Is This A Code Violation: One Wire, Two Lugs?

Zinsco

I put this 200 amp service in yesterday and ran a #4 (Bare Armored Ground) GEC to a water pipe, but since the wire was too big for the grounding bus in the panel, I split it between screws. I can't find any violation in the book, so I wonder if this is code compliant? Looks like my pic is sideways, but this is a Murray all-in-one panel.

Attached Thumbnails

 

Speedy Petey

Yup, that is a violation and no, it was not necessary. That wire WILL fit that bar.

__________________

DavidC

I agree it is a code violation and not necessary. I twist the wire tight with my pliers and it slides in pretty easy.

But what is the reasoning behind the code in this case? Practically speaking it will work and you could even argue that it is less likely to fail completely because of the double connection.

Good Luck
Dave

__________________
www.CookContractingLLC.com

mrmike

Right on Here !
One other Thing, You don't need ground rods in LA ?? Here, you need 2 Ground rods 6 ft apart with a continuos loop from the Panel & the Inspector may even have you also run to the water main coming into the Structure....................

Zinsco

Ya know, I didn't even try to get it under one screw, OK, live and learn. Yes, here in Los Angeles we run a #6 to a single ground rod. I've never installed nor have I ever seen a second ground rod.

Thanks guys

woodchuck2

If you cant for some reason get the ground wire into the buss then use one of these http://www.grainger.com/1/1/82838-sq...utral-lug.html .

Bubbles

Have this printed out for your inspector next time he ask's you for 2 ground rods.

2008 NEC—250.56

Resistance of Rod, Pipe, and Plate Electrodes.

A single electrode consisting of a rod, pipe, or plate that does not have a resistance to ground of 25 ohms or less shall be augmented by one additional electrode of any of the types specified by 250.52(A)(4) through (A)(8). Where multiple rod, pipe, or plate electrodes are installed to meet the requirements of this section, they shall not be less than 1.8 m (6 ft.) apart.

The requirement for a single electrode that does not have a resistance of 25 ohms or less to be augmented does not apply to any electrodes other than rod, pipe or plate. It is required to augment such an electrode with one additional electrode of any of the types specified by 250.52(A)(4) through 250.52(A)(8) so 250.52(A)(1) for underground metal water pipes, 250.52(A)(2) for metal frame of a building or structure, and 250.52(A)(3) for concrete-encased electrodes were deleted from the list of permissible electrodes to be used for augmenting the rod, pipe or plate electrodes.

Just like a criminal case. It's up to them to prove it's not 25 ohms or less. Not your problem. Although, you'll be getting turned down for screws on covers missing and things like that for the next 2 yrs.

AtlRemodeling

My electrician has used these in the past and I know from my electrician that the neutral lug is required by code. But, In looking at this setup it appears that it is no different in theory than way zinsco wired it.

wireless

What is the violation?

JohnJ0906

That neutral/ground bar has certain wire sizes it has been tested for/is rated for. 1/2 of a #4 isn't one of those sizes.
Besides, as Speedy said, that #4 will fit into one of those terminals.

__________________
John from Baltimore
"One Day at a Time"
All replies based on the 2008 NEC

Speedy Petey

Exactly. Thank you John.

__________________

DavidC

O.K., we have determined that the wire does fit in that bar and will not pass inspection if you split it and use 2 connections. Is the only reasoning because it hasn't been tested or rated as a split connection? Or am I missing a safety factor here?

Good Luck
Dave

__________________
www.CookContractingLLC.com

woodchuck2

Thanks for the info, if memory serves me when i spoke to the inspector about this several yrs ago the 2 ground rods and 6' apart application was a requirement by the POCO. I have gotten away with using an existing ground pipe and one ground rod in the past as long they were 6' apart and continuous loop. I have found it is easier to just ask the inspector what he wants to see when i am in doubt. Makes life much easier.

Static Design

So what is the violation? is art 110.3 (b) ?

__________________
Will do autocad/ 3d work for food.
SD on facebook... click here

Magnettica

They fit alright but just barely.

OP: I would suggest getting a lug and attaching it to the ground buss if you're having issues getting that #4.

__________________
Electrician service in Rahway, Cranford, Clark, Westfield, Mountainside, Scotch Plains, Fanwood, Roselle, Roselle Park, and New Jersey | Same day electrical service and repairs | Licensed and Insured Electrician in Rahway

mrmike

I think your right on here Paul- it is in the National Grid Service Guidelines book on the 2 ground rods- which it seems to have been this way for many, many years. It has been just automatic for me to use 2 rods.........

ampman

may be in violation of manu reccomendations for installation

__________________
an army of sheep lead by a lion will defeat an army of lions lead by a sheep

Magnettica

The 2nd ground rod is employed because of NEC 250.56

__________________
Electrician service in Rahway, Cranford, Clark, Westfield, Mountainside, Scotch Plains, Fanwood, Roselle, Roselle Park, and New Jersey | Same day electrical service and repairs | Licensed and Insured Electrician in Rahway

JohnJ0906

I agree, #4 stranded can be tricky - #4 solid is no problem. I like to have a few lugs on the truck for these situations.

I'll be honest - I did it the way shown in the OP for a long time, before it was pointed out to me that it was a violation.

__________________
John from Baltimore
"One Day at a Time"
All replies based on the 2008 NEC