Can you name that code?

[lanel]

Violation that is!

I wanted to see if some of you familiar with code could help me out? A swimming pool construction permit was obtained from the county which requires electrical work to be done by a licensed contractor. A plumber installed the electrical and was not the licensed person listed on the affidavit as the one doing the work. There are at least a few code violations I am aware of but want some help with the actual code numbers that would pertain to the various violations.

There is a subpanel on a basement wall feeding a Hayward Omnipl control. The service needs to be 120/240 @ 100 amps, will be in rigid PVC conduit for a distance of 40 feet from subpanel to pool controller. The subpanel is a 4 wire panel with 125A service.

The issues I know of (and there may be more) are:
Type NM -B cable was used (I am told that can't be used as a swimming pool feeder)
The cable contains three 6 awg wires and one 10 awg ground connected to a 100 amp breaker (need #3 copper or larger)
None of the breakers in the subpanel or control panel are labeled/identified
There are no ground fault breakers installed for the pool equipment which are connected to filter pump, booster pump, blower, heat pump, salt cell generator and ac outlet on side of control box.
One of the clamps securing the PVC is not attached because the PVC is not flush with the wall where it comes out of the subpanel.
Paper wrapped around the ground at the subpanel is not trimmed short. (although an easy fix)

Do any of you know the specific code numbers for any/all of the items listed above? Or do any of you see other issues from the photos?

If I misused terminology, please excuse since this is not my area of expertise. Photos below.

 

[infinity]

The NM cable is wrong, the strapping is wrong, the 100 amp OCPD is wrong, the lack of GFCI protection is wrong, the two wires one one terminal is wrong. I don't see any GEC. About the only thing that isn't really a violation is the paper on the EGC.

 

[roger]

The OP has an ongoing thread on this

 

[roger]

The OP has an ongoing thread on this

This is not actually a duplicate thread so it is reopened

 

[lanel]

the two wires one one terminal

Are you referring to the breaker in the control panel? Yes, they tied the pump which is controlled via rs485 to the booster pump which is controlled by the relay above the breaker.

Thanks for the post but what I really want is are code numbers that can be presented as 'proof' of a violation to provide legitimacy to my argument that it has to be corrected.

 

[Buck Parrish]

680.25-A Might cover a couple at least your AL feeder violation.
680.21-A - Insulated ground - 680.21 (C and D) for GFCI protection

Then tell them the whole chapter 680 shall be followed

 

[Dennis Alwon]

680.25-A Might cover a couple at least your AL feeder violation.
680.21 (C and D) for GFCI protection

Aluminum feeder is fine afaik.. if installed in a non corrosive environment and I see nothing wrong with nm cable being used however in this case it was used in conduit underground which is a violation.

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.
(A) Feeders. Where feeders are installed in corrosive environments
as described in 680.14, the wiring method of that
portion of the feeder shall be as required in 680.14(B) or shall
be liquidtight flexible nonmetallic conduit. Wiring methods
installed in corrosive environments as described in 680.14 shall
contain an insulated copper equipment grounding conductor
sized in accordance with Table 250.122, but not smaller than
12 AWG.
Where installed in noncorrosive environments, feeders shall
comply with the general requirements in Chapter 3.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Here is the art. for nm cable

300.5 Underground Installations.
(A) Minimum Cover Requirements. Direct-buried cable,
conduit, or other raceways shall be installed to meet the minimum
cover requirements of Table 300.5.
(B) Wet Locations. The interior of enclosures or raceways
installed underground shall be considered to be a wet location.
Insulated conductors and cables installed in these enclosures
or raceways in underground installations shall comply with
310.10(C) .

334.10(A) Type NM. Type NM cable shall be permitted as follows:
(1) For both exposed and concealed work in normally dry
locations except as prohibited in 334.10(3)

Nm cable is not permitted in a wet location.

 

[tom baker]

Does the panel come with the control board?

 

[Buck Parrish]

I had to replace one of those pool panels where the cover was "eat up" from the chlorine.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Table 310.15(B)(16) shows that #6 is only good for 55 amps so it cannot be used with a 100 amp breaker. ^0 amp would be allowed if the calculated load is not greater than 55 amps.

 

[tom baker]

The wiring in the panel is sloppy. Not a code violation

 

[Dennis Alwon]

It also seems to have a green wire being used as a hot conductor in the control panel on the bottom right.

 

[Fred B]

The double tap on the Eaton BR breaker is not listed for such. 110.14(A)

 

[Buck Parrish]

It also seems to have a green wire being used as a hot conductor in the control panel on the bottom right.

Looks like to me it is just looped around behind the breakers to the grd bar, But I agree "sloppy"

 

[lanel]

680.25-A Might cover a couple at least your AL feeder violation.
680.21-A - Insulated ground - 680.21 (C and D) for GFCI protection

On the AL, that is a direct burial between the house and pool house. From the pool house panel, it is copper to the control at the equipment pad although presumably the wrong type and too small gauge.

Aluminum feeder is fine afaik.. if installed in a non corrosive environment and I see nothing wrong with nm cable being used however in this case it was used in conduit underground which is a violation.

Thank you for the clarification

Does the panel come with the control board?

Yes, it's all made together

shows that #6 is only good for 55 amps

It will have to be changed/replaced.

The wiring in the panel is sloppy. Not a code violation

I agree, where I came from that would be unacceptable

It also seems to have a green wire being used as a hot conductor in the control panel on the bottom right.

I'll have to pop the panel off and take a look. Thanks

Fred B said:
The double tap on the Eaton BR breaker is not listed for such. 110.14(A)

If the double connection is moved to the relay would that satisfy the code? I still have to look because they have a 20a breaker supplying both the filter pump (2.7hp) and a booster pump (hp unknown)

 

[MTW]

Multiple breaker brands used in the loadcenter, Eaton and GE. Likely not approved for both. You would need to check the instructions for what breaker types are suitable. The GE breaker is not fully inserted on the bus stabs and could be loose, as GE normally uses a thicker aluminum bus stab.

Siemens and GE breakers used in the first panel, also a problem.

 

[retirede]

Multiple breaker brands used in the loadcenter, Eaton and GE. Likely not approved for both. You would need to check the instructions for what breaker types are suitable. The GE breaker is not fully inserted on the bus stabs and could be loose, as GE normally uses a thicker aluminum bus stab.

Siemens and GE breakers used in the first panel, also a problem.

I have a similar Hayward panel. I’ll look tomorrow, but I think the GE breakers are listed as OK, but I don’t think the BR are.

 

[tom baker]

Looks like to me it is just looped around behind the breakers to the grd bar, But I agree "sloppy"

The AHJ looks closer with sloppy wiring

 

[Little Bill]

@lanel
I have to ask............
What exactly is an Electric Utility Electronics Specialist?