Electrician forgot to connect ground wire....how big of deal is this?

[Cow]

Texie, you're saying that even if the #10 wire is an optional EGC (and the conduit is the "intended" EGC), the wire still has to be sized per 250.122? So it needs to either be removed or made bigger?

Yes, as silly as that sounds.

 

[ActionDave]

The problem, in my opinion, is that the electrician used an insulated lug that was intended to be used for a neutral as his landing point for an equipment ground. He probably should have installed a lug for the EGC directly to the box instead. If there was a neutral in the circuit this wouldn't have happened.

It's common for disconnects to have the option to insert a bond screw and convert the neutral lug to an EGC lug.

 

[awesomesauce]

One of our guys (who isn't a native English speaker) mentioned that he kept getting "ESD" when he touched this equipment. Now I understand why...

As much as the code errs on the side of caution and designs for the worst possible scenarios, it sure scares me that someone just forgot to tighten this green screw down, and as a result, it would have taken a very minor failure (say, one of the supply phases coming loose and touching the chassis) to easily kill someone.

So, tangential question: Why did this work not require an engineer's stamp (or: who was responsible for appropriately sizing the EGC)? And shouldn't it have been inspected (and/or: would an inspector have caught this?)

(These are all questions I'll ask the facilities guy, tomorrow, but just curious to get some other input, first...)

 

[jaggedben]

It's common for disconnects to have the option to insert a bond screw and convert the neutral lug to an EGC lug.

Fair enough. I've never used one that way but I don't know it to be a violation. Arguably one should double-check the green screw connection though, with this thread as a case in point.

 

[infinity]

It's common for disconnects to have the option to insert a bond screw and convert the neutral lug to an EGC lug.

If it's so listed I agree that would make it complaint otherwise it's a neutral bar being used incorrectly as Texie outlined.

 

[iwire]

If it's so listed I agree that would make it complaint otherwise it's a neutral bar being used incorrectly as Texie outlined.

I have to say my first reaction would be to laugh out loud if an inspector tried to fail an inspection over this.

If they pushed the issue I would have to comply but would be stupid.

 

[infinity]

I have to say my first reaction would be to laugh out loud if an inspector tried to fail an inspection over this.

If they pushed the issue I would have to comply but would be stupid.

I agree. On our last few projects the building owners have hired outside consultants to "inspect" the work as it progresses. It seems like these guys are looking for anything to flag as a problem because it justifies their position as being necessary.

 

[ptonsparky]

Interesting. I suppose that makes sense. It doesn't look like the terminal and screw came with the disconnect, though.

I usually have to order the neutral bar separately from the disconnect. My supplier knows I want them so he now keeps a few on hand.

 

[kwired]

One of our guys (who isn't a native English speaker) mentioned that he kept getting "ESD" when he touched this equipment. Now I understand why...

As much as the code errs on the side of caution and designs for the worst possible scenarios, it sure scares me that someone just forgot to tighten this green screw down, and as a result, it would have taken a very minor failure (say, one of the supply phases coming loose and touching the chassis) to easily kill someone.

So, tangential question: Why did this work not require an engineer's stamp (or: who was responsible for appropriately sizing the EGC)? And shouldn't it have been inspected (and/or: would an inspector have caught this?)

(These are all questions I'll ask the facilities guy, tomorrow, but just curious to get some other input, first...)

The designer is responsible for appropriately sizing the EGC - designer and installer are likely the same person in this case.
Even if it was engineered or inspected a loose screw could be easily overlooked If all the grounding conductors were on a multiple terminal bar one could still end up not tightening all the terminals properly - stuff happens.

If you fail to properly tighten a current carrying conductor you usually find out when the item fails to work.

If you fail to properly tighten the EGC, it can go for years without being noticed in some instances - as long as it is never called upon to do it's thing - no one ever knows there is anything wrong.

 

[jtinge]

The conduit to the service disconnect is metallic, but the cable from the disconnect to the equipment is a thick piece of SO cable.

On a side note, it doesn't appear that the connection from the disconnect to the equipment is code compliant if SO cord is being used as a permanent wiring method. Need to check against 400.7 and 400.8....

400.7 Uses Permitted
(A) Uses. Flexible cords and cables shall be used only for the following:
(1) Pendants.
(2) Wiring of luminaires.
(3) Connection of portable luminaires, portable and mobile signs, or appliances.
(4) Elevator cables.
(5) Wiring of cranes and hoists.
(6) Connection of utilization equipment to facilitate frequent interchange.
(7) Prevention of the transmission of noise or vibration.
(8) Appliances where the fastening means and mechanical connections are specifically designed to permit ready removal for maintenance and repair, and the appliance is intended or identified for flexible cord connection.
(9) Connection of moving parts.
(10) Where specifically permitted elsewhere in this Code.
(11) Between an existing receptacle outlet and an inlet, where the inlet provides power to an additional single receptacle outlet. The wiring interconnecting the inlet to the single receptacle outlet shall be a Chapter 3 wiring method. The inlet, receptacle outlet, and Chapter 3 wiring method, including the flexible cord and fittings, shall be a listed assembly specific for this application.

(B) Attachment Plugs. Where used as permitted in 400.7(A)(3), (A)(6), and (A)(8), each flexible cord shall be equipped with an attachment plug and shall be energized from a receptacle outlet or cord connector body.
Exception: As permitted in 368.56.

400.8 Uses Not Permitted
Unless specifically permitted in 400.7, flexible cords and cables shall not be used for the following:
(1) As a substitute for the fixed wiring of a structure
(2) Where run through holes in walls, structural ceilings, suspended ceilings, dropped ceilings, or floors
(3) Where run through doorways, windows, or similar openings
(4) Where attached to building surfaces

 

[jap]

I think it might help the OP to point out that the point where the EGC is connected in the disconnect in the photo is actually a neutral bar converted to an EG bar by installing the factory bond screw. This is a common practice where the disconnect is not being used a service disconnect and there is no neutral involved in the application. It achieves the same result when used under these conditions. I'm not sure that it meets the letter of the code but is a very common practice and if the factory screw has been tightened correctly you would not have had an issue.
As for the #10 EGC in the supply circuit, that is obviously undersized as pointed out by others. But if the conduit qualifies as an EGC you don't need a wire type EGC at all to be compliant. Note though that this wire type EGC would be viewed as an optional EGC if the conduit qualifies as the EGC but it would still have to be sized per 250.122.

My thoughts exactly.
I was just wondering where the 2nd lug on the neutral bar went to?
When I do this, I bring the EGC to the lugs on the Insulated Bar and use the bonding screw to bond the enclosure of the disconnect.
In my mind this makes a more direct return path rather than having to use the metal of the enclosure, through the bonding screw and back to the source when and EGC is used for both line and load.

JAP>

 

[ggunn]

If you fail to properly tighten the EGC, it can go for years without being noticed in some instances - as long as it is never called upon to do it's thing - no one ever knows there is anything wrong.

Deleted by me.

 

[kwired]

Deleted by me.

Is that a way of "unfriending" someone?

 

[ggunn]

Is that a way of "unfriending" someone?

Nah, it's a way of removing a pre coffee brain fart response on my part.

 

[greg4230]

WHERES THE MISSING #6 EGC ??

WHERES THE MISSING #6 EGC ??

PICTURE SEEMS TO BE MISSING #6 EGC GOING TO A PLACE WHERE A NEUTRAL SHOULD GO IF IT WHERE USED. THE #10 IS ONLY TO GROUND THE CAN WHICH PROBABLY CAN'T HANDLE A 200 AMP SHORT TO ENCLOSURE. I WOULD REMOVE THE ISOLATED NEUTRAL BLOCK AND SCRAPE THE PAINT ON THE SURFACE AND PUT A LUG THERE TO LAND ALL MY EGC'S. THIS WOULD ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR A CHEESY 10/32 ALUMINUM GROUND SCREW.I THINK 1 POINT GROUNDING IS GOOD.

 

[kwired]

PICTURE SEEMS TO BE MISSING #6 EGC GOING TO A PLACE WHERE A NEUTRAL SHOULD GO IF IT WHERE USED. THE #10 IS ONLY TO GROUND THE CAN WHICH PROBABLY CAN'T HANDLE A 200 AMP SHORT TO ENCLOSURE. I WOULD REMOVE THE ISOLATED NEUTRAL BLOCK AND SCRAPE THE PAINT ON THE SURFACE AND PUT A LUG THERE TO LAND ALL MY EGC'S. THIS WOULD ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR A CHEESY 10/32 ALUMINUM GROUND SCREW.I THINK 1 POINT GROUNDING IS GOOD.

That neutral block and bonding screw were listed for the purpose, there is nothing wrong with using them. The only thing that is wrong with the install is the undersized #10 EGC installed with the supply side conductors, and possibly improperly tightened bonding screw.

That bonding screw is not aluminum, it would twist off very easily if it were.

You can still remove the block, scrape paint, etc. if it makes you feel better though. Looks like that block has holes intended for more lugs to be attached to as well.