ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Admin 19
Recent Posts
fuse rejectors
by NORCAL. 03/29/17 01:44 AM
Old decora style outlets
by NORCAL. 03/29/17 01:41 AM
NFPA stuff
by gfretwell. 03/28/17 08:08 PM
Anyone hiring inspectors?
by HotLine1. 03/27/17 08:03 AM
ESA Arc flash course
by TheShockDoctors. 03/24/17 10:15 AM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
231,803 Are you busy
166,696 Re: Forum
160,836 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 66 guests, and 10 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
#54206 - 07/22/05 06:17 AM TIA to 680.26(C) in Massachusetts  
shortcircuit  Offline
Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 608
massachusetts
I heard that there is a tenative interm amendment to rule 680.26(C) of the 2005 MEC reverting us back to the 2002 MEC regarding this new code rule on swimming pools.

But, as with any code rule, I like to see it in WRITING.

Does anyone have any further information? Has it been accepted and doesn't take effect for a few months?

I also heard that the change(TIA)was implemented due to the end cost to the consumer. Why would a change in a code rule be made because of cost?

If the equipotential bonding grid is necessary for safely masking stray voltage around a pool to protect persons using the pool, then IMO, it should be installed...

shortcircuit


Work Gear for Electricians and the Trades

#54207 - 07/22/05 06:40 AM Re: TIA to 680.26(C) in Massachusetts  
iwire  Offline
Moderator
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,391
North Attleboro, MA USA
Quote
I also heard that the change(TIA)was implemented due to the end cost to the consumer. Why would a change in a code rule be made because of cost?


Cost is always a consideration when it comes to any rules.

We would all like to say save a life at any cost but in reality that is not what we as a society do.

40,000 people a year are killed in cars, they could be made safer than they are now but they would not sell.

All things come down to a cost vs benefit decision.

Quote
If the equipotential bonding grid is necessary for safely masking stray voltage around a pool to protect persons using the pool, then IMO, it should be installed...


Maybe that is part of it also.

Is the equipotential bonding grid necessary and / or effective?

A whole lot of pools have been installed without this grid.

Is there a history of problems with these installations?

I don't know the answer but judging from past MEC practices they are not quick to implement new rules.


Bob Badger
Construction & Maintenance Electrician
Massachusetts

#54208 - 07/22/05 07:15 AM Re: TIA to 680.26(C) in Massachusetts  
Joe Tedesco  Offline
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Boston, Massachusetts USA


Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

#54209 - 07/23/05 05:50 AM Re: TIA to 680.26(C) in Massachusetts  
shortcircuit  Offline
Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 608
massachusetts
Iwire...I temporarily forgot that it is a real world out there. Money and politics rule.

Joe...Thanx for the link to the NEMA news article.

Did the BFPR file the emergency amendment with the Massachusetts Secretary of State?

Does anybody have a link to any ruling concerning a change to article 680.26 of the MEC?

Also, I don't ever remember any code that required a #8 bonding wire to be installed in a pour of a pool so that no point in the pour is more than 15 feet from a bonding wire, but I will read my old code books to see...

shortcircuit



Member Spotlight
sparky66wv
sparky66wv
West Virginia
Posts: 2,236
Joined: November 2000
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.015s Queries: 14 (0.003s) Memory: 0.7590 MB (Peak: 0.8909 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-03-30 04:47:25 UTC