Jacuzzi tub w/ heater install

[SPC522]

home owner is having his bathroom remodeled...the jacuzzi tub requires two 15a circuits one for motor one for heater.. i ran two homeruns from panel to a 2 gang box in bathroom which i placed two faceless gfci's in and from there to under tub.. under the tub i used a 1 gang nail on and a duplex outlet which i just split to accomidate two circuits.. also ran a #8 bond from panel and bondeed motor heater and both water supply lines... basically the question is are there any code violations involved here? the inspector is very picky and i havent done a jucuzzi in years and for some reason im second guessing myself about using the split outlet...
thnx
figure the only dumb question is the one you dont ask

 

[jumper]

I do not see a problem with the split receptacle as long as it is readily accessible and the breakers have a handle tie or you used a 2 pole.

Also, I do not think your bonding jumper had to be connected to a panel.

680.74 Bonding. All metal piping systems and all grounded
metal parts in contact with the circulating water shall be
bonded together using a solid copper bonding jumper, insulated,
covered, or bare, not smaller than 8 AWG. The bonding
jumper shall be connected to the terminal on the circulating
pump motor that is intended for this purpose. The bonding
jumper shall not be required to be connected to a double insulated
circulating pump motor. The 8 AWG or larger solid
copper bonding jumper shall be required for equipotential
bonding in the area of the hydromassage bathtub and shall not
be required to be extended or attached to any remote panelboard,
service equipment, or any electrode

 

[Dennis Alwon]

There shouldn't be a problem with a split recep. as long as it is 15 amp circuit. If it were a 20 amp circuit I could possibly see a problem if you did not use a 20 amp receptacles.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

From what you said i think you did more than required. Was no need to run to panel but it can't hurt.
Welcome to the forum

 

[augie47]

There are still a few hot tubs that show up locally with manufacturers instructions that call for a #8 bond from the HEATER to the panel (or other boding source) to date the inspectors have required that when the manufacturer does.
(copy of instruction page attached)


View attachment 4951

View attachment jucuzzipg18.doc

 

[Dennis Alwon]

There are still a few hot tubs that show up locally with manufacturers instructions that call for a #8 bond from the HEATER to the panel (or other boding source) to date the inspectors have required that when the manufacturer does.
(copy of instruction page attached)

Gus, do you make the ec run the #8 to the panel if the instructions call for it? I have never done so and the instructions are generally not around when the inspectors come-- or they don't read it.

If I inspected I am not sure I would require that simply because it is bogus and the manufacturers are trying to cover their butts and really don't understand what the bonding is for. I hate when they can dictate such assinine requirements. I would be curious if the instructions were written as art of the UL listing. Somehow I doubt it.

 

[augie47]

If the manufactures instructions require it and there is no metallic water system for bonding, we do require a bond to the panel or bonding location (grounding electrode system, etc).
Heaters are rare and most of the E/Cs are aware of the possible requirement and install a bond if the run a heater circuit.

(I agree and guess I join the manufacturer in the CYA process. In the event of an injury, I don't want to be the one that ignored the mfg. requirement nor have any of the E/Cs to date)

 

[curt swartz]

If the manufactures instructions require it and there is no metallic water system for bonding, we do require a bond to the panel or bonding location (grounding electrode system, etc).
Heaters are rare and most of the E/Cs are aware of the possible requirement and install a bond if the run a heater circuit.

(I agree and guess I join the manufacturer in the CYA process. In the event of an injury, I don't want to be the one that ignored the mfg. requirement nor have any of the E/Cs to date)

Gus, the tub equipment is already bonded to the branch circuit EGC. I don't understand how running a separate #8 will make the tub any safer.

In reality the NEC doesn't even require the metal supply piping to be bonded to the tub equipment. 680.74 only requires metal parts in contact with the circulating water be bonded together. The supply piping is not in contact with the circulating water.

Even the commentary in the NECH agrees that the equipotential bonding does is not required to go back to the panel or leave the tub area.

The bonding requirement for hydromassage bathtubs requires interconnection between metal piping systems and metal parts associated with the water recirculation system only at the hydromassage bathtub location. As is the case with swimming pool bonding, this section does not require the installation of a bonding conductor from the hydromassage bathtub pump motor to the service equipment or panelboard from which the hydromassage bathtub branch circuit originates even if there is no metal piping or metal parts in the vicinity of the hydromassage bathtub.
The bonding required by 680.74 is intended to create a local equipotential plane, and the equipment grounding conductor of the branch circuit supplying the hydromassage tub provides the path for ground fault current. As is the case with other bonding requirements in Article 680, the 8 AWG copper bonding conductor is required to be a solid conductor. Solid conductors are required for Article 680 equipotential bonding applications in order to provide an added level of resistance to physical damage.

 

[Oakey]

I failed for the split receptacle once, the inspector claimed I had more than 20 amps on a single yoke. I agree with you guys though I just don't do it in this inspectors town.

 

[augie47]

Gus, the tub equipment is already bonded to the branch circuit EGC. I don't understand how running a separate #8 will make the tub any safer.

In reality the NEC doesn't even require the metal supply piping to be bonded to the tub equipment. 680.74 only requires metal parts in contact with the circulating water be bonded together. The supply piping is not in contact with the circulating water.

Even the commentary in the NECH agrees that the equipotential bonding does is not required to go back to the panel or leave the tub area.

The bonding requirement for hydromassage bathtubs requires interconnection between metal piping systems and metal parts associated with the water recirculation system only at the hydromassage bathtub location. As is the case with swimming pool bonding, this section does not require the installation of a bonding conductor from the hydromassage bathtub pump motor to the service equipment or panelboard from which the hydromassage bathtub branch circuit originates even if there is no metal piping or metal parts in the vicinity of the hydromassage bathtub.
The bonding required by 680.74 is intended to create a local equipotential plane, and the equipment grounding conductor of the branch circuit supplying the hydromassage tub provides the path for ground fault current. As is the case with other bonding requirements in Article 680, the 8 AWG copper bonding conductor is required to be a solid conductor. Solid conductors are required for Article 680 equipotential bonding applications in order to provide an added level of resistance to physical damage.

You are preaching to the choir
I can't say that I see added safety, but as long as it is part of the manufacturer's installation requirements, it's not a fight I wish to take on.
My "opinion" in court where there were injuries claimed do to the lack of bonding won't go far.
Over $10 worth of Copper, I'll vote to install the "unneeded" bond until the manufacturer changes his requirement.

 

[jimport]

Just a bit off this topic, but how would you handle it if the instructions called for something that results in a code violation, instead of an un-necessary requirement like in the case of the bond? I can't remember the exact circumstances but it might have been something that required improper grounding techniques.

How about a gas stove instruction that calls for a dedicated circuit when the only load is the micro-igniter and the clock?

 

[220/221]

I asume you also took out the neutral tab on the device.

 

[SPC522]

220/221- yes i split the noodle tab also... and as far as running the bond back to the panel ive always done it wether it was copper piping or pex just outta habbit... and thank you very much gentlemen for your input.. wish i found this forum earlier