According to Rule 9B – 3.047, Section 2705.1 of the FBC and E3304.1 of the FBC-R will be amended to include to language found in Section 680.22(B) of the 2008 NEC which requires GFCI protection of both direct connected (hard-wired) and cord-and-plug connected pool pump motors.



However, there will also be an Exception for one-and two-family dwellings. This exception is NOT found in the NEC.



As indicated in the IAEI Analysis of Changes, Proposal 17-85 was rejected which suggested this rule be placed back into the NEC as it was in the 1999 edition. It was looked at again by CMP-17 after a review of data provided from the Consumer Product Safety Commission, National Injury Information Clearinghouse. (See Comment 17-75 of the 2007 Record of Comments.)



I can and have supported making amendments to the NEC when the code is made stronger and provides better protection to people and property, but can’t understand why or how the Florida Building Commission is in a position to reduce what is established as the minimum provisions by a consensus process.



For example, the requirement for bonding metal studs in buildings and structures enhanced the NEC requirements without creating a significant burden to builders and contractors. This new rule reduces the minimum provisions for safety of a nationally recognized standard with no real substantiation provided for creating the Exception.



I hope you all can take some time to review this matter and forward your comments and opinions to the Florida Building Commission.

I understand that not all on the commission are in favor of this.

For many years up north it is common to to cord and plug the pool pump motors. As you know this required GFCI protection for the receptacle. There have not been any problems with the GFCI unit to trip. Therefore their idea that GFCI protection for a hard wired pump motor will be a trip problem is unfounded.

I guess I am not really clear on this change.
Understood that GfCI protection is required. But what is the exception??
Nobody has stated what the exception is.

The exception is for 1&2 family dwellings.

My issue with the whole deal is:

1. This wasn't even an agenda item.
2. This wasn't open for public review.
3. This wasn't sent to the electric TAC for review.
4. There has been no substaniation provided to necessatate the exception.
5. The exception reduces an already established minimum provision.

I agree with Bryan 100%

Still not clear.
The exception is for 1&2 family dwellings excludes the requirement for gfci completely?
So I guess this means it only applies to public/commercial pools I assume or what about the Mom and Pop swimming classes held at their home. I have at least 6 homes in my immediate area that do so.

Almost Ruben.

The 2008 NEC has expanded the gfci protection to hard-wired pool pumps in addition to cord-and-plug connected pumps which were already required to be gfci protected in the 2005 NEC.

See section 680.22(B) of the 2008 NEC.

The FBC has come along and added an exception for 1&2 family dwellings. The end result:

Cord connected pumps - gfci protection - Residential and Commercial.

Hard wired pumps - gfci protection - Commercial only.

At least that is the way it appears to be heading...

Has there been a big body count from residential hard wired pool pumps or is this just a "why not do it" issue?

I suspect it has to do with money and the builders have lobbied someone although we are only talking about $50-60 (2 pole 20a GFCI breaker).

If you read the data provided by the CPSC used as the substantiation for the rule, there has been many inujuries and deaths here in the US related to contact with pool pump motors.

The problem appears to be the fact that persons working around / maintaining their pool equipment are coming in contact with the pool pump motor and the timer, other enclosures, etc. and hurting / killing themselves. It only requires a small amount of leakage current, ususally caused by corrosion from the pool water chemicals, to be imposed on the motor housing for someone to be severely shocked. This leakage current is well below the threshold to trip a standard circuit breaker and is not mitigated by the equipotential bonding system. A GFCI device would be sufficient in preventing this hazard from occuring.

So yes, it will cost a little more for GFCI breakers, and perhaps the pump motors will have to be replaced more often, but, the NFPA's nationally recognized consensus process deemed it necessary and prudent for all pool installations.

You know me Greg. I am not a huge fan of manufacturer's lobby and other lobbying interests that have force-fed new code down our throats with no substaniation at all, but there can be no arguement or GFCI protection, especially of outdoor, pool related, wet, and corrossive electrical equipment.

Maybe it is time we went for the equipotential ground plane under this equipment like we have for the artificial bodies of water.
I did it on my pool but it was just because it was easy. The 8ga was already there, I just "bugged" it to the wire mesh when I poured the pad the equipment sits on.