MAIN BONDING JUMPER & BUILDING STEEL

[LECTRICBOSS]

I HAVE INSTALLED A SIEMENS 200 AMP THREE PHASE LOADCENTER IN AN OLDER LEASE BUILDING. WE INSTALLED AN 8' GROUND ROD AND TIED TO BUILDING STEEL. THE PANEL ALSO CAME WITH 2 GROUNDING BARS ATTACHED TO THE BACK OF THE CAN WITH MACHINE SCREWS AND THE MAIN BONDING JUMPER SCREW THAT IS ATTACHED TO THE NEUTRAL BAR THAT IS INSTALLED WHEN THE PANEL IS THE MAIN SERVICE ENTRANCE WHICH IN THIS CASE IS THE MAIN FOR THE BUILDING. OUR INSPECTOR POO-POO'S THIS MAIN BONDING JUMPER SCREW INSTALLED INTO THE BACK OF THE METAL PANEL CAN SAYING I MUST INSTALL A #4 CONDUCTOR FROM THE NEUTRAL BAR TO EACH GROUNDING BAR, PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL GROUND ROD AND THAT THE BUILDING STEEL WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS A GROUNDING ELECTRODE (THE BUILDING IS A STEEL BEAM AND STEEL BAR JOIST BUILDING). NOW I CAN SEE WHERE THE BUILDING STEEL BE MIGHT NOT BE CONSIDERED BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW THE BOLTS WERE ATTACHED TO THE FOOTINGS SO BONDING WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND WE WOULDN'T COUNT THIS AS AN ELECTRODE ALTHOUGH I HAVE NEVER SEEN IT TO BE A PROBLEM HERE. ANY THOUGHTS?

 

[augie47]

First thought is "kill the CAPS" , indicates yelling and makes the post hard to read for some.
To the point electrically. As far as the loadcenter is concerned, I would disagree with your inspector as to the need for added bonding based on 250.28.
Assuming the panel is listed, the bond screw was "factory", and the equipment grounding bars are installed per manufacturer, I see no reason he could possibly require jumpers.
(If the equipment ground bars were fastened in a questionable manner, I could see his request)
If memory serves me correctly the Code has addressed the building steel in various the last few cycles. In '08 it is covered by 250.52(A)(2). I can see an inspector asking for an additional ground rod based on 250.56 where the steel bond is questionable.