Is this a problem???

The local sparky and the local AHJ says these double taps are not a problem.

Sounds like at least two more people need a Code update class or read the label inside the panel.

so they are kidding …right?

ARTICLE 408 Switchboards and Panelboards

408.41 Grounded Conductor Terminations.

Each grounded conductor shall terminate within the panelboard in an individual terminal that is not also used for another conductor.

Exception: Grounded conductors of circuits with parallel conductors shall be permitted to terminate in a single terminal if the terminal is identified for connection of more than one conductor.

It hard to say what you are talking about since everything looks good.

If you are talking about the neutral and ground wires, it’s fine.

In what part of the world would that be? Even the panel listing will tell you this is wrong. . .

Two hot wires are not allowed.

Two neutral wires not allowed.

But a neutral and a ground from the same circuit, why not?

It’s specifically prohibited in the NEC, and is in direct contradiction with the listing of the panel.

Still don’t know what is the worst thing that can happen.

Around here it is considered an acceptable practice. I don’t know one city inspector that will call it out.

I’m so use to seeing this type of installation around here that I never questioned it. I though I seen in the NEC that a neutral and ground are allowed. I’ll have to look.

Acceptable practice??? Um…do the letters “BS” mean anything to you?


The picture in question are not two neutrals. They are a neutral and a ground wire.

I agree that two neutrals are not allowed and clearly noted in the NEC. City Inspectors around here would also not allow that kind of installation.

The NEC says nothing about two neutrals;

408.21 Grounded Conductor Terminations. Each grounded conductor shall terminate within the panelboard in an individual terminal that is not also used for another conductor.

The panel listing allows for 1 neutral per termination, and up to 3 grounding conductors per termination.

Trying to get a home inspection report done so I don’t have time now to look it up.

Still don’t know what the worst thing that can happen.

In general terms:

I believe it has to do with the “clamping pressure” of the terminal screw with respect to surfaces and a “current” carrying conductor. Normally the Grounding conductor is NOT carrying current (in a perfect world ,its a “safety”) so they can be grouped per NEC up to three per termination as Jeff P. has posted.

If you add two “conductors” such as the Grounded (neutral, current carrying) conductor and a Grounding conductor under one terminal it maybe possibly to not properly “fastened” or properly apply correct pressure on the conductors for proper amperage (current) to pass on a smaller surface area due to clamping screw making less contact on the two conductors. Proper torque or pressure on the conductor also determines the amperage at that point. Think surface area and current with respect to responsibility of the conductor. :neutral:

Here, read this. It will “esplain” it.

In your left picture… Second set from the top… Is that a neutral and a ground or two neutrals? I thought it was two neutrals.

The reationale (for not having neutral and ground under same screw) given in the referenced article concerns only the desire to maintain the integrity of the ground connection if and when the neutral is disconnected. While there is no doubt that maintiainng the ground connection maximizes safety under the most unlikely conditions, it is equally easy to see how very many AHJ would not see it as necessary, because after you turn off the breaker there is no power being supplied to the served load at all. Thus, it really does not matter a lot whether any of that circuit’s conductors are connected.

All that said, the code really doesn’t leave room for any such intepretation. Hopefully future code editions will clarify further. Personally if I saw a panel that well done otherwise, I probably would not write it up unless the home was very new.

The house was built in 2006.

Given that date, I would call it out because any electrician working in today’s world should know better, whether or not, it is “really” that large a hazard.

If a home inspector want’s to call this out, how old the panel is shouldn’t be a factor. If I, the home inspector, feels this can be a safety issue, then I should call it out on all panels (just like we do for the lack of GFCI receptacles). If I know that a city/town is allowing this type of installation, I would think that should also be noted.

In other words, this type of installation is no safer or dangerous now than it was 20 years ago.

Regarding me calling it out, you guys have convinced me that my clients should be aware. While I still don’t feel this is a safety or performance issue, I plan on including it in my reports. It will be interesting to see if I hear anything from the builder from today’s report.