# Objectionable Current



## czars (Aug 20, 2008)

Is there a definition in the NEC, or elsewhere, for the term "Objectionable Current"? Article 250.6 C & D identifies what Objectionable Current isn't, but I can't find an definition of what it is.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

It seems like it can be read that "objectionable current" is any current flow over conductors not designed to be current carrying. For example, an EGC isn't a current carrying conductor except under abnormal conditions, so any current flow over that would be objectionable. Same goes with bonded parts not rated as an EGC.

-John


----------



## czars (Aug 20, 2008)

Thanks Big John. It seems somewhat ironic that we spend a lot of time and effort to minimize Objectionable Current, and we all have our idea of what it is or isn't, but there is no "agreed upon definition" among us as professionals or within the NEC. Your definition is very good. However, I would add one word: NORMALLY.

"objectionable current" is any current flow over conductors not designed to NORMALLY be current carrying. EGCs are designed to carry current, as you identified, just not during NORMAL operation. 

Thanks again for your insight.


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Big John said:


> It seems like it can be read that "objectionable current" is any current flow over conductors not designed to be current carrying. For example, an EGC isn't a current carrying conductor except under abnormal conditions, so any current flow over that would be objectionable. Same goes with bonded parts not rated as an EGC.
> 
> -John



Of course UL has been listing devices that do use the EGC as a current carrying conductor.


----------



## Big John (May 23, 2010)

BBQ said:


> Of course UL has been listing devices that do use the EGC as a current carrying conductor.


 Yeah, but that was a case of being careful what you wish for, because now UL will probably stop doing that, but we gotta install neutrals at all our switches. 

-John


----------

