120VAC Single Phase Motor Disconnect

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rmonroe

Member
We had a contractor install a filtering system which has a single phase 3/4 hp pump. The control panel, which is a small 12" x 12" pull box, has only a push buttom start/stop. There is no means on disconnecting the supply voltage other than the supply breaker which is located on the other side of the plant.

Doesn't this fall under Art:430.102?

Thank you and Merry Christmas.
 
I would say that this installation would fall under the scope of Article 430 and 430.102 would require a disconnecting means within sight from the motor.

Chris
 
rmonroe said:
We had a contractor install a filtering system which has a single phase 3/4 hp pump. The control panel, which is a small 12" x 12" pull box, has only a push buttom start/stop. There is no means on disconnecting the supply voltage other than the supply breaker which is located on the other side of the plant.

Doesn't this fall under Art:430.102?

Thank you and Merry Christmas.
Click to expand...

See 430.102 (B)(2) Exception to 1 and 2
I don't necessarily like this method but it will do the job in a pinch.
 
One-eyed Jack said:
It works for me and I am the AHJ.:grin:
Click to expand...

One eye, do you understand the significance of the use of the word impracticable and not the word impractical in Exception (a) of 430.103(B)?


How about the significance of industrial, written safety procedures, qualified people etc. in (b).

From the little info we have there is no way we could say (b) could be used.
 
iwire said:
One eye, do you understand the significance of the use of the word impracticable and not the word impractical in Exception (a) of 430.103(B)?


How about the significance of industrial, written safety procedures, qualified people etc. in (b).

From the little info we have there is no way we could say (b) could be used.
Click to expand...

The op indicated that this was a plant. ie industrial. The op is aware of safety concerns so it would be reasonable to expect safety procedures and qualified personel. It is not unreasonable to say (b) could apply. As I originally stated this is not a prefered solution. Regardless of the interpretation the op could request a disconnect and the contractor will honor his request if he wants more work at this site. The ec would be foolish to refuse even if he was compliant.
 
roger said:
It might be better to say your the code enforcement official (inspector), the NCBCC would be the AHJ. ;)

Roger
Click to expand...

It may in fact sound better but the reality is the NCBCC is not present. It would be impracticable. As defined by the NEC : The organization,office,or individual responsible for approving equipment,materials,an installation,or a procedure. That dubious honor falls to the individual who is on site in real time. That individual is the one who signs the approved or disapproved slip.
 
One-eyed Jack said:
It may in fact sound better but the reality is the NCBCC is not present.
Click to expand...

In NC the AHJ are those who adopt codes and amend them at the state level,(the NCBCC) you are only their Representative the same as an NC Police Officer would be as far as enforcing the laws that are enacted by law makers who are usually not present when arrest are made.

Roger
 
Last edited:
roger said:
In NC the AHJ are those who adopt codes and amend them at the state level,(the NCBCC) you are only their Representative the same as an NC Police Officer would be as far as enforcing the laws that are enacted by law makers who are usually not present when arrest are made.

Roger
Click to expand...

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. The AHJ is no single thing or person. In this particular case the op is in position to be the AHJ. No permit mentioned. No inspection mentioned. If the op is the owner or person responsible for "approving" this Installation then they are the AHJ. As such they can request and get a disconnect required by code or not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top