Need Advice on a Spa Hookup

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Amps

Electrical Contractor
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Electrical, Security, Networks and Everything Else.
The owner is going to demo a concrete patio at the back of his house, install a new concrete patio, and have a spa placed a few feet from one edge of the patio.
The 50A circuit to power the spa is coming underground along the edge of the patio, then up a pressure treated 6x6, into the WP disconnect. The carflex load leads from the WP disconnect will go down the 6x6, be on top of the concrete, then into the spa's side for the internal connection. I am concerned about the carflex being a physical tripping hazard since there is a few feet of concrete "walkway" along the edge where the electric will be. The owner does not want the circuit set in the concrete under the spa in case they remove the spa someday, doesn't want any PVC sticking out of the concrete or a hole from it if it were cut off flush The house is about 8 feet from the spa with finished rooms in the basement. Main 100AMP panel is recessed in the wall of a finished room.
If the spa's WP disconnect was to be mounted on the house, it would be around the corner out of sight from anyone on the patio. I am also concerned about the 100AMP service, that has central air, electric cook top, wall oven and electric dryer. The spa's specs indicate 32A maximum current, 50A GFI rating. Owner objects to upgrading the service to 200A.
I attached a sketch for reference. Wondering if anyone has connected a spa this way and was it approved by the AHJ? The few I have done were on wood decks with access from below. Any thoughts or advice is very much appreciated. Thank you in advance.
 

Attachments

  • Spa.pdf
    27.4 KB · Views: 64
Build a wooden cover over the carflex for physical protection. Don't worry about the rest.
My spa draws maximum power for maybe 15 minutes 2x per hour and we live in the frozen north. The disconnect needs to be in site from the spa access panel
 
In regards to the "trip hazard," I agree with you on that.
It's not so much the actual tripping that concerns me, although it does, but more so the act of live wires being yanked out of the disconnect/spa if someone does hook their foot around the raceway.

The HO's reasoning for not going under the concrete is stupid, IMO.
If they removed the spa in the future, he/she are still going to have the 6x6 there and he's worried about a stub-up?
But ultimately it's their decision, unless you plan to turn down a job for a simple disagreement like that.
 
Last edited:
jim dungar said:
Build a wooden cover over the carflex for physical protection. Don't worry about the rest.
My spa draws maximum power for maybe 15 minutes 2x per hour and we live in the frozen north. The disconnect needs to be in site from the spa access panel
Click to expand...
Thanks for that idea. I would like to install the disconnect on the side of the house close to the corner, even though there is a down spout right there. I watched a few YouTube videos that have the disconnect far down the side of a house. Not an easy fix if an inspector doesn't like it.
 
Jerramundi said:
In regards to the "trip hazard," I agree with you on that.
It's not so much the actual tripping that concerns me, although it does, but more so the act of live wires being yanked out of the disconnect/spa if someone does hook their foot around the raceway.

The HO's reasoning for not going under the concrete is stupid, IMO.
If they removed the spa in the future, he/she are still going to have the 6x6 there and he's worried about a stub-up?
But ultimately it's their decision, unless you plan to turn down a job for a simple disagreement like that.
Click to expand...
I agree. And if I strapped the carlfex to the concrete I'd have to drill holes for that. Thank you.
 
Amps said:
Thanks for that idea. I would like to install the disconnect on the side of the house close to the corner, even though there is a down spout right there. I watched a few YouTube videos that have the disconnect far down the side of a house. Not an easy fix if an inspector doesn't like it.
Click to expand...
Can't tell by the scale of your drawing, but it appears that you'll meet the 5ft separation required by 680.12.
Other than that, and the requirement for it be within sight, the placement is up to you. Obviously you want to meet these requirements, but also be accessible if the need should arise for an emergency or for just regular maintenance/repair.

As far as understand it, the down spout would need to be bonded per 250.104(B). The other concern that would arise in my mind would be water potentially leaking from gutter system onto the disconnect.

YouTube videos are fine w/ the caveat that they come from a reputable source, but be certain that they do. Everyone uses YouTube now and this malicious framing that only hacks utilize those videos is disingenuous. You just have to be certain about the source of the content.

As it has been explained to me before on this forum, if you're concerned about an inspectors personal interpretation of the code, you're better off calling them and talking to them, then arguing about it or having to change things later on.
 
Last edited:
Dennis Alwon said:
I would fail that install if I were inspecting it. If the patio is being rebuilt then put the pipe in the slab.
Click to expand...
Fail it based on? The decision to utilize liquid tight as opposed to putting it in the slab?
While I agree with you that the raceway stubbing up is the better solution, what's the code reference for failing the liquid tight?
(That is, aside from the almighty supremacy of the AHJ)

Dennis Alwon said:
Do not let the homeowner tell you how to do your job.
Click to expand...
100% agreed, although sometimes easier said than done.
 
I agree that the conduit should go in the slab. If the future if need be it can be cut off and patched. We're talking about a hole barely over an inch in diameter. The disconnect can go on the corner of the house and still be within sight from the equipment.
 
infinity said:
I agree that the conduit should go in the slab. If the future if need be it can be cut off and patched. We're talking about a hole barely over an inch in diameter.
Click to expand...
I would think the same, unless that creates potential water issues below the slab, unsettling of the dirt, cracks, etc.
I don't pour concrete so I don't know. I would imagine as long as it's sealed properly (i.e. around the stub-up, in patching later on) or even formed slightly to guide water away from the stub-up hole that that should be fine.
 
Amps said:
The owner is going to demo a concrete patio at the back of his house, install a new concrete patio, and have a spa placed a few feet from one edge of the patio.
The 50A circuit to power the spa is coming underground along the edge of the patio, then up a pressure treated 6x6, into the WP disconnect. The carflex load leads from the WP disconnect will go down the 6x6, be on top of the concrete, then into the spa's side for the internal connection. I am concerned about the carflex being a physical tripping hazard since there is a few feet of concrete "walkway" along the edge where the electric will be. The owner does not want the circuit set in the concrete under the spa in case they remove the spa someday, doesn't want any PVC sticking out of the concrete or a hole from it if it were cut off flush The house is about 8 feet from the spa with finished rooms in the basement. Main 100AMP panel is recessed in the wall of a finished room.
If the spa's WP disconnect was to be mounted on the house, it would be around the corner out of sight from anyone on the patio. I am also concerned about the 100AMP service, that has central air, electric cook top, wall oven and electric dryer. The spa's specs indicate 32A maximum current, 50A GFI rating. Owner objects to upgrading the service to 200A.
I attached a sketch for reference. Wondering if anyone has connected a spa this way and was it approved by the AHJ? The few I have done were on wood decks with access from below. Any thoughts or advice is very much appreciated. Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...
As a retired electrical inspector for a medium sized city in the state of NY, I can tell you that there are circumstances where the 5' requirement for the disconnect to be from the inside edge of the water line is sometimes impossible to facilitate. I would speak with your local electrical inspector about that. Sometimes, inspectors have to use a modicum of discretion in determining whether the disconnect location is safe. As a 42-year licensed master electrician, I would get the owner to sign a statement that he is aware of the disconnect location in order to protect yourself from future liability. I understand that some inspectors will disagree with this but every situation cannot possibly be covered within the parameters of the code. Sometimes, the inspector must determine if the installation is safe. Also, I would not allow the trip hazard you described. Some jobs are better to walk away from. Conduit in concrete can be exposed and relocated if necessary and the relatively small hole that would be left behind if they decided to have no hot tub in the future can be patched with little aesthetic concern. I recall once as an inspector being threatened by a law enforcement officer because I would not approve the schedule 40 PVC conduit that was on top of the concrete. It was a potential trip hazard for his family and guests. Additionally, the hinged cover rested on the PVC conduit when it was in the open position. It was my perception that the conduit would be damaged in the frigid winter temperatures in western NY. Even though it was implied that I might be pulled over in the future for maintaining my opinion, I stuck to my original position. If the customer won't allow you to perform a proper installation, you should just walk. It will only come back to bite you when somebody, possibly inebriated, trips over the Carflex and is injured.
 
Jerramundi said:
Fail it based on?
Click to expand...


Protection from damage. Carflex is not an approved system of protection. If the pipe is in anyway within a walkway I would also claim it to be dangerous even if it is run in conduit. I could see that getting kick and stepped on and eventually having a mess on your hand. No reason to run it like that if the slab is open already.
 
Amps said:
The owner is going to demo a concrete patio at the back of his house, install a new concrete patio, and have a spa placed a few feet from one edge of the patio.
The 50A circuit to power the spa is coming underground along the edge of the patio, then up a pressure treated 6x6, into the WP disconnect. The carflex load leads from the WP disconnect will go down the 6x6, be on top of the concrete, then into the spa's side for the internal connection. I am concerned about the carflex being a physical tripping hazard since there is a few feet of concrete "walkway" along the edge where the electric will be. The owner does not want the circuit set in the concrete under the spa in case they remove the spa someday, doesn't want any PVC sticking out of the concrete or a hole from it if it were cut off flush The house is about 8 feet from the spa with finished rooms in the basement. Main 100AMP panel is recessed in the wall of a finished room.
If the spa's WP disconnect was to be mounted on the house, it would be around the corner out of sight from anyone on the patio. I am also concerned about the 100AMP service, that has central air, electric cook top, wall oven and electric dryer. The spa's specs indicate 32A maximum current, 50A GFI rating. Owner objects to upgrading the service to 200A.
I attached a sketch for reference. Wondering if anyone has connected a spa this way and was it approved by the AHJ? The few I have done were on wood decks with access from below. Any thoughts or advice is very much appreciated. Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...
Since nobody has addressed the load that you are concerned about, without the square footage of the house, I can t perform the load calculation but again, if the load calculation exceeds the 100 amp service, regardless of what the homeowner wants, it's creating a circumstance of possible future liability. I relied on the electrician to perform the load calculation when I was an inspector. I would require that on this installation as well. If the load was circumspect with or without such, I would require that a proper load calc be performed. Again, the customer doesn't dictate the installation. The code does.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Protection from damage. Carflex is not an approved system of protection. If the pipe is in anyway within a walkway I would also claim it to be dangerous even if it is run in conduit. I could see that getting kick and stepped on and eventually having a mess on your hand. No reason to run it like that if the slab is open already.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I was just curious about what code ref you would use to justify failing an installation like that.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Protection from damage. Carflex is not an approved system of protection. If the pipe is in anyway within a walkway I would also claim it to be dangerous even if it is run in conduit. I could see that getting kick and stepped on and eventually having a mess on your hand. No reason to run it like that if the slab is open already.
Click to expand...
Dennis, if the opening between the hot tub and the 6x6 post that the disconnect will be mounted on is too narrow to allow for someone to walk between it, would that change your opinion on whether the flex conduit or any PVC conduit would be "subject to physical damage?" I agree that I would fail it based on that principle unless the above reiterated scenario prevented someone from traversing across the conduit. All of that is predicated on the disconnect mounted on the post meeting the 5' foot clearance requirement.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Carflex is not an approved system of protection.
Click to expand...
Really?

Let me preface this by saying that I had to look up Carflex, which I guess is a Carlon product? Not really my forte because not much PVC, ENT work in these parts in my experience.

My first thought for an installation like this would be LFMC (if it wasn't run under the slab). Initial searches showed Carflex to be UL listed now and it was stated in such a way that it appears to be a recent thing?? Not confirmed, just result of an initial search.

Also, isn't Carflex just a LFNC product? Which is an approved raceway (Article 356)??
Or are you just saying NO based on 356.12(1) Where subject to physical damage?
 
RDF said:
As a 42-year licensed master electrician, I would get the owner to sign a statement that he is aware of the disconnect location in order to protect yourself from future liability.
Click to expand...
Good piece of advice. Also, if you're going to do a load calculation... make sure you're getting paid for it.
Been out for a few potential jobs where I did a calculation and then the job didn't take.

If it turns out the calculation doesn't allow for this installation and you push the service upgrade and they say no,
you should still get paid for doing the calculation, IMO. I wasted a good number of hours doing calculations for free like a dummy thinking it would help me get the job. I used to see the one off calculations as something that I would just do to get my foot in the door and then charge for later, but my perspective is gradually changing.
 
Jerramundi said:
Really?

Let me preface this by saying that I had to look up Carflex, which I guess is a Carlon product? Not really my forte because not much PVC, ENT work in these parts in my experience.

My first thought for an installation like this would be LFMC (if it wasn't run under the slab). Initial searches showed Carflex to be UL listed now and it was stated in such a way that it appears to be a recent thing?? Not confirmed, just result of an initial search.

Also, isn't Carflex just a LFNC product? Which is an approved raceway (Article 356)??
Or are you just saying NO based on 356.12(1) Where subject to physical damage?
Click to expand...
I too was unfamiliar with the term Carflex. I will assume for the sake of this discussion that it falls under LFNC.
LFNC not permitted. 356.12(1) Where subject to physical damage.
PVC not permitted. 352.12(C) Where subject to physical damage.
and last but not not least,
90.4 The authority having jurisdiction for enforcement of the Code has the responsibility for making interpretations of the rules, for deciding on the approval of equipment and materials, and for granting the special permission contemplated in a number of the rules.
Believe it or not, this inspector would work with an electrical contractor whenever they could but if I personally felt it was an unsafe installation, it was my duty to require that it be remedied.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top