17-75 Log #1663 NEC-P17 Final Action: Accept
(680.22)
________________________________________________________
TCC Action: The Technical Correlating Committee understands that
the panel?s action to Accept Proposal 17-85 deletes the second sentence of
680.22(A)(5) in the 2005 NEC:
?Receptacles that supply pool pump motors and that are rated 15 or 20
amperes, 125 volts through 250 volts, single phase, shall be provided with
GFCI protection.?
Submitter: Brian Myers, IBEW Local Union 98
Comment on Proposal No: 17-85
Recommendation: This proposal should have been accepted.
Substantiation: Receptacle fed pump motors are already required to be GFCI
protected. Hard wired pump motors present the same hazards due to the highly
corrosive atmosphere. Pump motor seals have a limited life due to chlorines
corrosive nature.
The stated purpose of the NEC is ?the practical safeguarding of persons and
property from hazards? it is practical to provide the same level of protection for
a hard wired pump motor that is afforded to a cord and plug connected pump
motor.
Panel Meeting Action: Accept
Panel Statement: As a part of the panel?s consideration of this comment, the
panel reviewed a ?Compilation of Data from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission National Injury Information Clearinghouse? that was assembled
by a task group of the panel.
Note: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters
Number Eligible to Vote: 11
Ballot Results: Affirmative: 8 Negative: 2
Ballot Not Returned: 1 Gill, C.
Explanation of Negative:
HIRSCH, B.: The Panel should reject this comment and this proposal since
proper substantiation was not supplied. The data presented at the meeting from
the US Consumer Product Safety Commission National Injury Information
Clearinghouse shows that of all the incidents on record, only one possible
incident is attributable to hard wire pool pump motors and the data available
on that incident is too vague to draw a positive conclusion. To implement
requirements that cannot be shown to add safety value puts an unnecessary
burden on the end use customer and does not meet the ?practical safeguarding?
purpose of the Code.
RAMIREZ, M.: The 1999 NEC did not require all motors associated with
Article 608 to be GFCI protected, in other than dwelling units. Motor, whether
cord and plugs connected or directly hard wired, were required to be GFCI
protected.
In the 2002 code cycle, the GFCI protection for hard wired (direct
connection) was eliminated because there was no substantiation to require it.
In the 2005 code cycle, the proposals to reintroduce the GFCI requirement for
?hard wired? motors was rejected by the panel and failed to acquire the votes at
the general assembly meeting.
For the 2008 code cycle, the only documentation that CPSC had in their
files was one incident dating back 20 years to back-up the theory that GFCI
protection should also include hard wired motors for pools and spas.
I conclude that, yes, cord and plug connected motors should have GFCI
protection due to possible mishandling of the cord and plug by a consumer.
There are thousands of hard wired pool associated motors without GFCI
protection without an incident including for 3 HP 30 ampere circuits or three
phase motors, pool heaters, ground level central A.C. units, swamp coolers, etc.
The requirements for a maintenance service disconnect on hard wire equipment
meets the code requirement.
Comment on Affirmative:
BLEWITT, T.: The only incident in the ?Compilation of Data from the
US Consumer Product Safety Commission National Injury Information
Clearinghouse? clearly attributed to a permanently connected swimming pool
pump indicated the unit had bare wires in the control box (?sparking was
observed?), was not grounded at all and had been repeatedly tripping its circuit
breaker.
JHONSON, D.: It has come to my attention the panel action to accept
Comment 17-75 that adopts Proposal 17-85 has an editorial issue which may
need to be addressed by the TCC. The following underlined text is the code
change resulting from the panel action. The bold italicized text seems to be
redundant and confusing. the intent to protect pool pumps receptacles or
outlets with GFCI protection wherever they may be located would be simply
accomplished with the remaining text in 680.22(B).
17-85 (680.22)
5) GFCI Protection. all 15- and 20-ampere, single-phase, 125-volt receptacles
located within 6.0 m (20 ft) of the inside walls of a pool shall be protected by a
ground-fault circuit interrupter. Receptacles that supply pool pump motors and
that are rated 15 or 20 amperes, 125 volts through 250 volts, single phase,
shall be provided with GFCI protection.
(B) GFCI Protection. Outlets supplying pool pump motors from branch
circuits with short-circuit and ground-fault protection rated 15 or 20 amperes,
125 volt or 240volt, single phase, whether by receptacle or direct connection,
shall be provided with ground fault circuit-interrupter protection for personnel.
ROCK, B.: NEMA supports this comment. GFCI protection of hard-wired
pump motors in the 1999 NEC provides needed safety and these requirements
should be reinstated in the 2008 NEC. The fatality cited in US CPSC National
Injury Information Clearinghouse data (INDP 990603HCN0217) supports this
position.
