There are a couple of questions with regard to this inquiry. The situation is as follows, A pool panel (time clock,
100W lighting transformer - NO BREAKERS), a branch circuit (or feeder depending upon who you talk to) from a 2 pole breaker.
Single family dwelling.
First, is it a feeder? My impression is that if there are no breakers it is considered a branch circuit from the last
overcurrent device.
Second, if it is a branch circuit is it permissible to run a 12/3 for this load. Motor load <12 amps per 430.248.
Lighting load <1 amp.
Third, is it permissible to run a romex for this circuit? I understand that the lighting circuit is a new system as it is
on the load side of the transformer. If that is the case 680.23(F)(1&2) could be addressed from the pool panel to the light
junction box. Some have suggested that because of the light (regardless of the transformer) that 680.23(F)(1&2) demand a
minimum of MC cable (more costly - no possible advantage).
I have checked with numerous others and there seems to be a difference of opinion with regard to each of these areas. I'm
not even sure that I would mind if it was not a cost only factor. I can see NO advantage to making the job more costly for
the home owner. Depending upon the location I want to do this job I may use 12/3 romex from the service panel to the pool
panel, or I am required by others to use a minimum of MC cable (more costly - no advantage), and in other locations I am
required to run a 10/3 as they consider it a feeder (again more costly - no advantage).
Don't get me wrong, if the customer wants the Taj Mahal I'm willing to provide it. But if the customer wants a safe yet
cost effective job, I believe the code allows for that. Insisting on more costly installations that provide no meaningful
aspect of safety hurts everyone. Such insistance allows for the suggestion that power, greed and or ignorance are the tools
of government.
100W lighting transformer - NO BREAKERS), a branch circuit (or feeder depending upon who you talk to) from a 2 pole breaker.
Single family dwelling.
First, is it a feeder? My impression is that if there are no breakers it is considered a branch circuit from the last
overcurrent device.
Second, if it is a branch circuit is it permissible to run a 12/3 for this load. Motor load <12 amps per 430.248.
Lighting load <1 amp.
Third, is it permissible to run a romex for this circuit? I understand that the lighting circuit is a new system as it is
on the load side of the transformer. If that is the case 680.23(F)(1&2) could be addressed from the pool panel to the light
junction box. Some have suggested that because of the light (regardless of the transformer) that 680.23(F)(1&2) demand a
minimum of MC cable (more costly - no possible advantage).
I have checked with numerous others and there seems to be a difference of opinion with regard to each of these areas. I'm
not even sure that I would mind if it was not a cost only factor. I can see NO advantage to making the job more costly for
the home owner. Depending upon the location I want to do this job I may use 12/3 romex from the service panel to the pool
panel, or I am required by others to use a minimum of MC cable (more costly - no advantage), and in other locations I am
required to run a 10/3 as they consider it a feeder (again more costly - no advantage).
Don't get me wrong, if the customer wants the Taj Mahal I'm willing to provide it. But if the customer wants a safe yet
cost effective job, I believe the code allows for that. Insisting on more costly installations that provide no meaningful
aspect of safety hurts everyone. Such insistance allows for the suggestion that power, greed and or ignorance are the tools
of government.
