Changes in the 2005 NEC
Article 250 now reads:
Grounding and Bonding
Slide courtesty: www.iaei.org :mrgreen:
This has been a “style” issue for years. If they are going to follow the new convention there is only one “grounding” conductor in the whole system. That is the conductor(s) that go from the bus in the service disconnect enclosure to the electrode(s)
I suppose we now have to call that bare/green wire in cables and raceways an equipment bonding conductor.
It also means the wire going to the electrode can be bare or any other color besides white or green. (let the arguing begin)
See this: http://ecmweb.com/nec/whats_wrong_062305/
http://images.industryclick.com/files/31/506wwh23full.jpg
Greg:
I believe we can now identify the GEC using green, or green with a yellow stripe conductor depending upon its size, or it can be bare copper, or copper clad aluminum, or aluminum, or even any color except white or gray.
Everyone knows that the color white is used only to identify the “neutral” or grounded conductor, and is not allowed for identification of any of the “hot legs” ungrounded conductors.
The Proposal by my Colleague Phil Simmons should be reviewed for any clarification needed where he identified a problem in the field, and the CMP 5 members made the change to satisfy the question.
NEC ROP and ROC information is available upon request for downloading over on the NFPA web site. The issues related to bonding as it would have been described where the equipment grounding conductor was questioned remains unsolved, and has not been accepted unless the ROC shows other arguments and substantiation that will make that change.
The comments here are my personal opinion and should not be considered as a Formal Interpretation of the NEC.
PS: The procedure for Formal Interpretations to promote uniformity of interpretation and application of the provisions of the NEC provide for formal interpretation procedures that have been established and can be found in the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects.
Joe
This could be an excellent topic, but it would have to be dealt with very carefully. Especially as Greg has mentioned with the changes made already to the NEC and I would expect some sweeping changes that may come this way in the next few code cycles.
IMO, the way to address this on a site such as this one, is to break a Thread down into one topic of Article 250 and work it that way. Pictures and illustrations to graphically explain with the wording. Bussmann has a great animated slide that shows what happens when a ground fault occurs in a system. Stuff like that.
P.S. Grounding/Bonding is my favorite Article in the NEC. 
PIERRE:
I AGREE, You too are capable of doing this, and may have the time to do so, but be careful, some may not agree with your comments.
The Bussmann information you mentioned sounds interesting, where can it be found.
Since I have become an instructor, my best learning tool has been when a student or other individual disagrees with a statement or thought that I have. It makes me think much more about what I say. It has also shown me that my experiences are much more limited (in my little corner of the industry) than I really understood them to be.
I always, always tell my students that I welcome a well intentioned discussion.
I cannot imagine what it was like for the “older” generation to find info without the benefit of the WWW.
Students help to clear the cobwebs in our minds, I am always challenged during my presentations.