Originally Posted By: anatol polillo This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Fellow Inspectors,
Today I did a Townhouse. 200 amp Square D panel. One double tap. The wiring for the dryer was AL. I wrote it up because there was no anti corrosion material at the breaker. All of the other AL wire, from the service entrance was correctly sealed. They are going to bring in Sparky. Will he say that I was full of it? Am I being paranoid or is it normal to have unprotected AL at the breaker?
Originally Posted By: jmyers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Anatol,
No, you are not full of it. On the rare occasion that you are full of it, you are keeping the right company by being here and we will let you know you are full of it. 
It does not matter what anyone else is stating, you are correct when you call the aluminum wiring which is missing the anti oxidant.
Don't go getting yourself all worked up over this, aluminum wiring needs the anti oxidant coating. I really doubt that any electrician would argue it is not needed, when in fact it is.
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
For an older home you are right on the money, but a sparky probably wouldn’t see that as a big deal unless it was starting to deteriorate. The newer AA-8000 series AL wire introduced a few code cycles ago doesn’t need the compound on listed terminations. So for a new home with AL wire (not common around here), I understand the anti-oxidant compound would not be needed …
– Robert O’Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
Originally Posted By: rpalac This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hi Joe…here we go…
I agree with every thing you said, expect.....it is not a requirement by NEC to use an anti-oxidation paste.
I agree it is best practise, and I always make sure the men use it when it is an aluminum connection. However it is not required unless the manufacturer specs call for it.
The code has several sections that talk about it, but none require it.
I unfortunately had call Right Way Electric on the carpet for the very same thing on a project I was running. Right Way was the sub. I was red faced and embarrassed when I could not find any proof that it was required. They did say it was good practise but not a necessity. They also preferred not to use it in bugs because it would weep and cause the tape to come apart.
I couldn't argue.
If you find a section that requires it, let me know.
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
For a newer home I would leave it up to a sparky as a judgment call, but it’s not required by code.
Like ya said, not a big deal since a sparky was called for a double tap anyway. Doesn't hurt to have him check out the connection and add anti-oxidant compound as he feels necessary ... 
-- Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
Originally Posted By: Bob Badger This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
The only time the 2002 NEC requires the use of anti oxidation pastes is if the instructions for the terminal say to use it.
Then it would be a 110.3(B) (B) Installation and Use. issue.
Just recently I installed a GE 30 amp disconnect and the instructions asked for anti oxidation paste when aluminum conductors are used.
The only time we use aluminum conductors at the company I work for is for temporary feeders, typically 4/0 AL or 2 AWG AL. Given the short term nature of these we do not use the paste and never have trouble.
Originally Posted By: jmyers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Robert P.
Sorry dude, I did not say anything about the NEC requiring anti oxidant compound.
Robert O,
Are you sure that was a "few code cycles" ago? I remember reading about the AA 8000 a year or so ago, courtesy of Mike Holt.
Bob B,
Unfortunately, you may never see the need to anti oxidant compound on a temporary feeder. On the other hand I have seen plenty of permanent installations with corrosion on the aluminum wiring which did need the anti oxidant paste. While it is not a common problem, it does seem to coincide with high temperature appliances, such as electric stoves and high moisture basements where the panel is typically located.
I am certain that no one here meant any harm by those comments but this inspector needs to protect not only himself but his clients as well. Please try to remember that many inspectors here do not have a working knowledge like yourself. To further compound that problem, the new 8000 series of aluminum is not marked so there is no way for the inspector to know if indeed it is the newer aluminum that does not need the anti oxidant compound.
Thanks for your understanding, after all, we are all here to provide our clients with the very best possible service. 
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
JM … I have a 1996 NEC which has the requirement for the newer AA-8000 series AL wire (310-14). I’m not sure what the previous edition to that says. I’m sure that many electricians continued to used the anti-oxidant compound even after it’s introduction, and it seems some still consider this good practice. To me thats now just a sparkies choice.
Sometimes it's good to know what codes/practice has been over the years, but I think the important thing about not seeing the anti-oxidant compound on AL wire is to make sure you check for deterioration if it wasn't used.
If you want to get more granular, you could list the missing compound on an older home as a "concern" or just make a note of that, but if the wire has been in service for a while without any deterioration it's not just going to fall apart overnight. And for the newer AL wire you probably will not get deterioration without the compound, as long as everything else was done right (no double lugs, tight connection, correctly listed termination, etc.).
Just my 2-nickles ... 
-- Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
Originally Posted By: jmyers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Lisa,
I am not sure what you mean when you state direct applications. Aluminum wiring is allowed for brach circuits, unless someone here knows something that I don't.
Aluminum wiring is just as safe as copper when properly installed. I have seen solid aluminum wiring that has been around longer than I and it still perfectly safe and functioning just fine.
Most of the problems that I hear of which are associated with aluminum wiring is from products that were not listed for use with aluminum wiring, like wire nuts on the splices.
Originally Posted By: Bob Badger This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jmyers wrote:
Bob B,
Unfortunately, you may never see the need to anti oxidant compound on a temporary feeder. On the other hand I have seen plenty of permanent installations with corrosion on the aluminum wiring which did need the anti oxidant paste.
Yeah that is why I made clear that this was for short term use.
My main point was it can not be said that the NEC requires the use of the paste other than when instructed to by the terminal maker.
Ilsco a major supplier of terminals "recommends" the use of the paste, that is not an instruction included with the listing and labeling so it is not enforceable by 110.3(B)
I do have the paste in my truck and do use it on the rare occasion I make a permanent AL termination.
Previous to where I work now I spent 5 years as a electrician / mechanic for an amusement park on the ocean side.
Many feeders where AL conductors I can tell you that the high moisture combined with the salty air made the use of the paste necessary.
Required? no not often.
Good idea? Sure, it can not hurt as long as it is listed for the purpose as required by 110.14 
Originally Posted By: lwilliams This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hi Joseph,
by direct application I mean directly to appliances such as dishwashers, ranges, dryers, fridges,anything not connected to branch circuitry. In Canada AL is not allowed in branch circuitry anymore. If found (older homes) the proper coplum connections must be present. This is what I am lead to understand. Does any of this sound familiar to anyone else out there
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Lisa … you are correct about there being some serious issues with older solid AL branch circuit wiring #10 and smaller (not really an issue with the larger appliance/feeder circuits that had stranded #8 AL wire and larger).
There have been some serious past problems with fires caused by smaller AL branch circuit wiring (solid #10 and smaller) from the 1960?s to early 1970?s called "old technology" aluminum wire. The only acceptable permanent repair for this according to the CPSC is to re-attach the device with a copper pigtail connected to the old AL wire with the special COPALUM compression connector. Some also say the purple Ideal #65 connectors can be used if installed correctly ... I'm on the fence there. There have even been some more minor deterioration issues until recently (and why the connection compounds were previously required).
But Bob and Joe are right that current US model codes allow AL wiring, even though the smaller branch circuit sizes may not be readily available locally because it's not that common (at least around my part of the woods). The newer AA-8000 series AL wire required by more recent model codes is much better and doesn't have the same problems as older type AL wire. Some local codes or standards may still be a little behind the times and still prohibit small AL branch circuit wiring due to the past problems.
Here is a link to another topic that discusses the older AL wire. There are a few others if ya do a search. Hope that helps ? 
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
P.S. For those interested in verifying things for themselves concerning the newer AL wire (highly recommended), the links in the topic noted above and the following link to a Mike Holt Newsletter concerning the newer AA-8000 series AL wire should get you “started” …
Note that the newsletter does NOT specifically address "old technology" AL wire, which I think is a whole separate issue ...
Originally Posted By: jmyers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Mike,
If the sparky busts his chop, I am going to bust the sparkies chop. Anatol did the right thing especially in the case of a double tap.
Anatol is providing his clients with the best possible service by recommending a professional evaluate those conditions. In my book, he is one pretty smart man. When anyone is humble enough to swallow their ego and have someone that will know check it out, has my vote.
My self personally I would bring along the multimeter, the circuit tracer and two 1500 watt hairdryers to check the circuit! 
