The area that I work in has numerous houses with sub-panels that are fed with a 3 wire SE cable, two hots and a bare neutral/ground and all the grounds and neutrals are on the same bus bar. The obvious fix is to re-pull a 4 wire SER cable and separate the grounds and neutrals but this is a hard sell. Is it code compliant to just pull an appropriate sized separate ground from the same source as the original SE cable? Or should I pull a separate insulated neutral and use the bare uninsulated conductor in the SE cable as the ground? Also when was the first year that neutrals and grounds needed to be separated added to the code book? Must have been 50's or earlier?
Sub-panel fed with 3 wire SE cable
- Thread starter Deke1069
- Start date
petersonra
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern illinois
- Occupation
- Semi-retired engineer
Why does it need to be fixed at all? Even if it is "wrong" unless some serious remodeling is done, who is going to know or care. And if serious remodeling is being done you should be able to just run some new romex.
I am not sure but I don't think the code ever allowed the bare wire of SE cable to be used as a neutral for a feeder, but I don't use SE cable so maybe I am wrong on this point.
But I also do not see it as your responsibility to replace the SE cable if all you are doing is adding or replacing some circuits downstream.
I am not sure but I don't think the code ever allowed the bare wire of SE cable to be used as a neutral for a feeder, but I don't use SE cable so maybe I am wrong on this point.
But I also do not see it as your responsibility to replace the SE cable if all you are doing is adding or replacing some circuits downstream.
- Location
- New Jersey
- Occupation
- Journeyman Electrician
The bold is your only fix. The other ideas that you've mentioned are not code complaint.
jaggedben
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern California
- Occupation
- Solar and Energy Storage Installer
No. But I've done it, when the cost of a more proper fix was prohibitive.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
It is my opinion that 300.3(B)(3) acts as an exception to the charging statement in 300.3(B) and permits this, but it is unlikely you would get the AHJ to agree.
Thank you for your quick response. This was actually caught on an inspection report done for the sale of the house. I'm not sure the sale is dependent on this getting repaired or not, I was just looking for options just in case.
The only reason I thought running a separate ground wire might be acceptable is because I believe it is acceptable to run a separate ground wire from a 120 volt device to device if the original wiring does not have a ground in it. (All residential)
jaggedben
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern California
- Occupation
- Solar and Energy Storage Installer
It is correct that you can do that when replacing a non-grounding type receptacle or extending a branch circuit, but that section (250.130(C)) doesn't explicitly extend to subpanels or other circuits.
Thank you, I guess I figured that was the case.
1940s install at grandmas house. Bare copper, two hots, and 240v service.
Probably before NEC, but its working! Back in the 70s there was a QO panel upgrade. Looks weird with no sheathed neutral. Oh well.
- Location
- New Jersey
- Occupation
- Journeyman Electrician
If this is showing a service the neutral with the ungrounded service conductors is permitted to be bare.
1940s install at grandmas house. Bare copper, two hots, and 240v service.
Probably before NEC, but its working! Back in the 70s there was a QO panel upgrade. Looks weird with no sheathed neutral. Oh well.
I've run into more of these recently with several feeding personal boat docks, what's the mass opinion as far as making the correct repairs? Do you guys just ignore the situation or attempt to have the customer do the wiring upgrade? When if ever is it our responsibility as a licensed electrical contractor to make any such repairs or even suggest the repair to customers? Thank you
Fred B
Senior Member
- Location
- Upstate, NY
- Occupation
- Electrician
Not sure it would be code compliant but had an inspector suggest taping off the un-sheathed conductor of the SE and run a new Ground and separate the N/G adding a new ground bar. He suggested the same for a range into a subpanel.
Didn't do it because got the customer to agree to a new run.
Didn't do it because got the customer to agree to a new run.
jaggedben
Senior Member
- Location
- Northern California
- Occupation
- Solar and Energy Storage Installer
A boat dock sounds like a separate structure. It used to be allowed to feed separate structures that way and still is covered by an exception for existing installations. See 250.32(B). Most important thing is that there is an effective ground fault current path; I have chosen the easiest way to do that when inspectors have allowed it. Grounds and neutrals bonded together at such panels is not as bad as not having an effective ground fault path.
hillbilly1
Senior Member
- Location
- North Georgia mountains
- Occupation
- Owner/electrical contractor
I had the same issue with a friend who had bought a vacation house from a large electrical contractor out of Atlanta. It was built in the early 90’s. We didn’t have inspections until around 10 or so years ago. Inaccessible crawl space. Luckily the service panel (which was also illegal, unfused from the meter 30’ away) was outside the laundry room, and I was able to pipe a new feed to the sub panel in the garage. The home inspector missed the illegal service.