I finally started digging into the 2014 changes. I expect this will be the first thread I will draw attention to various changes, and comment accordingly. I truly hope this leads to some lively discussion, and maybe even improves t NEC the next time around.
We are now required to identify neutrals with their associated 'hot' wires. This can be by marking, grouping, or obvious association (like them all coming out of tame pipe).
This section also adds a NEW prohibition against a single wire serving s the neutral for more than one circuit. (re on this in my next post).
"We need to start identifying our neutrals!" That was a comment made here by myself, long ago. It sure has it's advantages- and can easily become essential when there are AFCI's, GFCI's, and harmonics involved. But .... should it be code?
I was a lot more worried about it before I got involved with UPS-protected data circuits. For those jobs, keeping the neutrals rate was pretty important. When time came to pull wire though, it proved to be an exaggerated fear. Come connection time, it was virtually impossible to screw things up - unless you decided to put ALL the white wires under one wire nut.
The only time this as an issue was on a lighting circuit, where 5 separate circuits got mingled in one box, and only 2 neutrals made it home to the panel. I'll discuss that in the next post.
As for AFCI's, etc ... well, aren't we using Romex for those? Since the wires are all 'grouped' in the same cable, no other marking is required.
Now, I would LOVE to see a termination adjacent to the breaker for the neutral. That would encourage a natural 'grouping.' There is nothing in 200.4 to st such a design change by the panel makers.
I think this requirement is a bad one. At best, the sparky is forced to compensate for poor panel design- which forces all the neutrals to become a tangled mess in one corner of the panel.
