existing subfeed cited as hazzard

Status
Not open for further replies.

FREEBALL

Senior Member
Location
york pa usa
A friend asked today, actually my boss, about his subpanel in his garage. It was installed in 1999. It is 100 amp subfeed fed with 3 wire which was allowed back then. There are no other metalalic connections between the buildings. It has a ground rod driven in the ground bonded to neutral. Now he is selling the home and the home inspector cited this as a hazard since the grounds and neutrals were not separated. Question is wouldn't this be grandfathered in since the installation was code at the time it was installed. But what floored me was that he stated to fix this problem would only cost 100 dollars. I explained to him that the inspector is wrong because to fix the problem a ground would need to be installed back to the panel, to separate the ground from the neutral, and that would most likely be more than 100 dollars. I explained that when you factor in pulling conductors out, if are in conduit or possibly not (possibly being able to use existing conductors) then repulling back in with a ground. This would be a large undertaking especially if the conductors are not in conduit. Any thoughts.
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
I think that you are exactly right. And taking the time to educate the owner is very kind of you. If only you could educate the HI too. :)
 

FREEBALL

Senior Member
Location
york pa usa
I think that you are exactly right. And taking the time to educate the owner is very kind of you. If only you could educate the HI too. :)


Thanx Yea Im not sure what the outcome will be but another item he mentioned was that the receptacles outside were not GFI but the circuits are fed from a GFI circuit breaker. I told him the home inspector doesn't sound very knowledgeable in regards to electrical construction. Take care and be safe.
 

infinity

Moderator
Staff member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Journeyman Electrician
I agree the HI is incorrect. Unless the homeowner wants to bring this up to the current code which he is not required to do the installation is fine as is.
 

John120/240

Senior Member
Location
Olathe, Kansas
I agree the HI is incorrect. Unless the homeowner wants to bring this up to the current code which he is not required to do the installation is fine as is.

infinity you are right. But the buyers will hold these supposed infractions over the sellers head & demand corrections. Often times the HI will cite these types of problems & overlook real problems.
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
I agree the HI is incorrect. Unless the homeowner wants to bring this up to the current code which he is not required to do the installation is fine as is.
But it is up to current code, there is an exception in current code that allows the installation as is. If you were to be replacing the main panel in this garage you still wouldn't have to pull a separate EGC from the first building, if you were replacing the feeder you would.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top