Ground Riser Termination to I-beam

Can't see further up the picture than what was posted but if a bolted pressure connection is permitted I don't see an issue (assuming the two copper conductor shown are the same wire. Not how I'd do it, but it saved drilling a second hole, that's got to be worth something, right? Desirable installations and code compliant installations intersect to a certain extent, but the universe of code compliant installations is larger than what I'd consider desirable.

I’ll see your silver lining and raise you two black clouds. - Protection Operations

If the intent of the conduit clip is to connect the second copper cable to the conduit, I doubt the connection is good enough to meet NFPA 780 code intent. Is this connection to meet NFPA 70 (Electric code bonding), NFPA 780 (lightning), both?

Basically, the connection has to be a listed connection device, which this is not. There are plenty of UL-listed connectors for bonding to steel beam flanges. Check Erico catalog or website. If this is under the NEC, see 110.2 and 250.8.

The paint covering does not seem to have been removed from the beam.
I would prefer to see a cadmium bronze bolt.

--------------------
Ohm's law
Not just a good idea;
It's the LAW!

Thanks folks. I definitely wouldn't have done it this way either. This certainly is another example of a contractor taking the easy way out. This is a new facility bound by the NEC. After I posted my question, I found something in the project installation specs that prohibit this as well.

Thanks waross. Agreed on the paint. This is a violation of NEC 250.12 and just common sense. I'm old-school and like exothermic welded connections but where bolting is allowed and utilized, I prefer class 2 stainless steel bolting hardware.

I like cadmium bronze. Galvanized is available as a second or third choice when cadmium bronze is not available.
I haven't seen stainless hardware but I am OK with stainless bolts.

--------------------
Ohm's law
Not just a good idea;
It's the LAW!