Re-using Old Home Runs

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mkgrady

Senior Member
Location
Massachusetts
I started a thread a couple of years back about re-using old home runs in a new kitchen remodel. The concensus was that if the existing home runs were in good condition there is nothing wrong with re-using them. I asked that question because running new homeruns would have been difficult.

Today I'm in a situation where running new home runs to a new kitchen will be even more difficult. But today the existing cable has the reduced ground wire. Normally I would just replace it back to the panel but I will not do it here unless the code requires it or my customer wants to incur the cost because it is better.

Please don't tell me why new wire is better. I already know that. I just want to know if it is code compliant. If it is I will let my customer decide if it is worth tearing up lots of their finished wall surfaces. If the code doesn't allow re-use then the walls are going to become swiss cheese.

Mike
 
I'm thinking Rule 3 (mass code) could very well be cited


Rule 3. Additions or modifications to an existing installation shall be made in accordance with this Code without bringing the remaining part of the installation into compliance with the requirements of this Code. The installation shall not create a violation of this Code, nor shall it increase the magnitude of an existing violation
Click to expand...
.
 
Or the inspector could site rule #1 of the Mass code as the installation could be considered NOT reasonably safe to persons and property because the reduced equipment grounding conductor of the existing branch circuit would not provide a sufficient low-impedance path for ground fault current of the new installation that would be connected to it.
 
Jim W. in Tampa said:
where does nec say the ground can not be smaller than the conductors ?
Click to expand...


I assume that the circuits are in the 15 to 30 amp rated variety and they are NM cable so,... 250.122??
 
If you are asking me if you can add outlets to those circuits that have an undersized grounding conductor ?? I'd say no ... How can you comply with "this" code,. when this code requires a full sized grounding conductor ,.. and the next question is ,.. does the addition of outlets supplied by the undersized conductor increase the magnitude ?? I think it does.
 
M. D. said:
If you are asking me if you can add outlets to those circuits that have an undersized grounding conductor ?? I'd say no ... How can you comply with "this" code,. when this code requires a full sized grounding conductor ,.. and the next question is ,.. does the addition of outlets supplied by the undersized conductor increase the magnitude ?? I think it does.
Click to expand...

But your interpretation would render Rule #3 in the Mass code meaningless. See post #2.

We have to give meaning to the words in the rule, and it seems the words address additions and modifications to existing work. Seems to me the existing wires that met code can be used and added on to and still meet code (according to this code).
 
mkgrady said:
But your interpretation would render Rule #3 in the Mass code meaningless. See post #2.
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't ,.. let's say the original wire has not been stapled with insulated staples but has a full size GC ,.. the lack of proper stapling would not preclude from using the original wire ,. because you are not increasing the magnitude nor creating a violation because you have complied with "this" code in regard to securing the new cable.

...
mkgrady said:
...Seems to me the existing wires that met code can be used and added on to and still meet code (according to this code).
Click to expand...

Just keep in mind you own the work ... it is not code to supply an outlet with an undersized grounding conductor.. regardless if it once was
 
M. D. said:
No it wouldn't ,.. let's say the original wire has not been stapled with insulated staples but has a full size GC ,.. the lack of proper stapling would not preclude from using the original wire ,. because you are not increasing the magnitude nor creating a violation because you have complied with "this" code in regard to securing the new cable.
Click to expand...

I just went back to re-read Rule #3 to be sure it supports my arguement. I decided it did. Not clearly, because that's the way codes are written, but it seems to support my arguement more that it supports yours.

Then I chuckled when I realized YOU posted it to support your arguement. I thought it was posted to to show me why I could add to or modify an existing installation.....without bring the remaining part (the existing) into compliance.

I wonder how others see it.

I don't even care what the answer is one way or the other, I'm just trying to get a an interpretation I can believe in.
 
If it was a knob and tube homerun would you use it ? It was code when installed .

So was no ground romex and reduced ground romex. Trying to give you something to

believe in here. How about, the kitchen is being remodled not restored.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top