Would you write this bonding wiring method up?

Specific Inspection Topics Electrical Inspections
1

I was trying to find @ruecker 's fairly recent post concerning writing certain things up that seem insignificant in the grand scheme of things but I don’t remember the name of the topic.

I’m about to publish a report for a seller pre-listing and I’m torn about writing this multiple-instance “not as designed” install up. It’s a red wire that is incorrectly wired into fixture/receptacle boxes that is only used to bond copper water supply piping. Bonding is our friend but its just not the way to do it properly.

The last photo under the kitchen sink is not very clear but the red wire is tapped into the outlet around the cover plate and attached/bonded to the copper water supply pipe next to it.

Would you write this up?

On a side note, I was concerned about the holes in the attic j-box potentially allowing sparks to exit the junction box holes that the red wires are attached through but the adjacent can light knockouts have screwdriver slots that are similar in size and large enough to allow sparks to escape as well. We often comment on missing j-box covers or knockouts but how small a hole or gap is even allowable? Down the rabbit hole I go :smiley: :rabbit2:

Edit: After posting this, I feel that there might be some other reason for this “bonding” or at least some info that might help in determining the reasoning…This is a 1958 home with ungrounded branch circuits. The majority of the outlets were ungrounded but there were a couple that did test as grounded and I pulled off a cover of one of the outlets and it had a ground wire appropriately connected. I did not observe a GEC at the Zinsco main panel’s factory neutral bus but did observe some ground wires attached to the bus. The last pictures show the neutral/ground bus in the main panel.

Maybe the above mentioned bonding is being used as a GEC for the couple/few outlets that tested positive for being grounded?

IMG_0889
IMG_08891920×2560 196 KB

IMG_0813
IMG_08131920×1440 280 KB

IMG_0841
IMG_08411920×1440 238 KB

B351E223-71BD-426F-92DA-C6F3BB769718_1_105_c
B351E223-71BD-426F-92DA-C6F3BB769718_1_105_c768×1024 275 KB

53AB54A7-DC6E-4F56-852F-D782D0C35A8D_1_105_c
53AB54A7-DC6E-4F56-852F-D782D0C35A8D_1_105_c768×1024 245 KB

E8E0B418-FCE0-456E-95BB-935F0AAEC973_1_105_c
E8E0B418-FCE0-456E-95BB-935F0AAEC973_1_105_c768×1024 251 KB

2

That would be my guess. I do believe that is allowed. Not GEC though. It would be the EGC.

2 Likes
3

Bye Bye Zinsco… … …

1 Like
4

I suspect that your “opinion” is being skewed by this being a “Seller Pre-Listing” inspection.
Put on your “Buyers Pre-Purchase” inspectors hat.
How would you report these issues, (if at all), if you were inspecting for a Buyer client relying on your opinion for their family safety?
IMO, there are enough concerns, (including your full description of conditions present), to warrant an Electrician for further evaluation and to make necessary repairs/corrections, (likely to the homes entire system).

5 Likes
5

My concern isn’t about this wire being used for bonding or an EGC, my concern is with the way it is improperly tapped into the receptacle boxes . If this was at my home, I would have no problem with it because there is no real danger, but it is still wrong.

I meant the copper pipe and should have said pipe as the GEC and yes, the red wire may be acting as the EGC.

I’m writing hard overall on the electrical, I was just wondering if I was being too picky on the way the red wire was being tapped into the box, mainly the attic box. I’ll always call out the way the one at the sink was done.

2 Likes
6

There are two types of inspectors, in my opinion: the ‘gotcha’ inspectors and the ‘thinkers’.

Anyone can use a tape measure to measure the distance of the TPRV drain pipe from the ground, but not everyone understands the consequences.

If you understand why it is wrong then you are likely to make a better judgement. I see things wrong all the time that may not make my report.

6 Likes
7

Do you mean how it is ran through the hole in the back? If so, no, it wouldn’t make my report as a deficiency, since it is a grounding conductor. What I would consider adding to the report though is an info item explaining that the copper piping is being used as part of the EGC. Just in case they ever install some PEX or something, they should know that they might lose their grounding method.

2 Likes
8

Ah, now that is a ‘thinking’ inspector. :+1:

2 Likes
9

not even a cya mention? i’m new and trying to wrap my head around how you can get away with doing this. i don’t mean literally getting away with something, but more like how it doesn’t come back to bite you in the arse. i have been devouring these forums picking up tips and learning so much and this is one that sounds like it has the opprotunity to be a major learning experience for me. thanx in advance and happy new year.

10

First, whether you know it or not, you have passed many defects. No inspector will catch every defect, nor will they agree on what a material defect is (or what makes it into a report).

Ultimately, the age of the home and the age of the systems and components matter. Are they safe? Are they performing? What does the SOP require?

Experience makes defect discernment a lot easier. Do you step over that crack in the driveway of a 50-year-old home, or does it make your report? Rhetorical question.

My recommendation, stay away from filler, focus on safety, consequence, performance and let the SOP guide you.

6 Likes
11

Simple… stop listening to the wrong people on these forums and social media sites!
Read between the lines of what Brian posted above!
Go back in time (10+ years) to the archives when REAL Inspectors frequented these MB’s, before they got fed up with the influx of newbies with modern attitudes. Why try when all you get is attitude for trying to assist?
Read through most of the OLD threads listed at the bottom of all thread pages for related topic posts.

6 Likes
12

thanx to both of you guys for those tidbits. notice that i have over 15k posts read so reading is not an issue for me. i initially joined this forum and failed to read before jumping in which was a mistake. i “read the room” so to speak and figured out real quick there were some of you guys that had some real good info, both of you jeffrey and brian being two of them.

now that i have been given a reading assignement i’m off to the library, or vault so to speak. you may end up calling me the necoromancer soon though. i’ll try to seep those resurrections few and far between. at least when i do i will try to make it a teachable moment for everyone.

thanx to all and happy new year, mine went fantastic and i hope this year is as good or better for all of us.

13

Keep in mind that the national electrcial code is updated every three years so if you’re perusing very old electrical threads the information may no longer be accurate.

1 Like
14

Good thing Home Inspectors are not dependant on Codes, as what we utilize is only the ‘Basis’ for what we observe!

1 Like
15

And about 75% of those post will be folks bantering back and forth and wrong information being provided by folks with no clue!

2 Likes
16

yep, exactly why i pointed out that i found a few folks with good information. it’s easy to skim the crap and just scroll by it most of the time.

17

That is especially true with electrical systems. As home inspectors, we only see a very small portion of the total system. Further, the things we do see aren’t where the real hazards are.

Not everything can be taught exclusively from a textbook. Some things can only be learned through a combination of classroom training and lots of practical experience.

It doesn’t help that there is so much bad information being passed around on forums and in HI schools.

Far too much emphasis is being put on memorizing stuff instead of learning how stuff works. My pet peeve is HI schools pandering to new inspectors by talking about building codes when they should be putting the emphasis on how systems and components work, how they age, and how they fail.

I’ve been teaching the NEC to electricians for more than four decades, but I usually refuse to talk about the NEC or answer code questions in my classes for inspectors.

I tell my HI students that trying to learn about electrical systems from code books is like trying to learn how to drive by studying guardrails. That’s all building codes really are is guardrails.

I have posted the titles of several books in this forum on different occasions that do a far superior job at teaching about electrical systems than any HI course I’ve ever seen.

Home inspectors should have a solid enough understanding of the fundaments that when they encounter new things in the field, they can use sound reasoning instead of merely regurgitating something they heard in a classroom or read on a forum.

I asked Nick Gromicko once what the cause of the falling-out between Joe Tedesco and InterNACHI was. Without hesitation, Nick said all Joe wanted to do was talk about codes and inspectors don’t need to know about codes. Now, look at where InterNACHI and almost every other HI trainer is. They are pumping inspectors full of factoids when the inspectors don’t understand basic code theory, let alone the physics and mechanics of building systems.

By the way, for those who don’t know who Joe Tedesco is, he is one of the country’s most respected and foremost electrical experts.

As much as I personally like and respect Joe, I agreed with Nick then and I still say that’s as true today as it was then, 20 years ago. InterNACHI has since done a complete 180° turnaround.

There are thousands of home inspectors who study to pass a test. That is to say, they memorize a lot of crap without ever taking the time to learn the basics of how houses work.

If more home inspectors had a better understanding of how houses work, they would intuitively understand what needs to communicated to home buyers and sellers.

Home inspections in recent years have become little more than people thinking that they should be paid a lot of money for going around pointing out the obvious.

The very least the HI schools should do is hire truly qualified people to design their courses and equally qualified people to review them for accuracy. The people who are fixated on memorizing building codes are almost never the right people. They put most of their effort into memorizing stuff and not nearly enough effort goes into developing a real understanding of how systems and components work and basic physics.

Once a person understands electricity, everything else falls neatly into place. But, that’s not something that happens in a few weeks. It a continuous lifetime process.

5 Likes