A grounded conductor must NOT be dependent on a connection to a metallic enclosure, raceway or cable armor in order to meet continuity requirements. What does this imply?

• A. Continuity can rely on enclosure connections
• B. Continuity requires enclosure and armor to be continuous
• C. Continuity must be achieved without relying on enclosure, raceway, or armor
• D. Continuity is optional for grounded conductors

Answer: (C)

The main idea is that the grounding path must be reliable on its own, not dependent on metal enclosures, raceways, or cable armor. You achieve continuity of the grounded conductor by a dedicated equipment grounding path that runs with the circuit and is bonded at the proper points, so a fault can return to the source even if enclosures or armor aren’t continuous or are damaged. Relying on the enclosure or armor to carry the ground creates a fragile path that can fail if a connection or shield is broken, which is unsafe.

So continuity must be achieved without relying on enclosure, raceway, or armor. That’s why this option is correct. The other ideas would either imply relying on those metal parts, require them to be continuous, or treat grounding continuity as optional, none of which align with safe, code-based grounding practice.