Cathodic Protection Systems and the NEC

Conflicts and solutions for complying with grounding revisions of the NEC for
cathodically protected facilities.Jun 1, 2008
Whitt L. Trimble and Eddie Guidry, Fluor Enterprises, Inc. | Electrical Construction and Maintenanc

During the 2005 National Electrical Code (NEC) review cycle, a relatively simple
revision was made that created a significant change on the cathodic protection (CP)
systems of petroleum and chemical facilities (plants). The 2005 NEC made it clear
that there must be an interconnection of all concrete-encased steel reinforcing bar
(rebar) to the facility grounding electrode system.

<b>Fig. 1.</b> Cable stubbed out of concrete foundation.

For facilities using copper grounding electrode systems (and also having cathodic
protection as part of their corrosion mitigation and integrity programs), this revision
may require a facility to change their entire cathodic protection design and operating
philosophy. It will definitely require greater coordination and cooperation between
the various engineering and construction disciplines.

2005 Code changes

In NEC Sec. 250.50, it is required that all grounding electrodes present be bonded
together to form the grounding electrode system. The types of grounding electrodes
that must be bonded together, if present, are listed in 250.52(A)(1) through (A)(6).
They include: 1) metal underground water pipe, 2) metal frames of buildings or
structures, 3) concrete-encased electrodes (usually rebar), 4) ground rings, 5) rod or
pipe electrodes, and 6) plate electrodes. This article will focus on concrete-encased
electrodes, copper ground rings, and the potential problems this may create by
bonding without consideration of potential corrosion.

Prior to the 2005 edition of the NEC, the first paragraph of Sec. 250.50 started with
the phrase: If available on the premises all of the types of grounding electrodes
listed in the preceding paragraph were required to be bonded together. More times
than not, industrially oriented engineers and designers took the phrase if available
to mean that since the concrete structures were usually poured before the electricians
were onsite, then the rebar wouldn't be available. Therefore, they assumed it wasn't
necessary to bond the rebar to the other grounding electrodes and make the rebar
part of the grounding electrode system. In other words, the way the NEC used to be
worded seemed to give the designer some latitude as to whether to bond all of the
potential grounding electrode types together.
Right or wrong, this was and still is the typical attitude when designing plant
grounding electrode systems. If you're a design engineer who tries to follow the NEC,
however, removal of the words, If available on the premises has a rather
profound meaning. Now it becomes clear that one must bond the copper ground ring
to the concrete-encased rebar (and all other electrodes), unless the rebar is in an
existing structure. With a literal interpretation, all concrete structures within a
process unit, with the equivalent of more than 20 feet of -inch (or larger) rebar in
it, must be bonded to the copper ground ring and all other electrodes. This includes
pump foundations, pile caps, spread footings, concrete piers, and tank bottoms. For
new process units, this adds considerable initial costs and probably even more so
later, due to the resulting corrosion currents.

Grounding philosophies
In today's refineries and petrochemical facilities, a variety of philosophies are used.
Many plants want a large copper grid or grounding rings in each process unit. These
ground grids, ground rings, or ground loops, as they are often referred to, are
typically installed with 10-feet or 20-feet copper-clad rods spaced at an average
distance of 50 feet to 100 feet with a copper wire run between the rods. The copper
wire between the rods is usually bare, although occasionally insulated cable is used.
The conductor sizes are normally at least 4/0 AWG and can be as large as 500 kcmil.
Equal or smaller size taps from the ground ring are usually bonded to structural steel
aboveground throughout the unit and to all motors, transformers, and other
equipment such as tanks and vessels. The intent is to create an equal potential plane
while also creating a low resistance to earth for ground faults and lightning strokes.

For the purpose of this article, this ring, grid, or loop will be referred to as a ground
ring.

<b>Fig. 2.</b> Grounding pad on concrete foundation.

While most plant installations in the United States today have a copper ground ring,
there are some facilities that prefer only an equipment-grounding conductor run
with the branch circuits and feeders to electrical equipment (either in the form of
metal conduit, cable tray or wire, or a combination thereof), thinking that the circuit
equipment grounding conductors combined with structural steel and piping being in
contact with each other is all that is required to keep everything at an equal potential.
For system grounding in these cases (at a transformer secondary, for instance), there
may be one or two ground rods installed to supplement the grounding electrode
system.
Then there are other facilities that prefer something in between these two methods,
like small, partial ground rings around specific equipment, such as transformers and
substations, bonded together, and equipment-grounding conductors run with branch
circuits and feeders. This discussion will focus only on those systems with large
copper grounding rings, because this is where the probability for buried steel
corrosion is the greatest.

Bonding and grounding materials

When bonding the copper ground ring to the concrete-encased rebar, several
approaches can be used; however, an effective path must be provided. One may
choose to use exothermic welding on the rebar (Photo) or listed compression
connectors and attach a copper wire pigtail to the rebar. (It's important to note
that all grounding must be done with either exothermic welding or listed materials

per the NEC.) This wire can then be run just outside the foundation forms and
extended at a later time to the ground ring (Fig. 1).
Another method is to install a copper ground pad flush on top of the concrete slab
and bond it to the rebar prior to the pour. During construction of the ground ring,
taps can be installed and bolted to the copper ground pad (Fig. 2).
An additional technique is to leave a piece of rebar protruding from the concrete into
the soil to tap onto during ground ring construction (Fig. 3). Depending on the type
of soil and moisture content, however, the exposed rebar may not be permanent,
because it may rust and deteriorate fairly quickly.
Yet another means of bonding is to weld the anchor bolts (where used) to the steel
rebar before the concrete is poured. Then, during construction of the ground ring, a
tap can be run up to a steel tab welded to the structural steel at a convenient location
above ground (Fig. 4).

<b>Fig. 3.</b> Rebar stubbed out of concrete foundation.

Regardless of which method is used, they all require either mobilizing the electrical
contractor long before it would normally be required or adding work on the civil
contractor's part. The additional costs for supplying a means to bond the copper
ground ring to the rebar are considered negligible when compared to the corrosion
that will occur in the rebar when the connection is made without means to prevent
corrosion of the buried steel.

Grounding, corrosion, and the IEEE Green Book.

In IEEE Std 142 Green Book, Sec. 4.2.3 discusses the use of rebar as a grounding
electrode. Corrosion is discussed in Sec. 4.4.5. This section states: The basic
objectives of a sound electrical grounding system are safety of personnel, reliability
of equipment operation, fault current return and to limit transient over voltages.
After these objectives have been satisfied, the effect of the grounding installation on
corrosion must be considered. Systems, equipment, and lighting sometimes
unknowingly contribute to the corrosion of underground conductors, structures, and
piping. In the same chapter of the Green Book, it also explains how corrosion
works when copper and steel are connected.
Unfortunately, the NEC doesn't take matters such as corrosion into account. Making
the steel rebar part of the grounding electrode system is a very good idea for safety
at least in the early life of the steel rebar. After a few years, if corrosion isn't
addressed, corrosion of the rebar may cause cracking and spalling of the concrete
structure such that its integrity may be compromised. The integrity of the rebar
grounding safety electrode at this point becomes questionable. Thus, in cases
where large amounts of copper will be installed below ground and bonded to the
buried or concrete-encased steel, a CP system should be installed or a different
material than copper should be used for the ground ring.

Cathodic protection issues

The National Association of Corrosion Engineers International (NACE) is an
organization similar to the IEEE, except it deals primarily with corrosion issues.
According to NACE, Cathodic protection is achieved by making the structure the
cathode of a direct current circuit. In other words, cathodic protection is the

practice of ensuring that all current flow between a protected metallic structure and
its electrolytic environment is from the electrolyte to the structure. No current flow
from the structure means no metal loss from the structure.
The major root problem of the recent NEC grounding revision arises from the
modern construction practices of using copper for grounding purposes and steel for
structural purposes. Steel and copper have very different energy levels with steel
being the more negative and anodic of the two. This has probably contributed to the
practice of using copper for grounding as the copper components appear to last
forever, when in actuality, the copper has been cathodically protected by the steel
anode to which it has been connected. Bonding the two together creates a corrosion
battery with a driving voltage of approximately 0.5VDC. Only the circuit resistance is
variable and controls the amount of current/resulting metal loss. If the resistance to
earth of concrete-encased electrodes is sufficiently low to make bonding to them an
improvement to the facility grounding, the reader can be assured that ionic current
will flow from the steel anode to the copper cathode, and the rebar will deteriorate
(Fig. 5).

<b>Fig. 4.</b> Rebar welded to anchor bolt.

In addition to the dissimilar metals problem, there are other design complications
from the grounding revision. For example, the surface area of metal to be
cathodically protected will be substantially increased. Cathodic protection designers
base their preliminary design calculations on needing a certain number of milliamps
of CP current per unit area of bare metal. While rebar is concrete encased, grounding
components are bare by design. Even if foundation rebar and/or facility grounding
were included in the CP scheme beforehand, which is not uncommon, the new

combination will increase CP current requirements by several times. Another

problem is that of stray currents. CP designers constantly fight the battle of
distributing their intended CP currents to the intended structures. This is an
unappreciated task. Metallic piping systems such as firewater, potable water, demin
water, storm water, and oily water drain systems may be routinely considered.
Often falling through the consideration cracks are plant air and other utility gases,
electrical trays and ducts, instrument and communication cables, nearby utility
grounding, and even fencing. Bonding rebar to ground rings (or other grounding
electrodes) can inadvertently lead to numerous unintended stray current paths.

CP and rebar/grounding bonding solutions

The first and simplest practical solution to the new rebar grounding requirements is
to determine if the facility can be designed and/or operated without external CP.
This is a reasonable exercise and can have favorable results if piping can be routed
above grade or can be constructed using nonmetallic materials. (The use of
corrosion-resistant alloys for piping is cost prohibitive and perfect, neverdeteriorating coatings simply do not exist.) Aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) will
have to be constructed on solid concrete slabs or with dielectric liners and concrete
will have to be chloride free or nonmetallic reinforcement will have to be used.
Although it rarely happens, it should be mentioned that there is the rare case where
CP can be eliminated because the facility is being built in a location with extremely
high soil resistivity. Even then, eliminating CP generally requires that no lower
resistivity fill be brought in, that copper grounding equipment be replaced with
stainless steel, and that possible future soil contamination, such as the use of deicing salts in the winter, be eliminated. It should also be mentioned that sometimes a
short design life 10 years or less will justify the elimination of CP and protective
coatings and will rely instead on corrosion allowances and the substitution of
stainless steel for copper grounding to achieve the integrity goal.
The second solution activity is to determine if the facility can be cathodically
protected as a whole. With few exceptions, this is generally the case. Again, ASTs will
still have to be constructed on solid slabs or with dielectric liners; however, steel
reinforcement of concrete foundations can be cathodically protected. Sometimes,
unusual facility instrumentation requirements or locations with extremely high soil
resistance require limited area CP systems. When the facility is suitable for total CP,
several remote or deep anode beds can generally be installed to provide suitable total

current and current distribution. Sometimes, supplemental limited local distributed

anodes will have to be installed in congested areas or in areas of corrosion hot
spots.

<b>Fig. 5.</b> Unintended cathodic protection of copper grounding components.

When the above strategic solutions are not possible, targeted solutions must be
employed. These will involve a combination of the use of non-copper grounding
materials, specialized isolation equipment, separate grounding systems, nonmetallic
materials for a variety of purposes, combinations of local and area CP systems, and
possibly the use of automatically controlled rectifiers. This type of facility treatment
will require complex structure-to-soil potential and/or voltage gradient surveys to
determine the existence or mitigation of stray current situations. Personnel safety
and mechanical integrity can both be accomplished, but the methods may be nontraditional and engineering and procedures may need to be site specific.
Providing CP to all of a facility will initially appear to be the most expensive of the
strategic solutions. However, when the lifetime monitoring and maintenance costs
of targeted facility CP systems are considered, applying CP to only what we need or
have to have to meet regulatory requirements is often the most expensive course of
action.
Trimble is a NACE International Certified Cathodic Protection Specialist, an
instructor for the NACE CP1 and CP2 courses, and a member of numerous NACE
technical committees. He is also a member of the ASME B31.4 Committee Pipeline
Transportation Systems for Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and
Other Liquids. He can be reached at Whitt.Trimble@fluor.com. Guidry is a senior
electrical design supervisor at Fluor, Sugar Land, Texas. He is a licensed master
electrician in Texas and a certified ICC/IAEI electrical inspector. An active member

of Code Panel 11 since 1999, he is also a member of the International Association of

Electrical Inspectors and the NFPA. He can be reached at Eddie.Guidry@Fluor.com.