To EGC or not to EGC

[dtrynne]

Situation: Existing single family residence with 100 amp service with the grounds and neutrals connected to the same busbar. Building a new attached garage and installing a new 200 amp panel and moving the service drop to that panel and feeding the original 100 amp panel out of the new panel. 250.32(B)(2) seems to be saying that if I do not run an EGC then the grounded conductor can be bonded to the grounding electrode conductor at the second building as well as at the service, is that the case or am I missing something?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

If the garage is attached to the house it is not a separate structure. Thus the panel in the house becomes a sub panel and must be wired with a separate ground wire. The grounded and grounding conductors in the house panel must be separated.

 

[wbalsam1]

Hi: I don't believe your ATTACHED garage could be considered a SECOND building. IMO, if it is determined that it is the same building, you would not be permitted to reground the neutral, and would be required to hit the remote panelboard with a wiring method that included a 4th (egc) wire.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Even if it were a detached building I believe you would need 4 wires. The house surely has metal paths that need to be bonded to the grounded system-- in this case I believe you would need a EGC. And if the house does not have metal paths then at some time it may thus I would run a EGC.

 

[infinity]

250.32(B)(2) only applies to separate buildings or structures. An attached garage doesn't is neither therefore you need to run separate grounded and grounding conductors.

 

[electrofelon]

Be advised that even if the garage is detached or somehow considered detached, washington state does not allow rebonding the neutral/three wire feeders to detached structures. The washington administrative code (WAC) and revised codee of washington (RCW) are available online.

Electro

 

[tom baker]

Its been a violation in Washington State to use the neutral in place of the EGC since August 2003. It was too hard for the inspectors to determine if there was a parallel path or not. I appreciate that the state did the right thing, waiting for the NEC to catch up.

 

[iwire]

Its been a violation in Washington State to use the neutral in place of the EGC since August 2003. It was too hard for the inspectors to determine if there was a parallel path or not. I appreciate that the state did the right thing, waiting for the NEC to catch up.

So what is Washington State or the NEC going to do with all the parallel paths on the supply side of the service disconect....some of which the NEC requires?


I just have an issue with these authorities saying something is dangerous 'here but not here'