In my opinion the panel manufacturer does not give you enough lugs in some circumstances (larger homes with many circuits in one panel) to indivisually place the grounded conductor (neutral) under one lug. For the most part I also note it in my report and mention for improved electrical safety you may want to repair.
You just need to buy the add in kits to add extra lugs
Did something change with the NEC 2005? This section is no longer there. Maybe it moved… Currently, WI still uses the NEC 2005 excluding the AFCI section.
In the 2005 NEC, it was moved to 408.41.
Jeff
Great! Thank you! I found it.
Unforeteally we allready took in 2008 NEC code in effect and it should be allready in effect.{ yeah with few addments and deletesments }
Look up the Comm 16 they change a bit in there.
{ The Comm 16 is State of Wisconsin electrical code }
The AFCI requirement will be in use after 2010 { I will have to find the details when they will be in effect }
Merci,Marc
I see this all the time. The ground and neutral from the same circuit under the same lug. I suppose the installers think it makes the panel look organized.
I apologize for the Necro thread here.
This was not an inspection I did. I was helping an Electrician doing an inspection report repair. I was taping up a dryer duct in the attic, he was adding a grommet to this panel. Someone had fished NM through a punchout with no grommet.
When I looked at the panel, I saw all these grounds and neutrals ganged up. This SquareD panel does allow 2 conductors. I KNOW that neutrals should always be on their lonesome, but, as per this thread, prior to 2002, it wasn’t super clear. This home was built in 2001 and this is from the original builder. The HI didn’t call it out and the electrician said he just makes a note of it on his report.
I think the HI report should have at least mentioned this, but it does not, I read the entire electric section.
What is some good verbiage? I will definitely note this if I see it, but I don’t think I’ll call it a maintenance item and trigger a lot of pushback.
1 Like
Good… because it’s not, but it is a safety concern!
This has been an issue for many decades, but it wasn’t worded very well in code so it slipped through the cracks.
It was rewritten in Code about 2000, and immediately became enforced!!
Double Tap.pdf (89.2 KB)
1 Like
What I see in Mark’s picture is that neutrals and grounds have been put under the same lug.
This is not the same as double tapped neutrals, as described by the document in your link.
In 2001 I do not believe it was prohibited to combine a neutral and a ground under the same lug but I’ll defer to one of our electrical experts on that.
I think this is wrong. The square D breakers have a clamp that can accept two conductors. what you have pictured in your inquiry is neutrals and grounds double tapped on the neutral bus, which uses screws to hold the conductors in the thru-hole. Breakers and neutral buses are different.
2 Likes
Bert… If you are referring to the link in my post above… and…
If you had read the entire Document, you would have seen that the last paragraph addresses the exact condition in Marks photo.
2 Likes
As I read the document again, I gues it could mean that a neutral can’t be combined with another neutral OR ground. It must be the only wire under the screw. So Maybe JJ has it right?
2 Likes
Maybe??
Ha Ha. Posted at the same time. Yes, I read it again and I think you are right.
1 Like
That’s as good as you are going to get from me today. 
4 Likes
And that illustrates why for decades electricians got away with double lugging conductors!
4 Likes
The issue as I understand it, is that it wasn’t spelled out in the code but was instead a panel manufacturer’s or UL requirement not to have neutrals sharing a connection with any other conductor. But since sparkys’ were doing it anyway, it was finally added to the code.
2 Likes
And why do you think that was?
Nobody was telling them not to and also some older panels don’t have much bus bar room.
2 Likes
That’s the excuses they like to use.
Yes, the lack of room was born out of laziness. Nobody wanted to add additional Buses.
The primary reason though, is that was how their ‘Master’ trained them to do it as an apprentice. It began with laziness and profits, then moved onto speed and profits.
And correct, (with few exceptions), nobody was enforcing the requirements.
Heck, most AHJs were/are retired Sparky’s and inspect the same way they worked… using the same bad information!
I still see this level of AHJ knowledge today!
3 Likes