When Jim Pauley made his proposal that was accepted during the 2002 code cycle there was no definition of neutral anything. Jim’s proposal was adopted into the NEC as Section 408.21 in 2002. ARTICLE 200 Use and Identification of Grounded Conductors
Nowhere in the 2002 NEC is there a definition to neutral conductor.
In the 2005 cycle of the NEC Jim’s 1999 proposal was moved to 408.41 but there is still no definition to be found in Article 100 of neutral anything. ARTICLE 200 Use and Identification of Grounded Conductors
The scope of Article 200 directs us to Article 100 for a definition of grounded conductor which we find to be. Grounded Conductor. A system or circuit conductor that is intentionally grounded. (2002)
And we also see in Section 200.7 that this intentionally earthed conductor must be identified by
**200.7 Use of Insulation of a White or Gray Color or with Three Continuous White Stripes. ** (A)General. The following shall be used only for the grounded circuit conductor, unless otherwise permitted in 200.7(B)](http://code.necplus.org/document.php?field=jd&value=necss:70-2008:id01007000952#70-2008:id01007000952) and (C):
(1) A conductor with continuous white or gray covering
(2) A conductor with three continuous white stripes on other than green insulation
(3) A marking of white or gray color at the termination
So based on what is written in the code today or back in 1999 when Mr. Pauley made his proposal will not change the fact that when he made his proposal there was only a neutral in a multiwire circuit or a set of feeders.
Even as it is written today the white conductors that connect in the panel are grounded conductors. Verbiage as outlined above is going to be the same in the 2014 Edition of the NEC to the best of my understanding.
If one wanted to be really technical using the definition of the 2011 cycle the only neutral conductor would be either in the service drop or lateral Neutral Conductor. The conductor connected to the neutral point of a system that is intended to carry current under normal conditions.
The white wires of branch circuits and feeders connect to the terminal bar of the panel not the neutral point of a system.
Neutral Point. The common point on a wye-connection in a polyphase system or midpoint on a single-phase, 3-wire system, or midpoint of a single-phase portion of a 3-phase delta system, or a midpoint of a 3-wire, direct-current system.
But to restate, the grounding conductor (neutral) and the grounded conductor on the same circuit can terminate under the same screw as long as the service equipment is rated for multiple conductors. This is an isolated circuit with no chance of over voltage if not a shared neutral.
Such pairing is common but still wrong according to how the equipment is labeled.
408.21 Grounded Conductor Terminations.
Each grounded conductor shall terminate within the panelboard in an individual terminal that is not also used for another conductor.
Exception: Grounded conductors of circuits with parallel conductors shall be permitted to terminate in a single terminal if the terminal is identified for connection of more than one conductor.
The (grounded, white, neutral) conductor must be one wire to one screw.
What me and Rob are discussing is the link written by Jim Pauley Dated January 2008 in post 16 or at least I think that is what we were discussing and his use of the word neutral in that paper. In his 1999 proposal he also used the term neutral.
Is the white wire in a 120 volt branch circuit called a neutral today? Yes by many but does that make it a neutral as defined by the NEC? No as outlined in one whole article all to itself called, “Use and Identification of Grounded Conductors”
And in this article we are told what the grounded conductor is,
After sifting through pages of comments (mostly negative) regarding this change to the 2008 NEC, the CMP finally came up with this explanation. You can make your own judgement as to what it means.
I agree, the neutral bar in the OP has little to do with that code section. The terminal in question would be listed for two conductors and would look something like this.
So here is a panel constructed in 2001. Each branch circuit is separated but the grounded conductor and the grounding conductor is terminated at the same lug. It’s a Siemens Panel. I read an articlethat stated a change was made to the 2002 NEC that supposedly clarified this rule in 408.41 Was it good then?
There are many, many, panels where I see shared neutral terminations. I call those out in my report. These panels have absolutely no room left in them to separate the neutrals. You’ll see in the picture a grounding terminal was added but there are still more neutrals in the panel than lugs to connect to.
OK then, what should an inspector do when this situation is discovered? Does the age of the home matter? Are we supposed to “enforce code” when what we do explicitly is not code inspections (as we are not typically the AHJ).
[Sidebar Note: Code enforcement in WI did not start until 1985. Code inspectors around here won’t even offer an opinion on “old stuff” since “code does not apply…” They think nothing of FPE panels, either (only used to illustrate a point, No comment required)]
I think a benefit to all concerned would be to offer opinions of what we would say in our reports to our clients. We all know that shared neutrals on a 20A 220V circuit for a kitchen on new construction is very typical in 2006+. Not so much in 1950. Describe the real potential hazard; in 1950 not so much. In 2006, a loose shared neutral has the potential of making a disposall work extremely well for about 20 seconds before the windings burn out and hopefully without any personal injury…Blowing up TV’s, etc.
There should be a point where we need to be the educators, recommend true hazards be corrected, and to inform where improvements can be made if changes to the system are made in the future. Would like spending time discussing your responses in your reports to your clients.
Ok, maybe I should read the entire thread but my time is limited awaiting a flight here in Dallas. When I read the original post I fear their is confusion here. Indeed 408.41 calls for the grounded conductors (neutrals in your case) to be terminated in their own terminal on the bus bar and it is done wrong in the image. However, it is the argument in the explanation of the original post that bothers me…why would a SubPanel make any difference?..I think someone is confusing two distinct and different issues…but then again it was probably addressed and I just did not take the time to read them all…
