Spa feeds

[James S.]

Is there any reason you can't use romex to feed an outdoor spa or pool sub panel on a house? I keep seeing conduit in attics and it is making me second guess myself.

 

[augie47]

Unless you can meet the provision for existing feeders, 680.25 requires a conduit system for feeders.

 

[kwired]

For SPA's located at single family dwelling units, see 680.42(C). NM cable or any other method that includes a bare (but covered) equipment grounding conductor would be allowed to be run for the interior portion of the circuit.

For a "pool panel" you are stuck with other methods though.

 

[James S.]

What about 680.21(A)(4)? Wouldn't that allow for NM cable to be used for the pool panel?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

What about 680.21(A)(4)? Wouldn't that allow for NM cable to be used for the pool panel?

That article is for the motor. You can wire the motor that way not a panel. The panel would need a feeder which is in 680.25

 

[James S.]

That article is for the motor. You can wire the motor that way not a panel. The panel would need a feeder which is in 680.25

Ok, I can accept that but don't understand why. Why is it ok for just the motor or a sub panel but not ok for a POOL sub panel? :?

 

[Glennsparky]

...Why is it ok for just the motor or a sub panel but not ok for a POOL sub panel? :?

A pool sub panel usually has an underwater light (wet niche luminaire) run from it. 120 volts underwater, and chest height of a person holding on to the edge, makes the CMP very nervous. They want you to be very careful with that ground.

 

[James S.]

A pool sub panel usually has an underwater light (wet niche luminaire) run from it. 120 volts underwater, and chest height of a person holding on to the edge, makes the CMP very nervous. They want you to be very careful with that ground.

That makes sense but wouldn't the GFCI be a better protection for some sort of short in the pool light?

 

[GoldDigger]

That makes sense but wouldn't the GFCI be a better protection for some sort of short in the pool light?

I suspect that historically the no-NM rule came into NEC before there were GFCIs. Also a good solid ground will remain operational longer than the typical GFCI receptacle. Not sure how good, by comparison GFCI breakers are.

 

[Glennsparky]

That makes sense but wouldn't the GFCI be a better protection for some sort of short in the pool light?

Yes, and there's a #8 bond wire inside the niche and a bond wire on a lug on the outside surface of the niche. Each is there for a different catastrophic failure.

Besides, old GFCI receptacles used to fail and remain hot.

 

[James S.]

I suspect that historically the no-NM rule came into NEC before there were GFCIs. Also a good solid ground will remain operational longer than the typical GFCI receptacle. Not sure how good, by comparison GFCI breakers are.

Yes, and there's a #8 bond wire inside the niche and a bond wire on a lug on the outside surface of the niche. Each is there for a different catastrophic failure.

Besides, old GFCI receptacles used to fail and remain hot.

Ah, makes sense. Thanks guys.