Help me out here. Sub panel is hooked up to a 90 breaker from the main panel . but the panel has a sticker as main principal, and no grounds or neutrals separated. its throwing me off.
I’m writing it up as needs grounds and neutrals separated. plus a few other things.
but is there ever a way to have grounds and neutrals on same bus bar in sub panel ?
here is the main panel
The sub-panel must have the neutrals and EGC’s terminated on separate buses. The neutral must not be bonded to the enclosure. The sticker on the 90 amp breaker is incorrect and should be removed because the 90 amp breaker is not a service disconnect.
Only for panels in a separate structure installed before the adoption of the 2008 NEC. Within the same structure never.
Thank you Robert.
this could have been built before 2008.. but I’m still going to reference it needs to be separated.
The before 2008 reference is for a separate structure. Are these panels within the same building?
The main panel is in the basement of the house, the sub panel is in a detached garage/shed.
Well then depending on what code cycle it was installed under it may have been code compliant with the EGC’s and neutrals on the same bus.
Afternoon, Patrick. Hope to find you well.
From my basic understanding comes a basic answer to your question.
A Sub panel can have a main disconnect, main breaker, but it is not always required. The six-handle limit can serve as the disconnecting means.
The need for a main disconnect depends on factors like the sub-panels’ location such as detached structure, i.e. a separate garage, or the number of circuits it supplies.
Wait for theres to chime in. Robert M is astute on this subject.
That is correct,
Was just getting thrown off with the ground and neutrals on the same bus bar.. But it is wrong
Thanks, Robert
Funny thing is that they wired it correct for a post 2005 NEC installation with a 4-wire feeder and a separate ground bus.
Robert, even if wired under a code cycle that allowed combining grounds/neutrals in a separate structure, would the presence of the 4th feeder negate that? I know there is something about “parallel conductive paths,” or what not.
no matter what there was “other” stuff wrong with it.
Always willing to learn more, and thanks for pointing out post 2005 NEC
Yes. The 2005 NEC (and earlier) allowance for a 3-wire feeder was an exception to the general rule of the EGC and neutral being isolated from each other at any point after where the main bonding jumper is installed. In other words the neutral would not be bonded to the enclosure.
