SE Cable to a Sub Panel

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mkgrady

Senior Member
Location
Massachusetts
I just looked at a sub panel in a church. The panel was fed with SE cable. No seperate ground and neutral. The branch circuit neutrals and EGCs were all attached to the neutral bar.

Obviously this installation would not fly today. Was there ever a time that this met code? This part of the church addition looks to have been built in the 60s or 70s but that is just a guess.
 
mkgrady said:
I just looked at a sub panel in a church. The panel was fed with SE cable. No seperate ground and neutral. The branch circuit neutrals and EGCs were all attached to the neutral bar.

Obviously this installation would not fly today. Was there ever a time that this met code? This part of the church addition looks to have been built in the 60s or 70s but that is just a guess.
Click to expand...

Is this seu cable or ser. If it is seu it may have been the original power to the building then upgrade and additions were added. I don't recall it ever being legal
 
mkgrady said:
Would it matter if it was the original SE? It still would be a code violation if it is determined that SEU cable feeding a sub panel never met code??
Click to expand...

It would only matter if it were a service panel at one time. I am not sure when the rule about service disco needing to be as close to entry of the building as possible --
 
iwire said:
I think it has been a violation longer then any of us have been alive, nevertheless it was commonly done back in the day and not just when a service upgrade / move was done.
Click to expand...

Then it clearly didn't meet code when the feeder was installed because the feeder isn't that old. Looks like 60-70s.

I have been hired to add a couple of circuits to the panel. I'm concerned that I have some liability if I do.

When you say this was commonly done are you saying you would not worry about it and connect to the panel? I don't think you are but I want to be sure.

I feel like I should be telling the church folks that unless the sub panel feeder is changed to meet code I am not going to connect any new circuits. Anybody disagree with this approach?
 
mkgrady said:
I feel like I should be telling the church folks that unless the sub panel feeder is changed to meet code I am not going to connect any new circuits. Anybody disagree with this approach?
Click to expand...

I would do exactly that or try feeding back to the main panel-- my guess is that may not be an option.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
I would do exactly that or try feeding back to the main panel-- my guess is that may not be an option.
Click to expand...

Don't know what you are saying. The sub panel is currently fed by the main panel by way of the SEU.

Even though the current set-up does not meet code, it has worked for decades without incedent. How do I sell them on this safety correction? Can somebody describe why it is dangerous?
 
Call the AHJ ahead of time. Explain you want to add two circuits and the regrounded neutral.
He could require it to be changed, which is what you want. But there is the risk the customer may not hire you, and get it done elsewhere with no correction on the feeder, no permit.

If would help if you could explain the dangers. Perhaps they have a sound system on that panel, or want to, could cause humm. Its worth a try.
 
tom baker said:
Call the AHJ ahead of time. Explain you want to add two circuits and the regrounded neutral.
He could require it to be changed, which is what you want. But there is the risk the customer may not hire you, and get it done elsewhere with no correction on the feeder, no permit.

If would help if you could explain the dangers. Perhaps they have a sound system on that panel, or want to, could cause humm. Its worth a try.
Click to expand...

I'm OK with loosing the job if that happens.

What's bugging me is I can't think of why the code violation is a safety problem. What dangers can be avoided if I change the feeder and seperate the neutral from the EGC's in the panel?

I suppose I could just point out to the customer that during inspection the inspector might require the code violation be corrected. But I kind of feel like I should be able to explain why it is a problem to the customer. I don't even mind if they don't understand the explaination as long as I do.
 
The safety aspect comes in if you had a short in the wireing. The short could energise the panel as it may not have enough fault current to open the oc devise.
 
mkgrady said:
What's bugging me is I can't think of why the code violation is a safety problem. What dangers can be avoided if I change the feeder and seperate the neutral from the EGC's in the panel?

I suppose I could just point out to the customer that during inspection the inspector might require the code violation be corrected. But I kind of feel like I should be able to explain why it is a problem to the customer. I don't even mind if they don't understand the explaination as long as I do.
Click to expand...
That installation was non-compliant the day it was installed. I'd try showing the customer the applicable sections of your code book, and if you have to, explain that understanding is not required, but compliance is.
 
ceb58 said:
The safety aspect comes in if you had a short in the wireing. The short could energise the panel as it may not have enough fault current to open the oc devise.
Click to expand...
I've understood the reason for it being unsafe is because you have parallel neutrals (2 paths for the neutral current to travel back to source, thus possibly having current on metal parts that are normally grounded creating a possible shock hazard.

Please explain how it may not be enough current to trip the OCPD if their is a short.
 
steelersman said:
I've understood the reason for it being unsafe is because you have parallel neutrals (2 paths for the neutral current to travel back to source, thus possibly having current on metal parts that are normally grounded creating a possible shock hazard.
Click to expand...

How is it a parallel neutral if you only have one ungrounded conductor and no egc.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
How is it a parallel neutral if you only have one ungrounded conductor and no egc.
Click to expand...
good point. I guess i was thinking about why you should make sure when you do have a seperate neutral and ground in the feeder to keep them seperate in the sub-panel. But now I'm wondering why is it unsafe to just have a ungrounded conductor in your feeder.
 
I think there are some people that believe there is nothing wrong with the install other than the code won't allow it.
 
electricguy61 said:
In this situation, why not run a separate grounding conductor to the main, and install a ground bar at the sub panel.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking that won't meet code but not sure why. I suppose because you would be custom making your own "cable" which would not be a standard product??

If it would work (meet code), I think you would run an new insulated neutral since the current neutral/GEC is not insulated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top