Some people have a hair across it, and should be told so! (politely of course...)
Raise one brow like Spock, and a calm monotone voice... "I'm sorry, but you are out of your mind"
I had a simular thing happen with a panel once, the Inspector made some wild claim about "modification" of a neutral buss. So we continued with the Inspection, while I sent a guy to the supply house to get another one. He came back, we opened the un-opened box in front of him. Then took it back, a waste of time and money......
Mark Heller "Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
Scott, Was it a new, overly zealous inspector that I might be dealing with in a coastal city? I've got one that wrote a subpanel I changed up as this exactly "Continuity problem at subpanel" Thats all he wrote! I called him & he said between the neutral & ground there's a continuity problem... I measured it & it rang out just fine... I recalled him out.... We'll see if he's really crazy
The reason he wrote it up is that this mounting does not provide "direct metal contact."
He also doesn't like the EMT fittings without a grounding bushing or a Meyers Hub. He says that the hole (7/8", 1-1/8", etc) is larger than the fitting, and thus does not provide "direct metal contact".
I looked up "direct metal contact" in the '99 NEC for a total of 0 hits for my query.
The secondary conductors from the utility transformer were not yet installed, so when I gave him a torque letter from the office that the gear had been torqued to specs, he told me I was committing FRAUD.
This & more was all before I told him he was crazy. ...S