too close to your main panel grounding rods. NEC has spacing requirements for ground rod distances. So with only 4 feet between your main and shed you are probably under the allowed distance between rods. Depending on soil conditions you may not have sufficient grounding resistance. You can have that checked if your electrician has the correct meter.

 

[sparky 1971]

My understanding is that if you are in a place with lightning you need grounding rods on the outbuilding subpanel. If you are in a place where there is little lightning then you do not. I added grounding rods to a shed here in Norcal because several people here flamed me for not having them for a shed subpanel. Then when the building inspector came out for something else electrical he saw them and said, "you really didn't need to do that here. Why did you do it? It is only a requirement where there is significant lightning. In fact we wish you had not done that. You created more of a hazard by adding them. We don't get lightning here except rarely. I should make you take them out." My licensed electrician told me the same. The moral is, find out what your local codes require. In Texas you get lightning so I would suspect you need good grounding rods. Use a strong rotating hammer drill to drive them in.

that is your opinion. If the city inspectors (two of them actually) and the electrician tell me it was not only not required but undesirable, they win over opinions here. I have read the NEC on it.

Don't start this again. The NEC requires a grounding electrode for separate structures with a feeder, no exceptions. Just because the AHJ chooses to not enforce things, it's still in the book. For many years our inspectors chose to not enforce the GFCI requirement for sump pumps even though the NEC clearly stated it was required.

 

[wyliesdiesels]

My understanding is that if you are in a place with lightning you need grounding rods on the outbuilding subpanel. If you are in a place where there is little lightning then you do not.

this is totally 100% incorrect. nowhere in the NEC does it say electrodes are only required on a detached subpanel if there is lightning in the area.

Then when the building inspector came out for something else electrical he saw them and said, "you really didn't need to do that here. Why did you do it? It is only a requirement where there is significant lightning. In fact we wish you had not done that. You created more of a hazard by adding them.

that inspector is a total idiot. id love to know what hazard he was referring to. because none exists by simply adding grounding electrodes.

please tell us who this inspector is and which AHJ he works for. he needs to be written up and educated. he is 100% wrong

 

[wyliesdiesels]

that is your opinion. If the city inspectors (two of them actually) and the electrician tell me it was not only not required but undesirable, they win over opinions here. I have read the NEC on it.

wrong wrong wrong. the inspector cant just make up rules as they go. unless the AHJ (which he is not) has a WRITTEN amendment, then the electrodes ARE required by the NEC.

Their opinions are just that, opinions, NOT fact (as in NEC code). they are wrong 100% period full stop...

and no you havent read that in the NEC because what you (or they claim) does not exist in the NEC. they made it up or you are making it up

 

[wyliesdiesels]

The shed is 4' from the main house and main building panel. The main panel has grounding into the foundation, rebar and a rod at that point.

If you have a UFER, why did you bother with a ground rod? that was a waste. a UFER doesnt need a supplemental rod

They said that the code in the NEC is there specifically to protect the outbuilding against a lightning strike,

that is not the only purpose for grounding electrodes.

and that by adding the two new rods right adjacent to the panel at the shed, it is making it more probably that in a nearby strike, my main panel will get hit either from the shed or the panel itself.

wrong wrong wrong....

They were also concerned that some of the current in a strike nearby might flow the 4' from my house into the shed and down to the grounding rods, creating additional issues than if the main grounding of the panel was not so close to the shed grounds. They were well aware of the NEC when we discussed it because their comments caught me off guard.

they have no clue what theyre talking about. as someone who installs grounding protection for microwave towers, cell towers, etc you would be amazed at how many rods we put in on a single site. the tower gets a ring of rods, each com shed gets a ring of rods (and theyre all detached but close together), everything gets bonded.

and no, additional rods doesnt cause more issues like they claim, it actually causes LESS issues. why? because everything is bonded and allows the lightning to take a direct path to earth vs going thru equipment and frying it

these people youre dealing with have absolutely 100% without a doubt no clue what theyre talking about. They are totally ignorant of the subject matter. These types of people drive me nuts and they need to find another job because their ignorance is misleading people

 

[PCustoms]

@wyliesdiesels

 

[mm08822]

I think an imagineer from Disneyland has escaped and is running rampant! ( )

Possibly multiple have found each other and banded together to spout their book of .

 

[DGersic]

id love to know what hazard he was referring to. because none exists by simply adding grounding electrodes.

Tripping? That’s about all I can think of.

 

[Russell_Reid]

Wow, this post has gone way off the beaten path. As the OP I consider my original request as answered. Thank you all for your assistance.
The discussion about NEC grounding requirements and AHJ interpretation should probably move to it's own thread.