A change.. 680.26 Graphic

[frizbeedog]

Now lets not get into Hot tubs and Spa's......

With these, many times you can sit in the tub and still open the door. Many tubs I run accross are very close to windows and doors.

This is one of the reasons I'm so interested in this debate. Thanks guys. I learned a lot, I think. But I may be with Bob here, as in not sure one way or the other as to what to think about it now, except I have to install them. :smile:

 

[radiopet]

Then why tie the pool pump into the grid?

FYI...I think we helped fix that one with 680.22(B) in the 2008 NEC...

 

[M. D.]

I guess the thing that bugs me is this ,..when a person says 680.26(B)(7) says
" It says all fixed metal parts " to justify bonding whatever it is thatthey feel justly deserves bonding ....

And then when it is stated that " all fixed metal parts " includes all kinds of things some large , some small ,..some likely to become energized some thought to be very un-likely to become energized (not sure that matters much at all),..they now have turn their back on the encompassing word " all " . I don't think you can have your cake and eat it too ,..

When I read this ,..like Charlie suggests,.. in order to agree with the "all metal parts" folks I have to disregard the defined heading of the sub section of which the sentence speaks ... and now I have to say well they can't mean letter slots , hinges , bird feeders , fixed gas grills,. window frames , doors , surely they can't mean all fixed metal within 5' of the inside edge ,..This makes no sense to me

So now I look and see the definition of equipment and I can Identify a metal wiring method and so,..now when I read the section it makes sense to me ,..all fixed metal parts of equipment and metal wirng methods need to be bonded no matter the size it must be bonded..and I can see the wisdom ,..I don't have to turn my back on the word all...

Having said all of this I have my own idea about bonding which exceeds the minimum,..not quite "all fixed metal parts" but a good deal of it :smile:

(7) Metal Wiring Methods and Equipment. Metal-sheathed cables and raceways, metal piping, and all fixed metal parts shall be bonded to the equipotential grid.

Equipment
A general term, including material, fittings, devices, appliances, apparatus, machinery, and the like used as a part of or in connection with, an electrical installation.

 

[frizbeedog]

Having said all of this I have my own idea about bonding which exceeds the minimum,..not quite "all fixed metal parts" but a good deal of it :smile:

I'm starting to think that fixed metal parts should be removed from 680.26(B)(7) section, or that term should be defined. Fixed metal parts are.......fill in the blank. But left lingering under the heading Metal Wiring Methods and Equipment is confusing to say the least.

 

[dnem]

So bob...lets nail this down.....Are you for the bonding of the Window Frames and Door Frames and I hope not just because a cord could be run through the door. Do you feel the NEC says it crystal clear this intent?

Honestly I would like to know where I went wrong.

I'm glad that my process doesn't require me to ask if something is crystal clear. . I simply ask the question: Is it clear ? and move on the the next step based on that answer.

It's obvious the the Handbook says that window and door frame bonding is required by 680.26(B)(7). . The only question is whether or not the Handbook should be consulted for this question. . For me, it all comes down to the answer to the question: Is this code rule clear as written ?

Let me give one more line of reasoning that hasn't come up yet. . This doesn't answer the question of if the frame bonding is required. . It answers the question of if the rule as written is clear.

680.26(B)(7) heading says: "Metal Wiring Methods and Equipment" and those that don't want to include the Handbook Commentary in this decision are basing their position on the argument that the subheading defines and limits the scope of the paragraph that follows and limits the scope to the electrical equipment only.

I'm not going to dispute the define and limit concept but let me add this thought: The assumption is made that the concept discusses the requirement to bond electrical equipment to other electrical equipment. . But I'm asserting that this is an assumption. . It could mean that the paragraph will discuss what the electrical equipment is required to be bonded to.

And could means that it's not clear. . And not clear tells me which step to go to next which leads me thru the unclear wording of step #2 in 250.104, which in turn leads me to the wording of step #3 in the Handbook.

680.26(B)(1) Shell gets bonded
680.26(B)(2) Perimeter gets bonded
680.26(B)(3) Pool structure [other than shell] gets bonded
680.26(B)(4) Lighting gets bonded
680.26(B)(5) Fittings get bonded
680.26(B)(6) Electrical Equipment gets bonded to the other Electrical Equipment
680.26(B)(7) Electrical Equipment + Raceways gets bonded to ??what??
Finally 680.26(B) The main paragraph says you interconnect (1) thru (7)

Step #4, common sense doesn't overturn the Handbook so it's a "done deal". . I go thru the process without asking if I think the frame should be bonding.

 

[dnem]

[/B]So if we were to add a section 680.26(b)(8) what should the minimum size metal part be???

(8)Metal parts
All fixed metal parts, structures, or fittings 9 square inches or larger located on the premises within 5' of the inside walls of the pool shall be bonded

Since my idea of looking at the path didn't excite anybody. . If you really want to put a size on a proposal for 680.26(B)(7), look at the size that they use for 680.26(B)(5). . It's 4" in any dimension that is the cut off for isolated metal fittings.

 

[M. D.]

One reason it did not excite me was ,..I could be the path whether the fixed metal is a nail or a window frame.. David does the limit in (5) give you any pause in your reasoning process

 

[M. D.]

I think B(7) is a refinement of the requirements pertaining to
680.26(B)(5) Fittings get bonded
680.26(B)(6) Electrical Equipment gets bonded to the other Electrical Equipment

and so everyone knows,..(B)(7) All fixed metal parts of a metal wiring method and equipment ,...so if the equipment is mostly plastic but has a fixed part that is metal it shall be bonded ... no size consideration here If it is part of equipment as defined by the code book it shall be bonded..

It seems clear to me...

Are you still failing my job if I don't bond the window frame?? just curious

 

[radiopet]

I'm glad that my process doesn't require me to ask if something is crystal clear. . I simply ask the question: Is it clear ? and move on the the next step based on that answer.

It's obvious the the Handbook says that window and door frame bonding is required by 680.26(B)(7). . The only question is whether or not the Handbook should be consulted for this question. . For me, it all comes down to the answer to the question: Is this code rule clear as written ?

Let me give one more line of reasoning that hasn't come up yet. . This doesn't answer the question of if the frame bonding is required. . It answers the question of if the rule as written is clear.

680.26(B)(7) heading says: "Metal Wiring Methods and Equipment" and those that don't want to include the Handbook Commentary in this decision are basing their position on the argument that the subheading defines and limits the scope of the paragraph that follows and limits the scope to the electrical equipment only.

I'm not going to dispute the define and limit concept but let me add this thought: The assumption is made that the concept discusses the requirement to bond electrical equipment to other electrical equipment. . But I'm asserting that this is an assumption. . It could mean that the paragraph will discuss what the electrical equipment is required to be bonded to.

And could means that it's not clear. . And not clear tells me which step to go to next which leads me thru the unclear wording of step #2 in 250.104, which in turn leads me to the wording of step #3 in the Handbook.

680.26(B)(1) Shell gets bonded
680.26(B)(2) Perimeter gets bonded
680.26(B)(3) Pool structure [other than shell] gets bonded
680.26(B)(4) Lighting gets bonded
680.26(B)(5) Fittings get bonded
680.26(B)(6) Electrical Equipment gets bonded to the other Electrical Equipment
680.26(B)(7) Electrical Equipment + Raceways gets bonded to ??what??
Finally 680.26(B) The main paragraph says you interconnect (1) thru (7)

Step #4, common sense doesn't overturn the Handbook so it's a "done deal". . I go thru the process without asking if I think the frame should be bonding.

Remember...The Handbook is not code ( In itself Alone )....its an interp. of the code much as many other books on the subject.

 

[dnem]

Remember...The Handbook is not code ( In itself Alone )....its an interp. of the code much as many other books on the subject.

Which is why I only consult it if the code text isn't clear.

Are you still failing my job if I don't bond the window frame?? just curious

I wouldn't approve it.

 

[M. D.]

I wouldn't approve it.

I didn't think so,.. but what about the words " all fixed metal parts ",..why stop with the examples the author lists ??...or would I be required to bond the letter slot and door bell button too... how do you stop giving examples of "all fixed metal parts,... when there are none left to bond??
Do throw in the "likely to be energized" phrase after parts ?

Metal fittings that are part of the pool are not required to be bonded if they are 4" or smaller and do not penetrate into the structure more than 1" , but " all metal parts " within 5' of the the inside edge shall be bonded

I think it is clear that this does not say what your steps and his commentary conclude.

 

[inspector141]

It does not say or show if the pool is 5 ft away?

 

[dnem]

I think it is clear that this does not say what your steps and his commentary conclude.

my previous post #125

It answers the question of if the rule as written is clear.

680.26(B)(7) heading says: "Metal Wiring Methods and Equipment" and those that don't want to include the Handbook Commentary in this decision are basing their position on the argument that the subheading defines and limits the scope of the paragraph that follows and limits the scope to the electrical equipment only.

I'm not going to dispute the define and limit concept but let me add this thought: The assumption is made that the concept discusses the requirement to bond electrical equipment to other electrical equipment. . But I'm asserting that this is an assumption. . It could mean that the paragraph will discuss what the electrical equipment is required to be bonded to.

And could means that it's not clear. . And not clear tells me which step to go to next which leads me thru the unclear wording of step #2 in 250.104, which in turn leads me to the wording of step #3 in the Handbook.

 

[M. D.]

680.26(b)
"The parts specified in 680.26(b)(1) through (7) shall be bonded together..."

Then comes a specific list of parts

conductive pool shells

Perimeter Surfaces

Metallic Components

Underwater Lighting

Metal fittings

Electrical Equipment

Metal wiring Methods and Equipment

These are the things that are required to be bonded together ,.. I don't really understand this comment you've made.

I'm not going to dispute the define and limit concept but let me add this thought: The assumption is made that the concept discusses the requirement to bond electrical equipment to other electrical equipment. . But I'm asserting that this is an assumption. . It could mean that the paragraph will discuss what the electrical equipment is required to be bonded to.

I'm directed to bond them together "shall be bonded together"

I think this line of reasoning is flawed given the first sentence of 680.26(B)
Metal Wiring Methods and Equipment are what is specified and they are also defined,.... window frames do not fit the definition nor are they specified.

 

[dnem]

I didn't think so,.. but what about the words " all fixed metal parts ",..why stop with the examples the author lists ??...or would I be required to bond the letter slot and door bell button too... how do you stop giving examples of "all fixed metal parts,... when there are none left to bond??
Do throw in the "likely to be energized" phrase after parts ?

Metal fittings that are part of the pool are not required to be bonded if they are 4" or smaller and do not penetrate into the structure more than 1" , but " all metal parts " within 5' of the the inside edge shall be bonded

"why stop with the examples the author lists ??"
I wouldn't, I don't.

"how do you stop giving examples of "all fixed metal parts,... when there are none left to bond??"
yes

"Do throw in the "likely to be energized" phrase after parts ?"
Someone could copy some sentence structure from 250.104 and put in a proposal to add it into 680.26, but as of now, it isn't there and the '08 edition of 680.26(B)(5) went in a different direction. . I think 680.26(B)(5) is more applicable than 250.104 in this situation.

"would I be required to bond the letter slot and door bell button too"

Here's where I go for window or door frame:
#1] What does the wording in the NEC actually say ? . Is it clear ? . If yes, then skip to #4.
The word "parts" is not clear, I'm going to step #2.
#2] Is there other language within the NEC that might not directly apply but can help understand a word or phrase ? . If yes, then skip to #4.
I'm looking at stuff like 250.104 + 680.26(B)(5) and there's no clear help to be found, I'm going to step #3.
#3] Is there info in an ROP, NEC Handbook, or UL Whitebook that helps clear up the question ?
Yes, the Handbook is clear.
#4] Take the best answer you have at this point and apply common sense to the specific installation that you're looking at.
Common sense tells me that you can get shocked from a metal frame that's within 5' of the pool.
#5] Is it still unclear which of several options are required ? . Then accept any of those possible options that the contractor chooses.
The Handbook is clear, that will be the finding of my inspection.

Here's where I go for door bell button:
#1] What does the wording in the NEC actually say ? . Is it clear ? . If yes, then skip to #4.
Not clear, I'm going to step #2.
#2] Is there other language within the NEC that might not directly apply but can help understand a word or phrase ? . If yes, then skip to #4.
680.26(B)(5) is helpful when looking at stuff that's has a long dimension not over 4". . If a metal fitting attached to the pool isn't required to be bonded, now I'm looking at a metal doorbell button that's removed from the pool by 5' or less. . I'll look at this concept again in step #4, I'm going to step #3.
#3] Is there info in an ROP, NEC Handbook, or UL Whitebook that helps clear up the question ?
No, everything in the Handbook is considerably bigger than a door bell button.
#4] Take the best answer you have at this point and apply common sense to the specific installation that you're looking at.
I go back to the 4" spec in 680.26(B)(5). . That makes sense to me.
#5] Is it still unclear which of several options are required ? . Then accept any of those possible options that the contractor chooses.
I would not require the door bell button to be bonded according to where I'm at after step #4.

Here's where I go for letter slot:
#1] What does the wording in the NEC actually say ? . Is it clear ? . If yes, then skip to #4.
Not clear, I'm going to step #2.
#2] Is there other language within the NEC that might not directly apply but can help understand a word or phrase ? . If yes, then skip to #4.
680.26(B)(5) is helpful when looking at stuff that's has a long dimension not over 4" but I've never seen a letter slot that wasn't longer than 4". . Not clear, I'm going to step #3.
#3] Is there info in an ROP, NEC Handbook, or UL Whitebook that helps clear up the question ?
No, the Handbook doesn't discuss the letter slot of anything similar.
#4] Take the best answer you have at this point and apply common sense to the specific installation that you're looking at.
You wouldn't have the exposure of damaging a cord in the letter slot, nothing like the exposure that a window or door frame has.
#5] Is it still unclear which of several options are required ? . Then accept any of those possible options that the contractor chooses.
Still unclear. . I would accept the contractors option and I would tell him that his installation is not clearly code compliant and that fact might have an increased liability for him. . His choice.

 

[dnem]

680.26(b)
"The parts specified in 680.26(b)(1) through (7) shall be bonded together..."

Then comes a specific list of parts

conductive pool shells

Perimeter Surfaces

Metallic Components

Underwater Lighting

Metal fittings

Electrical Equipment

Metal wiring Methods and Equipment

These are the things that are required to be bonded together ,.. I don't really understand this comment you've made.



I'm directed to bond them together "shall be bonded together"

I think this line of reasoning is flawed given the first sentence of 680.26(B)
Metal Wiring Methods and Equipment are what is specified and they are also defined,.... window frames do not fit the definition nor are they specified.

If the paragraph that follows 680.26(B)(7) didn't exist, then you would have a point. . The main body paragraph of 680.26(B) says to bond the list that goes from (1) to (7) together. . But the paragraph after the heading in 680.26(B)(7) is a different paragraph. . It's purpose might be the same, it might be different. . "parts" might mean bond equipment parts to equipment parts. . "parts" might mean bond equipment parts to other parts.

And might means not clear. . And not clear changes the way I proceed.

 

[M. D.]

Wow ,..we do not see this at all alike,.. It has been a good discussion none the less .I don't think there is anything I could add or say that would effect a change in your approach..so I won't try

 

[dnem]

It has been a good discussion none the less

I agree.

It has been a good opportunity for me to put my method to the test and see if it holds up under scrutiny. . The actual answer to the question was secondary in my mind. . Most important was that I have a process to follow that limits the opinion of the inspector. . If all inspectors would limit their opinion in the process, there would be more uniform code interpretation.