Another Pool Question

[kwired]

Again I think you're all obfuscating all over the place here: 250.32 (A) specifies a grounding electrode or grounding electrode system, except in the case of a single branch circuit. 250.32 (A) states that the grounding electrode conductors shall be in stalled in accordance with 250.32 (B) or (C).

I'm saying a pool is a "structure"; it requires a grounding electrode or grounding electrode system AT the structure, which must be wired in accordance with 250.32 (B).

End of story.

Not really because I have no intention of installing the ground rod either. In fact I find it a little redundant even in the case of an actual structure. My point is that we've been playing these games since the 60s and it's time we focused on getting it - the NEC - right.

But are you feeding the pool with a service or feeder, or are you supplying the pool with branch circuits originating at a "separate structure"?

A ground rod is never required anywhere by NEC - it is just the most common electrode of choice when not others are available. An in ground pool will by design have a concrete encased electrode present. Equipotential bonding rules only require to tie things together with at least 8AWG. Depending on the service or feeder you may need larger then that for the GEC connection to it. But again the service or feeder is never at the pool it is at a nearby separate structure.

 

[iwire]

Again I think you're all obfuscating all over the place here: 250.32 (A) specifies a grounding electrode or grounding electrode system, except in the case of a single branch circuit. 250.32 (A) states that the grounding electrode conductors shall be installed in accordance with 250.32 (B) or (C).

I'm saying a pool is a "structure"; it requires a grounding electrode or grounding electrode system AT the structure, which must be wired in accordance with 250.32 (B). No where in 32 (B) does it suggest we can eliminate that grounding electrode system; in fact, it uses the word "and" to signify its existence, as in: "and to the grounding electrodes."

End of story.

It is not the end of the story at all.

Yes, a pool is a structure, I think we all agree that it is.

But lets really look at the code section.

250.32 Buildings or Structures Supplied by a Feeder(s)
or Branch Circuit(s).

(A) Grounding Electrode. Building(s) or structure(s) supplied
by feeder(s) or branch circuit(s) shall have a grounding
electrode or grounding electrode system installed in
accordance with Part III of Article 250. The grounding
electrode conductor(s) shall be connected in accordance
with 250.32(B) or (C). Where there is no existing grounding
electrode, the grounding electrode(s) required in 250.50
shall be installed.


Exception: A grounding electrode shall not be required
where only a single branch circuit, including a multiwire
branch circuit, supplies the building or structure and the
branch circuit includes an equipment grounding conductor
for grounding the normally non?current-carrying metal
parts of equipment.

The pool structure is usually not supplied by anything but water lines. The structure being electrically supplied is the structure the panel in mounted to or the pumps are etc.

If you have a pool that has more than one branch circuit actually supplying that pool structure, say pool lights mounted to that structure, maybe a motorized pool cover mounted to that structure in that case you could say the pool structure requires a GES.

However that would be the odd pool, not the majority of pools.

 

[david]

Where in article 680 does it say the feeder supplying pool utilization equipment has to be re-earthed at the pool equipment feeder?

Yes a pool is a structure but I am saying article 680 addresses that specific structure and associates multiple branch circuits and utilization equipment directly with that structure with specific rules in relationship to that utilization equipment.

if you define what the pool panel is attached to as a seperate structure without consideration that the article is considering it pool eguipment you will have to provide re-earthing at the structure.

 

[iwire]

Where in article 680 does it say the feeder supplying pool utilization equipment has to be re-earthed at the pool equipment feeder?

Why would it say that? The issue is addressed in 250. Chapters 1 through 4 apply generally unless modified.

Yes a pool is a structure but I am saying article 680 addresses that specific structure and associates multiple branch circuits and utilization equipment directly with that structure with specific rules in relationship to that utilization equipment.

I disagree that 680 modifies the rules in 250.32 under discussion.

if you define what the pool panel is attached to as a seperate structure without consideration that the article is considering it pool eguipment you will have to provide re-earthing at the structure.

Yes, exactly. Just because it can be called pool equipment does not negate the rules in 250.32.

 

[kwired]

Where in article 680 does it say the feeder supplying pool utilization equipment has to be re-earthed at the pool equipment feeder?

Yes a pool is a structure but I am saying article 680 addresses that specific structure and associates multiple branch circuits and utilization equipment directly with that structure with specific rules in relationship to that utilization equipment.

if you define what the pool panel is attached to as a seperate structure without consideration that the article is considering it pool eguipment you will have to provide re-earthing at the structure.

Items in chapters 5 6 and 7 still supplement the general rules in chapters 1-4. A feeder to a separate building or structure still needs a grounding electrode system at the separate structure unless stated otherwise somewhere in art 680 for this application. I don't believe you will find anything in 680 that relieves the GES requirements for a feeder to a separate structure.

This means the panelboard at the pump house or other structure needs a GES.

Any branch circuits at the pool itself gets a little more complex, but again the equipotential bond conductors are typically large enough in relation to size necessary for the GEC that you inherently have a compiant GES anyway. It doesn't say the equipotential bonding and the GES must be made up of separate items - in fact they will be bonded together and essentially be the same thing.

 

[david]

Why would it say that? The issue is addressed in 250. Chapters 1 through 4 apply generally unless modified.



I disagree that 680 modifies the rules in 250.32 under discussion.




Yes, exactly. Just because it can be called pool equipment does not negate the rules in 250.32.

Except that 680.25 specifically states that the feeder supplies a separate structure and a feeder from a separate structure supplies swimming pool equipment branch circuits.

I will concede on the bases of it really doesn?t matter because I have no assurance that the feeder will only supply swimming pool equipment branch circuits

 

[kwired]

Except that 680.25 specifically states that the feeder supplies a separate structure and a feeder from a separate structure supplies swimming pool equipment branch circuits.

I will concede on the bases of it really doesn?t matter because I have no assurance that the feeder will only supply swimming pool equipment branch circuits

I kind of tried to point that out earlier. There is no such thing as a pool panel. There is panels that feed pool equipment though. But those panels are not limited to supplying only pool loads.

 

[GoldDigger]

But are you feeding the pool with a service or feeder, or are you supplying the pool with branch circuits originating at a "separate structure"?

A ground rod is never required anywhere by NEC - it is just the most common electrode of choice when not others are available. An in ground pool will by design have a concrete encased electrode present. Equipotential bonding rules only require to tie things together with at least 8AWG. Depending on the service or feeder you may need larger then that for the GEC connection to it. But again the service or feeder is never at the pool it is at a nearby separate structure.

An in-ground pool with a reinforced concrete shell and no membrane outside that will have a concrete encased electrode present in effect. But that concrete does not fit the NEC definition of Concrete Encased Electrode. So it does not counter for anything in terms of a required electrode. And an equipotential ring wire is too shallow to count as a ring electrode for grounding.

 

[retire09]

The pool structure is not supplied by a feeder.
The sub panel near the pool and not structurally connected to it is supplied by the feeder and only one circuit to a pool light is sometimes run to the pool structure.
I think the idea of requiring a GES for a pool structure is over thinking the code.
If it turns out that the electrodes are needed; notifications need to be sent to all pool builders and jurisdictions around the country to advise them of this requirement because I would guess over 95% of all pools with remote subpanels have been installed wrong.

 

[david]

I wrote a proposal about septic pumps because they often have a 240v feed and a 120v alarm cir. I tried to get an exception in to 225.30 which requires only one feed to a structure. The cmp members said that it was a piece of equipment and thus it did not need to comply with 225.30. I still disagree however it shows that you can have more than one branch cir. to a structure without a panel. There is no physical way to mount a panel to a pool so I don't see how a panel would be required.

If you have a pool that has more than one branch circuit actually supplying that pool structure, say pool lights mounted to that structure, maybe a motorized pool cover mounted to that structure in that case you could say the pool structure requires a GES.

However that would be the odd pool, not the majority of pools.

Moving even further down that road, how many branch circuits is a separate structure allowed?

you baited this earlier and i think we are both trying not to distract away from the GE issue,

 

[augie47]

The pool structure is not supplied by a feeder.
The sub panel near the pool and not structurally connected to it is supplied by the feeder and only one circuit to a pool light is sometimes run to the pool structure.
I think the idea of requiring a GES for a pool structure is over thinking the code.

To me, the underlined is the key. The ground rod is there to provide the required GES for a subpanel where the panel is at/on a detached structure, in some cases that might be the "structure" to which the panel is mounted.
Immaterial as to wheter the circuits from the panel feed a pool.

If it turns out that the electrodes are needed; notifications need to be sent to all pool builders and jurisdictions around the country to advise them of this requirement because I would guess over 95% of all pools with remote subpanels have been installed wrong.

"pool builders" need not be concerned. electricians installing subpanels at detached locations need to be aware of 250.32

 

[Little Bill]

Again I think you're all obfuscating all over the place here: 250.32 (A) specifies a grounding electrode or grounding electrode system, except in the case of a single branch circuit. 250.32 (A) states that the grounding electrode conductors shall be installed in accordance with 250.32 (B) or (C).

I'm saying a pool is a "structure"; it requires a grounding electrode or grounding electrode system AT the structure, which must be wired in accordance with 250.32 (B). No where in 32 (B) does it suggest we can eliminate that grounding electrode system; in fact, it uses the word "and" to signify its existence, as in: "and to the grounding electrodes."

End of story.

Not really because I have no intention of installing the ground rod either. In fact I find it a little redundant even in the case of an actual structure. My point is that we've been playing these games since the 60s and it's time we focused on getting the NEC right.

Here is your OP:

Since I haven't done this in awhile, correct me if I'm wrong (and thus reeducate me): A pool subpanel requires a four wire install and a ground rod. Or two. ?

I replied with this:

I'll try and give my simple answer to this question since it was what the OP asked to begin with.

Any sub panel requires a 4-wire feed. (Assuming single phase)

It depends on where the sub panel is installed as to whether it needs a ground rod (or any electrode).

Same structure as what it's fed from = no, no additional ground rod

Separate structure (another building, wooden post, strut asmy, etc) = yes, add rod (or any electrode)

Simply put, a sub panel for a pool is no different than any other sub panel in terms of the GES requirements.

Asked and answered!
Now how is that "obfuscating"?
Unless that big word means something else!

As to this:

I'm saying a pool is a "structure"; it requires a grounding electrode or grounding electrode system AT the structure, which must be wired in accordance with 250.32 (B). No where in 32 (B) does it suggest we can eliminate that grounding electrode system; in fact, it uses the word "and" to signify its existence, as in: "and to the grounding electrodes."

Just because you can define a pool (or anything that meets the definition) as a structure, that doesn't mean you have to have a GES. I say that because a structure may not have a service or feeder attached to it. For the code to apply, it would have to have a service or feeder attached/mounted to or on it.
Since the pool is a structure but it has no service or feeder mounted on it, the rules don't apply and no GES required.
Would you have to install a GES to a building that had no service or feeder run to it?
No!:happyno:

 

[retire09]

A wooden post is a structure requiring the protection of an electrode system?

 

[augie47]

IMO, you were more elucidating than obfuscating [h=1][/h]

 

[augie47]

A wooden post is a structure requiring the protection of an electrode system?

The post does not need an electrode !
A sub-panel mounted on that post would if one accepts:

NEC:
"Structure.That which is built or constructed.

 

[Little Bill]

IMO, you were more elucidating than obfuscating

Now you made me go and look up that one!:lol:

 

[augie47]

Now you made me go and look up that one!:lol:

(I had to search for it but I figured two could play the game )

 

[iwire]

Except that 680.25 specifically states that the feeder supplies a separate structure and a feeder from a separate structure supplies swimming pool equipment branch circuits.

680.25 Feeders. These provisions shall apply to any feeder
on the supply side of panelboards supplying branch circuits
for pool equipment covered in Part II of this article and on
the load side of the service equipment or the source of a
separately derived system

I do not see what you are driving at. :? I see nothing in 680.25 that modifies section 250.32.

 

[retire09]

I agree.
I have just never considered a wood post to be a structure.
So this panel must also be service rated and typically have a main breaker unless listed for use with no more than 6 disconnects.

 

[david]

I do not see what you are driving at. :? I see nothing in 680.25 that modifies section 250.32.

I am no longer debating this I already said I concede, but just to answer your question and then leave it at that

Just for clarification there is nothing in 250 .32 that requires my feeder that is supplying pool utilization equipment to be re-earthed at the load end of the feeder.

Ito illustrate that assume I mount my electrical panel to a live tree or a dead tree if you like and provide expansion joints for my conduit. Would you agree that it is just equipment and nothing in 250.32 re-quires the feeder to be re-earthed.

We know for sure that article 680 does not allow a breaker panel to be mounted to the pool 680.12

article 680 makes refers over and over to pool equipment branch circuits

. We know for sure that the pool is a structure or more correctly a building since this structure we are discussing stands alone.

We know for sure all the equipment at the pool structure is being supplied by branch circuits. In the case of a pool cover motor, chair lift, and lighting it is going to be supplied by more than one branch circuit. You and I both know that if this is not being consider utilization equipment that violates 225.30

By requiring the disconnect to be five ft away that amends article 225.30 or the pool and equipment associated with it is being considered no more than equipment.

Why would 680.25(2) make mention of 250.32(B) for the feeder at the supply end of the pool equipment feeder and not for the load end of the feeder unless it was looking at the load end as strictly equipment?

680.6 tells you the equipment ground run with the feeder has to ground the panel serving equipment at any body of water

680.25 feeder to separate structure (250.32(B)) feeder from separate structure ?????? (nothing about earthling) insulated equipment ground to panel 680.6 insulated equipment ground to utilization equipment 680.6

The article is pretty specific when it comes to grounding and bonding .