110.12(B): Repair vs. Replace

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SPARKLEY

Member
Location
Denver, CO
Occupation
Electrician
In a 200amp Nema1 MCB loadcenter, the CU Service Entrance Conductors coming from the meter housing were poorly installed and contorted. One main lug was bent outward and appeared to me to be under extreme tension (a side view would've better shown the bend angle of the lug, but see the leftmost terminal). Doing this for 40 years, I felt there was risk of this lug connection breaking and the SEC shorting against the inside of the deadfront, which would then clear (or burn itself out) due to no OCP between the SEC and the utility grid. I also felt that the terminal was neither designed to bend, nor to be bent back into position, but was damaged and that bending it back into place could void the equipment listing.

I showed the customer the situation and I then recommended we replace both the offending SEC and the main breaker kit.

GE lug.jpg

Other electricians at my company felt this solution was excessive, and that the lug should be bent back into position.

I’m asking you veterans to weigh in on 110.12(B):

Internal parts of electrical equipment, including busbars, wiring terminals, insulators, and other surfaces, shall not be damaged or contaminated by foreign materials such as paint, plaster, cleaners, abrasives, or corrosive residues. There shall be no damaged parts that may adversely affect safe operation or mechanical strength of the equipment such as parts that are broken; bent; cut; or deteriorated by corrosion, chemical action, or overheating.

Does the NEC allow for a bent part such as this to be repaired instead of replaced?
 
It’s up to the guy doing the work, IMO...
I can kind of see the bent lug, and I agree a side view would have been better.
was it a lug that was screwed into the bar with one screw in the center, or an all in one piece lug?
I say the wire needs to be trained into position, and as far as the lug, your decision is right. You were there, so it’s your call.

the ones that weren’t there say it can be bent. I’m not there and haven’t seen the situation, so it’s easy to say “ bend it back”
it’s the difference between the flex that’s there anyway by untrained wire, and actually bending which weakens the material.
 
I’m asking you veterans to weigh in on 110.12(B):

Internal parts of electrical equipment, including busbars, wiring terminals, insulators, and other surfaces, shall not be damaged or contaminated by foreign materials such as paint, plaster, cleaners, abrasives, or corrosive residues. There shall be no damaged parts that may adversely affect safe operation or mechanical strength of the equipment such as parts that are broken; bent; cut; or deteriorated by corrosion, chemical action, or overheating.

Does the NEC allow for a bent part such as this to be repaired instead of replaced?
Click to expand...


methinks at least 1/2 my state would qualify Mr Sparkley
:cautious:
but i suppose we become desensitized over time

codes aside, you did the 'better job' ......bravo!
🏆
anecdotally , i've enough bandaids out there that were allegedly on my customers xmas list to remedy,and never did

~RJ~
 
romex jockey said:
methinks at least 1/2 my state would qualify Mr Sparkley
:cautious:
but i suppose we become desensitized over time

codes aside, you did the 'better job' ......bravo!
🏆
anecdotally , i've enough bandaids out there that were allegedly on my customers xmas list to remedy,and never did

~RJ~
Click to expand...
If I could get my non paying family’s small fixit lists complete I would be happy..
 
It's definately seeing some stress. Something like that even if it it could be re bent and the wire shortened to go in the lug properly, who would want to take it apart twice. I wouldn't want to touch it unless I had some new parts in case it needed to be changed. I think you made the right call
 
Why would one suggest replacing the conductors, besides being poorly shaped into the terminal are they damaged in any way?
 
infinity said:
Why would one suggest replacing the conductors, besides being poorly shaped into the terminal are they damaged in any way?
Click to expand...
yes I should've explained that better... the distance from the nipple to the main lug was too short for the installer to bend the SEC properly, so the SEC needed to be longer to allow it to enter the panel and 'loop' into the main lug.

That said, the debate only concerns repair vs. replacement of the terminal, sorry I was unclear on that point...
 
Terminals sometimes twist when inserting the conductors and also when they're tightened but it does not mean automatically that they will fail. As I said prior IMO from what is visible in the photo there is no issue.
 
I don't see this as a code issue, I see this as a business opportunity.

  • Give the customer your plan, with price and warranty.
  • Then give the customer the bend it back in place option without warranty. (no way I am accepting responsibility for the component to fail again)

Now the customer gets to choose if price or quality is more important. And your conscience is clear.
 
Thanks everyone for your input. I took this case to the State Electrical Board for their input. They ruled that

1. Repairing instead of replacing a bent wiring terminal is a violation of 110.12(B)

2. The terminal was not designed to bend, or to be bent back into position, and this damage voided the equipment listing
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top