Equipotential bonding

Status
Not open for further replies.
cowboyjwc

cowboyjwc

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Simi Valley, CA
Sorry if this sounds like a silly question, but since we've only been on the 2008 for a year I haven't had enforce this.

Is a Equipotential bonding ring required around a self contained, above ground fiberglass spa?
 
cowboyjwc said:
Sorry if this sounds like a silly question, but since we've only been on the 2008 for a year I haven't had enforce this.

Is a Equipotential bonding ring required around a self contained, above ground fiberglass spa?
Click to expand...

Under the 2008 NEC yes.

There is a TIA for the 2011 NEC that eliminates the requirement for the equipotential bonding grid for self contained spas, here is what it says;

Exception No. 2: A listed self-contained spa or hot tub that meets all of the following conditions shall not be required to have
equipotential bonding of perimeter surfaces installed as required in 680.26(B)(2):
(1) Is installed in accordance with manufacturer?s instructions on or above grade.
(2) The vertical measurement from all permanent perimeter surfaces within 30 horizontal inches (76 cm) of the spa to the top
rim of the spa is greater than 28 inches (71 cm).

HERE is a link to the TIA.

Chris
 
cowboyjwc said:
Thanks Chris.

I couldn't see any exception for an above ground spa, but I couldn't see any point in it either.
Click to expand...

We have two of them to do and the hot tubs are on a deck 20 feet in the air. One has an indoor pool under it so there is epb while the other is just on a high deck. Not sure if it makes any sense to do it but there are no exceptions.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
We have two of them to do and the hot tubs are on a deck 20 feet in the air. One has an indoor pool under it so there is epb while the other is just on a high deck. Not sure if it makes any sense to do it but there are no exceptions.
Click to expand...

I agree, but look at the link Chris sent, especially if you are on the 2011.
 
cowboyjwc said:
I agree, but look at the link Chris sent, especially if you are on the 2011.
Click to expand...
One would think if the 2011 came out with an addendum then why would they not make it retroactive to the other years. Our state says we have not adopted the 2011 so we cannot use the addendum. Now that is dumb.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
One would think if the 2011 came out with an addendum then why would they not make it retroactive to the other years. Our state says we have not adopted the 2011 so we cannot use the addendum. Now that is dumb.
Click to expand...

I think it is dumb that some states are still on the '08 code, to me it makes no sense. Does that open up liability issue on the state/contractors part if they did not accept changes made within a 6 year period, from a code book they are using to safeguard all?
 
jusme123 said:
I think it is dumb that some states are still on the '08 code, to me it makes no sense. Does that open up liability issue on the state/contractors part if they did not accept changes made within a 6 year period, from a code book they are using to safeguard all?
Click to expand...

Um, No. You go by the code that your state adopts.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
One would think if the 2011 came out with an addendum then why would they not make it retroactive to the other years. Our state says we have not adopted the 2011 so we cannot use the addendum. Now that is dumb.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we were just talking about that here in the office, and we may just go that way. It would be an informal adoption since we've already rewritten out local codes too.
 
jusme123 said:
I think it is dumb that some states are still on the '08 code, to me it makes no sense. Does that open up liability issue on the state/contractors part if they did not accept changes made within a 6 year period, from a code book they are using to safeguard all?
Click to expand...

How about those states that are still on the '05 code!?!?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top