In article .com, John Ross wrote:


Doug Miller wrote:
In article . com, w_tom
wrote:
On Sep 28, 8:06 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
And now you've gone and gotten it wrong again. Metal water pipe is
*required*
to be used as a grounding electrode. You said it's not. That's not true.

Code only requires water pipe must be bonded. That 'bonding' to
remove fault currents from pipes. Code does not require water pipe to
be used as an earth ground.

False.

"All grounding electrodes as described in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6) that
are
present ... shall be bonded together to form the grounding electrode system.
.. 250.52(A)(1) Metal underground water pipe."

If it's there, Code requires it to be used "to form the grounding electrode
system" i.e. as an earth ground.

However code is written so that a water
pipe may also be an earthing electrode

Wrong -- it MUST be a grounding electrode if it's present.

- albeit insufficient. If
water pipe is used as an earthing electrode, that still in not
sufficient to meet code requirements for earthing as stated in article
250.52(D).

True -- but not relevant to the question of whether using it is optional or
required. If it's present at all, its use as part of the grounding electrode
system is MANDATORY.

Doug, as it is now the only ground is to the water pipe, but back then
they just connected it any convenient place near panel--not within 5
foot of pipe entrance. So if I have the ground rod installed AND leave
the current situation, am I right in that it will still serve as a
earth ground AND a bonding to the pipes.

No, not unless the connection to the water pipe is within 5 feet of the
entrance.

BTW, it is still all metal,
so if not required, I would assume it is ok just to leave that as is.
Does that satisfy what you said above?

Ground rod, and connection to the metal water pipe within 5' of the point at
which it enters the building.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.