Hot Tub equipotential exception...

[ritelec]

680.42 (B) talks about not needing the equipotential bonding around the perimeter if all 4 requirements are met..
Am I reading this correctly, - (4) rim has to be 28" above perimeter surfaces up to 30" away from the tub.
The question, if I install a equipotential perimeter bond around the tub,
could I build a brick wall right next to the tub 10' High if I wanted??

Thank you

 

[Dennis Alwon]

You are reading it correctly and yes you could build the wall IMO if you have the equipotential bonding all the way around the tub but why would you do that?

 

[ritelec]

I'm not :- )
The question was for a landscaper and and he will probably bond trucks hardscape wall higher than the Tub wall

Thank you

 

[FionaZuppa]

It's a UL listed standalone tub that is not rated indoor-only?

 

[ritelec]

It's a UL listed standalone tub that is not rated indoor-only?

sorry for the misspelling.. spell check or something on iphone.

I don't know, standalone units are only rated for indoor use only???

 

[kwired]

It's a UL listed standalone tub that is not rated indoor-only?

680.42 that is in question is titled "Outdoor installations".

I have never seen self contained hot tub that isn't rated for both indoors and outdoors, but if there is indoor only units, 680.42 would not apply to them because they can't be outdoors.

 

[FionaZuppa]

680.42 that is in question is titled "Outdoor installations".

I have never seen self contained hot tub that isn't rated for both indoors and outdoors, but if there is indoor only units, 680.42 would not apply to them because they can't be outdoors.

2017 680.42 B(2) got goofed up folks. It says "..... suitable only for indoor use". Whaaaaat. If it's listed as "indoor use only" then you would not be able to install it outside.

The MH PDF for 2017 NEC 680 has different verbiage. 2017 NEC from NFPA site B(2) is meant to say "not labeled as suitable for indoor use".
see https://www.mikeholt.com/download.php?file=PDF/Swimming_Pools_Spas_2017NEC.pdf

also note that the MH PDF for 680.42 B (1-4), the B part does not say "all conditions" whereas the NFPA NEC version does.

There are three possible 'use' listings for 680.42 B(2)
1) indoor only
2) indoor and outdoor
3) outdoor only

Why does NEC require the "indoor" use statement on a standalone outdoor spa in order to be eligble for the exception? That makes no sense.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

It says it shall not be listed as only indoor use. In other words it must be suitable for outdoor use. Not sure what you are seeing as incorrect

 

[FionaZuppa]

It says it shall not be listed as only indoor use. In other words it must be suitable for outdoor use. Not sure what you are seeing as incorrect

The point made earlier (not by me) was that if it was listed as indoor only then this section would not apply because this section is for outdoor installation, so then why even mention "if its listed as indoor only". Makes no sense.

In the MH PDF it reads as if, if the tub is not rated for indoor use at all then you cannot get the exception, or in other words, if the tub was rated outdoor only.

 

[kwired]

2017 680.42 B(2) got goofed up folks. It says "..... suitable only for indoor use". Whaaaaat. If it's listed as "indoor use only" then you would not be able to install it outside.

The MH PDF for 2017 NEC 680 has different verbiage. 2017 NEC from NFPA site B(2) is meant to say "not labeled as suitable for indoor use".
see https://www.mikeholt.com/download.php?file=PDF/Swimming_Pools_Spas_2017NEC.pdf

also note that the MH PDF for 680.42 B (1-4), the B part does not say "all conditions" whereas the NFPA NEC version does.

There are three possible 'use' listings for 680.42 B(2)
1) indoor only
2) indoor and outdoor
3) outdoor only

Why does NEC require the "indoor" use statement on a standalone outdoor spa in order to be eligble for the exception? That makes no sense.

I see what you are questioning and it is redundant because of the title of 680.42 being "outdoor installations".

 

[FionaZuppa]

I see what you are questioning and it is redundant because of the title of 680.42 being "outdoor installations".

So my question is, does that line item even belong there, or do they mean to say the tub has to be rated a indoor/outdoor tub in order for the exception to be allowed?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

So my question is, does that line item even belong there, or do they mean to say the tub has to be rated a indoor/outdoor tub in order for the exception to be allowed?

It does seem to be a moot point. If the tub is outdoors then one would expect it to be rated for outdoor use. I guess they are just making sure that it is install properly

 

[FionaZuppa]

It does seem to be a moot point. If the tub is outdoors then one would expect it to be rated for outdoor use. I guess they are just making sure that it is install properly

It's not moot yet. What is meant by that item?

Does NEC mean to say that the tub has to be indoor/outdoor rated? Would a tub rated as outdoor-only still meet the criteria?

Both indoor/outdoor and outdoor-only ratings still work ok for outdoor installation, etc.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

You are over thinking this. Indoor/outdoor or just outdoor are both acceptable for outdoor installation and both can use the exception

 

[FionaZuppa]

You are over thinking this. Indoor/outdoor or just outdoor are both acceptable for outdoor installation and both can use the exception

The line item mentions the word "indoor" alone. So please explain what it (that line) means.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

It is bad wording. All they needed to say is it is listed for outdoor use.

The spa or hot tub shall NOT be identified as suitable only for indoor use.

 

[FionaZuppa]

It is bad wording. All they needed to say is it is listed for outdoor use.

The spa or hot tub shall NOT be identified as suitable only for indoor use.

Ok, but then why even include that line/verbiage in the OUTDOOR install exception section?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Ok, but then why even include that line/verbiage in the OUTDOOR install exception section?

Probably doesn't need to be there but you can write a proposal and see if they see merit in the change

 

[FionaZuppa]

Probably doesn't need to be there but you can write a proposal and see if they see merit in the change

Is this how NEC does things now? Rhetorical Q btw, but if they cant see what they are writing then there's bigger issue going on. If they are reading what they write before it goes to print, they why don't they catch the blunder and fix it, then print it? The NFPA 70 cant be a collection of "well, we all know what they meant", because when you get to that stage then the text basically becomes junk. If i recall correctly, people need to buy the NEC print, and it's not a $5 cost either.

 

[kwired]

Is this how NEC does things now? Rhetorical Q btw, but if they cant see what they are writing then there's bigger issue going on. If they are reading what they write before it goes to print, they why don't they catch the blunder and fix it, then print it? The NFPA 70 cant be a collection of "well, we all know what they meant", because when you get to that stage then the text basically becomes junk. If i recall correctly, people need to buy the NEC print, and it's not a $5 cost either.

There is free access to it on NFPA website.