680.26 Equipotential Bonding (swimming pools and similar)

The rules for bonding the deck around a pool were clarified, then made (perhaps) less clear by a Tentative Interim Amendment (TIA)

[@jasondavies4073]

Great video. I have shared this with numerous local inspectors.

[@nhicks8028]

This is the best explanation of , why we need to bond pools correctly, I have seen on KZbin.

[@tomp9447]

Holly crap, the fact that 500k volts could be traveling through a pool is scary. Every one with a pool needs to watch this.

[@iaov]

Single #8 copper wire does not sound like a good idea. Most electricians won’t settle for “good enough “, we want things to be safe and bulletproof. Excellent video once again. Thanks

[@vlad1889]

Yea, I agree. There's nothing like running the minimum just to realize you have to tare everything up to do it again 😅

[@MrMaxyield]

Great work Ryan! It's always a pleasure learning from you, thanks!

[@brianwinn-fd7ww]

Great information, Ryan. Thanks as always.

[@Katiebelly123]

Very informative, and very clear. Seriously excellent presentation.

[@julianfolk]

Thank you for the informative videos!

[@MrMaxyield]

Ryan's the 🐐

[@261Pro]

Thank you Ryan 😊 great video..

[@mikaelfehlberg6854]

Thanks Ryan!

[@seasonaldepression840]

Nice video

[@4gizzle85]

This is for conductive pools only and the single conductor method still seems to be accepted for nonconductive pools in the TIA correct?

[@liferelation]

Thanks again Ryan, would like to know about the substantiation and corroboration for the pool shocks caused by the single conductor method. Could be just bad install. Loose joints, water not bonded etc. I would have fell on the minority side of this TIA also without corroborating evidence

[@KJSKKNP]

Thanks!

[@RyanJacksonElectrical]

Thank you!

[@eriknovak5452]

Some areas around me above ground pools are popular and installed by the lowest bidder (often the pool salesmen never explain how much electrical work is required). Most of these installations are just on the unpaved grass, and therefore we will bury the #8 conductor 5" under the surface. How would this work with the copper grid? Im not arguing that it creates a better equipotential area, but would it be required to dig up a three foot path around the pool?

[@H750S]

About the 12:00 min mark. With the fence being that far away wouldn’t it be more of a danger to have it bonded so it could potentially have voltage on it? Seems more likely to have someone staring on the dirt outside it and touching it that someone in the water.

[@josemancia3689]

I am confuse ..I have an exterior Panel for the pump , water heat sistem , lights etc ,the sub panel it’s feed with 4 wires gauge # 10… of course neutral separate with the ground … do I need to complete the bounding around the pool , conect all the metal bare , ladder , lights , Water heat , sum pump , etc and then conect to the sub panel ground together? ? Also I installed 2 rod for ground , but the NEC say is no necessary to a add the bounding to any panel ??

[@josemancia3689]

😂😂 wow he gave me the answer on the video !!! Amazing help , pictures all the details Thank mr you are a master

[@tymccart164]

Hello Ryan, Concerning packaged hot tubs being exempt from an equipotential grid on the perimeter surface, what is the justification of the stipulation of the “top rim at least 28 inches above perimeter surface”? Is it assuming that a person could get out of the hot tub without using the typical non-conductive steps if this distance was

[@tymccart164]

@tymccart164 2 minutes ago Hello Ryan, Concerning packaged hot tubs being exempt from an equipotential grid on the perimeter surface, what is the justification of the stipulation of the “top rim at least 28 inches above perimeter surface”? Is it assuming that a person could get out of the hot tub without using the typical non-conductive steps if this distance was

[@chrisf3875]

Question for the inspectors, with input from all whoever installed swimming pool equipment particularly outside where you would have a combination panel/controller for all the associated pool equipment. I think i might have dropped the ball over the years, regarding article 250.32 structure supplied by feeders. once we install 2 posts in the ground and mount our pool equipment to it( now is this not a structure?), then pull our feeders. I do believe we're obligated to install a grounding electrode system as well. Never have done this or been called out by an inspector over this. Thoughts?

[@MrSamsamsammy]

I’ve never had anyone require a ground rod for that. Just bond it to the panel feeding the pool panel. If it’s on the back of a detached garage or something, the garage feed would require a ground rod to be driven but I don’t think a couple of posts in the ground classifies as a “separate structure”

[@chrisf3875]

I would agree with you that if you put it on the exterior of a garage,then the feeder originated from the panel from the garage that you wouldn't need one, other than the freestanding garage would need one. The example I'm trying to use is if you had to build something to mount your panel to, other than an existing structure.

[@chrisf3875]

Also just add... Done many pools where the pool equipment is exterior Island(All out in the open) situation 30 to 50 ft away from the house.

[@liferelation]

If it stands alone separated from a garage or house it’s a separate structure that has been built. It Will require a grounding electrode system.

[@chrisf3875]

I do tend to agree

[@WindsurferHD]

I have been an electrical inspector for 8 years and have been in the electrical industry since 1979. If this TIA is an emergency and the single #8 equipotential ground is really not as good as the grid then how does the NEC code making panels view ALL of the millions of swimming pools in use that have the single #8 equipotential ground loop? It’s moronic and idiotic to say this TIA is an emergency because it does nothing to address the existing swimming pools. Our city council is about to vote on the use of the 2023 NEC from what I am hearing this April 2024. We shall see how they adopt or don’t adopt this new cost on new swimming pools which this TIA creates.

[@RyanJacksonElectrical]

The Code Making Panel DID NOT view it as an emergency, nor did it view it as neccessary at all. The NFPA Standards Council overruled the CMP and issued the TIA, against the wishes of the CMP.

[@boeing757pilot]

No disrespect. But how would this situation not be an emergency? Without the TIA, the jurisdictions would allow contractors to continue to build hazardous installations that could cause serious injuries or death. If this hazardous installation has been identified, then the proper course would be to immediately stop these installations rather than wait for the next code change. In addition, is there any "legalise" that states the TIA can only be issued for "emergencies?" It seems that a TIA to resolve a serious situation such as this is appropriate. Frankly, I would be livid if someone were injured in my pool by a installation that was known to be hazardous but was allowed because there was debate regarding the definition of what constitutes an emergency. As for the inability to correct the existing installations, sure, but that inability doesn't mean that we shouldn't correct the new installations. My .02...

[@RyanJacksonElectrical]

​@@boeing757pilot No disrepect taken. The CMP didn't view it as an emergency because, out of the tens of thousands of pools installed, the number of alleged problems was miniscule. Should we change the NEC for a failure rate of 1 per 50,000 installations? Furthermore, there was a lot of discussion about the previous attempts to change this that were reviewed and rejected by the CMP. None of the questions had been answered by the submitter.

[@boeing757pilot]

@@RyanJacksonElectrical Ryan, thank you for explaining the reasoning. Also, thank you for these excellent videos. You're an excellent instructor.

[@RyanJacksonElectrical]

@@boeing757pilot thank you!

[@Electric_Sherlock]

Wait. There was testing, which yielded factual results, that further evidenced a single conductor was not good enough in which people were getting shocked and not able to use their pool and you and other “panelists” voted No?!?! …the purpose of the code is THE SAFE GUARDING OF PEOPLE & PROPERTY. If that’s not a direct example then idk what is. I’m glad the others got it right!!

[@RyanJacksonElectrical]

There was a lot more to it than that.

[@timrobinson4330]

Dude what?! Please explain in further detail. Comments like this must be backed with something other than a Karen response. Ryan does a great job bruh

[@shonashook2497]

​@timrobinson4330 Karen forgot there's a thing called HUMAN ERROR!😂 And whatever the process entails to be on this panel tells me you probably have an engineering degree, or an extended amount of electrical knowledge...so I'm sure there was a very good reason Ryan voted it down!