Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Western Montana
    Posts
    261

    Default 2nd Opinion Please on bonding

    Having a discussion with realtor on a house I inspected the other day (he also happens to be the president of local board realtors this year). He called out an electrician today to review what I called out in my report, and basically said that the electrician said there was nothing wrong with the bonding and grounding.

    1965 house, a room was added at rear, basement finished in 1990.

    At service entrance, I see two hot conductors, a system grounding conductor, and a neutral that all pass through the wall to inside. (Ignore the splices, those are installed by the city sewer department, and are accepted by the city electrical inspectors, long story not worth going into).

    At the Main distribution panel in the basement, I see all four conductors coming in. The system grounding conductor is attached to a lug on the interior side of the panel. (Ignore the fact that this is a Federal Pacific panel, and ignore the fact that most breakers have been replaced, and ingore the fact that three breakers are double-taped).

    The neutral (grounded conductor) goes to what appears to be a floating bus bar. Of course all the equipment grounds and neutrals all meet at this bus bar.

    Here is the main gist of what I said in the report:
    "1) Equipment ground wires are not connected to the grounding system. Grounding conductor and grounded conductors (neutral) are not isolated at this panel; bonding has already been accomplished at the meter.
    2) Double-tapping observed at breakers 2, 6, and 24.
    Note: No room is available at this panel for expansion for added circuits. We recommend that a licensed electrician review the panel and make all corrections necessary for safe and proper operation of the system."

    The realtors electrician states that "well, that how it was done in 1965 and therefore is mostly ok. He plans to somehow replace or rearrange a few breakers (I assume to take care of the double-tapping), but he apparently sees no problem with the grounding and bonding at this panel. (Of course, this is 2nd hand, so don't know for sure what the electrician actually said, wish I had been there).

    What is you opinion??? What would you have said in your inspection report?

    Similar Threads:
    ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images
    Inspection Referral

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Memphis TN.
    Posts
    4,311

    Default Re: 2nd Opinion Please on bonding


    What is you opinion???
    .
    What would you have said in your inspection report?
    .
    Federal Pacific Electrical Panel is beyond it's Service Life and needs Replaced.
    .

    Last edited by Billy Stephens; 12-05-2008 at 06:27 PM.
    It Might have Choked Artie But it ain't gone'a choke Stymie! Our Gang " The Pooch " (1932)
    Billy J. Stephens HI Service Memphis TN.

  3. #3
    Ron Bibler's Avatar
    Ron Bibler Guest

    Default Re: 2nd Opinion Please on bonding

    You called it out correctly. Now let them deal with it.
    but just do not go back on any reinspection.

    Best

    Ron


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,252

    Default Re: 2nd Opinion Please on bonding

    You called it right, plus you did tell them that it was an FPE panel and that should be replaced.

    Additionally, there are improperly attached terminals attached to the enclosure sides being used for grounds.

    Tell the electrician that the neutrals were supposed to be isolated from grounds after the service equipment going back to at least around 1928 (give or take) and that the learning curve for some electricians and inspectors has taken longer than anyone thought it would take, and that unless he is 80 years old, it goes back to before he was even born - who did he learn it from, some old timer who learned it from some old timer, and no one has bothered to keep up with the codes?

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  5. #5
    Jeff Remas's Avatar
    Jeff Remas Guest

    Default Re: 2nd Opinion Please on bonding

    You are correct, good call. EC needs some learnin


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Greenville, N.C.
    Posts
    254

    Default Frank Adam panel

    Is anyone familiar with a Frank Adam brand panel and are there any opinions?

    The home is 75 yrs. +/-. Everything looked prettly standard in the panl and I have no real issues. Just never heard of that brand. It was one of 5 panels in the 400 amp serviced home.


  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    2,481

    Default Re: Frank Adam panel

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffrey L. Mathis View Post
    Is anyone familiar with a Frank Adam brand panel and are there any opinions?

    The home is 75 yrs. +/-. Everything looked prettly standard in the panl and I have no real issues. Just never heard of that brand. It was one of 5 panels in the 400 amp serviced home.
    Jeffrey,

    I have not. Might be some local manufacturer. I have seen furnaces constructed locally, so maybe electrical panels were as well.

    Department of Redundancy Department
    http://www.FullCircleInspect.com/

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,252

    Default Re: 2nd Opinion Please on bonding

    I've only seen a few, don't know anything about them.

    A search did find this: Mike Holt Newsletter

    Other than being obsolete, and therefore replacement *is not* out of the question, I don't know much about them.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  9. #9
    John Steinke's Avatar
    John Steinke Guest

    Default Re: 2nd Opinion Please on bonding

    I don't think I've ever seen four wires going in as the service. Our usual grounding / bonding rules seem to assume that the service will have only a neutral, and no ground.

    I think it's time for a chat with the PoCo and see what's really going on.


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,252

    Default Re: 2nd Opinion Please on bonding

    Quote Originally Posted by John Steinke View Post
    I don't think I've ever seen four wires going in as the service.
    .

    John,

    I've seen it in some areas. Seems as though they want the ground to be grounded and the neutral, which is also grounded, to be there too. Their reason was, as can be seen in that photo, the neutral is continuous through the service equipment/main disconnect enclosure instead of landing on a terminal as is typical, even required. The ground, then, is used to ground the service equipment enclosure, which, in the case in the photo, is one and the same for the meter - which doubly makes no sense.

    But I have seen it before, usually, though, with separate meter can and service equipment enclosures.

    Our usual grounding / bonding rules seem to assume that the service will have only a neutral, and no ground.
    To re-phrase what you said, "Our usual grounding / bonding rules seem to assume that the service will have only a neutral, *which is also the* ground."

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •