Overhead Clearance For Hot Tub

[jeff43222]

HO just called me. It seems he's already paid for the hot tub, and he still wants it, but he's not too keen on having to pay for a new service in addition to the hot tub wiring. This assumes it's possible to put in a new service far enough away from the hot tub. I'm going out tonight to take another look at possible options.

 

[infinity]

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

That post is directly from Mike Holt's book on Article 680. It is related to the 2005 NEC.

The authors comment is Mike's opinion on how the rule is applied.

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.

 

[steve66]

This is the part I don't see in the 2005:

(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.


The 2005 seems to just say "swimming pools and similar installations".

Maybe I wrong, since nobody else seems to agree, but I just don't see a hot tub as being a similar installation to a pool.

I also don't see how sitting in a hot tub under a service drop is any more dangerous than sitting in a lawn chair under the same drop?

 

[dlhoule]

This is the part I don't see in the 2005:

(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.


The 2005 seems to just say "swimming pools and similar installations".

Maybe I wrong, since nobody else seems to agree, but I just don't see a hot tub as being a similar installation to a pool.

I also don't see how sitting in a hot tub under a service drop is any more dangerous than sitting in a lawn chair under the same drop?[/quote]

It isn't unless you are doing it while there is bad weather in the area and then it would be a marginal call. I was once told the reason for having 10' horizontal clearance from waters edge was due to fact that there are a lot of birds that like to sit on overhead lines. Many filters do not do a good job of getting rid of the polution caused by these birds. IMO a hot tub would provide the birds with the same opportunity.

 

[jeff43222]

OK -- how about this idea:

I met with the HO again to look at options. We could move the service to the garage, run an underground feeder to the house, and convert the house main panel into a sub, but that would be a lot of effort just for a hot tub.

Do the requirements in 680.8 still apply if a roof is built over the hot tub?

 

[dlhoule]

OK -- how about this idea:

I met with the HO again to look at options. We could move the service to the garage, run an underground feeder to the house, and convert the house main panel into a sub, but that would be a lot of effort just for a hot tub.

Do the requirements in 680.8 still apply if a roof is built over the hot tub?

IMO no; as long as the proper clearance is kept from roof to overhead lines.

 

[jeff43222]

But then we have the problem with the roof being too close to the service drop. But the PoCo often puts it service drops very close to roofs, and, as Bob pointed out, the utility's wires are technically not governed by the NEC. I tried getting a ruling from the chief inspector, but he's out of the office today.

 

[hillbilly]

Just a thought ....Why not move the service attachment point to a location that gives you the proper clearance and run new service cable from there back to the existing meter location. You would have to keep the run outside. You could use SE cable (if not subject to damage) or wire in conduit. Run it under the eave to hide it.

steve.

 

[allenwayne]

Similar installation is the key word.Does it contain water YES.Does it have a pump YES.that is similar to a pool.The NEC gives us height restrictions from a roof top.The poco might have an entirely different view on the install.I did a 4 module office trailer that we set the pole and wired it all up.The AHJ passed the install saying that the min. clearances have been met but the poco said they won`t feed the service since it ran parrallel with the roof of the modular trailer.They didn`t care how many feet above the modular trailers it was if it ran with the modulars then they wouldn`t hook it up.Check with the poco before you take a loss.Not sure how it is where you are but here we can meet with a poco engineer and have them sign off an install that They aprove,that way if anything comes up later you`re covered.This method has proven beneficial in the past when a juinor engineer signed off a 600 amp SFR service in the back of a home since the HO didn`t want to see the service when they drove up.The Point of entry was on opposite side of the structrue but once he signed off that we could set our service in an specific location they were bound in court to meet it.It went to court and the judge agreed that once the poco agreed to hook up at a specific location regardless of the power matrix they were bound to hook up.Didn`t matter if the engineer was a junior,senior engineer ,or CEO of the POCO

 

[jeff43222]

Just a thought ....Why not move the service attachment point to a location that gives you the proper clearance and run new service cable from there back to the existing meter location. You would have to keep the run outside. You could use SE cable (if not subject to damage) or wire in conduit. Run it under the eave to hide it.

steve.

I thought of that, but the problem is that the pole the drop is connected to is just north of the lot on the other side of the alley, and the only place the service point could be moved to would be the southwest corner of the house. That would have the drop going diagonally across the back yard, and I don't think it would still have enough clearance where the tub is going to be located.

But maybe it would work if the PoCo was willing to put in a mid-span tap near the southwest corner of the house (the next pole is too far south). They charge for that, but it would be a whole lot less than I would charge them for installing a new service at the garage and running an underground feeder from there to the house.

I like the idea of using SE cable (I've been using it more lately), but I think I'm going to have to install a through-the-roof mast because the new deck is closer than 10' to the underside of the eave.

 

[hillbilly]

I like the idea of using SE cable (I've been using it more lately), but I think I'm going to have to install a through-the-roof mast because the new deck is closer than 10' to the underside of the eave.[/QUOTE]

I believe that you can install the mast and run down to a JB mounted on the outside wall. From there you can splice the service conductors and run SE cable around the house to the meter. The code allows you to splice underground service laterals and service entrance conductors, but I can find no mention of splicing the service conductors between the point of attachment and the meter. It doesn't say that you can't (that I can find).
Maybe someone else that knows for sure will chime in.
The cables are spliced at the servive head and the meter, what's the difference?
steve

 

[jeff43222]

I like the idea of using SE cable (I've been using it more lately), but I think I'm going to have to install a through-the-roof mast because the new deck is closer than 10' to the underside of the eave.

I believe that you can install the mast and run down to a JB mounted on the outside wall. From there you can splice the service conductors and run SE cable around the house to the meter. The code allows you to splice underground service laterals and service entrance conductors, but I can find no mention of splicing the service conductors between the point of attachment and the meter. It doesn't say that you can't (that I can find).
Maybe someone else that knows for sure will chime in.
The cables are spliced at the servive head and the meter, what's the difference?
steve

I've never done it, but what you describe does sound reasonable. I'm not sure SE would be acceptable, though, since it's not in a raceway and would be closer than allowed by 680.8. I think what I might look into would be to have the service point around the corner of the house, and then run a PVC mast from there to the meter socket. I think that would pass inspection.

 

[hillbilly]

I've never done it, but what you describe does sound reasonable. I'm not sure SE would be acceptable, though, since it's not in a raceway and would be closer than allowed by 680.8. I think what I might look into would be to have the service point around the corner of the house, and then run a PVC mast from there to the meter socket. I think that would pass inspection.

That's a better way. If you put it in conduit, you won't have to splice the conductors.
steve

 

[jeff43222]

I think I might have a solution to this mess. I just got off the phone with a PoCo designer who is going to meet me at the property tomorrow to discuss options and see if we can come up with a solution that will work for both sides.

 

[allenwayne]

I said check with the poco on page three of this thread.I have always found when dealing with a poco that they are the ones that need to be contacted,since they are not under the guidelines of the NEC.