ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues Neutrals in same panel???

Zackly! Those factory-wired generator panels include a whip with no neutrals and they are UL listed, so me thinks that this scenario is OK.

IMO, a GenTran panel isn’t the same as a standard subpanel. It is just extending the circuits that at are supplied from the existing panel and as a generator transfer switch/panel, is listed for the application.

The subpanel in the OP’s post is actually supplying the two circuits that originate from within it with the neutrals and grounding conductors being connected to a bus in a different panel.
Does it make any difference if the this subpanel is adjacent to the main panel, or across the room?
Why would the installation requirements and circuit connections be any different in this case?

The difference in my mind is that the two circuits pass through the original panel. If there was a violation I would point to that. (312.8)

To clarify:

1 is a sub. 100A off of a 200A main.
Just side by each and trani loops thru the 2" nipple

I think I am keeping up. I see the current coming into the 200 from the utility, going out the feeder to the 100, through a breaker, coming back into the 200 on the branch circuit taps and going off to the load. It returns on the neutral and goes straight back to the utility. The EGC is connected to the bus with the main bonding jumper. I see no inductive heating problems (300.3) and no ground integrity problems (250.4). That leaves me whether you are using the cabinet for a raceway and if there is adequate space (312.8).
I agree it isn't trade practice and it may be considered sloppy but I don't see a hazard or a particular violation beyond "I don't like the looks of that".
... but that is just the interpretation at the end of Pine tree lane, the only place where I am AHJ these days

Greg:

As I said above, not something that I would do as a common practice. Thinking about it what entered my mind is...
Possibility of un-landing a 'hot' neutral in the 'main' panel that was sourced from the 'subpanel'. That would be my concern.

Basis would be that the neutral should be located within the same 'panel' as the ''hot".

No argument, I have not looked for a specific article, just something I would not do or condone, and I probably would not write a red sticker for it, unless I have an article.

Sorry, I haven't had time to read all the inputs but just wanted to clarify something. The reason I hesistate on moving the neutrals is that the neutral buss is packed full and hard and dangerous to get into. The subpanel is directly attached to the main panel by 1 1/2 pvc. Just wanted to clarify the reason I didn't go ahead and move the neutral also... Thanks again, and I will read the other inputs as soon as I can..... Steve

OK, I have to grab this and run with it.....

The OP responded...
"The reason I hesistate on moving the neutrals is that the neutral buss is packed full and hard and dangerous to get into. The subpanel is directly attached to the main panel by 1 1/2 pvc. Just wanted to clarify the reason I didn't go ahead and move the neutral also... Thanks again, and I will read the other inputs as soon as I can..... Steve"

Using his words 'packed full and hard and dangerous to get into' would be all the more reason to get two out of there and maybe tidy up a little! Didn't you have to terminate the new sub panel neutral in there?

The word 'dangerous' scares me!

So far, I can only find one "POSSIBLE" NEC issue - 210.4(A):


In a _Technical_sense... I do not see any performance issues, or "Smoke-Loss problems" with the current installation.

Albeit, I would have chosen to bring the Grounded Neutral Conductors of the relocated Circuits, to the newly installed Panelboard. This would be done, so as to "Keep The Circuitry Together"
Similar to what others have mentioned, if an L-L 2 Wire Branch Circuit is available, I would also choose to relocate that Circuit to the new Panelboard, and use its original 2 pole spaces for the new Feeder Device.

This setup appears to be an existing 200 Amp, 120/240V 1 Phase 3 Wire Service Panelboard (Meter Section + Main Service Disconnect & MBJ, with 200 Amp Panelboard combined), and the OP has installed a new 100 Amp, 120/240V 1 Phase 3 Wire Panelboard directly next to it - and fed the new Panelboard with a new 100 Amp Circuit via 1-1/2" PVC Nipple. New Panelboard Feeder is derived from 100/2 MCCB installed in existing Service Panelboard at positions of the existing, relocated Branch Circuit.

So much for Mr. Obvious, huh???

Per the new Grounded Feeder Conductor, I am also curious how the OP terminated the #2 (or #4?) Neutral Feeder to the Existing Service Panelboard's Neutral Bus Kit, due to the "Can-O'-Worms effect" surrounding the Neutral Bus (packed full and hard and dangerous to get into).

Back in the day when I actually worked hard in this trade (read: when I worked in the field), I had dealt with a few Services which had a similar "Dangerous" placement of the Neutral Bus Kit, and I needed to remove and/or add Conductors to it.
Turning off the Main Disconnect was good on some, but others were just too dangerous (or no Main Disconnect).
In these cases, we would:

* Pull the kWH Meter (when the sealing rings were the thin Aluminum ones),

or,

* Cut the Service Entrance at the Drip Loop (where the Meter sealing Ring was the "Tamper-Proof type).

I can recall some Services with "High Pucker Values" to be ITE / Bulldog "Pushmatic", Zinsco type Q, Square D type XO (and some earlier QO Panelboards - the "Thin Ones"), some Crouse-Hinds types, Challenger circa 1980's, and of course FPE's "Stab-Lok Panellettes"

It's been so long, I can hardly remember what a Residential Service Panelboard looks like!!!

Adding my $0.02

Scott

I knew when I said "dangerous" that would get some eyebrows. Actually just what I meant was that it's kinda tight for me to get in there and remove neutrals. I figure 2 wirenuts is better than 6 ( including grounds). The romex that carries these circuits are buried among the rest. To completely remove them and take them to the other panel would be a major task, (probably have to cut the seal on the meter and pull it, which is not included in the permit description). If there is no obvious code violation, it's simpler and more reasonable under the circumstances to leave it as is. As far as the new "feeder neutral and feeder ground",
I managed to double up on some of the existing "grounds"
(not neutrals) to get some room for (2) "add on lugs". Hope this paints the picture a little better. Thanks for the input. Steve...