680.26(C)

Status
Not open for further replies.
FionaZuppa

FionaZuppa

Senior Member
Location
AZ
Occupation
Part Time Electrician (semi retired, old) - EE retired.
this is around bonding for pools.

the 9sq.in. (min) required to contact pool water and then bonded...... why doesnt the code specify where the 9sq.in. has to be. on side wall near top of water seems silly. to me this item should be specified as "in or on floor (lowest part of pool), must maintain 9sq.in. of liquid contact up until the pool is completely empty". any other method leaves room for the 9sq.in. of bonding to become un-bonded, etc.
 
The infamous "what if".
If somebody drained the pool halfway but continued to use it, the water might no longer be bonded....

Tapatalk!
 
From purely a code standpoint I agree with the OP.

The NEC does not say the water bonding only has to be compleate when people are swimming.

It might make sense if every pool drain fitting provided a place to bond the water.
 
FionaZuppa said:
this is around bonding for pools.

the 9sq.in. (min) required to contact pool water and then bonded...... why doesnt the code specify where the 9sq.in. has to be. on side wall near top of water seems silly. to me this item should be specified as "in or on floor (lowest part of pool), must maintain 9sq.in. of liquid contact up until the pool is completely empty". any other method leaves room for the 9sq.in. of bonding to become un-bonded, etc.
Click to expand...

@FionaZuppa

Firstly, I support pool water bonding on many levels (aiding a GFCI Device to function properly is but only one). Installing the required surface area at a specific location by the NEC would remove many compliance options to achieve the 9sq.in. requirement. If the pool was nearly empty and you bonded it at the bottom, considering you would not be able to reach other potential path for current flow the need would become moot at best. While noble in itself; the water line will always be a moving target so to speak and we can't control the end users (consumers) activity no more than we can ensure they test their GFCI's and AFCI's every 30 days. But, I encourage you to submit a public input and we will see how it "flushes" out.

In the words of a wise man I know in Richardson TX, I eagerly await your Public Comment ;)
 
what i am getting at is, bonding the water depends on the location of the bonding. i was only suggesting the floor of the pool to accommodate those cases where the water levels fluctuate. its not all about "swimming". a pool with 2" of water in may be entered by unknown persons, but we should still try and protect against that water having voltage on it. perhaps the answer is that pool drains standard be changed to include the min NEC requirement of 9sq.in. and provide a place to connect the bonding wire. voila, issue taken care of.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top