COMMENT 5-29 draft ? Neutral conductors.

[fmtjfw]

I'm looking for constructive criticism on the following, and if you think it is merited, support in the form of comments from you on 5-29. Thanks, Jim Williams

4 Comment:
Revise text to read as follows:

200.4 Neutral Conductors.
(B) Multiple Circuits. Where more than one neutral conductor associated with different circuits is in an enclosure, the ungrounded and grounded circuit conductors of each circuit shall be grouped by cable ties or similar means in at least one location within the enclosure.

Exception: The requirement for grouping shall not apply if the circuit conductors enter from a cable or a raceway unique to the circuit that makes the grouping obvious.

Exception: The requirement for grouping shall not apply if the circuits enters from a cable or raceway unique to the circuit that makes the grouping obvious or if the conductors are identified at their terminations with numbered wire markers corresponding to the appropriate circuit number.

red denotes deleted text

5 Statement of Problem and Substantiation.

The exception text is copied from 210.4(D) Exception: and since both exceptions describe the treatment of the same conductors treated as a circuit, the exception text should match.

 

[texie]

I submitted a proposal very similar to this back in the 90's. It was blown off as a non problem. I beg to differ and see this as a chronic problem. The requirement to do it at panelboards (I think in 2008) is a good start. Glad to see you propose this. Good luck.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I think consistency is where the NEC is heading so I would think this is a good change.

 

[kbsparky]

Exception: The requirement for grouping shall not apply if the circuits enters from a cable or raceway unique to the circuit that makes the grouping obvious or if the conductors are identified at their terminations with numbered wire markers corresponding to the appropriate circuit number.

I submit that numbers would not be the only appropriate method of identifying circuits, and you should leave any reference to them out of your proposal:

Exception: The requirement for grouping shall not apply if the circuits enters from a cable or raceway unique to the circuit that makes the grouping obvious or if the conductors are identified at their terminations with wire markers corresponding to the appropriate circuit.

 

[fmtjfw]

I submit that numbers would not be the only appropriate method of identifying circuits, and you should leave any reference to them out of your proposal:

Exception: The requirement for grouping shall not apply if the circuits enters from a cable or raceway unique to the circuit that makes the grouping obvious or if the conductors are identified at their terminations with wire markers corresponding to the appropriate circuit.

good idea, THANKS

 

[kbsparky]

Oops. Left out a word --->

Exception: The requirement for grouping shall not apply if the circuit{s} conductors enter{s} from a cable or raceway unique to the circuit that makes the grouping obvious or if the conductors are identified at their terminations with wire markers corresponding to the appropriate circuit.

 

[fmtjfw]

I submitted a proposal very similar to this back in the 90's. It was blown off as a non problem. I beg to differ and see this as a chronic problem. The requirement to do it at panelboards (I think in 2008) is a good start. Glad to see you propose this. Good luck.

They've already accepted it in principal, I'm just tweaking it.

 

[Smart $]

They've already accepted it in principal, I'm just tweaking it.

The only problem I have with it is that typical wrap-around markers are not as permanent as we think they are when we put them on. I've been in panels where after years of service, the markers material and/or adhesive degrades, they unravel, and become detached, all on their own.

 

[infinity]

The only problem I have with it is that typical wrap-around markers are not as permanent as we think they are when we put them on. I've been in panels where after years of service, the markers material and/or adhesive degrades, they unravel, and become detached, all on their own.

They're no worse than the permitted piece of electrical tape.

I think this was one of my proposals.

 

[Smart $]

They're no worse than the permitted piece of electrical tape.

I have more faith in electrical tape, especially with two or more wraps.