# Dangerous Pool, your opinion please.



## MechanicalDVR

Sounds like a problem just waiting to hurt someone. Are the circuits out to the HP, pump, and light in conduit or UF ?


----------



## chicken steve

My opinion is all pools ,ponds, baptismal orifices &/or bodies of immersible water should be required by law to have an annual inspection by qualified personnel 

~CS~


----------



## RePhase277

The lack of GFCI protection and the 3-wire feed with the neutral/ground bond would keep awake at night. The only thing keeping this thing from being a death trap is the bonding grid.


----------



## 3DDesign

MechanicalDVR said:


> Sounds like a problem just waiting to hurt someone. Are the circuits out to the HP, pump, and light in conduit or UF ?


They are in conduit and Liquid Tight


----------



## MechanicalDVR

3DDesign said:


> They are in conduit and Liquid Tight


They did one thing right. I've seen UF coming out of the ground to the box for the pump switch with the jacket shredded by weed whackers. Felt a tingle just standing near it.


----------



## lighterup

InPhase277 said:


> The lack of GFCI protection and the 3-wire feed with the neutral/ground bond would keep awake at night. The only thing keeping this thing from being a death trap is the bonding grid.


I didn't catch that this is an in ground pool.(not specified) If it is , I was
thinking that whoever did this ( given the description of violations) more 
than likely wouldn't have done (or known to do) equipotential bonding
below the slab and to any metal portions of the pool. IMO.

Agree. Stay out of the pool.


----------



## 3DDesign

lighterup said:


> I didn't catch that this is an in ground pool.(not specified) If it is , I was
> thinking that whoever did this ( given the description of violations) more
> than likely wouldn't have done (or known to do) equipotential bonding
> below the slab and to any metal portions of the pool. IMO.
> 
> Agree. Stay out of the pool.


YES, in-ground. I found out the pool company did the bonding, someone else did the wiring.


----------



## lighterup

3DDesign said:


> YES, in-ground. I found out the pool company did the bonding, someone else did the wiring.


The problem still remains that the bonding that the pool company did
(and I'm just spit balling here) is probably landed at the sub panel
(located in pool house?) , which is actually the neutral , know what I
mean?


----------



## RePhase277

lighterup said:


> The problem still remains that the bonding that the pool company did
> (and I'm just spit balling here) is probably landed at the sub panel
> (located in pool house?) , which is actually the neutral , know what I
> mean?


He said in the OP that the grid connected to the heater and pump motor, as it should be.


----------



## MTW

With the microscope that is on pools due to media coverage, you should make this right 100% or not touch it.


----------



## lighterup

InPhase277 said:


> He said in the OP that the grid connected to the heater and pump motor, as it should be.


SEU and #2-3 urd is what's feeding the pool house sub panel . I do not
see a fourth non current carrying conductor mentioned by the OP. So
the bonding (in a fault) is being carried by the neutral. That is not how
it should be.


----------



## RePhase277

lighterup said:


> SEU and #2-3 urd is what's feeding the pool house sub panel . I do not
> see a fourth non current carrying conductor mentioned by the OP. So
> the bonding (in a fault) is being carried by the neutral. That is not how
> it should be.


The equipotential bonding grid around the pool is what we're talking about here. That grid is tied to the pump and is what has kept this pool from killing so far.


----------



## 3DDesign

MTW said:


> With the microscope that is on pools due to media coverage, you should make this right 100% or not touch it.


That's what I told the owner. I wouldn't do any work unless they agreed to fix everything and have it inspected.


----------



## Dennis Alwon

& years ago it may have been that the 3 wire to a sub panel at a separate structure was compliant. 

The dp 50 for the heat pump doesn't require GFCI however the light does.

Hard to know what exactly is happening there but it appears there are things that need work.

All the neutral and equipment grounding conductor's should be tied together in a sub panel on a separate structure if the panel was install back before the 2008 NEC.


----------



## MTW

Dennis Alwon said:


> & years ago it may have been that the 3 wire to a sub panel at a separate structure was compliant.
> 
> The dp 50 for the heat pump doesn't require GFCI however the light does.


The rule we follow at the company I work for is that everything that carries pool water goes on a GFCI. We go above and beyond the NEC in that regard but for the minor cost of a GFCI breaker ($80-120), it's far cheaper than a lawsuit.


----------



## RePhase277

MTW said:


> The rule we follow at the company I work for is that everything that carries pool water goes on a GFCI. We go above and beyond the NEC in that regard but for the minor cost of a GFCI breaker ($80-120), it's far cheaper than a lawsuit.


Lawsuits eventually end, but you will live the rest of your days knowing that not spending $120 on a breaker killed someone.


----------



## lighterup

Dennis Alwon said:


> & years ago it may have been that the 3 wire to a sub panel at a separate structure was compliant.
> 
> The dp 50 for the heat pump doesn't require GFCI however the light does.
> 
> Hard to know what exactly is happening there but it appears there are things that need work.
> 
> All the neutral and equipment grounding conductor's should be tied together in a sub panel on a separate structure if the panel was install back before the 2008 NEC.


I'm fairly certain that even under the 2008 nec , the use of SEU was illegal
as a sub feeder (the stranded neutral conductors are unsheathed). This is
for service entrance conductor only.


----------



## 3DDesign

lighterup said:


> I'm fairly certain that even under the 2008 nec , the use of SEU was illegal
> as a sub feeder (the stranded neutral conductors are unsheathed). This is
> for service entrance conductor only.


I started electrical contracting in 1981, it was illegal then.


----------



## Dennis Alwon

MTW said:


> The rule we follow at the company I work for is that everything that carries pool water goes on a GFCI. We go above and beyond the NEC in that regard but for the minor cost of a GFCI breaker ($80-120), it's far cheaper than a lawsuit.


Then why not gfci every circuit in a home? I understand being ahead of the code but I assume there is a reason the heater doesn't have to be gfci protected. That may change as the pool pump didn't require gfci either when it was direct wired.


----------



## hardworkingstiff

I would not wire nor have a pool that did not have all of the electrical consumption equipment protected by GFCI's. (Bonding grid needs to be there too,  )


----------



## lighterup

InPhase277 said:


> He said in the OP that the grid connected to the heater and pump motor, as it should be.


The way we install the bonding grid ( for equipotential plane) bonds everything
about the pool together and back to the "grounding bar" , not the neutral bus ,
at the sub panel we would install in the pool house.
I'm not debating that the pool pumps are part of this , I'm questioning how it
is seperated from the neutral bar when the sub panel is not only fed with the
wrong feeder , but has no fourth (non current carrying conductor) for grounding / bonding. Savy?


----------



## RePhase277

lighterup said:


> The way we install the bonding grid ( for equipotential plane) bonds everything
> about the pool together and back to the "grounding bar" , not the neutral bus ,
> at the sub panel we would install in the pool house.
> I'm not debating that the pool pumps are part of this , I'm questioning how it
> is seperated from the neutral bar when the sub panel is not only fed with the
> wrong feeder , but has no fourth (non current carrying conductor) for grounding / bonding. Savy?


It isn't electrically separated because the pumps presumably have an EGC that goes back to the neutral-bonded subpanel. But the equipotential grid doesn't work because it is grounded. It works because it equalize voltage gradients across its area. So yes, the grid is electrically connected to the neutral through the pump EGC, but it isn't required to be. And I think it may introduce more hazard running it to the bar rather than the pump itself. Putting it on the pump keeps it as close as possible to the most likely point of energization.


----------



## MTW

Dennis Alwon said:


> Then why not gfci every circuit in a home? I understand being ahead of the code but I assume there is a reason the heater doesn't have to be gfci protected. That may change as the pool pump didn't require gfci either when it was direct wired.


I don't know the NEC reasoning. What I do know is there have been many high profile pool electrocutions and shocks and that's reason enough to go overboard with GFCI protection.


----------



## macmikeman

GFI protection will not protect when stray currents occur off property and are returning to the origin along a path that takes them in, under, thru the pool area. I don't know stats on how many deaths you can attribute to that, but from reading Mike Holts posts it has to be at least a ''few''. 

I still think that requiring a two part armature which has a carbon / fiber rod instead of a metal one between it and the impeller would help reduce a whole lot of injury and death from electric shocks in pools.


----------



## A Little Short

lighterup said:


> The way we install the bonding grid ( for equipotential plane) bonds everything
> about the pool together and back to the "grounding bar" , not the neutral bus ,
> at the sub panel we would install in the pool house.
> I'm not debating that the pool pumps are part of this , I'm questioning how it
> is seperated from the neutral bar when the sub panel is not only fed with the
> wrong feeder , but has no fourth (non current carrying conductor) for grounding / bonding. Savy?


The equipotential bond & grid do not need to go back to the panel. The EGC and equipotential bonding are two different things.
As was mentioned, it will tie into the system grounding through the EGC from the pump motor.


----------



## chicken steve

The theory is local ground contact enhances gfi capabilities , thus the last code cycle's focus on the EQ plane around a pool.

This is usually made back to the motor terminal or wet niche in #8 solid , assuming them the chief culprit as well as proximal. 

Yet as others have stated, possibilities exist where pool accessories , pool heaters ,or other electrical hazards could be every bit as lethal , including what may be a parallel neutral path 

That said, a '17 change is rumored to allow a EQ pool plane to serve as a GEC

Yes that is correct, i sad GEC :whistling2:

Stick that in yer theory pipe & smoke it! :laughing:~CS~:laughing:


----------



## donaldelectrician

macmikeman said:


> GFI protection will not protect when stray currents occur off property and are returning to the origin along a path that takes them in, under, thru the pool area. I don't know stats on how many deaths you can attribute to that, but from reading Mike Holts posts it has to be at least a ''few''.
> 
> I still think that requiring a two part armature which has a carbon / fiber rod instead of a metal one between it and the impeller would help reduce a whole lot of injury and death from electric shocks in pools.




Agreed Macmikeman .... It seems the most effective and simple ways to prevent
a number of electrical problems with pools are not implemented ...

WHY ?



Don


----------



## donaldelectrician

MTW said:


> I don't know the NEC reasoning. What I do know is there have been many high profile pool electrocutions and shocks and that's reason enough to go overboard with GFCI protection.




They go Nuts on Pool Electrocution ...

I think Macmikeman should Patent his Idea... or someone else will...

GFCI will fail over time , non conductive shaft will not ...

Do you hear me Mike ? Great fail safe idea .

Think retirement with a check ... But move on it quick .

A Public forum don't ya know ...



Don


----------



## A Little Short

Proper equipotential bonding will help as much as anything.


----------



## 3DDesign

I found that the original Electrician installed ground rods at the pool house as a source of ground Two local electrical inspectors say it's wrong and that it should have been 4 wire cable.
What's your opinion?


----------



## lighterup

3DDesign said:


> I found that the original Electrician installed ground rods at the pool house as a source of ground Two local electrical inspectors say it's wrong and that it should have been 4 wire cable.
> What's your opinion?


If you read my previous posts , I've been saying that the feeder is all 
wrong. Didn't they notice that SEU was used?


----------

