Pool bonding sub panel?

Status
Not open for further replies.
With all of the stray-voltage threads we've had, I think I'd want bonding done even on a pool with no electrical equipment.
 
LarryFine said:
With all of the stray-voltage threads we've had, I think I'd want bonding done even on a pool with no electrical equipment.
Click to expand...
You still have to add the EPBG even if no power to the pool. You may only be bonding the perimeter to the water but it is required.

I've seen plenty of pools with just a pump, nothing extra, but IMO, you would need a pump or swim in green slime!:sick:
 
romex jockey said:
Further, there was a lot of activity when the NEC allowed pools to be part of the whole GEC scheme

~RJ~
Click to expand...
When was this? Haven't done pools for very long.
romex jockey said:
so would the same theory apply to barns >547??

~RJ~
Click to expand...
It is on the same concept as barn or even the remote watering stations, the EPB brings everything the livestock might contact all to the same potential recognizing that there are times NEV is present and the potential gradient or differential was causing issues. In the barn situation they will create a gradient at entry points that will allow a gradual change from the unbonded surface and any voltage present on the EPBonded surface.
 
According to 2020 680.22(E), a panel shouldnt be within 5’ of a pool…. unless separated by a barrier.
 
Just saw this as I don’t do a lot of pool stuff I was looking into it because ahj just failed because he could not “see” my bonding wire to a pentair panel. Made me bond it to the rest of pool equipment to pass
 
I think it does make a difference. I'll give you an example. I seen several pools next to each other utilizing a 200 amp pool panel . This panel fed a these commercial pools with all the bells and whistles.
The electrician installed the grounding electrode wire in conduit straight down to a ground rod. (No intersystem bonding connector) Then he brought the equipotential bonding to the same panel with no conduit, So then the other utilities that came along phone, internet, cable, They all bonded to the equipotential wire below the panel.
 
Final inspection last week on pool. Inspector failed. Stated the Jandy sub-panel, the (4) 12V transformers and the Jandy power center for the salt system must be bonded. There are lugs on the Jandy equipment but none on the Intermatic transformers.

Pool equipment 40' from the pool.

We had bonded same equipment set up about 15 years ago, and the inspector at that time said no need to. Go figure.
I copied that section of the code Dennis referenced, 680.26 (B). Perhaps I'll show the inspector.
 
Mystic Pools said:
Final inspection last week on pool. Inspector failed. Stated the Jandy sub-panel, the (4) 12V transformers and the Jandy power center for the salt system must be bonded. There are lugs on the Jandy equipment but none on the Intermatic transformers.

Pool equipment 40' from the pool.

We had bonded same equipment set up about 15 years ago, and the inspector at that time said no need to. Go figure.
I copied that section of the code Dennis referenced, 680.26 (B). Perhaps I'll show the inspector.
Click to expand...


All equipment associated with the pool needs bonding. I guess an inspector can argue that the pool panel is equipment for the pool. What I have seen mostly, that is before these Jandy boxes were around or being used, was a standard panel that we used as a sub out at the pool. We drove rods and treated it like a remote subpanel.

I would agree the power center for the salt system should be bonded but not the Jandy---however I can see his argument also.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
All equipment associated with the pool needs bonding. I guess an inspector can argue that the pool panel is equipment for the pool. What I have seen mostly, that is before these Jandy boxes were around or being used, was a standard panel that we used as a sub out at the pool. We drove rods and treated it like a remote subpanel.

I would agree the power center for the salt system should be bonded but not the Jandy---however I can see his argument also.
Click to expand...
The power center for the salt gets it's power from the Jandy panel. I can see his argument as well.

He was nice enough about it. No big deal. We can make the change. He did tell me concrete pools no longer needed the water bond. Not sure about that.
 
Mystic Pools said:
The power center for the salt gets it's power from the Jandy panel. I can see his argument as well.

He was nice enough about it. No big deal. We can make the change. He did tell me concrete pools no longer needed the water bond. Not sure about that.
Click to expand...
What nec year are you using?
 
What I link about the NEC Link is that they explain certain sections. The enhanced contents explains things better at times. The bold shows where a conductive shell in contact with the water will satisfy the requirement for bonding the pool water. But this is the 2020 nec. I'm am not sure the 2017 hits on this- at least not clearly

(C) Pool Water.

Where none of the bonded parts are in direct connection with the pool water, the pool water shall be in direct contact with an approved corrosion-resistant conductive surface that exposes not less than 5800 mm2 (9 in.2) of surface area to the pool water at all times. The conductive surface shall be located where it is not exposed to physical damage or dislodgement during usual pool activities, and it shall be bonded in accordance with 680.26(B).
Click to expand...


ENHANCED CONTENT
Collapse
Where bonded items such as ladders, rails, or underwater luminaires are in direct contact with the pool water and provide the required surface area, it is not necessary to provide another conductive element. A conductive pool shell in contact with the water also satisfies this requirement. However, where the pool does not include any of those items, it is necessary to install a conductive element. Devices have been specifically listed as a means to provide this contact with the pool water.
Click to expand...
 
Dennis Alwon said:
What I link about the NEC Link is that they explain certain sections. The enhanced contents explains things better at times. The bold shows where a conductive shell in contact with the water will satisfy the requirement for bonding the pool water. But this is the 2020 nec. I'm am not sure the 2017 hits on this- at least not clearly
Click to expand...
I'll still continue to use the water bond fitting. I use the 1" in line version.
 
shortcircuit2 said:
680.26(B)(6) specifies electrical equipment associated with the pool water circulating system...NOT all pool equipment.

IMO...12-volt transformers 40' feet from a pool do not need to be bonded under 680.26
Click to expand...
Good point. I have never bonded the pool panel but I was curious as to why the manufacturer had a bonding lug for it. (I have heard there is a lug)
 
Last edited:
Bonding of the EGC to all panels yes, but bringing the EPB all the way to the pool panel 40 ft away would introduce a hazzard itself as it can introduce a voltage from the pool that otherwise might not have been present 40 ft from the pool and was made safe at the pool by the EPB. Also it might unnecessarily introduce stray voltage from other unrelated equipment failures then charging the EPB. The EPB would then be energized even if the pool panel was off even if the panel GFCI scensed a fault current and tripped.
hhsting said:
Here is the twist what if that sub panel was fed by outside feeder? NEC 2017 section 250 says equipotential grid cannot be used as grounding electrode??? You still bond it to sub panel?
Click to expand...
That is a good point in that the EPB cannot be used for a GEC.
The connection of the EPB to the panel that is tied by (by code) a bonding jumper (4th wire) to the main panel GEC, has now made the EPB an extra GEC. Point not covered in 680. (Whole code always need to be considered.) Point OP might want to highlight.

The handbook has reasoning and justification for EPB in the narrative in 680.26(A) that would justify the absence of the EPB connection to a panel 40ft away.

Side question, (picture) why are the struts installed reversed? The "adjustable" sliding portion toward the post not the equipment? I would think you'd want to have the struts "fixed" to the post and the equipment be "adjustable". The way installed, the connection by simply loosening a little could cause Strut to become unfixed from post by simply sliding to one side or other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top