680.23F 2(b)

[WinZip]

Then I suppose many Inspectors in six different cities are completely wrong.

 

[hurk27]

For one - we have been aloud to run NM cable to the first switch location for the past 20 years , the use of 12/3 from the electrical panel with red conductor marked as green has been acceptable to a switch location for a pool light an GFCI receptacle and from the switched location to the pool light junction box in conduit with single conductors , and the pump circuit in 12/2 to the switched location and liquid-tight from there to motors an heaters ETC.

If a sub panel is Installed or control center then it is in conduit the entire way to the electrical panel with 4 insulated conductors and also conduit and liquid-tight to the equipment locations and pool light junction boxes.

Again is an enclosure considered an electrical panel.

I would like to know how your getting past250.119(A) (2002) as far as remarking the #12 red as a equipment grounding conductor???

That is a violation in its self?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Then I suppose many Inspectors in six different cities are completely wrong.

I would say so, Yes..however, your area may have an unwritten rule to accept this. Who knows? Personally I would not cut corners on this.

Again I think it may have been acceptable years ago to use NM for a switch leg. I seem to remember that but I wouldn't count on it.

We had an excellent retired inspector who was at one of our local contractor meetings who stated that NM was allowed for switch legs for the pool light. I showed him that he was incorrect and he was quite puzzled. That's partially why I was thinking it was an old rule.

 

[readydave8]

Then I suppose many Inspectors in six different cities are completely wrong.

it wouldn't be the first time

 

[hurk27]

Heres another way you could look at this:

Even though an inspector might allow this, it does not relieve you of your obligation of doing a code compliant installation, and if a person were to be hurt of even killed and the insurance company was smart enough to get a good expert witness and found this non-code compliant wiring, you might find yourself in the hot seat trying to explain why you didn't follow code? and if this wiring is found to have caused the death, then even criminal charges can be brought up against you, it has happened.

Just something to think about.

 

[WinZip]

Ok guy's here we go an you may not like it.

Head electrical inspector said we allow NM 12/3 with the red conductor taped green for a circuit that's GFCI protected that switches an under water pool light, as long as the circuit is within the structure and enters into an enclosure as it exits an outside wall ( 2 gang pvc box with GFCI protected receptacle and switch )

Reason is that they do not feel it is life threatening ( and that could change at anytime they want it to ) and that the Multiconductor cable must be run within the structure as noted above.

As far as taping a conductor green within a Multiconductor cable look in -

2005 - 2008 ART. 250.119 B

I don't have the 2002 book anymore

We also come under a State Wide Building Code that from what I was told supersedes the NEC

So there it is.

 

[WinZip]

Forgot to mention this , that any of you in the same boat I think its best to just Install a pool sub panel an be done with it.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Why will we not like the answer. The answer they gave is not code but what they think is okay to allow. Is there an amendment or are they just overlooking this issue?

 

[WinZip]

Dennis ,

I do not have the answers , this is the 2nd time this year that I found that our SWBC - state wide building code allows things that NEC does not.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Dennis ,

I do not have the answers , this is the 2nd time this year that I found that our SWBC - state wide building code allows things that NEC does not.

Well, I did learn something with article 250.119.(B) however, I do not see how the conditions of maintenance and supervision ensure that only qualified persons service the install can be met with residential pools.

 

[WinZip]

I truly understand but there it is in black an white.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I truly understand but there it is in black an white.

My point is that taping the red wire green in your situation would not satisfy 250.119(B) , IMO. In reality, I don't see a problem with it.

Years ago when the dryers were only required to be 3 wire, I ran a 10/3 without ground for a gas dryer. I taped the red wire green and got turned down. I explained that if I removed the covering altogether then the wire would be useless if someone wanted to install an electric dryer. Fortunately he accepted my rational and let it go. No harm done by that, IMO.

 

[WinZip]

It doesn't mention the color red but says one or more insulated conductors can be marked green in a Multiconductor cable.

 

[hurk27]

It doesn't mention the color red but says one or more insulated conductors can be marked green in a Multiconductor cable.

yep but ya left out the first part:

Where the conditions of maintenance and supervision ensure that only qualified persons service the installation,

In a dwelling you do not have this, if the code writer thought this way, there would have been no need for 250.119(A), unless you think (A) is just for minors under 21:roll:

 

[Dennis Alwon]

In a dwelling you do not have this, if the code writer thought this way, there would have been no need for 250.119(A), unless you think (A) is just for minors under 21:roll:

Thanks Hurk-- that's what I kept trying to point out

 

[satcom]

Thanks Hurk-- that's what I kept trying to point out

Dennis every inspector I deal with, agrees with your view, and we went over it in our CEU classes.

 

[WinZip]

yep but ya left out the first part:



In a dwelling you do not have this, if the code writer thought this way, there would have been no need for 250.119(A), unless you think (A) is just for minors under 21:roll:

And it doesn't say - commercial - residential dwelling - multiplex apartment building so what is the article re furring to as to where this can take place.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

And it doesn't say - commercial - residential dwelling - multiplex apartment building so what is the article re furring to as to where this can take place.

IMO, you can never assure the first sentence in a residential setting. I guess it would be a place where only qualified individuals would have access to the wiring and also a place that has a regular maintainence schedule.

Someone would have to hired by the building owners to accomplish this.

 

[WinZip]

As I said earlier to eliminate a lot of this it would be best just to install a small pool sub panel an be done with it.

Sorry guy's , I was sort of venting with my replies.

 

[hurk27]

As I said earlier to eliminate a lot of this it would be best just to install a small pool sub panel an be done with it.

Sorry guy's , I was sort of venting with my replies.

oh it ok we all vent on here,

At a IAEI convention we were told that industrial and limited commercial where there is a on site maintenance electrician, it is considered supervised, all else it is not.

again there would be no need for 250.119(A) if this wasn't so.