Murray Split Main Panel
Looks like some handle ties not originally designed for use as handle ties. About 9,000 NM cables going through one Tomic connector. Grounds made up outside the enclosure. Missing GEC(s). The conductors on the 30 amp “tied” breakers may or may not be of an appropriate gauge for that size OCPD device. Hard to tell. That’s some stuff I notice right off the bat.
If those grounds outside of the box were done before 1967 (going off memory, but close), they might have been done legally.
Home was built in 1966. Original Panel…
I noted the improper grounding anyway…
The Roofing Nails as breaker ties were interesting…
Legally or not…recommend those EGC’s be bought into the box properly as if the entire house has this then it can go from a ungrounded system to a grounded system and be a MORE appealing sale…people seem to want it.
Bet their are 3 prong plugs in the house…done without that nice EGC being done…:)…
The 1965 NEC I have talks about grounding the receptacles IF they have a grounding terminal…starts to get BLURRY after that unless it is to equipment and then they require it.
Technically, the breakers feeding the lower bus should also be tied together. . .
My gut sorta tells me the same thing, but darned if I can come up with anything specific that would require that. You got something? I can find stuff about branch circuits, but not for services or feeders.
The fact that the lower bus would be considered a “240 volt circuit” or a 240 volt feed, is enough for me. There is at least one two-pole breaker fed from the lower bus, so there is the potential for only one leg to be energized.
Yeah, that’s why my gut is telling me the same thing you’re thinking, but there is nothing that I can find that requires simultaneous opeing of both poles of the overcurrent device in a service. For some branch circuits, yes. After all, you protect 240 volt circuits with 2 fuses, and there’s no “handle tie” for a fuse that blows. There is no hazard created when 240 volt single phase circuit is “half hot” or has a “dead leg”.
Several arguments could be made for either case, but for the record, that would be my recommendation.
215.2(B)(2) addresses feeders supplying a combination of transformers and utilization equipment. I think the lower bus qualifies as utilization equipment, although there is no transformer.
225.38(B), 225.53 and 230.74 address building or structure service disconnects. Obviously, this is not the service disconnect.
As there is no “danger” of an over-loaded neutral, this wouldn’t qualify as in multi-wire circuits. . .
So. . .
I can’t find a “requirement” either, but I would still make the recommendation. We’ll see what others have to say. . .
****Utilization Equipment. **Equipment that utilizes electric energy for electronic,
electromechanical, chemical, heating, lighting, or similar purposes.
Not sure I would use that one…lol
But I love where ya are going…:)**
Just shootin’ from the hip - to see what sticks 
External splicing of the EGCs as seen in this photo has never been permitted, as they would still be required to be bonded to the enclosure.
Who says this is the service panel? Where is the service disconnect?
Taking a closer look at this picture… I blew it up as much as the picture would allow before it became blurry…
If this is a service panel, I cannot see an GEC going towards a Grounding Electrode.
If this is a secondary panel (subpanel), there is no neutral conductor, or… the neutral conductor is bare(taped at the entry) and there is no equipment grounding conductor.
This panel needs someone to take a closer look at it.
Prior to about 1967, the code was mute on the matter.
This is the only Panel in the Home.
It is located within the Garage (Exterior Wall) directly opposite the overhead service drop and Meter.
Some utility companies permit the installation of the GEC in the meterpan, maybe that is so in the location where this picture was taken.