Overhead Clearance For Hot Tub

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jeff43222

Senior Member
Location
Minneapolis, Minnesota
I just looked at a potential job today involving wiring up a hot tub that is due to be delivered late next week. The HO built a deck next to his house on which the tub is to be placed. The service drop runs over part of this deck, and the new deck probably creates a violation of 230.24(B)(1). I didn't measure it, but it looked closer than 10' to me.

Anyway, since I don't have much experience installing hot tubs, I looked through Article 680, particularly Table 680.8. Am I correct in understanding that the minimum straight-line distance from any part of the water surface to the service drop wires must be at least 22.5'? If so, it seems to me that hot tubs cannot be installed anywhere near service drops since they are usually a lot lower than 22.5' over most of the property.

My impression is that I'm going to have to break the bad news to the HO that he's going to have to find a very different location for his hot tub. The only other thought I had was building a roof over the tub, but I don't think that would work, either, since it would create a violation of 230.24(A).

Suggestions?
 
Does 680.8 apply to utility owned conductors.

I know it is unpopular view but IMO no it does not.

Take a look at the wording of 680.8 than the definitions of service conductor, service drop, service point etc.

An NEC service drop is on the customer side of the service point.

If the service point is at the weather head than those overhead conductors from the pole to the weather head are not a 'Service Drop' to the NEC.

Just food for thought.
 
Bob,
I don't think that it matters. I believe that the NESC code has rules to prevent this installation. Not sure how they would be enforced. I guess the utility could just disconnect the power.
Don
 
I took a look at the definitions, and I agree that technically a service drop doesn't necessarily refer to only utility-owned wires. The commentary following the definition in the NECH says that the utility could specify that the service point is on their pole, so in a case like that the service drop would be on the customer's side.

Still, I have a hard time believing that the 22.5' of clearance over the hot tub only applies to customer-owned wiring and that I could install the hot tub without regard to the utility's service drop conductors. If it's only an NESC violation, I don't think I could claim that I'm not bound by the NESC and just plow ahead. Like Don said, PoCo could always cut power to the house.

Just to be safe, though, I called the chief inspector just now and asked him. He said that the clearances in T680.8 do refer to the utility-owned service-drop wires. The HO is not going to be terribly happy to hear this, especially since he built the deck specifically for the hot tub (he even pulled the appropriate permit and got it inspected). Moving the service would be pretty tough, too.

Thanks for the responses.
 
Moving the service underground would be fairly problematic. The lot is 40' wide, and the nearest utility pole is on the side of the lot where the detached garage is. The utility won't tunnel under the garage. I don't know if there's another pole in the alley the utility could tap, but even if there is, most of the back of the house has a large deck in front of it. I suppose theoretically the service could be moved to one side of the house, but that would be a pretty big hassle.
 
680.8(A) Power - With respect to service drop conductors and open overhead wiring, swimming pool and similar installations shall comply with ....

I would not consider a hot tub a "similar installation". Even if you disagree, I think "similar installation" is pretty vague. Similar in what way? The quantity of water? Similar treatment chemicals? Similar use?

A swimming pool is normally constructed on site from raw materials like concrete. A hot tub is installed as a complete factory assembled unit. In that way, I would submit that they are not similar.

Steve
 
Jeff,
I called the chief inspector just now and asked him. He said that the clearances in T680.8 do refer to the utility-owned service-drop wires.
Click to expand...
While it is a good idea to comply, how are utility owned and installed conductors covered by any rule in the NEC? They are outside of the scope of the NEC per 90.2(B)(5).
Don
 
I haven't been involved in pools or hot tubs for a while now, but (at least in SE Michigan) it used to be we were not allowed to wire any pool or hot tub that had less than 10' horizontal clearance from overhead lines. It made no difference whether they were electric, phone, clothes line or anything of a similar nature.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Jeff,

While it is a good idea to comply, how are utility owned and installed conductors covered by any rule in the NEC? They are outside of the scope of the NEC per 90.2(B)(5).
Don
Click to expand...

I agree that the utility's lines are outside the scope of the NEC. So theoretically, the HO could build a high platform and have his hot tub perched on top of it, with the service drop dipping into the water. My experience with the local PoCo leads me to believe that they wouldn't care if someone did this. They seem pretty laid-back about things.

But realistically I do think it's a good idea to keep the hot tub plenty far away from the service drop, and since the inspector is going to enforce 680.8 for the utility's wires, I'm going to go along with him. This one is not worth fighting.
 
jeff43222 said:
They seem pretty laid-back about things.
Click to expand...

LOL :D

But realistically I do think it's a good idea to keep the hot tub plenty far away from the service drop, and since the inspector is going to enforce 680.8 for the utility's wires, I'm going to go along with him. This one is not worth fighting.
Click to expand...

I doubt any one here would disagree with that, as I said it was just food for thought.
 
iwire

I see your point on this, but the voltages in the table would seem to indicate utility owned conductors, maybe this is two code panels not on the same page
 
Here is Mike Holt's opinion on this:

680.8 Overhead Conductor Clearance. Overhead conductors must meet the clearance requirements contained in Table 680.8. The clearance measurement is to be taken from the maximum water level.

(A) Overhead Power Conductors. Permanently installed pools, storable pools, outdoor spas, outdoor hot tubs, fountains, diving structures, observation stands, towers, or platforms must not be placed under or within 221⁄2 ft of service-drop conductors or open overhead wiring.

Author?s Comment: This rule doesn?t prohibit utility-owned overhead service-drop conductors from being installed over a permanently installed pool, storable pool, outdoor spa, outdoor hot tub, or fountain [90.2(B)(4)]. It does prohibit a permanently installed pool, storable pool, outdoor spa, outdoor hot tub, or fountain from being installed under an existing service drop.
 
Could you put the service on the garage then pipe over and UG to the house panel?

Also, if you can move things around so the drop is 10' away from the waters edge you won't need 22.5'. We were able to do this at one site by offsetting the riser.

I always thought the reason for the 22.5' was for clearance of those long aluminum poles used on nets etc. I guess someone could use one of those on a spa too.
 
monkey said:
Could you put the service on the garage then pipe over and UG to the house panel?

Also, if you can move things around so the drop is 10' away from the waters edge you won't need 22.5'. We were able to do this at one site by offsetting the riser.

I always thought the reason for the 22.5' was for clearance of those long aluminum poles used on nets etc. I guess someone could use one of those on a spa too.
Click to expand...

Good suggestions, but going UG is just a whole mess of hassle. Basically, the entire back of the house has deck adjacent to it. About the only way this might work is if I installed a new overhead service on the far side of the house, opposite where the pole is in the alley. The house faces east, and the utility pole is at the NW corner of the lot. Existing service point is about in the middle of the back of the house, and the proposed location of the hot tub is at the NW corner of the house. The service drop wouldn't be directly over the tub, but it would be close. It would be less than 10' from the water to the wires. If I installed the new service at the SW corner of the house, that might give the service-drop wires enough clearance from the water.
 
Last edited:
infinity said:
Overhead conductors must meet the clearance requirements contained in Table 680.8. The clearance measurement is to be taken from the maximum water level.

Permanently installed pools, storable pools, outdoor spas, outdoor hot tubs, fountains, diving structures, observation stands, towers, or platforms must not be placed under or within 22ft of service-drop conductors or open overhead wiring.
Click to expand...

Trevor:

I'm not sure what NEC that came from. I looked in the 2005, 2002, and 1996 NEC. None said anything about spa's or hot tubs. In fact, those seem to be missing from the older codes which were a little more specific (they listed diving structures, for example).

I'm still not sure this was intended to apply to a hot tub. (Not many hot tubs have diving boards:) )

Steve
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top