Panel set-up

Jody Humbert · 05-20-2010, 10:39 AM

I had an electrician tell my client in a response to my report that this set-up is okay. I stated that this was a 200 amp panel on exterior with a 100 amp downstream panel on the inside. There is a 100 amp disconnect at the panel on the exterior that is feeding the interior panel. There are also some additional breakers feeding the A/C condenser and water heater. I stated that the neutrals and grounds must be on separate bonding bars per NEC. This electrician stated that this set-up met code and that updating service for entire house would cost several thousand dollars. Am I wrong in my assessment? Thanks for your comments in advance.

Jody

Similar Threads:

**Paul Kondzich** · 05-20-2010, 11:24 AM

That interior panel with fuses should be replaced regardless due to age, obsolete etc etc.

**Jerry Peck** · 05-20-2010, 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by Jody Humbert

I had an electrician tell my client in a response to my report that this set-up is okay.

I stated that the neutrals and grounds must be on separate bonding bars per NEC. This electrician stated that this set-up met code

I am presuming that the first 'it is okay' related to the second 'it meets code', right?

Nonetheless, the second panel DOES not meet code (notice the 'present tense' usage), even IF all else was okay, and as you stated, then neutrals are required to be isolated from ground.

What the electrician was thinking - at least what I think the electrician was thinking - is that the second panel MET code (notice the 'past tense' usage) as that WAS (also 'past tense' usage) the original service equipment and, as long it it WAS the service equipment it MET code (all 'past tense' usage).

As soon as the new service equipment was installed, the original service equipment became DOES not meet code.

and that updating service for entire house would cost several thousand dollars.

Yeppers.

Am I wrong in my assessment?

No, but you might try explaining it as above and I will bet the electrician 'will get it' before you are through explaining it.

**Michael Chambers** · 05-20-2010, 11:40 PM

Suggest they get the electrician to put it in writing on his letterhead, that the electrical system in the house meets current code, and then put his signature on it. He may change his tune if asked to do that.

**Trent Tarter** · 05-21-2010, 12:20 AM

I would have said something like this:

This old fused service panel is outdated, obsolete, and has wiring methods that are no longer allowed by current codes. A qualified electrician should further review to determine repair/replacement options and costs.

Bob Winchester · 05-21-2010, 02:47 AM

None of this ever met code. First of all the code that applies to this today is the code that was used at the time of installation so to state that it does not meet code is correct.
The grounded conductors must be identified with white tape and they are not.
I see no signs of a grounding electrode conductor nor a bonding conductor from a metallic water pipe system.
The feeder to the inside panel must be 4 wire.
The inside panel must be a 4 wire panel with the grounding conductors and grounded conductors separated, the grounded conductor not bonded to the enclosure.

The outside panel, service disconnect, with 3 breakers, all 2 pole, is not a violation itself as there are no single pole breakers in the panel. It is simply a service disconnect panel with 3 disconnects installed. Up to 6 are allowed according to the NEC going way back in time. I would have to read the panel label to verify that it says "Suitable for use as service equipment" to make a final call on this service disconnect panel.

If the grounded conductor buss in the inside panel can not be isolated from the enclosure then it must have one installed that can be isolated and the white, grounded, conductors must be terminated there.

If I inspected this service it would get a "NOT APPROVED" and it would have to be corrected as noted here.

There may be other violations that were not noticed in the 2 photographs.