Re-using Old Home Runs

Status
Not open for further replies.
benaround said:
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.
Click to expand...

Im trying to learn what the code requires. I also like to learn why the code requires what it requires, which often becomes obvious after asking a question. That's not the case this time though.
 
wawireguy said:
It has a ground. Grounds job is to clear faults. Do you think it will? Call your inspector. See what he thinks.
Click to expand...

Yes I think it will clear a fault.

The inspector said he will not allow twin breakers. He is new to the job and says it's his policy. So in that case I am charging the customer for a sub panel because the inspector is requiring something that the code does not.

Once I find the answer to my question, I willl use the existing home run because it meets code, or I will not because it doesn't, or I will charge the customer extra because it meets code but the inspector will not allow its use.
 
mkgrady said:
The inspector said he will not allow twin breakers. He is new to the job and says it's his policy. So in that case I am charging the customer for a sub panel because the inspector is requiring something that the code does not.
Click to expand...

Wow, seems over the top to me. Listed panel with breaker listed for use in said panel... Seems to me he can make it "his policy" on his own jobs or his own house... or is there something in the Mass. adoption that I'm missing?
 
In the NYS building code documentation, there is a section dealing with reusing existing material. It states the existing material can be reused as long as it is in good condition and does not violate the current code as of the time of installation. Pretty simple.


For branch circuits of 30A, 20A and 15A, the equipment ground conductor under current code is required to be the same size as the ungrounded conductor...again, pretty simple.
For other branch circuits and feeders, just check Table 250.122 for the minimum size equipment ground conductor.
 
A thought process that goes through my mind when dealing with using material that is existing or old.
The person you are installing for may be in the building for many years to come. If one is reusing material that is 30 - 50 years old, is that material going to be past its original lifespan? I understand there are variables of use during its history, but that is generally an unknown factor....just a thought.

*Would you want to move into a house newly renovated to find out the electrician used cable or equipment that could be decades old????
 
mkgrady said:
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.

Mike
Click to expand...


Did you note this during your walk-tru for the estimate? I am curious how some do a walk-thru and either miss this or intentionally decide at that point to reuse existing material.
 
Pierre C Belarge said:
In the NYS building code documentation, there is a section dealing with reusing existing material. It states the existing material can be reused as long as it is in good condition and does not violate the current code as of the time of installation. Pretty simple.


For branch circuits of 30A, 20A and 15A, the equipment ground conductor under current code is required to be the same size as the ungrounded conductor...again, pretty simple.
For other branch circuits and feeders, just check Table 250.122 for the minimum size equipment ground conductor.
Click to expand...

I think you are saying the existing home run can stay and what I add on to it has to meet current code. Am I right?
 
mkgrady said:
I think you are saying the existing home run can stay and what I add on to it has to meet current code. Am I right?
Click to expand...

I don't think that is what he is saying.

If it is existing it is okay to leave it. You cannot extend it because the outlets you add on will not be supplied by a full size EGC, even if the part you add has a full size EGC. The old section is under sized so the new outlets are being fed with an undersized EGC.
 
I lost 2 jobs just like this last week - maybe to the OP? I insisted on all new homeruns. Mostly because of liability - I don't want to tap into anything existing and be responsible for that circuit. I insist on all new - I've even convinced many a homeowner or GC to remove all sheetrock and start with a clean slate - it is a better job in the end.

Maybe that's why I didn't get the job - but then again at least I won't get sued some day. (my fault or not)
 
Let's try this.

Let's try this.

Let's say a customer wants a receptacle on the outside of his house, and where he wants it is just happens to have a receptacle right through the wall. I would drill through the wall and connect to the existing indoor receptacle if I was sure the circuit could handle the additional load.

Now lets say that receptacle is fed with a circuit with a reduced EGC like the original old romex. I think what most of you are saying is that you would not connect to this receptacle because the EGC does not meet current code, so it can't be extended.

You would run a new circuit all the way back to the panel. You would do this even if you knew the receptacle inside was fed by a circuit dedicated to that one outlet and the outlet was not even being used. You would do this because the code would not allow extending the existing circuit.

Is there anybody that would just connect to the old romex and feel they are not violating the NEC? I realize the code isn't likely to say it CAN be done. What I'm looking for is where the code says it can't be done. I have not seen that yet.

Please, no more responses that say it is a bad idea. I really just want to understand what the code requires when circuits are extended from these old cables.
 
CopperTone said:
I lost 2 jobs just like this last week -* maybe to the OP?* I insisted on all new homeruns.* Mostly because of liability - I don't want to tap into anything existing and be responsible for that circuit.* I insist on all new -* I've even convinced many a homeowner or GC to remove all sheetrock and start with a clean slate -* it is a better job in the end.Maybe that's why I didn't get the job - but then again at least I won't get sued some day. (my fault or not)
Click to expand...

They are removing all the sheet rock in the remodeled room. Seems a little too much to ask for sheet rock to be removed back to the panel through three rooms for a couple of runs of romex if the code allows their re-use. I know re-use is allowed for romex with a full size EGC. My question is about when the existing home run has a reduced EGC.

There are ways to insure the integrity of the old insulation. Do you ever use 6-3 romex? Are you OK with the EGC being smaller than the rest of the wires?

Sorry to hear you missed out on two jobs. There were no other bidders on this one.
 
The M.E.C. code requires a full sized grounding conductor for branch circuits rated @ 30 ,20 &,15 amps,.. adding outlets to a circuit that employs an undersized grounding conductor creates a violation of "this" code ,..250.122.

Rule 3 does not help you because once you add wiring to this circuit you create a violation of the this (current)code the rule speaks of.
 
Last edited:
M. D. said:
The M.E.C. code requires a full sized grounding conductor for branch circuits rated @ 30 ,20 &,15 amps,.. adding outlets to a circuit that employs an undersized grounding conductor creates a violation of "this" code ,..250.122.

Rule 3 does not help you because once you add wiring to this circuit you create a violation of the this (current)code the rule speaks of.
Click to expand...

Thanks for responding again, you must think my head has a thick coating of cement around it, but I just don't get where it says you can't connect to an existing circuit with a reduced EGC. Of course I understand the new extension must have a full size EGC.

So in the example of post #32, you would run a home run for the outdoor receptacle?
 
mkgrady said:
. . .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. . .
Click to expand...

On one hand you could (sometimes) try 406.3(D)(3)(c) for replacements of receptacles, "Where attachment to an equipment grounding conductor does not exist . . ."406.3(D)(3) 2008.
That will only work for outlets that existed, not additions, however.

On the other hand, I would strongly consider 250.114(3)a, b, and c. If a residential kitchen, you'll have to comply with " . . . shall be connected to the equipment grounding conductor". 250.114 2008. I would interpet that to mean that plugging one of the 250.114 appliances into the receptacle, this year, not 40 years ago, is a current violation you may be causing the occupant to unknowingly commit.

So I would want some 250.130(C) action for 250.114 appliances.:)
 
mkgrady said:
Of course I understand the new extension must have a full size EGC.....
Click to expand...

then why would you want to add equipment requiring grounding to a conductor that violates the current electrical code ???


mkgrady said:
So in the example of post #32, you would run a home run for the outdoor receptacle?
Click to expand...

If I wanted to comply with the code ,... If you are asking me if I have ever committed this violation ?? The answer is yes.
 
Mkgrady, The code says what it says. It says ( for what ever code cycle your using) that

if you are going to install something, these are the rules. For example: it doesn't say it's ok

to reuse nm with a full size egc, it says 15a, 20a, and 30a branch circuits shall have an

egc the same size as the circuit conductors. So. to install a code compliant 15,20, or 30a

device, that circuit must have an egc the same size as the circuit conductors, by extending

a circuit ( 15,20,30) with an egc smaller than the circuit conductors a code violation has

been made. I hope this helps what your looking for.
 
mkgrady said:
Thanks for responding again, you must think my head has a thick coating of cement around it, but I just don't get where it says you can't connect to an existing circuit with a reduced EGC. Of course I understand the new extension must have a full size EGC.

So in the example of post #32, you would run a home run for the outdoor receptacle?
Click to expand...

You understand that a new outlet must be supplied with a full size EGC, right?

So if the EGC starts out under sized at the panel and the only place it is full size is at the wire you added how can you say the outlet is supplied with a full size EGC?

That's like saying I can run a #14 to the laundry room and splice a #10 to it to supply the dryer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top